අරාබි වසන්තය ඇවිදින් හේමන්තය ඉදිරියට

(මෙය රිවිර පත්‍රයේ පළ නොකළ ලිපියකි)

පසුගිය 8 වැනි දා මෙරටට අරාබි වසන්තය උදාවිය. එය වසන්තයක් වන්නේ රටට නොව බටහිරයන්ට, ඔවුන්ගේ අනුගාමිකය ඊනියා උගතුන්ට හා දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන්ට ය. අප වැනි නූගතුන්ට, සාමාන්‍ය ජනයාට දැඩි ශීත කාලයකට ඉදිරියේ දී මුහුණ දීමට සිදුවනු ඇත. ජාතිය පාවාදුන්නෝ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන් සමග පෙම් කෙළියේ පසුවෙති. ඔවුන්ගේ මධුසමය ගෙවෙනු ඇත්තේ සිංහලයන්ගේ මළකඳන් පාවෙන ලේ විලක ය.  අද සිංහලයන්ට නායකත්වයක් නැත. කිසි දෙයක් කරගත නොහැකි පිරිසක් තැන තැන ඊනියා සාකච්ඡා පවත්වති. එහෙත් ඔවුන්ට අරමුණක් නැත. සාකච්ඡා තේ බීමට සීමාවෙයි. ආණ්ඩුව ඉතා ඉක්මණින් තම පරාජය වසා ගනු ඇත. පෞද්ගලිකව ගතහොත් මට කළ හැකි දෙයක් නැත. පිරිස් සංවිධානය කිරීමේ ලා ඉතා දුර්වලයකු වන මට උපක්‍රම කිසිවක් නො තේරෙයි. හැරත් මිනිස්සු මා කියන දෙයක් ගැන සැලකිල්ලක් නො දක්වති. මා තවමත් පුවත්පත්වලට (දැන් එය දෙකකට පමණක් සීමා වී ඇත) ලියන්නේ තවමත් මගේ මමත්වය නොනැසී ඇති බැවින් මිස ඉන් සත පහක වැඩක් රටට වන නිසා නො වේ. (මේ ලිපිය ඉරිදා රිවිර පත්‍රය පළ කළේ නැත. එමෙන් ම දිනපතා රිවිර පත්‍රයට පසුගිය සතියේ යවන ලද ලිපිය ද පළ වූයේ නැත. එබැවින් මින් මතු රිවිර පුවත්පතට ද නො ලියමි. අවුරුදු තිහක් පමණ ලිපි ලිවීමෙන් පසු කිසිදු වැඩක් වී නැති බැවින් ලිපි ලිවීම නතර කිරීමෙන් රටට එය නොදැනෙනු ඇත)     

එහෙත් ඒ ලිවීමෙන් හා ජනමාධ්‍යවල පෙනී සිටීමෙන් රටට වැඩක් නැති වුවත් පෞද්ගලික ව ගතහොත් මට විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිෂන් සභාවෙහි සාමාජිකත්වයක් ලැබිණි. එය තනතුරක් නො වීය. එයට වැටුපක් නොලැබුණත් කොමිෂමේ රැස්වීම්වලට සහභාගි වීම වෙනුවෙන් දිමනාවක් ලැබිණි. මාස හයක කාලයක් මම ඒ සාමාජිකත්වය දැරීමි.  ඉන් රටට හෝ කොමිෂමට හෝ උසස් අධ්‍යාපනයට හෝ තුට්ටුවක වැඩක් නොවුවත් මට නම් ගුවනින් ත්‍රිකුණාමලයට හා යාපනයට යෑමේ අවස්ථාව ලැබිණි. ඒ එහි සිද්ධ වෙදකම ඉගැන්වීම සොයා බැලීම සම්බන්ධයෙනි. කසිකබල් උගතුන් තමන්ට අනුව සිංහල ජාතිවාදියකු වූ මගෙන් සිද්ධ වෙදකමට විය හැකි සේවය කුමක් දැයි අසනු ඇත. සේවයක් ඇතත් නැතත් මට නොමිළේ ගුවන් ගමන් දෙකක් ලැබිණි. මගේ පත්වීම දේශපාලන පත්වීමක් විය. ඒ සඳහා මට සුදුසු කමක් නො විය. බටහිර අධ්‍යාපනයට විරුද්ධ මා වැන්නකුගෙන් ඊනියා උසස් අධ්‍යාපනයට විය හැකි සෙත කුමක් ද? කොමිෂන්සභා සාමාජිකත්වය හුදෙක් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා මට දුන් “ත්‍යාගයක්” විය. කෙසේ වෙතත් නවවැනි දා සවස ම සිරිසේන මහතා දිවුරුම් දුන් විගස ම මම ඒ සාමාජිකත්වයෙන් ඉල්ලා අස්වීමි (අස්වීමේ ලිපිය ද කාලය වෙබ් අඩවියේ ඇත). එසේ අස් නොවී නම් තුට්ටුවක් නොවටිනා විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ගුරුවරුන් සමූහයක් මට අස්වන ලෙසට හෝ මා අස්කරන ලෙසට හෝ කරන උද්ඝෝෂණ හමුවේ මා දූෂිතයකු ලෙස නම්කිරීමට තිබිණි. කෙසේ වෙතත් මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා වැන්නකුගේ ජනාධිපතිත්වය යටතේ ඒ සාමාජිකත්වය දැරීමෙන් මගේ ගෞරවයට හානියක් කරගැනීමට මට අවශ්‍ය නොවන බව ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපියෙහි සඳහන් කළෙමි.  

ජාතික මතවාදය වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටින ඒ වෙනුවෙන් ලියන කියන අය තමන්ගේ සිහින ලෝකවලින් බිමට වැටී ඇති ආකරය දැකගත හැකි විය. ඔවුන් බොහෝ දෙනකු සිතා සිටියේ මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා බලයට පත්කළේ තමන් බවත් ඊනියා යුද්ධය ජයග්‍රහණය කළේ තමන්ගේ ලිය කියවිලි හා දේශන නිසා බවත් ය. එහෙත් ඔවුන්ට ඒ ලියකියවිලි, දේශන පමණක් නොව තොරතේ්ංචියක් නැතිව පවත්වන ලද පුවත්පත් සාකච්ඡා (ඔවුන්ගේ හා ජනමාධ්‍යවේදීන්ගේ බසින් ප්‍රෙස්) මගින් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාගේ පරාජය වළක්වා ගැනීමට නො හැකි විය. ජනතාව තීරණවලට එළඹෙන්නේ ජනමාධ්‍යයට සවන්දීමෙන්, ඒ කියවීමෙන් නැරඹීමෙන් නො වේ. ඔවුන්ගේ සාමූහික මනස හැසිරවෙන ආකාරය ගැන මට නම් අවබෝධයක් නැත. එය සෘජු ව කෙරෙන්නක් නොවන බව පමණක් පැහැදිලි ය. ඒ කළ හැක්කේ කපටිකමනි. චාටුවෙනි. බොරුවෙනි. බොහෝ තරුණයන් තරුණියන්ගේ සිත් දිනගන්නේ ද ඒ අන්දමින් යැයි සිතෙයි. පසුගිය අවුරුදු පහ පුරාම ජනමනස රාජපක්‍ෂවරුන්ට එරෙහිව සියුම් ව සකස් කෙරිණි. එය පිටුපස බටහිරයෝ සිටියහ (මේ කතාව පසුව කිව යුතු ය). අද වන විට සිංහල ජනමනස යම් ප්‍රමාණයකට  පමණක් නොව මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාට පින්සිදුවන්නට තම හිස කඳට උඩින් තබාගත් අය පවා ඒ මහතාට විරුද්ධ තැනකට ගෙනැවිත් ඇත. විශේෂයෙන් ම ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ මැති ඇමති ධුර දැරූ අයට මෙය වලංගු වෙයි.       

පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ තමන්ට බහුතරයක් මන්ත්‍රින් සිටියත් විපක්‍ෂයේ වාඩි වී සිටීමට තරම් නිවට බවක් කොන්ද පණ නැති කමක් ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂයේ නායකයන් යැයි කියාගන්නා අයට ඇත. ඔවුන්ට අද ඇත්තේ තමන්ගේ කුණු කය ආරක්‍ෂා කරගැනීමේ නිවට අරමුණ පමණකි. ඔවුන් මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපති පදවියට පත්කර ගත්තේ පක්‍ෂ ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව එසේ කළ යුතු නිසා නො වේ. පක්‍ෂ ව්‍යවස්ථාව අනුව ජනාධිපති ධුරයට පත්වන්නකු පක්‍ෂ සභාපතිකමට පත්වන්නේ ඔහු ශ්‍රි ල නි පක්‍ෂයෙන් හෝ පක්‍ෂ නායකත්වයෙන් ඇති සංධානයකින් ජනාධිපතිවරණයට ඉදිරිපත් වුවහොත් පමණකි. සිරිසේන මහතා ඉදිරිපත් වූයේ ඉඳහිට මකුළුදැල් කඩා එලියට ගන්නා පක්‍ෂයක නමින් ය. අනෙක් අතට ශී ල නි ප සභාපති නිලබලයෙන් සංධානයේ නායකයා ද වෙයි. ශ්‍රී ල නි ප කෙරුමන් සිරිසේන මහතා තම පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපති ධුරයට පත්කර ගැනීමේ දී සංධානයේ අනෙක් පක්‍ෂවලින් ඒ පිළිබඳ විමසූ බවක් දැන ගැනීමට නැත. මේ කෙරුමන් අනෙක් පක්‍ෂවලට ද සිරිසේන මහතාගේ නායකත්වය ලබා දීමට කටයුතු කර ඇති බව පැහැදිලි ය. දූෂිතයන්ට දඬුවම් කිරීම, කෘෂි රසායන ක්‍රමයෙන් ඉවත්කිරීම, ඖෂධ ප්‍රතිපත්තියක් සැකසීම ආදී කරුණු නිසා නොව තමන්ට අගමැතිකම නොදීම නිසා තම පක්‍ෂයට ද්‍රෝහි වී වෙනත් පක්‍ෂයකින් තරග කළ අයකු පක්‍ෂයේ සභාපති පදවියට පත්කර ගැනීම තරම් ද්‍රෝහිකමක් පක්‍ෂයේ ඉතිහාසයේ කර ඇත්නම් ඒ චන්ද්‍රිකා කුමාරතුංග හා විජය කුමාරතුංග ය. තමන්ගේ කඳ බඩ ආරක්‍ෂා කරගැනීම හැර වෙනත් අරමුණක් මේ කෙරුමන්ට නැත. ඔවුන්ට ඇත්තේ උදාර පරමාර්ථ නොව උදර පරමාර්ථ ය. ඒ එසේ වුවත් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාට හිතවත් අය හා ජාතිකත්වයට නැඹුරු වූ පාක්‍ෂිකයන් මගින්  ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂය ගොඩගැනීම හැරෙන්නට කළහැකි අන්දෙයක් නැත. 

මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා දූෂිතයන්ට හොරුන්ට දාමරිකයන්ට එරෙහිව පියවර ගෙන නැත. සරත් ෆොන්සේකා මහතාට හා ශිරාණි බණ්ඩාරනායක මහත්මියට දඬුවම් විඳීමට සිදුවයේ ඔවුන් යම් අවස්ථාවක දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය වෙනුවෙන් පෙනී සිටි නිසා යැයි සිතිය හැකි ය. මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා දඬුවම් නොදුන්නේ තම පක්‍ෂයේ අයට පමණක් නො වේ. ඔහු බටලන්ද, සතොස විකිණීම, රාජ්‍ය සංස්ථා කුණු කොල්ලයට විකිණීම වෝටර්ස් එජ් මගඩිය ආදී කලින් ආණ්ඩුවල දහසක් වැරදි අමතක කළේ ය. ජ වි පෙරමුණේ මිනීමැරුම් ගැන කිසිවක් නො කළේ ය. ජ වි පෙරමුණේ බොරු ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය ගැන එදා මරු බියෙන් ඡන්ද පොළට ගිය ඡන්දදායකයන්ගෙන් අසා දැනගත හැකි ය. අද එ ජා පක්‍ෂයේ තරුණ සංවිධානය බවට ජ වි පෙ පත් වී ඇත්තේ එහි නායකයන් තරුණ විය පසුකර කලක් ගත වී ඇති බව ද අමතක කරමිනි. මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා මේ කිසිවකුට දඬුවම් නොකිරීම හේතුවෙන් අද ඔවුන්ට උපාසකයන් ලෙස සමාජය ඉදිරියට පැමිණ ඒ මහතාට ම විරුද්ධව කටයුතු කීිරීමට හැකි වී ඇත. 

මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාට විරුද්ධව බටහිරයන් හා ඔවුන්ගේ වන්දිභට්ට දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන් කටයුතු කළේ අද ඊයේ නො වේ. දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය බටහිරයන්ගේ නිර්මාණයකි. එය අඩුම තරමෙන් 1833 සිට ක්‍රියාත්මක වෙයි. අද මධ්‍යම පංතියේ ගෞරවයට පාත්‍ර  වී සිටින ඊනියා දේශපාලන  විචාරකයන් පනහට පනහ දෙමළ ඉල්ලීම්වල මුල ඇතැයි කීම පිළිබඳ අපි සතුටට පත්වෙමු. අප අවුරුදු විසිපහකට අධික කාලයක් තිස්සේ ඒ බව කී නමුත් කසිකබල් මධ්‍යම පංතිකයෝ ඒ නොසළකා සිටියහ. දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය හතළිස්ගණන්වල දෙමළ බෙදුම්වාදය බවටත් හැත්තැගණන්වල දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය බවටත් විකාශය විය. මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාගේ දේශපාලන නායකත්වය (එදා අප දේශපාලන නායකත්වය ගැන කියද්දී පඬියෝ අපට සිනහසුණහ.) හා ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාගේ මහපෙන්වීම යටතේ රණවිරුවෝ දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය පරාජය කළහ. ඒ රණවිරුවන්ට සරත් ෆොන්සේකා මහතා ද අයත්වන නමුත් සුදු කොඩි කතාවෙන් පසු ඔහු තමන්ට ද රටට ද හානියක් කළේ ය. අද ප්‍රශ්නය වී ඇත්තේ ඊනියා යහපාලනය නොව දෙමළ බෙදුම්වාදය හා දෙමළ ජාතිවාදය පරාජය කිරීම ය. එහෙත් බටහිරයන්ගේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි ක්‍රියාකරන මේ ආණ්ඩුවට ඒ කළ හැකි නො වේ. එපමණක් නොව දෙමළ ත්‍රස්තවාදය නැවත හිස එසවීමේ අවදානම ද වෙයි.

රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා පුනරුච්චාරණය කරන බටහිරයන්ගේ වචනවලින් කිවහොත් රාජපක්‍ෂ රෙජිමය ගෙදර යැවීමට බටහිරයෝ 2010 සිට ම උත්සාහ ගත්හ. ඔවුහු අරාබි වසන්ත අනුගමනය කරමින් මෙරට ලේ හැලීම් මගින් රතුපස්වල, කටුනායක ආදී සිද්ධි ඔස්සේ මෙරට ඔවුන්ගේ ආවතේවකාරයන් සහභාගි කරගනිමින් මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා ගෙදර යැවීමට උත්සාහ ගත්හ. ඒ සමග ඔවුහු ඊනියා ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය මගින් ද එසේ කිරීමට කටයුතු කළහ. රාජිත සේනාරත්න මහතා කළකට පෙර හෙළිදරවු කළේ එයම දැයි අපි නො දනිමු. කෙසේ වෙතත් මේ ක්‍රියාවලිය ගැන එතරම් අවධානයක් යොමු නොකර ලේ හලන අරාබි වසන්තයක් ගැන පමණක් විමසිල්ලෙන් සිටීම අපෙන් වූ බලවත් වරදකි. ලේ හලන අරාබි වසන්තය අසාර්ථක වුවත් ඊනියා ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදී අරාබි වසන්තය සාර්ථක වී ඇත. එය කෙතරම් සාර්ථක වී ඇත් ද කිවහොත් අටවැනි දා පැවැත්වූයේ ජනාධිපතිවරණයක් මිස පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයක් නොවුවත් නිවට ශ්‍රී ල නි පක්‍ෂ කෙරුමන්ගේ ද ආධාරය ඇතිව ඒ මහාමැතිවරණයක් බවට ද පත්කරගෙන එ ජා ප ආණ්ඩුවක් පිහිටුවීමට ද බටහිරයන්, විශේෂයෙන් ම එංගලන්තය සමත් වී ඇත. සාමාන්‍ය ශ්‍රී ල නි පාක්‍ෂිකයන්ට එහි මහින්ද විරෝධී කෙරුමන් පරාජය කළ නොහැකි වුවහොත් අපට දරුණු හේමන්තයක් උදාවනු ඇත.                

නලින් ද සිල්වා

2015-01-24

ජනතාව ආණ්ඩුව වෙනස් කිරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැහැ

(මෙය රිවිර පත්‍රයේ පළ නොකළ ලිපියකි)

පසුගිය දා පැවති ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් මෛත්‍රීපාල.සිරිසේන මහතා නීත්‍යානුකූල ව ජනාධිපති  බවට පත් වී ඇත. ඒ මහතාට මහින්ද රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතාට වඩා ඡන්ද ලක්‍ෂ හතරහමාරක් පමණ ලැබී ඇත. මේ ඡන්දවල පදනම අනුව මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා සිංහලයන්ගේ ඡන්දවලින් 45% ක් වත් ලබා  නැත. අද ජනාධිපති සම්බන්ධයෙන් ගත්කල ඇත්තේ සුළුතරයේ ආධිපත්‍යයකි. (පසුගිය 18 වැනිදා ඉරිදා රිවිර බලන්න ) එය ඉංගිරිසින්ගේ අනුග්‍රහය ලැබූ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන් 1833 ව්‍යවස්ථාදායක සභාව ආරම්භයේ සිට ම බලාපොරොත්තු වූවකි. 1931න් පසුව ඩොනමොර් ව්‍යවස්ථාව යටතේ ජී ජි පොන්නම්බලම් පනහට පනහ ඉල්ලා සිටියේ ද ඒ අරමුණෙනි. මේ කරුණු අවුරුදු විසිපහකට වැඩි කාලයක් තිස්සේ අපි ලිපි මගින් දේශන මගින් හා ප්‍රභාකරන් ඔහුගේ සීයලා බාප්පලා හා මස්සිනාලා කෘතියෙන් ද කියා ඇත්තෙමු.

ඒ කෙසේ වුවත් ජනාධිපතිවරණ නීති රීති රෙගුලාසි අණ පනත් අනුව මේ කිසිවක්  ප්‍රශ්න නො වේ. ජනාධිපති ලෙස තේරී පත්වීමට අවශ්‍ය වන්නේ ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ දී දුන් වලංගු ඡන්දවලින් සියයට පනහක් හා එක් ඡන්දයක් පමණ ය. ජනාධිපති ධුරයට මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතා පත්වීම බටහිරයන්ගේ අවශ්‍යතාව පරිදි සුළුතරයේ ආධිපත්‍යය පිහිටුවීම වුවත් එය ඔවුන්ගේ ම දේශපාලන විද්‍යාව අනුව නීත්‍යානුකූල වෙයි. එහෙත් ඒ සමග ප්‍රධාන වශයෙන් ම එක්සත් ජාතික පක්‍ෂයේ ආණ්ඩුවක් පිහිටුවීම කිනම් පනතකට එකඟ ද? මෙරට ජනතාව රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති ලෙස පත්කිරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. රවි කරුණානායක මහතා මුදල් ඇමති ලෙස පත්කිරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. මා කැමති වුවත් අකමැති වුවත් රාජකීය විද්‍යාලයේ ආදි ශිෂ්‍යයන් 11 දෙනකුට ඇමතිකම් දීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. ඊනියා යහපාලනයක මුවාවෙන් රටේ ආරක්‍ෂාව බිල්ලට දීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. මේ දින කිහිපයෙහි දේශපාලන පළිගැනීම් කීයක් කර ඇත් ද? මහජනයා ඒ කිසිවක් සඳහා ඡන්දය දී නැත.  දහතුන් වැනි සංශෝධනය ඒ අයුරින් ම ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. පොලිස් බලතල හා ඉඩම් බලතල පළාත්සභාවලට පැවරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. මහවැලි ගඟ මුහුදට වැටෙන්නේ නැගෙනහිර පළාතෙනි. පළාත්සභාවලට පුර්ණ බලතල පැවරීමෙන් පසු මහවැලි ජලය බෙදාගැනීම පිළිබඳ ප්‍රශ්න ඇති නොවන්නේ ද? නැගෙනහිර පළාත් සභාව උතුරට එක්කර ඒකාබද්ධ පළාත් සභාව මහවැලි යෝජනා ක්‍රම මගින් මහවැලි ජලය සම්පුර්ණයෙන් ම ත්‍රිකුණාමලයට නොඑවීම පිළිබඳ ප්‍රශ්න ඇති කරනු ඇත. ජනතාව ඒ සඳහා චන්දය දී නැත. 

