`We were tortured`

  • 12 Jan 2006 00:03:48 GMT

    Should we earn money like this?. The attitude of the Men in that country is well known. The women there are not bothered as the men are allowed to take any number of women. The women are child producing machines.

    By sending our women there the family is broken and the husband runs riot. The children are ruined and eventually everything is lost. Our women are tempted first and later become victims of sedation and some are seen on the road loitering in search of clients.

  • 12 Jan 2006 01:15:53 GMT

    If such crimes were committed to these women by America or any `Western` nation, I wouldn`t be the least bit surprised if all these JVP hypocrites with their hoodlums would go on their street marches shouting about `Anti Imperialism` or some bull like that!

    HYPOCRITES!

  • 12 Jan 2006 01:37:18 GMT

    The unfortunate fact is that most of these house maids are willing to work as domestic helpers in the middle east at the risk of so many pitfalls rather than work as domestic helpers in SL itself. One reason is the prestige of working abroad and earning petro dollars. But they do not realise as to whether it is worth taking the risk. They may now be poorer than when they left SL but they definitely would be wiser! Education it is said does not come cheap!

  • 12 Jan 2006 03:32:13 GMT

    When Mr.Premadasa was determined to provide employment to women he atleast made them Bus conductors and Traffic Wardens. About a 1000 women were hired and prevented from going as House maid.

    I f you ask Mahinda to think of a plan to employ a 1000 Housemaids in another job here in SL, he will hang himself.

    Ape aanduwa, Pol gahannawa!

    Munta yudhdheth beha,anith eketh beha.

    Fairplay

  • 12 Jan 2006 09:53:01 GMT

    Hi..buddy Some59..Pls. no offense meant.

    The Foreign Ministry might be asleep to these atrocities

    committed by our Embassy guys whom you rightly addressed as Thugs-Kupadiyas and let me add one more `hithak papuwak Nathi Thakkadiyas`. The Saudi(kupadiyas) behaving as such could be expected as `women` is something not available freely in the open as in other countries, but what has got into our Sri Lankan `rogues` in the Embassies?!. The most notorious among the Embassies in the Middle East I hear is in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

    Well..then another piece of information I would like to share with you is regarding what you had written about the place from which the Sinhala race trace their ancestry in India - Orissa. This could be a probable place due to the proximity although there is no tangible evidence. According to many other sources the place of origin is assumed to be the State of Bengal.I too guess this could be probable because of the language similarities. Anyway this is a matter of conjecture by one and all.

    Then.. I would like to correct you(no offense meant once more!)on another issue you had written saying that the Muslims of Sri Lanka are the descendent`s of Sinhala & Tamil converts. This notion is completely wrong and should be corrected. The Majority of the Muslims of Sri Lanka are the descendent`s of Yemeni and Iraqi Traders who arrived in the Island 1000 years ago. It should be emphasized that there had been Non-Muslim Arab Traders who had also frequented the Island as far as 2400 years for trade. None of those Arabs settled down in the Island and their place in History had not been documented except in some Arab chronicles whose English translations I `ve read. The Arabs who came to the Island about 1300 years ago were Muslim Arabs and many of them had espoused mostly Sinhala and in some cases Tamil women and they settled down in the Island. Some were periodic visitors with a wife and family in the Island. These Yemeni/Iraqi Arabs were TRADERS and were not Invaders or Missionaries as had been the Portuguese or the Dutch. The Majority of Muslims are their descendent`s and NOT, I REPEAT, NOT Sinhala or Tamil converts. There are Tamil converts to Islam who had become a part of the Muslim community but here too the numbers are not in the thousands. Sinhala converts to Islam is exceptionally few and very negligible or not worth a count, in the Island. These are matters for thought and expresses the identity of a people who are part and parcel of the Lankan Society.

  • 12 Jan 2006 10:09:44 GMT

    I would like to here from ravi-r,muni-r,jay-r,anizam ,karthika,shanA,ASHAN ,anud and of course our one and only prof pera.

    please come and contribute in this thread as well.

  • 12 Jan 2006 11:24:03 GMT

    Hi..SomaRama59.... such stories are not unusual among these Housemaids in the Middle Eastern countries. I have heard pathetic incidents as mentioned in the News report in some of these Middle Eastern Countries. In countries like Saudi you could expect such behavior by some men which cannot be condoned. But, the behavior of our `goondas`

    (in other words-Thakkadiyas or Thugs)in the Embassies should not be condoned and they ought to be punished.

    Then..Some59..no offense meant..buddy.. The subject of the

    arrival of the so-called Aryans in the Island nearly 2500 years ago is a matter of much conjecture. There is no tangible evidence. Your notion of Orissa in India could be guessed due to the proximity to the Island. But then, a people traveling in Boats in search of adventure or new lands could go to any distance as their capabilities and the condition of their mode of transport would allow them.

    There are people in Sri Lanka(Scholars!) who presume and conjecture Vijaya, his Twin Brother Lala and the retinue would have set sail from the Bengal which could be a probability. The are people in Northern Bengal who have the name Sinha linked to their name and even the Bengali Language is somewhat akin to Sinhala having some common terms used in both the Languages. The Sinhalese having Facial resemblance to the Bengals is also a matter worth noting.

