I can’t breathe, Ms Teplitz

On the 25th of May, 2020, something terrible happened in Colombo. A set of police officers accosted a citizen who did not belong to the majority community. The man was suspected of giving a bad cheque. He was assaulted, handcuffed and even as he said 'mata husmaganna bae (‘I can’t breathe), one of the officers pinned him down, knee on neck. The man died.

There were protests in Colombo. Riot police baton-charged and tear-gassed protestors. Water cannons were used. Rubber bullets were shot. Police dogs were unleashed. Police cars ploughed through demonstrators in various parts of the city. Unarmed, handcuffed people were punched. Over and over again. People who had fallen, were punched on and pummeled mercilessly. Televisions crews were attacked. Equipment destroyed. The media, state and private, ‘fixed’ the narrative: ‘a criminal, an unruly mob, vandalism…the police merely moved in to keep the peace…they didn’t start the fire, they are merely quenching fires lit by anarchists.’

There was outrage. There were missives from several diplomatic missions, the USA one included. Ambassadors called and wrote to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Statements were issued to the media. Dr Fernand de Varennes, Extraordinary (!) Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, castigated the Sri Lankan Government for promotion of violence against minorities, in diplospeak of course. International human rights organizations were livid. Sanctions against Sri Lanka were recommended. Michelle Bachelet, chief of the UNHRC, expressed dismay in a missive full of veiled threats.

Well!

Didn’t happen here. Happened and is happening right now in the United States of America.

The US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Alaina B Teplitz knows what has been happening in the US for centuries. She knows what happened on May 25, 2020 in Minneapolis. She knows what’s happening right now. Brutal. Racist. Insufferable Unpardonable. But Fenand de Varennes is extraordinarily silent. So is Michelle Bachelet. The Sri Lankan Ambassador in Washington, DC, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sri Lanka are silent too. Those NGO personalities in the rights business who sneer at nation and nationalism here in Colombo are not affirming their internationalism either.

George Floyd said ‘I can’t breathe.’ George Floyd was not allowed to breathe. George Floyd is no longer breathing. Are you breathing easier now Ms Teplitz, I wonder. Is your America, that of genocidal, white racism breathing easier now, I wonder. Who had a knee on whose neck and who is kneeling now, I wonder.

There’s video footage of all this, Ms Teplitz knows. Its streaming in from New York, Houston, Harrisburg, Los Angeles, Washington DC, Atlanta, Detroit and other unhappy cities in her country. The United States of America is burning. The good people of that country are standing up. They want to be counted and they are being counted too I have no doubt, not for benevolent and happy purposes either.

LeBron James was spot on when he picked up and posted two images, one of George Floyd being kneed and another of Colin Kaepernick kneeling while ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ was being played before a San Francisco 49ers preseason game in 2016. ‘This ... ... Is Why,’ read the legend above the pictures. And this was the question LeBron put to one and all on Instagram: ‘Do you understand NOW!!??!!?? Or is it still blurred to you? #StayWoke.’

Black people and other minorities did not have to wake up. They were up and their nightmares were not associated with night and slumber. George Floyd’s murder was not a one-off affair. He is one of many. The various Police Departments in major US cities are notorious for racial profiling, mindless brutality against non-white suspects and soft-gloved approaches to white miscreants. The judicial system is racist and the proof is in the highly disproportionate number of inmates who are non-white. White racism’s knee has been on minority-neck for decades. No, centuries.

But Ms Teplitz knows that this knee-on-neck is not a phenomenon that is peculiar to Minneapolis or Los Angeles or New York or Washington DC or any other major city in the USA. It sums up in fact US Foreign Policy. It’s not a Donald Trump thing. It predates the US President.

The US will not let anyone or any country that gets in the way of US interests (access to and extraction of resource, securing and maintaining markets and acquiring strategic assets legally, through arm-twisting or simply by implementing guns-in-booty-out policies). It uses knee on neck on nations   and leaders who say ‘no can do.’ Those who will not be brainwashed with tall stories about free markets, growth and such, will be cajoled and bribed. Those who will not submit will be subdued. Knee on neck. Proverbially, speaking.

There’s a cry that’s rising from all over the United States of America. ‘I CAN’T BREATHE.’ That’s how George Floyd is breathing right now. That’s how this man, who pleaded, ‘let me stand,’ but was not allowed to, stands today.

The world can also say, ‘I can’t breathe!’ The world can agitate against the kind of kneeling that’s ‘all in a day’s work’ for the police in the USA. The world can stand up. And if the world does not, then breathing will not be an option. Standing will not be tenable. Maybe, just maybe, considering that the Government she represents is on its knees on many counts Ambassador Teplitz might understand now something of the condition of asphyxiation. She might be unexpectedly finding it hard to breathe. That would be extraordinary, Fenand de Varennes (who got hot under the collar over Muslim Covid-19 victims being cremated in Sri Lanka) might in his less complicit moments conclude.

She says, ‘the US Justice Department has announced a full criminal investigation into the circumstances of Floyd’s death.’ Death? Interesting choice of word. It was MURDER, Ms Teplitz knows this.  And there’s not a word in her media release about the absolute brutality unleashed on protestors after the murder of George Floyd. Humbuggery much.

‘I can’t breathe’ is a worldwide cry. It is a cry flavored by the last breath taken by a 46 year old man in Minneapolis, George Floyd. It’s a ‘#staywoke’ slogan. Let’s not sleep, for there’s a good chance that we will be kneed while in dreamland.



RELATED ARTICLES
Those who kneel are actually standing

malindasenevi@gmail.com.

