|
|
Norway blocking Government efforts to corner LTTE
Full News Article
ksama
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 375
Member Profile
|
10 Sep 2005 18:08:09 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Hi Tigress 19,
It is nice to see the hate is gradually reducing. A litle by little the loving kindness increasing. See, how easy to spend the day now.
I am happy for you my dear. |
tigeress19
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3760
Member Profile
|
10 Sep 2005 20:32:28 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ksama
i only hate the racist people from lanka.(you might think im a tamil racist but you have not been in my situation or like the other tamils situation).
this forum keep things alive!!!!! |
ksama
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 375
Member Profile
|
10 Sep 2005 21:55:37 GMT Report for Abuse
|
My dear Tigress19,
I am a sinhala person, but 30% of my friends are sinala and 40% of my friends are tamil and other 10% are from muslim and 20% from Burgers and other nationalies from the international community. (I mean 'friends' not friends and colleagues and acquaints), so I think I know a little bit of your frustration.
In 1990s when there was seeming to be another communal troubles one of our tamil friend was with us in oder to avoid any unfortunate incident and many sinhala neighbours knew it and appreciate what we were doing.
Just becuase of the behaviour of theieves, thugs and some politicians (in 1980s and ..) don't put us sinhalese into the same account please.
We don't put all tamils into the LTTE account.
ok darling.
Edited By - ksama - 10 Sep 2005 21:57:57 GMT |
Fairplay
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2503
Member Profile
|
10 Sep 2005 23:57:41 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ksama,
Did you mean ' I ' not 'we' ???
You cannot generalise, is that right ?? |
ksama
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 375
Member Profile
|
11 Sep 2005 07:38:17 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dear Fairplay,
I know, it is difficult to generalize many things without having exact facts with you.
But in this case I like to generalize for the sake of sinalese and if you do not want to includ in 'we' we can exclude you, and any body can be excluded if not happy with including in 'we' here.
Until then I am happy to say we, for the sake of forward looking rather than stuck in the same,old, stale argument |
saleemtariq
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 291
Member Profile
|
11 Sep 2005 11:30:29 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ksama,
In SL 'I' means just me and 'we' generally either means minority or majority as the case may be.
We know that majority of Sinhalese stand for peace, as the past has shown unabiguously. In every election the party stands on peace platform wins and forms the government except in 1956. Even then the Prime Minister with 88 out of 95 elected MPs singned a pact, known as B-C Pact, with the democratic leader of the minorities to solve the ethnic problem once and for all. But the tiny minority on Sinhalse and monks (I do not refer to them as Buiddhist monks fearing disrespecting the great Lord) not only distrupted the honouring that pact but also aroused communal riots that end up killing 1000's of innocent lives and shipped them to Nortgeast. Even the subsequent electiions and opion polls demonstrate the clear commitment of the silent majority for peace.
By the same token we must admit that it's not just one or two individuals at random who sabotage efforts of finding a solution and create riots as those who hunted for minorities always used electoral registers and government owned vehicles to demolish homes of minorities and kill them.
In any society less than 10% of the people who commit crimes and enforce the governments to employ police and judges and give employments to the lawyers.
The powerful and poisnous minority must be defeated to develop the country by reaping the peace dividend. |
shan
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 864
Member Profile
|
11 Sep 2005 17:25:12 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha
From your previous post within double brackets
((SHAN:
Mister, Get this crystal clear. I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEMS ABOUT YOUR ENGLISH. Your English MAY not be very good, and mine is DEFINETELY not good. So I am not in a position to advise you how to write English.
The problem with your writing is you are not responding to what I ask. You just write something.
THIS IS EXTRACTED FROM YOUR LAST POST (modified).
*********************************************************************
SHAN in a previous post wrote: Kandy king is answerable to QUEEN OK. There was no such independent Kandy king after Rajasingan. Kangarathanam was WORKING FOR KANDY KING IN 1921. How frequent these Kandy kings did the so called census before? What was the Sinhala population in 1948 in the eastern province? What is now? (Emphasis, mine).
In response to this I asked him: Do you still stand by this statement. If not, just say NO. Otherwise please give the name of the KANDY KING who answered to the Queen of UK. Also give the name of the Kandy King who ruled in 1921. )
This is how SHAN replied to the question I asked: Europeans never had a massive population to be present and rule the country. They forced deals with the local ruler to do their business. If they were not agreeing rulers are changed or challenged. This is what I meant. Do you think that is independent?
********************************************************************** ))
My Answer
PLEASE READ YOUR ORIGINAL POST AND THE WAY YOU WROTE WHICH MADE ME CONFUSED. I ASSUMED THAT YOU ARE REFERING TO THE LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE IN KANDY AS THE ?KING.
This was your post on 1st of Sep
(SHAN Again x 2:
2) Quote: Obviously there should have been big big troubles when SL Tamils came here and we would not been invited without a single trouble do you agree?
On certain occasions, there were records of conflicts that took place between Tamils and Sinhalas, the one most famous is that between Elara (Ellilan) and Dutu Gemunu (Dutta Gamini). On certain other occasions Sinhalas calmly moved out from those areas without much of objections. There are evidence in this regards as late as from 20th Century. According to an account in the 1921 Census reports, Mudliyar of Batticaloa Kachcheri S. O. KANAGARATHNAM wrote on the approaching settlements of Muslims and Tamils: ?The whole of the Batticaloa District was under the King of Kandy. Sinhala Villages were dying out?. According to the Sessional Paper 43 of 1882 under the heading ?Forest Administration? (Chapter I Page 2): The gradual spread of the Tamils down the coast especially in the East and the fact that nowhere except in the Northern Province and in Tamankaduwa old Tamankaduwa stretched to the North East coast , do they form more than coastal settlements, are both striking. Wherever the Tamil or the Mohomendan comes to settle, the Sinhalese is driven back to the forest where he earns a precarious existence by chena cultivation and by hunting?)