ආණ්ඩුක්‍රම ව්‍යවස්ථාවේ 43 (3) වැනි වගන්තියට අනුව ජනාධිපතිතුමාට තමා සිතන ආකාරයට පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ බහුතරයක් දිනාගැනීමට හැකි අයකු අගමැති ධුරයට පත්කළ හැකි ය. එය සැබෑ ය. එහෙත් එය ඒ මහතාගේ (ජනාධිපතිතුමාගේ) සිතේ තිබෙන කාරණයකි. වත්මන් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ මන්ත්‍රිවරුන් තෝරාගනු ලැබුයේ ජනවාරි 8 වැනි දා නො වේ. ඒ තෝරාගනු ලැබුයේ 2010 දී ය. එහි දී සංධානයට බහුතරයක් ලැබිණි. පසුව එය තුනෙන් දෙකේ වැඩි ඡන්දයක් බවට පත්විණි. අද වුවත් පාර්ලිමේන්තුවේ බහුතර බලය ඇත්තේ සංධානයට ය. එසේ තිබිය දී රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති වන්නේ කෙසේ ද? එය ව්‍යවස්ථාවට එකඟ වන්නේ ජනාධිපතිතුමාගේ සිතිවිල්ලක් අනුව පමණ ය. එය ඊනියා ශීලාචාරකම ද? එය යහපාලනය ද?

සංධානයේ මන්ත්‍රීවරුන් දේශපාලන වශයෙන් ශීලාචාර වීම නිසා මේ ආණ්ඩුවට විරුද්ධව විශ්වාසභංග  යෝජනාවක් නොගෙනනවා විය හැකි ය. ඔවුන් දේශපාලන වශයෙන් ශීලාචාර මිනිසුන් ලෙස ඊනියා දින සියයේ වැඩ සටහනට සහයෝගය දෙනවා විය හැකි ය. එහෙත් එපමණකින් රනිල් වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති ලෙස පත්කිරීම යුක්ති යුක්ත කළ නො හැකි ය. අනෙක් අතට ඊනියා දින සියයේ වැඩ සටහන වික්‍රමසිංහ මහතා අගමැති ලෙස පත්කරන මෙන් ඉල්ලා පිහිටු වූ ආණ්ඩුවක වැඩසටහනක් නො වේ. එය මෛත්‍රිපාල සිරිසේන මහතාගේ ජනාධිපතිවරණ පොරොන්දුවක් පමණකි. ඒ පොරොන්දුව සුදුසු පරිදි සංධාන ආණ්ඩුවකින් වුව ද ඉටුකර ගත හැකි ය. 

ජනවාරි 8 වැනි දා ඡන්දය සළකා බැලුව ද දිස්ත්‍රික් වශයෙන් සළකා බැලීමේ දී බහුතරය ඇත්තේ කිනම් පක්‍ෂයකට ද යන්න ගණනය කළ යුතු ය. එහෙත් එය ආණ්ඩුව පිහිටුවීම සම්බන්ධ නිර්ණායකය විය යුතු යැයි මම නො කියමි. එය පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයක් නො වී ය. ආණ්ඩුව පිහිටුවීමට මහජනයා ඡන්දය දුන්නේ 2010 දී ය. 2010 පාර්ලිමේන්තුව තවමත් විසුරුවා හැර නැත. ජනතාව ඒ ආණ්ඩුව වෙනස් කිරීමට ඡන්දය දී නැත. එසේ ඡන්දය දීමට පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයක් පවත්වා නැත. ජනවාරි 8 වැනි දා පැවැත්වූයේ ජනාධිපතිවරණයකි. ඒ ඡන්දය අනුව ජනාධිපති තෝරාපත් කර ගැනීම නීත්‍යානුකූල මෙන් ම ශීලාචාර ද වෙයි. එහෙත් ඒ ඡන්දය අනුව ආණ්ඩුව පිහිටුවීම කිසිසේත් යුක්තියුක්ත කළ නො හැකි ය. 

නලින් ද සිල්වා

The logic of the impeachment - nonpublished

The economists usually say that on one hand this is the situation explaining some phenomenon related to economics, and then continue to tell us in the same breath that on the other hand the situation is exactly the opposite. The lawyers usually present their case listening to the other side only if the opposition presents a weak case. It is a case partly heard, but as far as the law is concerned it does not matter much. There are eminent lawyers arguing for or against the impeachment of the CJ without ever coming into any agreement on the important points. As laymen I have followed the debate but I find it difficult to understand some of the “points” raised by some eminent lawyers who argue that the impeachment is not constitutional, not according to the law etc. It may be due to my ignorance in law but when I consider the “solutions” suggested by them I know that their knowledge of law is not heads and shoulders above my knowledge which is absolutely minimal. The Bar Association is clearly divided on the issue as seen by the fights but I was flabbergasted when I heard that an important resolution on the impeachment had been accepted unanimously without even putting it to the meeting on last Saturday. When the learned President was asked by a journalist why no vote was taken on the resolution the reply that the latter got was that there was no need to put to the meeting a resolution that would be adopted unanimously. (Ekamathikava sammatha vena yojanavakata chande ganne ona nehe). I am not blaming the lawyers for their queer logic as the academics would give the lawyers a run for their money. During the year of 2011 when the University Teachers’ Association of the University of Kelaniya discussed the resolution to engage in trade union action I opposed it. The resolution was passed and soon a Professor in Economics declared that the resolution has been passed unanimously. When I reminded the meeting that I voted against the resolution the learned Professor said except for the Professor (me) the resolution has been passed unanimously (Mahacharyathuma herunuwita yojanawa ekmathikava sammathai). It appears that some learned people have a different opinion on the concept of unanimous which I find difficult to understand.

As a schoolboy who studied Civics in the GCE (Ordinary Level) class, albeit without sitting for the examination in that subject, I came across these so called three pillars of western democracy. The textbooks give the impression that the three pillars executive, legislature, judiciary are absolutely equal, and it is unfortunate that most of us have this feeling that the three pillars are equal. What is not understood is that they are equal only as a general principle and the so called separation of powers on an equal footing is only found in the text books stemming from the unfinished bourgeois revolution in England. In theory the three pillars may be equal but in practice the pillars are neither of equal height nor strength depending on the constitution of the particular country. In Sri Lanka as well as in USA the sovereignty is with the people in the abstract but the three different sections of sovereignty are exercised by different organs. The western modernity that has a linear logic has to have somebody at the apex though in theory powers are supposed to be separated on an equal footing. According to the 1978 constitution of Sri Lanka the executive has more powers than the legislature which in turn has more powers than the judiciary. We may not agree with the constitution, but whether it is bahubootha or not we have no alternative but to abide by it until it is amended or repealed according to the very same constitution, unless of course a revolution puts an end to the constitution.