Read more

Getting over Trump(ed)

"Peaceful Acceptance" of "people's will" there was NOT in 2008

Kautilya, a religious bigot if ever there was one, nevertheless wrote an excellent treatise on state craft titled ‘Arthashastra’, one of the earliest works on the subject.  In Book VI, "The Source of Sovereign States", Kautilya writes, “The king who is situated anywhere immediately on the circumference of the conqueror's territory is termed the enemy. The king who is likewise situated close to the enemy, but separated from the conqueror only by the enemy, is termed the friend (of the conqueror).”

This is the earliest recorded note on the issue of friends and foes in the matter of governance.  It has subsequently been used in other contexts of course and is generally reduced to the familiar dictum ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’ often attributed to Mao Zedong.  What is important to note here is that neither Kautilya nor Chairman Mao proposed it as a general theory, but rather one which could be applied to given situations.  Perhaps this is why we have that other adage which could be considered a corollary of sorts, ‘there are no permanent enemies or friends in politics”.  

The recently concluded US Presidential Election prompted animated response from Sri Lankans of different political/ideological shades both here and in the USA.   They are as divided, one might say, as the people of the USA, perhaps for reasons that are not too dissimilar, reasons that appear to be drawn from the above political observations on friendship and enmity.  It’s probably not surprising considering that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were said to be the most unpopular candidates in remembered history. 

After all, Republicans were told ‘hold your nose and vote Trump’ even as their Democratic counterparts pleaded, ‘hold your nose and vote Hillary’.  

It was a close race and one where the winner lost the popular vote.  Naturally, the Democratic camp felt cheated by the elections system or rather the system of selection in the USA.  On the other hand, if system was at fault, then the die-hard Clinton supporters can’t really complain, for they were happy when system-flaw hoofed out Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primaries.  Trump was not the first ‘winner’ who lost the popular vote, he was the fifth, following the election of John Quincy Adams (1824) which helped launch the Democratic Party, Rutherford B Hayes (1876), Benjamin Harrison (1888) and George W Bush (2000), when the Supreme Court in a split decision refused to sanction a re-count in Florida.

One can only speculate whether the Democrats or rather the anti-Trump camp (which is broader than the support base of Clinton) would have been as vociferous in their protests had it been some other Republican that had secured the White House.  As for Trump supporters who are yelling that the Clinton camp is in denial and telling them to shut up and accept the result, they are silent on the kind of denial that the most racist and bigoted of their camp demonstrated when Barack Obama won in 2008.  

As of now, it appears that a lot of people, across the so-called political divide, are trying to get on non-existent moral high horses.   

Trump came with a lot of baggage that has upset a lot of people in the USA and elsewhere.  Women and minorities, in particular, have reasons to fear a Trump administration given his brash sexism, racism and homophobia.  Trump’s victory has in fact emboldened the worst elements of Intolerant America (of the US) and promised legislation to overturn key progress on resolving grievances of women, minorities and LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Queer) groups could only make things worse.  

His trigger-happy brashness is certainly worrisome given that the Republicans have control of the Senate and Congress and not just for US citizens that have reservation about Washington’s foreign policy prerogatives of late.  On the other hand, there would be those who think that it is best to have the true face of US foreign policy in the top seat because it would all be straight-up without the frills, double-speak and subterfuge.  Others might just shrug shoulders and say ‘same old, same old.’   These fears, more than the issue of a President elect who lost the popular vote, appear to be the fuel for the Dump Trump protests that have mushroomed all over the USA.   We didn’t see the Obama administration being ‘progressive’ about the pipeline crossing sacred burial grounds and the Missouri, the main water source of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.  Would Hillary do better?  Is she ‘more progressive’ than Obama? These are not questions that we hear from the  Dump Trump campaign.

It must be noted, however, that although the anti-Trump protests are putting ‘Arab Spring’ to shame, but the self-righteous Western media are given them the proverbial cold shoulder, just like the human rights squads that were so gung-ho about Middle Eastern dictators not too long ago.  

The truth is that it is meaningless to think of Republicans and Democrats as Right and Left respectively.  They are so in relation to one another, but on the broad political spectrum both parties are far right, if you want to be serious about this.  

Apart from the real felt fears of the aforementioned groups within the USA, the truth is that it is meaningless to think of Republicans and Democrats as Right and Left respectively.  They are so in relation to one another, but on the broad political spectrum both parties are far right, if you want to be serious about this.  Even Bernie is not really ‘left’, but looks so in relation to Hillary and certainly in relation to Trump.   Sure, Obama ‘The Progressive’ didn’t have the cushions in Congress and Senate that Trump has, but he didn’t exactly make the world ‘safer’ did he?  The truth of the matter is whether one is Right or Left (relatively speaking), there are always operational limits imposed by the system, be in domestic or foreign policy, be it climate change or war (declared or undeclared).  In short the interests of the corporate class will be served while the interests of special groups such as the Jews will determine policy in the Middle East.  

US policy is not about resolution, but containment, or ‘management’ which is the more fashionable word.  Even domestic policy will be informed by the larger need to ensure that things do not get out of hand — neither the KKK or the anarchists in the Dump Trump efforts are likely to do as they please, subject of course to the caveat that the KKK types will probably get a pat on the back with the friendly ‘now enough’ while the anarchists, if there are any, will be roughed up.  

