He says it’s a shame
You know it may be a game
Ah, but I won’t play to loose

Yeah, sticks to his guns
He take the road as it comes
It take the shine off his shoes

He’s too fast to stop
He take it over the top
He make a line in the news

Of course I agree. All offensives are violent,aren’t they? Butis all violence legitimate? Until we have the answers to some questions – genuine answers – I personally feel we cannot, and must not, express any finite opinion born of stupid , and an intentionally couldn’t-care-less approach to unpleasant facts. Such ‘analysts’ abd ‘ apologists’ merely snarl up the traffic in the pursuit of truth. Truth is what was, is and will be.

In the Lankan case, I am persuaded that truth has been a casualty because it has been looked at through the distorting prism of a false sense of patriotism and, I suspect, vested interests which are ALLOWED to corrupt integrity in thought and purpose. I say ALLOWED because many commentaries come from the pens of people WHO KNOW THAT THEY ARE LYING ABOUT THE TRUTH.So, the national debate has sadly corrupted some potentially great minds and translated them into sickeningly fawning minions. Well, it’s said that true grit is tested in the furnace of such trials and if I might say so, true itegrity and morality are being tried, an found wanting, in this national debate.

Looks like we’ve ‘won’ a war and lost our dinity, integrity and morality and hoinesty in the process. A huge price tompay indeed. We’ve lost immeasurably more than what we’ve won. And as to that, what have we won. A few months before his death,I asked him whether in retirement,in retrospect, he saw himself as a political success or failure. Pensively rubbing his chin, he took a couple of minutes to say ” Not a qualified success.The blood of our youth from north to south will laugh at me if I said I was a success.Why ? Becasue I am told that not all of them died in the process of confrontation.Some things succeeded because of logistics. Any fool with superior numbers can win a war. I once lost a boxing bout to a boy lesser than I was in build but not in strength.And I beat a boy a good 50 pounds heavier but weaker and not well trained. no great feat really.The thing is this, I should have stopped fighting when I knew he was weaker and could not go the distance. But the roar of my ‘friends’ around the ring egged me on. I think I lost that fight from the humane angle though I won it on professional points.Let’s talk of something else.

You see my friend, JR was trying to held on to what eh thought he’d lost : Integrity and Morality.Without these qualities we are but brute forces. A British Mp was ridiculed for his sexual impotence by another MP known for his excesses and rumored sexual potencies. Said the ridiculed Mp ” the member preens himself on an ability at which my pet dog is infinetly his superior – and even my pet dog is infinitely superior in other facets too which are lacking in this member.”

Perhaps we ennoble in men that which we would not even in an animal?

“AND IMEDIATELY, FOR THE SAFETY OF A VISITUING HEAD OF STATE AND HIS ‘DELEGATION’ , WOULD YOU STILL GO THROUGH WITH THE EVENT?”

I might not even had the event to begin with, as I’m not a great Mahinda fan. But my commentary was directed toward the pro-LTTE elements not OU.

“BUT I UNDERSTAND VIOLENCE NOT AS VIOLENCE PER SE BUT IF USED AS A JUSTIFIABLE WEAPON FOR SURVIVAL”

So you agree with the outcome of Nanthikkadal? A “justifiable weapon for Sri Lankan survival?”

If you were responsible for the safety of all undergrads and staff at OU – AND IMEDIATELY, FOR THE SAFETY OF A VISITUING HEAD OF STATE AND HIS ‘DELEGATION’ , WOULD YOU STILL GO THROUGH WITH THE EVENT?

POINT NO.2 : NOT THAT I STAND FOR VIOLENCE.. IT’S A WEAPON OF DESPERATION THAT CAN ONLY BRING COUNTER VIOLENCE. THE SANSONI REPORT PREDICTED IT ALL A LONG ,LONG TIME AGO. BUT I UNDERSTAND VIOLENCE NOT AS VIOLENCE PER SE BUT IF USED AS A JUSTIFIABLE WEAPON FOR SURVIVAL.. BUT AS FOR YOUR ‘ PRO-LTTE ELEMENTS’ bring a ‘ THREAT TO DEMOCRACY IN THE UK” PRAY TELL ME WHETHER YOU THINK PEOPLE LIKE LASANTHA WICKREMATUNGE, SIVARAM, EKNELIGODA, TISSANAYAGAM ETC WERE THEREATS TO DEMOCRACY OR THE ‘STATE’ IN SRI LANKA? WHAT ARE WE DEFENDING ? DELUSIONS OR REALITY, CONSCIENCE OR FLAWED CONVICTIONS? ALSO, WHEN DID OXFORD BECOME THE PLATFORM TO UNVEIL SUCH A DRAMATIC THING AS A ‘ SOLUTION TO SRI LANAK’S ETHNIC GRIEVANCES’ YE GODS, MAN, THAT CALLS FOR A HUGE PLATFORM, WITH GLOBAL PLAYERS SITTIGN IN TO UNDERWRITE SUCH A SOLUTION AND NOT JUST IMPOSED BECAUSE A,B.OR C THINKS IT IS THE TOTAL PANACEA. I’M ALL EARS MY FRIEND – AND FAR, FAR FROM BEING NAIVE.

Anyway 99% of the stuff is exactly what everyone knew the US thinks. Take for example the Colombo US Ambassador’s views on our triumvirate (MR, GR, SF) and war crimes. I never had the slightest doubt that this is what 99.9% of US diplomats (and 999 million other people) believe. Now they got the chance to say it openly. Take Afghanistan, China, Pakistan, Brit soldiers, the Kremlin mafia, the Americans have had their say. Embarassment? Bollocks, get real!

My small reservation about why it may not be a plant is revelation of activities against US law. That is the ONLY thing disadvantages to the Administration.

“has anuone givena thought to the immediate fears at OU about the retaliatory fallout on all its undergradfs and staff had the Oxford Union gone ahead with the rajapaksa event?”

Interesting statement. So you are acknowledging that the threat of pro-LTTE violence led to the cancellation? Doesn’t that clearly show how the pro-LTTE elements are a threat to democracy in the UK?