The relevant articles of the constitution for this purpose are 4 (C), 107 (2) and 107 (3). Then we have the standing orders 78 (A) of the Parliament, which have been referred to, often without quoting them. The Article 4 (C), without denying the sovereignty of the abstract people establishes that the Parliament is superior to the Judiciary in Judicial matters. It says “the judicial power of the People shall be exercised by Parliament through courts, tribunals and institutions created and established, or recognized, by the Constitution, or created and established by law, except in regard to matters relating to the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament and of its Members, wherein the judicial power of the People may be exercised directly by Parliament according to law”. The judicial power of the people is exercised by the Parliament and not by the Courts that are mere instruments used by the Parliament. The question is asked whether the Parliament could directly exercise the judicial power of the people who exist in theory in the abstract, other than in matters relating to privileges etc., of the Parliament and its members. The answer to that question is yes if the Parliament is recognized by the constitution as an institution through which the judicial power of the People is exercised by the Parliament for a specific purpose. That is if the Parliament itself is recognized by the constitution as an institution through which judicial power is exercised by the Parliament.

Now Articles 107 (2) and 107 (3) of the constitution recognize the Parliament together with the President (President is also recognized for this particular purpose) as an institution through which judicial power of the People is exercised by the Parliament in the case of impeachment of the judges of the two higher courts of the country. This is what 107 (2) says on this matter. “Every such judge shall hold office during good behaviour, and shall not be removed except by an order of the President made after an address of Parliament, supported by a majority of the total number of members of Parliament (including those not present) has been presented to the President for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.” As article 107 (1) empowers the President to appoint such judges, the constitution gives the power to remove the judges also to the President. However he cannot do so on his own and only the Parliament has the power to initiate the process and make an address to the President to remove such judges. The Parliament on the other hand can address the President only on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Thus the Parliament has to prove to itself the misbehaviour or incapacity of the judge and the Article 107 (3) of the constitution quoted below provides for procedure as well as the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity. “Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to the presentation of such an address, including the procedure for the passing of a such resolution, the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the right of such Judge to appear and to be heard in person or by representative.”. What is clear is that the standing orders alone could make such provision.

The judges of the higher courts are not perfect, and somebody has to judge the judges. The western modernity with its linear thinking and hierarchical structures has a problem in such cases and in this case the power to judge the judges has been invested in the Parliament and the President, recognized as an institution by the constitution for the specific purpose. This again proves that in our constitution Parliament is superior to the Judiciary in exercising the Judicial powers of the abstract people. However, in this particular case the investigation and judgment (including punishment or otherwise) have been separated. The Parliament has the investigative powers (of the judicial powers) and the President has the power to remove the particular judge if the Parliament finds that the charges have been proved. It should be pointed out that even if the Parliament finds the charges have been proved the President need not remove the accused judge. The way 107 (3) has been worded gives the President power either to remove or retain the judge even if the Parliament finds that the particular judge is not suitable to continue in that capacity. The President can exercise his discretion proving that according to the constitution the executive is superior to the Parliament. If the President decides to retain the judge, it does not imply that he has neglected the Parliament or Parliamentary Select Committee but he has only exercised power given to him by the constitution. It is up to the President to consult anybody, a so called independent committee or even individuals before coming to a decision on the removal, though no such course of action is provided by the constitution. It has to be mentioned that if the Parliament finds that a judge is not guilty then the President does not have the power to remove such judge.

According to 107 (3) the Parliament has the power to act as specified in standing order 78 (A) and thus the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) appointed under 78 (A) (2) for the purpose has the investigative power in a case of impeachment of a judge. It is the standing order 78 (A) (6) that has specified the period during which a report has to be presented by the PSC to the Parliament, and all the other procedural matters are governed by standing orders 78 (A). In particular 78 (A) (3) among others says: “The Select Committee appointed under paragraph (2) of this Order shall have power to send for persons, papers and records”. There is no provision to call for witnesses and to listen to evidences as such specified by the ordinances or acts. There are courts who do not summon witnesses and the procedure adopted by Labour Tribunals is different from that of the district courts or the higher courts. The PSC is governed by standing orders and no courts could challenge the PSC on any procedural matters or on anything pertaining to the investigation by the PSC. The PSC has the power to call for persons and those persons are not witnesses that could be cross examined. A person called by the PSC is not a witness in the sense of the ordinances and acts pertaining to evidence, and no court can challenge any findings of the PSC made according to the standing orders.

There are some MPs as well as lawyers who want a panel of retired judges, commonwealth judges, or others to sit on the impeachment. While the people in the abstract cannot agree to withdraw their sovereignty in Judicial powers by appointing foreigners to sit on judgment on impeachment of their judges in the higher courts, it is clear that new laws cannot be enacted to judge a person after he/she has been accused. The CJ has to be judged according to the existing laws of the country, the supreme law being the constitution, and the laws should not be changed even in the case of the CJ. The CJ unfortunately has not respected the constitution. According to standing order 78 (A) (5) which says that “The Judge whose alleged misbehaviour or incapacity is the subject of the investigation by a Select Committee appointed under paragraph (2) of this Order shall have the right to appear before it and to be heard by, such Committee, in person or by representative and to adduce evidence. oral or documentary, in disproof of the allegations made against him”. The onus of disproving the charges falls on the judge unlike in the cases in the courts, and when the CJ withdrew from the PSC she gave up that right.

Then finally the question arises as to the interpretation of the Articles mentioned above, especially with regard to the Parliament using Parliament as an instrument to exercise the Judicial powers of the people. There is no ground for such interpretation as the Parliament so far has acted according to the constitution, and further the Supreme Court cannot decide on a case involving the impeachment of one of its judges, even if it is an interpretation. It is against the maxim of not judging one’s own case and all such interpretations, if needed, have to be made by the Speaker of the Parliament.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

