@Dhiraj, you too must read more before you judge. Thank you.

I don’t think comments like these are in line with the groundviews guidelines – they personal attacks on others.

You say I stole a toffee…I claim I didn’t… the logical thing for me to do is empty the contents of my pocket. Only *one* of us is correct.

Bad example buddy, a person with a sweet tooth would eat it straight away. Then what? Your logic has big cheese holes. In a mathematical domain strict logic holds. Not in the real world. Unless you can account for all possible states that can arise from the situation. Which in most real world cases, approaches infinity. Hence why it is ludicrous to expect anyone to prove their innocence in most cases. If you have ever taken discrete maths, you’d understand why it is easier to disprove a hypothesis as opposed to prove it.

Probably the latter. If I don’t buy into suspect accusations then so be it!

The three COPE reports, even with your suspect English comprehension and intelligence, will make for interesting reading.

suspect English comprehension? English is a second language for me. So I’ll let you have that one.

suspect intelligence? again, what ever that means, if my logic has been formed in a way to require hard facts & evidence as opposed to speculation and accusation then so be it!

Finally if it takes personal insults to win your way, then SO BE IT!

Had a degree of humility and acknowledgment of valid points by others been exercised over this ceaseless display of arrogant puffery, I would not feel compelled to reply to your latest specious answer to Observer.

Never mind the fact that you avoided answering his pointed questions on how you would expect proof to be furnished for certain accusations, never mind the fact that the said “Right to Information” legislation has sadly not even been passed in Sri Lanka, let us for a moment, accept this idealized state of affairs you so ignorantly describe (with the remarkable irony of expecting learning from others) – I will pose the question you evaded earlier once again – did you contact the compaign and at least give them a chance to respond before concluding their guilt? These are basic journalistic ethics, and surely something that ought to be exercised by those commenting with snooty-nosed disdain on the “partisan piffle” of others, if for nothing but to prove one’s own impartiality.

Or are you under the impression that the accused body must, based on non-existent legislature, scour all the trumpery emanations from every other “citizen journalist” on the Internet and proactively furnish non-requested information?

As for the two “unanswerable” questions you raised, their absurdity is only eclipsed by their disingenuity. I’ve already answered the question “Why don’t you ask the campaign?” I just might, but that’s irrelevant. Since when is the onus on the reader to furnish the proof, even though what we’ve done so far is just that? As I mentioned earlier, even in the absence of legislature, I would consider it ethical to assume their guilt upon failure to furnish information, not otherwise. Whether the cost is neligible or not has already been at least partially answered, but the full answer requires inquiry from the campaign. Whether it runs off private donations or not I have no clue. As I’ve repeatedly acknowledged, it’s highly possible they come from ripping off public money, but again, with no inquiry from the campaign, were you expecting to divine an answer, or just join the bandwagon and sling mud?

And just what is it with the pointed refusal to properly acknowledge the findings as they stand now, in which case this entirely unpleasant confrontation could have been avoided? Not being a “poseur citizen” yourself, surely, it should not be difficult?

Last but not least, I don’t think you should persist in this Gotabaya Rajapakse style dichotomy of “MR Fan Club vs the world”, lest your own “churlishness” and binary mindset be irrevocably cemented in the perceptions of others. I believe my reply here, amongst others, (http://www.groundviews.org/2010/01/01/unsolicited-sms-messages-are-spam-please-desist-mr-president/#comment-12560) gives the lie to that style of misdirection.

Thank you!

I remain,

somewhat disgusted.

Did you know that the American President is forced to publicly declare his assets? I know that every time corruption is mentioned, your counter-argument will be something along the lines of “well, its much worse in the West… look what happened in 1812 and 1945…”… anyway, applying some of your logic, if the evil American President can declare his assets, why can’t your much vaunted man in SL do the same? How hard is it to clear one’s name? You say I stole a toffee…I claim I didn’t… the logical thing for me to do is empty the contents of my pocket. Only *one* of us is correct. Its the same way with public accountability. Reveal your assets, then no one can accuse you.

P.S: If you are interested, the above mentioned assets of the US President can be found using Google. The audit, of course, is correct because its done by the IRS, not the President’s friends.

Seriously, are you being disingenuous or are you actually so ill-educated? The three COPE reports, even with your suspect English comprehension and intelligence, will make for interesting reading. Groundviews has also published an article based on it – The Rajapakse regime: Rewarding the corrupt and sheltering the criminal? The scale of corruption is not what WE alone claim, it is what has been tabled in Parliament. And this is not even counting the reports in traditional media, including most recently this article by Rajpal Abeynayake (Negative Attributes of Mahinda Rajapaksa: Candid assessment of Presidential Candidates – 1), who is by no stretch of imagination a supporter of the opposition, a fan of Groundviews or partial to NGOs.

groundviews, it is very, very easy to shatter my fragile self-delusion!

give me (whole of Sri Lanka) 1, just ONE document proving massive corruption. i’m talking order of millions here since the claim is boundless, massive corruption by the administration. i accept there are irregularities, not to the scale you claim though.