One might say that there could be a (dangerous) shift when it comes to environmental issues since Trump has selected a well known climate-change skeptic to head his US EPA transition team, Myron Ebell.  On the other hand, despite Obama’s rhetoric, the US conceded nothing voluntarily by way of multilateral efforts in this sphere.  The track-record, compared to other countries, is embarrassing.  With Trump, the one positive is that there’s less likelihood of spin, foot-dragging and (again) subterfuge — again not something that calls for popping the champagne.  

However, to think that a Trump Presidency would see a policy regime on Sri Lanka that is more informed, more acknowledging of contexts, fair etc., etc., is to be optimistic.  That’s not how Washington has worked. 

From this end, i.e. Sri Lanka, we had M.L. Shivajilingam of the Tamil National Alliance organizing an event to smash coconuts and light candles to bless Clinton ahead of the election.  Everyone knows that Clinton categorically stated that she did not want the LTTE defeated.  It’s hard to put any spin on that.  Why should any Sri Lankan who abhors terrorism be unhappy about a Clinton defeat under these circumstances, one can ask.  Again, it’s about friends and enemies, not in an absolute sense but at least in terms of specific contexts.   However, to think that a Trump Presidency would see a policy regime on Sri Lanka that is more informed, more acknowledging of contexts, fair etc., etc., is to be optimistic.  That’s not how Washington has worked.  To be thrilled about the result on account of justified antipathy to Clinton is certainly uncalled for.  

Kautilya was correct, but only so in a specific context determined by time and space.  Our enemies are not always our enemies and our friends are not our friends forever.  Our current enemies current enemies may in time and in different contexts become their friends.  Where would that leave us?  Ask Clinton if she’s changed her stand on Sri Lanka (vis-a-vis the LTTE) and she will cautiously skip around it but essentially end up standing against Sri Lanka.  Ask Trump and he might not know where Sri Lanka is, but if pushed, he might find himself rubbing shoulders with Hillary.  

So the USA had an election. So Donald Trump was elected or selected if you want to have it that way.  I feel for all those who feel less belonged than ever before in that country.  I am not sad that Clinton lost and I am indeed glad that I didn’t have to hold my nose and vote for either of these two.  I don’t think there’s reason to celebrate Trump’s triumph or Clinton’s defeat.  I could say ‘cheers’ for less spin on US foreign policy, but then again, going by history, I doubt I would be cheering for too long.  The truth is that the US still holds the trumps in certain global card games.  They’ve got one with a name in the White House.  Doesn’t make too much of a difference.   

See also the following reflections in a series titled 'Love Notes to Democracy' following the US Presidential Election 2004:

Let's go to another country

The Church is the State

The USA elects a Pontiff

Wither democracy now?

"Chortle Now": The hidden transcripts of democracy

"Nothing" really matters

Territories of the displaced political

Good luck USA and remember I love you

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer.  Email: malindasenevi@gmail.com.  Twitter: malindasene.

Read more

A story of brotherhood and manhood

The United States of America is not bombing Libya right now.  Bombs are falling nevertheless.  But exactly five years ago, the USA was bombing Libya, as I was writing the article that follows (first published in the Daily News, March 24, 2011).  

The United States of America is bombing Libya as I write, supposedly for the benefit of Libyans. The USA bombed Iraq and killed or caused the death of over a million Iraqis, supposedly for the benefit of the victims. The USA has maimed, displaced and killed tens of thousands of Afghans (and the killers have been caught salivating over their victims) and hundreds of Pakistanis (supposedly for the benefit of Pakistanis and Afghans). Yes, they say it’s not the USA but a ‘coalition’. Yes, a ‘coalition’ that goes along with the USA, making up numbers, adding colour and legitimacy. Fools few.

This particular offensive purchased legitimacy from the Arab League which sanctioned a no-fly zone over Libya in view of Muammar Gaddafi launching air strikes against armed groups challenging him. The Arab League has since expressed misgivings after the USA and its non-Arab allies (only Qatar and the UAE have expressed support for the military action, the latter a big importer of weapons from the USA) bombed Libya and killed dozens of people. Yes, in order to save people, ie like having sex to ensure virginity.

Very soon Barack Obama will say ‘it is not enough to ensure that nothing but white flies in the no-fly zone’ and press for more. The lexicons pertaining to Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan will be dusted and perused by Hillary Clinton and others for terminology and phrase. And the Arab League will contemplate their collective navel once again.

What’s with the Arab League? Surely, these people can’t be ignorant about what Uncle Sam really wants? The answer, ironically, came from Gaddafi himself. At the annual Arab Leaders’ Summit in March 2008, Gaddafi asked, ‘Where is the Arabs’ dignity, their future, their very existence?’ and observed, ‘Everything has disappeared’.

‘Our blood and our language may be one, but there is nothing that can unite us,’ he added and is reported to have mocked a plan by the Arab League to start Arab cooperation on a joint nuclear program thus: ‘How can we do that? We hate each other, we wish ill of each other and our intelligence services conspire against each other. We are our own enemy.’

A friend of mine elaborated in an email: ‘Arab politics is all about hypocrisy. In public they kiss each other and sneer behind closed doors. As you can see, it’s not a well-kept secret. The Arabs could have united to form one great pan Arab Force but one-upmanship saw umpteen attempts and efforts being scuttled. Ghaddafi routinely castigated this hypocrisy at every Arab League meeting telling them what a farce they all are when in actuality one was spying on the other.

He challenged one Arab country to name another with whom they’re friendly - and there were no takers. He said, “in fact we are more friendly with Russia and/or America than with each other”. He also reminded them that when the US raided Iraq, on a pretense and then hanged Hussein, a leader of one of the Arab league countries, none ventured to protest but instead, thanked God it was not one of them. He finally asked them “Who will be next” not even dreaming that he’d be the one!’