My answer cont.
On Mar 2, 1815, Lanka was ceded to the British under a treaty called the Kandyan Convention. You were talking some thing in 1921 then 1882 in between Kandy king and a Tamil Mudaliar in batticalo. What can I infer from that? Your answer was vague. You didn?t mention any big battles and mass mass migration. I hope you will answer later.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mucha you continued as within brackets
(About Ishwaran Temples:
Foget about this. You do not have any valuable information about the so called inscription you spoke about, but are trying to hide the very fact. There is no point of giving my explanation again here since I have given this on two different occasions.
In the 25th page of this discussion you wrote: I am confident to tell you that I have inscriptions in my pocket date back to 6th century AD about these temples .
What I am politely asking you is just to empty your pocket. That?s all.)
My Answer is
I am pretty sure you would have seen my answer to the Tigress 19 about this. Before Buddhism was introduced you all were Demon worshipers. If you say Tamils were not here in 6/ 7 century, it is your duty to produce Saivaite Sinhala Kings and Saivite Sinhalease about these temples. I have given enough evidence re this matter. I cannot explain Hindu and Tamil origins in this forum. Please visit the site Tigress Mentioned above and see yourself. Thevarams were wrote in Tamil not in Pali. You are the one brought your Kings and Devals story
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mucha you cont as within brackets
(About Battles between Sinhalas and Portuguese and Dutch:
You wrote: You (i.e. Sinhalas) didn?t put up resistance to Portuguese! Or Dutch! Well done.
After giving all the evidence about the Battles those took place at places like DANTHURE, RANDENIWALA, GANNORUWA, MULLERIYAWA, if you still say that you stood by your statement, may god bless you SHAN.)
My Answer
Did you read my answer to that post?
When Indian Red cross brought relieve material to Jaffna people your navy intercepted the boats. Didn?t they? Like that your Sinhala forces fighting in the N&E. Is that clear?
( Even if there was a battle that does not necessarily reflects the local population. Eg; If you cross from Syria to Iraq now you will be caught by US forces.)
Hope you had a Good Weekend.
-Shan |
asir
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 40
Member Profile
|
11 Sep 2005 21:57:13 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Well, well, well!
someone said history is my guide! (path finger)
oh))))) this is too much to digest!............
so there were two peoples fighting and forming alliance as and when needed to sustain a political equilibrium at various times, historically.
so, even if they divide this country, will history repeat on these lines again? or will they stop fighting and form alliances, because of a binding equilibrium that compells them to settle down.
the tamil-singhala relationship is certainly a blood relationship after a couple of thousand years of people changing language, religion and even names.
may be ( ? ) it's best to separate so the (historical) need to align will settle in eventually, overwhelming the separation.
eventhough this might sound a political bait, there is much more to substantiate a separation as a solution to re-unite!
question:
where will singhala budhist nationalism fit into this equation????.
............may be there is a way out for this purpose too.
although i see the singhala budhist nationalism as self destructive in a unitary state, i can see it as non destructive in a non unitary state.
p.s.
i am unable to understand mahinda!
is he serious about the 'no go'jvp alliance?
or is he too clever to agree with jvp and then.....
withdraw troops from northeast before things heatup!
either way, mahinda or ranil, the outcome will be favorable for tamils because of the comprehensive but maverick stance taken by mahinda aiya. i cannot imagine anura being pm. he might walk into the parliament in ammudey to impress the singhala nation and especially the farmers to win votes without much to show.
Edited By - asir - 12 Sep 2005 03:32:33 GMT |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1560
Member Profile
|
12 Sep 2005 03:22:28 GMT Report for Abuse
|
SHAN and Others:
I am bit busy with other stuff and will be back ASAP (most probably tomorrow, if not late in the vening).
I appreciate your effort and time.
See you soon.
Cheers.
-Muchalinda
. |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1560
Member Profile
|
13 Sep 2005 04:33:18 GMT Report for Abuse
|
SHAN:
Thanks for the reply and for your patience. However, the way you have responded to some of the questions I raised make me think whether is it worth enough to continue this discussion, because you are still trying to stand by some of the things you said.
1. You first told that Kandy Kings were subjugated by the Queen (of UK).
2. You again told that Mudliyar S. O. Kanakarathnam made such a statement in 1921 because he is under the rule of a Kandy King.
3. You also told that Sinhalas never fought with Portuguese or Dutch.
4. You also told that you have enough inscriptional evidence to prove the origins of the Ishwaran Temples.
THE REAL FUNNY THING IS YOU ARE STILL STAND BY (AND JUSTIFY) THESE STATEMENTS. THIS IS HILLARIOUS.
Do you really think any sensible person would continue any discussion with you any longer. It does not matter whether you misunderstood or missed any thing. But a reasonable man expects you to admit that the above statements are wrong without going around. If you cannot admit to such a clear and plain mistakes of the magnitude of the above, how would one expects you to agree (or disagree) to any sensitive topic like Ishwaran Temples or the Origins of Sri Lankan Veddas. So, please do not try to twist the above statements any longer. Either accept the fact they are WRONG or just say that you do not want to continue any more because I am not ready to go any further without you being subscribing to above.
-Muchalinda
PS: I am happy to continue this discussion (including that on Ishwaran Temples and Veddas of SL) with anyone who are willing to admit the above statements made by SHAN are wrong OR are capable of proving the above beyond reasonable doubts.
GOOD LUCK
. |
|