Reason, Experience and Prathyaksha - nonpublished

Prof. Carlo Fonseka in his parting article claims that I do not understand multiple meanings of the word reason. “In his response to my claim, Prof. Nalin says:’What Prof. Fonseka tries to say is that evidence of senses of human beings is the deciding factor and not the soundness of human reasoning. However, he himself ends that paragraph with "therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity". (The Island, Sept 8) Thus Prof. Nalin is asserting that by using the word ‘reason’ in the preceding sentence, I am being inconsistent about my claim concerning the primacy of sensory experience as the test of truth. Anyone who knows the multiple meanings of the word ‘reason’ will grant that the word ‘reason’ in the phrase "therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity" refers to the evidence of the senses, and not to the exercise of pure reason.” However, this is what I had said in my article of 8th September. “What Prof. Fonseka tries to say is that evidence of senses of human beings is the deciding factor and not the soundness of human reasoning. However, he himself ends that particular paragraph with ‘therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity’. In any event the Theory of General Relativity has failed to explain what is called dark energy and some other phenomena I have mentioned in my previous articles. Further Prof. Fonseka could not resist the temptation to quote Russell: ‘Before tackling Einstein’s law, it is as well to convince ourselves, on logical grounds, that Newton’s law of gravitation cannot be quite right.’ Russell mentions two things here. Firstly that Newton’s Law of Gravitation cannot be quite right. Thus if somebody says that Einstein incorporated Newton’s gravitation theory then the latter has incorporated a theory that is not quite right. Secondly Russell talks of convincing of oneself that Newton’s theory cannot be quite right on logical grounds. Thus Prof. Fonseka is not consistent in his statements and supporting statements.” Prof. Fonseka conveniently ignores Russell’s remark on convincing oneself on logical grounds that Newton’s gravitation cannot be quite right, which he himself had quoted. Prof. Fonseka while ignoring Russell on convincing oneself that Newton’s gravitation cannot be quite right on logical grounds and not on so called empirical grounds had said that there was reason to accept the truth of theory of relativity.

The so called empirical evidence is nothing but a reason for Prof. Fonseka to accept the so called truth of relativity. It is not pure reason for the simple reason that there is nothing called pure reason in a Kantian sense or otherwise. Similarly there are no pure empirical grounds on which one comes to conclusions. All deductions starting from “if A=B and B=C, then A=C” are inductions and in that sense all so called reasoning is based on induction that cannot be called rational. Western Philosopher Hume did not believe causality purely on empirical evidence and in western philosophy problems of this sort cannot be solved. There are no sense perceptions without conceptions and Prof. Fonseka, how much he tries, cannot show that he believes in the theory of relativity because of evidence of pure sense experience. Firstly there is no pure sense experience as all perceptions are conception laden just as much so called facts are theory laden, and secondly causality in western thinking is based on induction. People believe in sense experience due to repeats and induction. Induction which has no rational basis as such ironically plays a big role in reasoning. It is hilarious to see so called empiricists rejecting sense experience on the grounds that appearance cannot be true and then testing deductions of theories that people have constructed, using their senses based on nothing but appearances. I have explained some of these in my latest book “Batahira Vidyava, Arsenic saha Deviyo” and Prof. Fonseka could gain something at least in his old age by reading the book.

Prof. Fonseka says “Prof. Nalin has unequivocally declared that by virtue of the culture into which he was born, his approach to life and the world is that of a Sinhala, Theravada Buddhist. In other words his credo is the religion of his birth”. I have never said anything equivalent of what Prof. Fonseka ascribes to me. This could have been the case if I had had my religion of my parents as my Philosophy from childhood, though religion is different from philosophy and culture. However, I had been a Marxist, Scientist though people may claim that I failed to grasp the relevant disciplines, before I became a Theravada Buddhist for the second time having gone through an education in western science and Marxism. There are many ways to create knowledge other than through rationalism and empiricism and I subscribe to “Prathyaksha”, which is not sense perception as such. However I know that I am spiritually not advanced, and as said in the second part of Kalama Sutta which Prof. Fonseka ignored for many decades I believe in the “Prathyaksha” of my Vinnus. However, though not approved by Theravada Buddhism I also construct knowledge (theories, concepts etc.,), until I am advanced spiritually through “Bhavana”, based on the Sinhala Buddhist Chinthanaya relative to Sinhala Buddhist culture. It was theorizing that way we were able to convince many people in this country that the LTTE could be defeated with a non wavering political leadership. Incidentally we constructed our basic theory that knowledge (not merely western science) is created relative a culture based on a Chinthanaya though some who have been trained in western science try their best to ascribe it to some westerners. All theories whether they are constructed based in the Sinhala Buddhist Chinthanaya or Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya are mere stories which appear to be consistent with other theories “facts” etc.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

On Muslim protests - nonpublished

Mr. Shyamon Jayasinghe in his letter to the editor on Muslim protests states: “Nalin Silva’s account of the nature of the recent Muslim riots over the video trailer, "Innocence of Muslims," has missed focus on the real situation. Attempting as he does to relate it to what he calls the Western-Christian hegemony does not help our comprehension of the event.”. Unfortunately it is not clear what it is meant by the words “relate it”. Relate what? There were three events that we have to consider. Firstly the production of the relevant video, secondly the protests by most of the Muslims all over the world against the video, and finally condemning of the protests by the western media and the claim by them that the producer had the freedom of expression to produce the film. What I had said in my article published on 19th September was the following on western Christian supremacy. “When the western media tells us that the person who made the film had the right to do so they talk from their vantage position as everything in this world is today decided by the western Christian supremacy. It is true that in the west they have made films such as Da Vinci Code, though the film was banned in Sri Lanka if my memory is correct, but these films are made in a world dominated by western Christian hegemony. The book and the film Da Vinci Code were produced by western Christian culture who are looking for a new interpretation of Jesus Christ against the Jesus of the Catholic Church. This should be the last step in the fight of Christianity against Catholicism, and I was not surprised when the Catholic Church here decided to ask the Sri Lankan government to ban the film.”

I was neither concerned whether the producer of the video belonged to a minority Christian sect nor whether he was not born in the west. There may be thousands of Christian sects but generally they can be grouped under Catholic and Christian (non Catholic) though there are exceptions. Whether a person is born in Sri Lanka or Australia, generally he would belong to a culture and the latter is important as the way we look at the world (as they say grasp the world, though there is no one given world as such) is determined (created) by the culture and is based on what I call the chinthanaya. The person who produced the video did not try to defame Jesus Christ but Prophet Mohamed and his act has been governed by his general cultural view of the “world”, whatever the sect he belongs to. The Muslims were offended, and they protested against the video. Then the western media came to defend the producer appealing to freedom of speech. This defense was originated by a group in the western world with the help of the western Christian supremacy. Nothing would happen to the producer and as I had mentioned the protests have now been subdued with the help of some Muslim leaders as well, and the western Christian supremacy reins without any problem. The Muslims regardless of Iraq invasion etc., have fought and are fighting against Catholic as well as Christian cultural supremacies for more than a thousand of years and whether the video was produced by a Christian of a minority sect or a mainstream Christian the video appears to be an attack against the Muslim culture.