The fault is not with the Arabs, though. It is with their ‘leaders’. Qatar is an absolute monarchy. The United Arab Emirates is, well, made up of regions headed by Emirs. These are not democracies. These are the countries that have supported the military action. Then there’s Saudi Arabia, Obama’s key ally in the Middle East and a despotic regime if ever there was one and one which has sent troops to Bahrain to prop a tyrannical monarchy against a people’s uprising.

These leaders are not democratically elected. They are despotic to the core. Barack Obama does not utter the word ‘democracy’ with respect to such regimes. No no-fly-zones in these countries. No sanctions. No arm-twisting. Full support instead.

Gaddafi has promised a long war. The long and short of it, though, is the fact that a revolution needs to happen in the region and not one led by Barack Obama and his pals. There’s a question that should be put to the Arab people: ‘Who do you wish to design your future, Muammar Gaddafi or Barack Obama?’ I am sure that Gaddafi will not get 100 percent backing.

I am pretty sure that Obama will get close to zero. A second question: How do we find out the true sentiments of the Arab people? Here’s the rub: we can’t, because most of the countries we are talking about are not democracies!

Gaddafi’s observations in March 2008 indicated that the Arab League was impotent. Well, someone else from another part of the world has just displayed his manhood.

He’s in fact waving his manhood at the leaders of the Arab League. Have they noticed? I doubt it. I am pretty sure they’ve reverted to their favourite pastime of navel gazing.

Gaddafi is no saint. He’s a man though. That much can be said.

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer who contributes a weekly column titled 'Subterranean Transcripts' to the Daily Mirror.  He can be reached at malindasenevi@gmail.com

Read more

When a war-like people got a war they liked

This was first published in the Daily News exactly 5 years ago (March 23, 2011).  It was 'Libya' back then.  Now it is 'Syria'.  Tomorrow? Who can tell.  It's an oft-performed drama and as such it is useful to know the script. 

'We like war; we are a war-like people.’ - George Carlin on trigger-happy America (of the United States)

Barack Obama and his gang of international thugs got UN clearance (Surprise! Surprise!) to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. The purpose was to prevent Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi from launching air strikes against forces opposed to him. They didn’t want civilians harmed. Well, it seems that Obama’s thugs feel that some civilians constitute ‘fair target’.

That’s not surprising, for the United States of America has for more than a century operated as though people who are not white and people who are not Christians are disposable. In the Bush years, they invented a sanitized term for these victims. ‘Collateral’ they called it. Yes, someone can ask, ‘how about Hitler’s Germans?’ Well, someone else can argue, ‘They were an exception yes, but then again, that’s only because the Germans were cutting in on the action’. That’s Uncle Sam’s ‘action’.

The Arab Coalition was taken for a ride. They didn’t mind the no-fly zone but didn’t expect Obama to destroy Gaddafi’s strike capabilities or kill civilians. Sorry, ‘generate collateral’. Only the United Arab Emirates has pledged to support this war and guess who has beefed up the UAE’s arsenal? Why, Uncle Sam of course!

Barack Obama	Hillary Clinton
Nicholas Sarkozy	Muammar Gaddafi

The Arab League is now having second thoughts, we are told. They did not expect (talk about naivete!) this kind of intense military action and certainly not the kind that would endanger civilians. War is what the USA is about. The USA needs war like you and I need to breathe. For all Nicholas Sarkozy’s grandstanding and Hillary Clinton’s assertions that the US would ‘support’ an international coalition ‘to enforce the terms of Resolution 1973’, it’s been Uncle Sam’s adventure (yet again). The US is not in the lead but conducting all military operations.

It is not about Gaddafi being a dictator. The United States supports all kinds of tyrants in all parts of the world. Obama would never rush to ‘help the people’ in Bahrain, for example. Ninety percent of Bahrain Petroleum Company’s employees went on strike last week in response to a Police crackdown on anti-government demonstrations. 

On March 15, the Bahrain Government declared a three month state of emergency to counter increasing discontent among the population, especially the Shiite Muslim majority, which is calling for democracy and civil rights in the Sunni-ruled kingdom. No, Obama will not send in the Marines, not unless he has a deal with the would-be ousters so that the US can continue to use Bahrain as a military base. Neither would he sanction military action against Yemen, which declared a state of emergency on March 18.

Ideally for Obama, ‘Libya’ would exacerbate political stability in the region to the point that his dictator pals would have to spend billions of dollars to buy US weapons. Obama, like all his predecessors who went to war, needs a distraction. If killing ‘other folks’ and getting a handful of Marines killed makes for a surge in patriotism and if this can extend his political life, he would do it. Well, he has. That’s two birds, ladies and gentlemen: threats to Obama’s political future and a sagging economy. Libya and the UN will pay for all expenses eventually. That’s the bottom line. The ‘bonus’ is what this would do to US arms sales. Some thugs are going to make bucks.

The United States of America needs something really bad. It’s called ‘civilization’. I am not betting they’ll get it any time soon.

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer who contributes a weekly column to the Daily Mirror titled 'Subterranean Transcripts'.  He can be reached at malindasenevi@gmail.com

Read more

Beware of diplomats, they have license to kill we are told

Raymond Davis is not an uncommon name in countries where English is spoken by the majority. The name got some notoriety courtesy of the man who shot two Pakistani men in the back on January 29, 2011. That Raymond Davis, is a confirmed CIA operative who operated in Pakistan with the vaguest of links with the US Embassy in that country and certainly nothing that warranted the description ‘diplomat’.