    On the other hand concerning the Muslims of Sri Lanka, your notion that they are descendent`s of Sinhala or Tamil converts to Islam is TOTALLY NOT CORRECT AND UNTRUE. Sri Lanka had been visited by NON-MUSLIM ARABS probably circa 2300 B.C. in search of trade and probably adventure. Remember the Phoenecians..! who were also a Semitic People like the Arabs were Sea-farer`s and Europe is indebted to them for the present day Alphabet.

    These early Arabs were not Muslims who were in the Island somewhere 2300 years ago. After the advent of Islam 1400 years ago there were Yemeni/Iraqi and probably Omani Arabs who came to Sri Lanka, the Conconi- Malabar Coast of

    India and the even to the Malacca Straights near Malaysia-Indonesia in search of Spices etc..as Traders. Most of them arrived alone without women and in the case of Sri Lanka they espoused Sinhala Women and in some cases Tamil women as well and many settled down in the coastal Areas from Puttalam up to Matara and beyond. There were also some among these Arabs who were temporary sojourners having a local women as wife and with children and would visit the Island

    from time to time depending on the Monsoon and the seasons.

    The present day Muslims in the Majority are the descendent`s of these Arabs and your notion of Sinhala converts or Tamils is totally NOT CORRECT. There are Tamil converts to Islam in the Island but their figures are comparatively very negligible and Sinhala Converts are almost non-existent with probably one convert in a Thousand. The Muslim Arabs being Traders they were not concerned with Conversions as had been the c

  • 12 Jan 2006 11:28:58 GMT

    Hi..SomaRama59.... such stories are not unusual among these Housemaids in the Middle Eastern countries. I have heard pathetic incidents as mentioned in the News report in some of these Middle Eastern Countries. In countries like Saudi you could expect such behavior by some men which cannot be condoned. But, the behavior of our `goondas`

    (in other words-Thakkadiyas or Thugs)in the Embassies should not be condoned and they ought to be punished.

    Then..Some59..no offense meant..buddy.. The subject of the

    arrival of the so-called Aryans in the Island nearly 2500 years ago is a matter of much conjecture. There is no tangible evidence. Your notion of Orissa in India could be guessed due to the proximity to the Island. But then, a people traveling in Boats in search of adventure or new lands could go to any distance as their capabilities and the condition of their mode of transport would allow them.

    There are people in Sri Lanka(Scholars!) who presume and conjecture Vijaya, his Twin Brother Lala and the retinue would have set sail from the Bengal which could be a probability. The are people in Northern Bengal who have the name Sinha linked to their name and even the Bengali Language is somewhat akin to Sinhala having some common terms used in both the Languages. The Sinhalese having Facial resemblance to the Bengals is also a matter worth noting.

    On the other hand concerning the Muslims of Sri Lanka, your notion that they are descendent`s of Sinhala or Tamil converts to Islam is TOTALLY NOT CORRECT AND UNTRUE. Sri Lanka had been visited by NON-MUSLIM ARABS probably circa 2300 B.C. in search of trade and probably adventure. Remember the Phoenecians..! who were also a Semitic People like the Arabs were Sea-farer`s and Europe is indebted to them for the present day Alphabet.

    These early Arabs were not Muslims who were in the Island somewhere 2300 years ago. After the advent of Islam 1400 years ago there were Yemeni/Iraqi and probably Omani Arabs who came to Sri Lanka, the Conconi- Malabar Coast of

    India and the even to the Malacca Straights near Malaysia-Indonesia in search of Spices etc..as Traders. Most of them arrived alone without women and in the case of Sri Lanka they espoused Sinhala Women and in some cases Tamil women as well and many settled down in the coastal Areas from Puttalam up to Matara and beyond. There were also some among these Arabs who were temporary sojourners having a local women as wife and with children and would visit the Island

    from time to time depending on the Monsoon and the seasons.

    The present day Muslims in the Majority are the descendent`s of these Arabs and your notion of Sinhala converts or Tamils is totally NOT CORRECT. There are Tamil converts to Islam in the Island but their figures are comparatively very negligible and Sinhala Converts are almost non-existent with probably one convert in a Thousand. The Muslim Arabs being Traders they were not concerned with Conversions as had been the c

  • 12 Jan 2006 11:46:58 GMT

    SomaRama59... (Continuation)..

    The Arab Traders were concerned with Trade and were not Invaders or Missionaries as had been the Portuguese or the Dutch.Even today.. there are no Muslim missionaries in Sri Lanka trying convert either the Sinhalese or the Tamils. Those who had embraced Islam from these communities had done so only on their own conviction and nothing else.

  • 12 Jan 2006 12:16:20 GMT

    Tigeress19

    Why do you have to hear from ravi-r, muni-r, jay-r, anizam, karthika, shanA, ASHAN ,anud and pera.

    You should ask your older generation from north about what happened to little servant girls in their houses.

    In case if they have forgotten there were incidents where these little girls were pushed into water wells when their parents asked for their wages.

    These little girls couldn`t go home for festivals such as New year or Diwali because these little girls had to work twice hard to prepare your houses for these festivals.

    There little girls were intimacy objects for your men and when these girls were pregnant by these men they would end up in wells too.

    Therefore you don`t have to ask anyone but your older generation to find out how they treated their servants. I am sure it was much worse than the Arabs.