Mr. Jayasinghe has completely missed the point regarding Da Vinci Code. I am of the view that there has been another cultural “war” or a struggle between the Catholic Chinthanaya and the Christian Chinthanaya spreading over more than five hundred years. The Christian Chinthanaya has defeated the Catholic Chinthanaya on many counts, and today the dominant culture of the world including Australia is the Anglo Saxon variety of the (non Catholic) Christian culture. There may be local differences among the Anglo Saxon countries but in general their culture dominates the world. Whether one is an Atheist or not, or even if one does not practice a religion, it is immaterial in these cultural “conflicts”. Though the Christian culture is the dominant culture in the world ironically those who belong to that culture do not have their own Jesus. Books such as Da Vinci Code are attempts to “create” a Jesus who was married in contrast to the Catholic Jesus who did not marry, and there have been such efforts in the last five hundred years. Thus Da Vinci Code is produced in a Christian culture and not against it, though the Catholic culture would have been offended by the book as well as the film. The Christian culture is not happy with the Jesus of the Catholic culture, and is evolving towards a culture without a God in the Catholic sense. The Christian culture would in general not protest against Da Vinci Code and it was left to the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka to get the film banned in the country. It has to be reminded that though many Buddhists protested against “Bavatharanaya” written imitating the tradition of so called realistic novel of the western Christian modernity, the book was never banned in the country.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

Reason, Experience and Prathyaksha - nonpublished

Prof. Carlo Fonseka in his parting article claims that I do not understand multiple meanings of the word reason. “In his response to my claim, Prof. Nalin says:’What Prof. Fonseka tries to say is that evidence of senses of human beings is the deciding factor and not the soundness of human reasoning. However, he himself ends that paragraph with "therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity". (The Island, Sept 8) Thus Prof. Nalin is asserting that by using the word ‘reason’ in the preceding sentence, I am being inconsistent about my claim concerning the primacy of sensory experience as the test of truth. Anyone who knows the multiple meanings of the word ‘reason’ will grant that the word ‘reason’ in the phrase "therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity" refers to the evidence of the senses, and not to the exercise of pure reason.” However, this is what I had said in my article of 8th September. “What Prof. Fonseka tries to say is that evidence of senses of human beings is the deciding factor and not the soundness of human reasoning. However, he himself ends that particular paragraph with ‘therefore there is reason to accept the truth of the theory of relativity’. In any event the Theory of General Relativity has failed to explain what is called dark energy and some other phenomena I have mentioned in my previous articles. Further Prof. Fonseka could not resist the temptation to quote Russell: ‘Before tackling Einstein’s law, it is as well to convince ourselves, on logical grounds, that Newton’s law of gravitation cannot be quite right.’ Russell mentions two things here. Firstly that Newton’s Law of Gravitation cannot be quite right. Thus if somebody says that Einstein incorporated Newton’s gravitation theory then the latter has incorporated a theory that is not quite right. Secondly Russell talks of convincing of oneself that Newton’s theory cannot be quite right on logical grounds. Thus Prof. Fonseka is not consistent in his statements and supporting statements.” Prof. Fonseka conveniently ignores Russell’s remark on convincing oneself on logical grounds that Newton’s gravitation cannot be quite right, which he himself had quoted. Prof. Fonseka while ignoring Russell on convincing oneself that Newton’s gravitation cannot be quite right on logical grounds and not on so called empirical grounds had said that there was reason to accept the truth of theory of relativity.

The so called empirical evidence is nothing but a reason for Prof. Fonseka to accept the so called truth of relativity. It is not pure reason for the simple reason that there is nothing called pure reason in a Kantian sense or otherwise. Similarly there are no pure empirical grounds on which one comes to conclusions. All deductions starting from “if A=B and B=C, then A=C” are inductions and in that sense all so called reasoning is based on induction that cannot be called rational. Western Philosopher Hume did not believe causality purely on empirical evidence and in western philosophy problems of this sort cannot be solved. There are no sense perceptions without conceptions and Prof. Fonseka, how much he tries, cannot show that he believes in the theory of relativity because of evidence of pure sense experience. Firstly there is no pure sense experience as all perceptions are conception laden just as much so called facts are theory laden, and secondly causality in western thinking is based on induction. People believe in sense experience due to repeats and induction. Induction which has no rational basis as such ironically plays a big role in reasoning. It is hilarious to see so called empiricists rejecting sense experience on the grounds that appearance cannot be true and then testing deductions of theories that people have constructed, using their senses based on nothing but appearances. I have explained some of these in my latest book “Batahira Vidyava, Arsenic saha Deviyo” and Prof. Fonseka could gain something at least in his old age by reading the book.

Prof. Fonseka says “Prof. Nalin has unequivocally declared that by virtue of the culture into which he was born, his approach to life and the world is that of a Sinhala, Theravada Buddhist. In other words his credo is the religion of his birth”. I have never said anything equivalent of what Prof. Fonseka ascribes to me. This could have been the case if I had had my religion of my parents as my Philosophy from childhood, though religion is different from philosophy and culture. However, I had been a Marxist, Scientist though people may claim that I failed to grasp the relevant disciplines, before I became a Theravada Buddhist for the second time having gone through an education in western science and Marxism. There are many ways to create knowledge other than through rationalism and empiricism and I subscribe to “Prathyaksha”, which is not sense perception as such. However I know that I am spiritually not advanced, and as said in the second part of Kalama Sutta which Prof. Fonseka ignored for many decades I believe in the “Prathyaksha” of my Vinnus. However, though not approved by Theravada Buddhism I also construct knowledge (theories, concepts etc.,), until I am advanced spiritually through “Bhavana”, based on the Sinhala Buddhist Chinthanaya relative to Sinhala Buddhist culture. It was theorizing that way we were able to convince many people in this country that the LTTE could be defeated with a non wavering political leadership. Incidentally we constructed our basic theory that knowledge (not merely western science) is created relative a culture based on a Chinthanaya though some who have been trained in western science try their best to ascribe it to some westerners. All theories whether they are constructed based in the Sinhala Buddhist Chinthanaya or Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya are mere stories which appear to be consistent with other theories “facts” etc.

(12/09/27)

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

The Z score and the Supreme Court Judgment - Nonpublished

The Supreme Court has decided that the Z scores of the students who sat the GCE (A/L) Examination in the new syllabus and the old syllabus should be calculated separately as the candidates belong to two different populations. While respecting the judgment, it has to be pointed out that the Supreme Court has not given instructions to the UGC on a method to admit students to the Universities. Whoever calculates the Z scores it is finally the UGC that decides on admission of students.

In this respect there is no other way than pooling the two populations and devising a scheme to admit students to the Universities from a common list. Even if the Z scores are calculated separately one has to admit students to the Universities from one list prepared according to “merit” notwithstanding what is popularly known as the district quota system. There are various schemes that can be adopted in preparing the common list. Whatever the method is adopted it is going to be arbitrary as even lists prepared according to Statistical formulae are also arbitrary.

Suppose the UGC decides to prepare one list after calculating the Z scores separately purely on “merit”. In such a case the student who has the best Z score in a particular stream will be placed first whatever the population he/she belongs to. Then the second place will go to the student with the next best Z score again irrespective of the population. Then the third place and so on. However what is assumed in this particular method of preparing one list is that the Z scores of the two populations are equivalent. That is the Z score of x in population A carries the same weight as the Z score x in population B. Now how does one know that the Z scores of the two populations are equivalent?  