Those for whom the names ‘Raymond’ and ‘Davis’ sound familiar are unlikely to know of any Faizan or Faheem, the names of the two young men Davis shot to death. Neither would they know of an Ibadur-Rehman, the name of a biker who was crushed to death by an employee of the US Embassy who had raced along the wrong side of the road in a land cruiser, in an attempt to rescue the murderer.

The families of the two murdered men have been forced to take ‘Blood Money,’ which according to Sharia Law includes ‘forgiving murderer’ and therefore acquittal. Ibadur-Rehman has since been forgotten. This ‘diplomat’ is to be tried in US courts, but that’s no consolation to the murdered or their subsequently arm-twisted families. One notes, also, that the US criminal justice system is notorious for its racism and summary acquittal of officers charged with racism and murder. Those who are interested could google ‘Amadou Diallo’ or ‘Rodney King’, two of the more prominent cases which were too in-your-face for the mainstream media to ignore or fudge, as it has in the case of the January 29 shooting.

While books can be written about the Raymond Davis case, I thought it would be good to talk about the ‘diplomatic’ element.

Barack Obama, a man who has given the green light to torture and cover-up in cases involving detainees in Guantanamo Bay and other off-shore torture chambers run by the US military (including those in Iraq and Afghanistan) and has chosen to fudge the human rights issues pertaining to the incarceration of Bradley Manning (including humiliation, absence of due process), calls this murderer, Raymond Davis, ‘our diplomat’.

The US Government left no stone unturned to get their ‘diplomat’ released, even threatening Pakistan with ‘dire consequences’ if they did not accede to this ‘request’. This ‘diplomat’ was, let me repeat, a CIA operative and it has been discovered that he was in possession of a lot of undiplomatic material. He carried a gun. He claims he shot in self-defence. It is strange that the victims, who according to him were about to shoot him, had their backs turned to the murderer. It is strange that ‘diplomats’ have to carry guns. It is strange that ‘private security officers’ are called ‘diplomats’. Next we will hear, I suppose, that janitors in embassies are also ‘diplomats’ and have the same right to kill and get away with it as Davis apparently has.

We are living in a world where James Bond gadgets are available in the real arms market and are regularly used by real-life secret agents. Here’s some information from the Internet:What all this means is that diplomats have double-o privileges, ie ‘the license of kill’ a la James Bond. It means that every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane, Patricia and Kathy in every embassy in every country, from ambassador to his/her toe-nail clipping maid has the right to carry arms and shoot anyone and put it all down to ‘self-defense’. The relevant paragraphs pertaining to diplomatic immunity will be quoted, the murderer acquitted and duly sent to ‘trial’ back home, branded ‘hero’ (most likely) and packed to another embassy in another country. This might be called the Raymond Davis method of getting away with murder.

‘True-life secret agents usually favour small-calibre handguns because they are easy to conceal. However, in situations where greater firepower, range or accuracy is needed, special rifles or machine guns can be made to fold down or disassemble into smaller components that are easy to hide. During World War II, the British Sten submachine gun was provided to French resistance operatives and other Allied spies - it could be collapsed into three pieces for hiding. Spies have used very Bond -like concealed, single-shot weapons disguised as common objects. A tiny pistol that can fit into a belt buckle, a cigarette that could fire a single 22 calibre round when the operative pulled a string with his teeth, a single-shot pen gun and a wrist-holster that could fire with a single arm movement were all actually used. Guns were also concealed in flashlights, gloves, pipes, pencils, tubes of toothpaste and rolled up newspaper.

Obama’s ‘Our Diplomat’ has created a precedent. One can safely assume that all US diplomats carry guns and engage in spying. One can assume that they are willing and able to shoot to kill. We know that the US is right at the top when it comes to manufacturing and using sophisticated, deadly and concealable weaponry. We know that the Uncle Sam is the mother of double-standards. We know that what’s sauce for the any goose is not sauce for the US gander. We would not be faulted for saying that everyone who comes within firing range of any US diplomat is a potential dead-duck, for these are trigger-happy two-tongued terrorists, nothing less. That’s Obama speaking, friends.

No one will check Patricia Butenis’ handbag or her make-up case when she attends some function. Who knows, her right incisor might be a gun which can be activated with flick of tongue and shot when she speaks the words ‘human rights’.

The victim would not know what hit him/her and if anyone noticed or somehow it was found that she was the murderer, all she needs to do is call one of her security-guard-diplomats to rush to her aid, killing half a dozen people and make enough ‘news’ so that Barack Obama will scream the words ‘diplomatic immunity’ and threaten Sri Lanka with ‘dire consequences’.

Not saying it would happen, but it might. Better safe than sorry, they say. I would be wary of attending any function where anyone working for any embassy is present, especially those working for the US mission and those of Uncle Sam’s allies. Thank you, no.

This article was first published in the 'Daily News' exactly 5 years ago (March 21, 2011).  Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer.  His email is: malindasenevi@gmail.com

Read more

MH17 is re-hit in the afterlife

Courtesy www.malaymail.com

I was hit.  I wish I was a hit but no, I was hit.  For me at death-point or hit-point if you prefer who hit, how and why are irrelevant.    I was no misfit by any stretch of the imagination. I had some skies yet to fly, some miles to clock and some more perfect landings to make.  Some say I was hit and other claim I was mis-hit.  Either way, I went.  I took off in ways I never had before.  I flew into the afterlife even though I was broken, my wings clipped in ways no flying creature has ever been dismembered, and my engines scattered over a field I had never dreamed of and never imagined I would visit and certainly not in the way I eventually did. 

This is MH17 speaking, folks.  MH17 in the afterlife of a rude subversion of flight path and wrecking of all the to-do plans associated with destination.  And here, free-floating in the after-flight sans control towers, auto-pilots, visas, baggage claims and the usual complement of irritable, egotistical, self-righteous and insufferable passengers, much higher than engine and fuel could ever have taken me, I see things I’ve never seen before.

I see a crash site and that’s disturbing.  It’s no fun even in the intact and integrity of afterlife to see people gathered around supposedly to mourn but accompanied by some intent on turning carcass into political capital.  I’ve found that I can hear better right where I am, up where I (now) belong and all that kind of thing. 

I hear people screaming.  It would have been okay if the screams were coming from those who lost their near and dear, my co-dead who are now in their respective afterlives.  That’s legit, after all.  But no, the screams are emanating from the rear ends (it seems to me) of those really don’t give a damn about death and destruction (never mind the afterlife which they, at some point, must inhabit).  

As far as I can see (and trust me, I can see far, so far, further than any of these ‘omniscients’ with their pretentious punditry!) I have been turned into a pawn (how puny!) and so too all those who flew with me and re-flew in after death painlessness.  We are pawns of people trying to prove a pointless point; pointless to me, my fellow-dead and those who cared about all of us. It’s all about who did what and why. 

It’s getting crowded up here you know, with all the theories that have been floated since someone broke my heart and the hearts of others.  I always knew that reason, logic, pursuit of truth and such were never the strong point of those spoiling for a fight.  After all I know all about non-existent weapons of mass destruction and flimsy excuses to declare war on people who have done you no wrong but could be sitting on a lot of wealth.  ‘Shift their whatnots – get at the booty’ is an ancient story, we all know that.

What gets my afterlife gut, however, is the sheer inability of these folks to understand the term ‘sense of proportion’.  Here they talk in somber tone about who did what and when to create what conditions for which set of idiots to shoot me down for this, that and the other reason.  There should be independent investigations, some say, and I wonder if they know what the word ‘independence’ means because from up here I can see clearly that there’s no one who is not a stakeholder in the politics of preferred outcomes.  They are talking of sanction.   That too I can hear.  

But while all this noise is being made and while some nutcase residenced by some monumental mistake in a place called Geneva passes judgment in helluva-how-do-you-do mode, I can see bombs flying from a place some people were hoodwinked into believing was promised to them and right into hundreds of families so body parts fly in all direction as people who used to be people are made to swell the numbers of my newly found community, the after-dead. 

And they are talking about a black box.  About made-up tapes.   Assassination attempts.  Blame games. Sanctions.  Oh, the self-righteousness bugs the hell out of my afterlife senses.  Aren’t these the very dudes whose been making a killing, pardon the pun, in selling weapons of all kinds, including those capable of mass destruction?

Hey! What was that?  Whatever it was, it almost scorched off the end of my afterlife tail!  Did I float too far South and too low?  Can’t an airplane body have a peaceful and stress-free after life?  Whatever happened to rest-in-peace?  Damn it, it’s getting hot up here.  Must be the fires in Gaza. 

Read more

Hail All the Grandmasters of Bee-Essing!

Courtesy www.sunipix.com

‘We have new evidence that the Russians intend to deliver heavier and more powerful rocket launchers to the separatist forces in Ukraine, and have evidence that Russia is firing artillery from within Russia to attack Ukrainian military positions,’ US State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters during the Thursday afternoon briefing last week.

That’s a serious claim.  A very serious claim.  A claim so serious that claimant has to substantiate it.  Marie Harf failed there.  She was questioned by an AFP reporter, Matthew Lee about the basis for the claim she simply said ‘based on some intelligence information.’

All this comes in the aftermath of Washington first claiming that it is impossible to rule out Russia providing technical assistance with regard to the surface-to-air missiles blamed for taking down MH17 which was quickly morphed into ‘proof positive’.  That ‘proof’ which included images allegedly showing Russian military fighting alongside anti-Kiev militiamen was later admitted to be ‘inaccurate’.

The key word however is ‘intelligence’.  It is impossible to assess Harf’s claims without alluding to another intelligence-moment.  That was when US ‘intelligence’ provided ‘proof positive’ about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction.  The US and its allies went to war on the basis of this ‘evidence’.  Today, the world knows, that it was a trumped up charge.  Iraq became a US-EU plaything.  Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis perished. Iraq remains a cemetery.  Courtesy, we must add, ‘US intelligence’. 

Since all this umbrage emanating from Washington has to do with the downing of a plane it is relevant to refer to another plane-downing.    On July 3, 1988 Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai was shot down by a surface-to-air missile fired from USS Vincennes.  It happened in Iranian airspace, over Iran’s territorial waters in the Persian Gult and on the flight’s normal flight path.  A total of 290 people including 66 children died.  President George W Bush, referring to that wanton crime against humanity infamously said, ‘I will never apologize for the United States. I don’t care what the facts are.  I’m not an apologize-for-America kind of guy.’

The contradictions, sleight-of-hand, downright lying and utter contempt for all norms of civility in conduct by the United States of America have become, sadly, ‘just another one of those things’.  It’s so common, in other words.  US double-speak is now daily news and the tragedy is that the US doesn’t seem to give a damn over tongue-tripping and half-truths. 

So it is ok for the USA to shoot down a plane carrying passengers and then say, ‘we will not even apologize’.  The world has to swallow it all. It is ok also for the USA to preface claim with ‘we have evidence’ even when there’s no shred of proof, to point fingers at the particular enemy of the moment, demand action and sanction and even declare war, tossing missiles, launching drone attacks and running torture chambers.  It’s easy because of the Bushism ‘We don’t care about facts’.  It’s easy because it goes with a corollary: ‘We will conjure facts and force you to care about them!’ 

That, ladies and gentlemen is the world we live in. 

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the same-same that’s happening with respect to Gaza.   There was spoof of a BBC stroller posted on Facebook which referred to an Israeli soldier suffering an ankle injury.  BBC is not that bad, but it’s bad enough.  And that goes for all Western media reporting on ‘Gaza’, falling over one another to play down the carnage to something akin to someone bruising his knee when tripped by someone else. 

Here’s another FB comment which puts things in perspective:

‘Over 800 human beings murdered in Gaza as of today (and some in the West Bank as well). 190 of them i.e. approximately 25% of them were children. Yet the only picture the NYT can find to run is one of the bodies of "a Jihadist leader" and his two sons. Who out there still believes you get the real news from American newspapers? Do you have children aged 11 and 13? Dozens of those are dead in the prison that is Gaza. Anyone with a newborn, or infants? Those too. Can you shut your eyes for one minute and imagine holding the dead body of your 11 year old or your 13 year old or your newborn or infant in your arms? How about trying to find their bodies underneath the rubble of your entire neighborhood while the shelling continues? Half of the $37 billion that the U.S. gives in foreign aid goes to Israel for arms/military. We are complicit, people. And until we say something - until you go to your local demonstrations, until you place your voice and your body not against bombs, but simply on any one of our well-managed, quiet American city streets, this will not stop. Is that really too much to ask of ourselves?’

The above was written by a citizen of the USA.  Those facts, Harf and other spokespersons of the Obama administration, would not even bother to comment on because slaughter has been sanctioned by Washington in the name of ‘defence’.  The ‘just war’ principle, however, is not applied across the board.  In short, the USA has treated ‘lie’ and ‘truth’ in such deft and interchangeable ways that foreign policy has become a piece of cake for that country. 

Does the media pick it up? Well, it took Russia Today to elaborate on the politics of misrepresentation so effectively obtained by the AFP correspondent.  BBC didn’t ‘see’ it.  None of the US networks bothered to take Harf to task.  No one asked the most important question, ‘Hey! Wait a minute Ma’am, isn’t that the line Dubya Bush used to launch a campaign that resulted in half a million Iraqi children dying, not to mention produced a nation that doesn’t seem to be able to stop the blood-letting?’ 

In this scenario it is futile to debate Washington because that kind of exercise presumes some minimal degree of integrity.  Washington can’t spell the word.  Perhaps it is better to call Washington’s bluff and ask some unanswerable questions and make some indisputable points. 

‘We have conclusive proof that the sewerage system in Washington DC has collapsed, that people can’t flush their poo-poo down the toilet bowl and that the s*** has literally hit the fan.  Proof of that is the stink that quite asphyxiates correspondents when US spokespersons deign to speak.’

‘Ban Ki-moon does not have a back bone; he has an artificial contraption which can help him sit or stand straight for the few minutes he shows up in public.  The US representative in Geneva just before he faces the camera dabs his cheeks, forehead and chin with a special powder that allows Ki-moon to keep a straight face.’

‘The earth is flat.’

‘The Oxford Dictionary has changed the definition of terrorist: ‘an individual so named by the USA”.’

‘The Oxford Dictionary has changed the definition of fact: “that which the USA has determined to be true”.’

‘Truth is dead.  Lie is dead.  They fornicate in the afterlife of global political economy and that love-making yields death, destruction, dismemberment, displacement and tears that the Western media does not find newsworthy.’

’

‘

Read more

The wages of believing one’s own lies

Eleven years ago, when the World Trade Centre, NY, the White House and the Pentagon were subjected to multiple attacks, the world was shocked.  Americans of the United States were shocked beyond belief.  World-shock was probably prompted by two things.  First, the audacity of the attack and the tragedy it produced, and secondly on account of the unthinkable having happened; the US was supposed to be invincible or that is the impression that Washington-based media-spin industry had created. 

When the shock abated, as often happens, sympathy for victim was laced with the whispered expression, ‘just deserts’.  People talked of cocks coming home to roost, of what went around coming around.  The ‘shock’ felt by the USA was quickly replaced by belligerence, revenge-intent and unbridled racism.  Nothing went from the people of Iraq or those of Afghanistan, but they were bombed into the Middle Ages. In the name of justice and democracy. 

Then came the turn of the Middle East and the now infamous ‘Arab Spring’ which, after a few hopeful months, settled into an unending winter of discontent.  The USA instigated rebellion.  Rebels were armed.  Al Qaeda operatives in these countries suddenly became bosom buddies.  The USA, as a nation, cheered when the Libyan leader was murdered in cold blood. 

And two days ago, the US Ambassador to Libya, J Christopher Stevens, was killed in an attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.  It is reported that unidentified armed men had stormed the grounds overnight amid uproar among Muslims over a US-produced film said to insult Prophet Muhammed. 

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State is upset, naturally.  She says ‘many Americans (sic) are asking how such an attack could have happened in a country America (sic) had helped to liberate’.  The answer lies perhaps in a shocking inability to extricate oneself from the lies one propagates.  Propaganda is an inevitable part of politics, but it remains something that comes in the ‘overstatement’ column.  It is about inflation.  It tweaks or (in most cases) exaggerates the dimensions of truth.  The astute politician will see it as tool but will not believe his/her own lie.

There is a reason why the world understood 9/11 and understood it differently from the way the US chose to read it.  There is a reason why the world understands this horrific act that took the life of Stevens, even though the world will not approve. 

The USA must wake up from its drunken imperialist stupor.  Clinton and Obama and any others who may want to be President and/or Secretary of State in that country must understand that the world is not fooled by media spin.  They must understand that if they continue to operate in the manner they have, where queries about crimes against humanity are brushed aside with ‘don’t ask me that question’ or ‘we are executing a plan’ or some such nonsense, no Ambassador or US representative anywhere in the world is safe.  Steven is a victim of US foreign policy in the first instance and secondly that of a mob attack.  Mobs, Clinton should also understand, are made not just by fanatics but by those who stoke the fires of fanaticism by their own brand of religious intolerance. 

The USA is not a tolerant nation.  In the mad rush to ‘Save the USA from terrorism’, her leaders have forgotten that fostering terrorism has been a longtime strategy of containment and that terrorism is a preferred and frequently used fighting option (from Hiroshima/Nagasaki through CIA-led assassination to the drone attacks in Afghanistan).  The world is no less safe.  And no one is less safe than Americans (of the US) abroad.  J Christopher Stevens’ death testifies to this.  Clinton must understand. 

Read more

The Jayel Aheram story

Take any conflict and what it means to anyone depends where he or she is located, where he or she has been and where he or she desires to be.  I’ve just read testimonies of persons who have done military service in Afghanistan and Iraq, posted in a website called www.ourlivesourrights.org.  

For Jayel Aheram, a US Marine who served in Iraq, it is all made of guilt:

‘As an Iraq War veteran, the combat deaths and home front suicides of our troops not only fill me with grief, but also indescribable guilt.  Grief, for these men and women are much too young to have needlessly died in a needless war.  Guilt, for I feel I have not done enough to dissuade young Americans from participating in this injustice.  I wish I could tell them what awaits them: that they will bear a disproportionate number of the deaths in these wars, and if they survive, suffer massive psychological trauma – trauma that comes from being morally complicit in the murders of innocents – that compels their comrades-in-arms to commit an increasing number of suicides.  And that once the military is done with them, they will face disproportionately high unemployment rates, homelessness, and higher risk for suicides.  I feel personally responsible for my fellow veterans’ suffering and deaths.  It is a shame and the ultimate tragedy is that most Americans do not feel the same.’

The focus is on the soldier.  A woman speaks of rape and abuse by a fellow Marine.  Others, both military personnel as well as civilians, talk about how wrong these wars are. 

An Afghan offers a Travel Advisory of sorts: ‘Hey US Govt, NATO and all military personnel: Going to one of the world’s most impoverished and war-torn countries to BOMB & OPPRESS does NOT make you a HERO (emphasis his)!’  He wants the above categories of people to get the what-not off Afghanistan and recommends the following: ‘Refuse, resist, revote and go AWOL (that’s ‘absent without leave’)’. 

An Afghan woman put it softly but is as insistent: ‘You cannot bomb us into liberation!’ adding that ‘NATO’ is not equal to ‘Progress’. 

On the first count, i.e. the issue of what really happens to those who fight and survive, is a story that the grandmasters of the US military industrial complex don’t want the world to know.  It’s bad, naturally, for troop morale and will make recruitment tough.  Americans of the US don’t usually handle truth very well, for they tend to believe what the mainstream media tell them.  However, once they do get hold of the truth, they cling to it tenaciously.  The truth is that ex-service personnel in the USA don’t enjoy a fraction of what their counterparts in Sri Lanka who fought and defeated the world’s most ruthless terrorist outfit enjoy by way of post-conflict benefits.  The relevant truth, even if they’ve never heard of Sri Lanka, is that the glory of fighting for flag and anthem can’t be cashed once they lose their minds or are rendered homeless.

The second issue is of course part of the first and vice versa.  The invasion of Iraq was illegal and Bishop Tutu’s call for hauling George W Bush and Tony Blair to the Hague is a position widely supported by people all over the world.  Why Bishop Tutu has not called for the arrest of Barack Obama and David Cameron (and of course other war-mongering leaders in the EU) for crimes against humanity is of course hard to understand.  That ‘truth’ is the following: The USA and its allies are not bringing democracy to Afghanistan. They are killing people.  In the hundreds.  Almost every day.  And they are not doing this to make the world safer.  They are doing it because it is necessary for business, because it secures access to resources, especially oil and gas.  Moreover it is good for the arms industry.  And they are doing it not for the ordinary citizens of their respective countries but those who profit or stand to profit from this business. 

If ‘business’ requires that wars should continue and if it serves the interests political allies of these business enterprises, then rest assured there will be another war. Somewhere.   If for example Barack Obama snubs the UN and attacks Syria direct (Uncle Sam is currently using proxies), it could be because he is impatient to lay his hands on Syria’s resources. It could also be because he wants to give his re-election campaign a boost.  And that’s because most Americans of the US do not know what most of the world knows: the truth. 

The USA must fear Jayel Aheram and others like him.  They and not Barack Obama or Mitt Romney represent hope for their country and for relations between that country and the rest of the world. 

In wars there are casualties. Destruction and death.  Loss and grieving.  A lot is buried in conflicts.  The truth resists.  Jayel Aheram testifies to this.  It’s a good sign.  

Read more