Then there is the suggestion that a certain percentage of students in a particular stream should be from the population of students who sat for the examination in the new syllabus and the balance from those who repeated the examination. The percentages will not be the same for different streams but then there is again the problem of determining the percentages. Would it be based on the average of percentages of students admitted in the previous five years, ten years or what? In any event it also amounts to a pooling of students on some arbitrary Statistical basis and then compiling a common list.

The populations of students were different not only in the GCE (A/L) examination held in 2011 but also in the previous years. Though all students sat the same question papers in any particular subject in the previous years there were differences in quality of students with respect to those who sat first time and those who repeated the examination. Strictly speaking they belonged to two populations, though they were considered as one population for the calculation of the Z scores. Thus the students were considered to be of the same quality. In 2011 the repeat students were given different question papers and effectively they were sitting for a different examination. If the UGC decides to prepare the common list on a percentage basis depending on Statistics how would it account for the introduction of two sets of papers which was not the experience of the previous years. Then of course there are other problems such as the equivalence of the Z scores in different subjects that I had discussed in a previous article.

The expert committee appointed by the UGC came out with a formula to pool the two populations by first calculating a common variance and then finding the Z scores of the candidates. I do not agree with the formula as it is based on another formula for the calculation of variance of samples but a better a formula can be arrived at considering the populations themselves.

Once the Z scores are calculated separately as ordered by the Supreme Court for the two populations, in order to compile a common list it is also possible to derive a formula for a “common list Z score” as pooling is essential in admitting students to the Universities. Depending on the method of pooling different sets of students would be admitted to the Universities and there may be a series of court cases unless all stakeholders get together and arrive at a satisfactory solution.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

Back to Arsenic - Nonpublished

There is Arsenic in the soil and water of areas affected by Chronic Kidney Disease. It is not coming from Natha Deviyo or Vipassaka Deviyo but from the horse’s mouth so to say. WHO according to a certain newspaper has said: “The WHO had appointed an international team to do research related to CKD on a request made by Health Minister Maitripala Sirisena and this team commenced research about under the patronage of WHO Headquarters Senior Advisor Prof.Shanthi Mendis.

This team has planned to conduct their research under four key research questions. They are: What is the prevalence of CKD?,What is the incidence of CKD?, What is the exact geographical distribution of CKD? and Which strategies could prevent the condition?.

While continuing their research based on these questions, they have found that CKD cases has been observed in North Central, North Western, Uva and Eastern Provinces and it was also revealed that 8,000 people are currently undergoing treatment for this condition.

Experiments on CKD cases were conducted on a wide scale with the assistance of a number of institutions and it has been developed as a national research programme.

According to Prof. Mendis heavy metals could cause this condition and they have already conducted several experiments on three heavy metals, namely, cadmium, arsenic and lead. She said heavy metals are contained in soil, water and the food chain on a normal level and if it increases, it will be a threat to one’s health.”

WHO has also said that hard water is also responsible for the disease and warned the people not to consume hard water. As an immediate step the government should take steps to prevent people using well water which is the main hard water supply as far as the villagers in the affected areas are concerned. I am told that the best source of water is the wewa but with the present conditions I am not sure as to how the government would cope up with the situation. In any event the government and other organizations will have to provide the people with fresh water as much as possible. Having said that the medical practitioners should come out with a cure for the disease and I am not sure what WHO experts have in their minds with respect to this aspect.

In any event we know now that Arsenic is present in the soil and water in the affected areas and also that hard water is also a cause of CKD. It is no more CKDu, or Chronic Kidney Disease unidentified etiology but CKD. However, the group at the University of Kelaniya researching on CKD had known this for some time and at various seminars had made presentations revealing their findings. In fact it was the Kelaniya group which first announced that Arsenic is the main cause of the disease. The group at Kelaniya had said that CKD is caused mainly by Arsenic but two more conditions were needed to account for the high incidence of the disease in certain areas, they being hard water and a particular soil known as the kumburu pasa that is found in the affected areas. The mechanisms had been explained during the presentations but the great scientists in Sri Lanka made a hue and cry over the findings claiming that they were not scientific. Some scientists went to the extent of claiming that there was no Arsenic in water in the affected areas. I wish they had done their tests before they made these claims. In any event they were of the opinion that the Kelaniya group was making these statements without conducting any so called research employing the METHOD.

The method that they referred to is called the scientific method in their jargon, though now I find that not only that there is no method as such as has been shown by Feyarabend, but the so called method is only a cover up for the falseness of the so called scientific theories. In fact when Popper said that scientific theories should be open for falsification, he was only giving a grandiose credential for theories which are in any case false. I explain all these in detail in a forthcoming book “Batahira Vidyava, Aresnic ha Devivaru”.

Now the group at Kelaniya did not hide the fact that they got the idea of Arsenic being present in soil and water from Natha Deviyo but they conducted research in order to verify or otherwise these revealing by Natha Deviyo and Vipassaka Deviyo whom in my opinion should have been awarded hundreds of Nobel Prizes for his findings. However, Vipassaka Deviyo is not interested in Prizes Noble, Nobel or otherwise and he would in any case not accept awards made by a dynamite vendor. The Kelaniya group did not ask anybody to accept their views simply because Devivaru had revealed them but to carry out research on their own. It has to be mentioned that there are several academics including two Professors and a research student who had been awarded a scholarship by the UGC to conduct research not only on the cause of the disease but on a cure as well. He is a lecturer from the Rajarata University and is a western medical doctor. The Kelaniya group was able to verify that there was Arsenic in water, soil and flora from the affected areas but some members of the staff including a person who has been warned by the University for releasing results of a candidate without marking the relevant answer script and a person who has been warned by the University for staying at home without reporting for duty after coming back to the country from special leave and spending her leave at home did not accept the findings of the group giving flimsy excuses such as there were no Analytical Chemists in the group. Another member of the staff claimed that the equipment at the University were out of order while claiming for other purposes that she had carried out experiment using the selfsame equipment. Then there were their kith and kin who told gatherings of parents of students that some of the members of the Kelaniya group were insane. Some of these accusers got round the minister of Higher Education to tell him that the group at Kelaniya had established a Devale at the university. I wonder whether he believed these stories but these facts have to be mentioned in order to give an indication of the difficulties the group faced.

Then the Sri Lanka Association for the Advancement of Science came out with an unprecedented statement to demean the activities of the Kelaniya group at the instigation of some “great scientists” in the country. The statement said among other things: “The SLAAS cannot comment on the truth of these claims, which have been investigated by other institutions better equipped to do so. Their results contradict the claims made by this group. ‘However, we wish to make the following observations on the scientific process for gaining and disseminating knowledge, in order to guide both the press and the general public.

Scientists obtaining new research results are expected to submit these results to other scientists for verification in a process called "peer review". This includes publishing, or presenting their results to fellow scientists, before releasing them to the general public. If the results are likely to have an impact on public policy or public well-being, it is particularly important that other scientists have an opportunity to verify or reproduce these results, the statement noted.

In this case, there has been no peer review of the results. It has been claimed that a new method was used to obtain certain results, but no evidence of validation of this method has been presented. Instead, there appears to have been an attempt to get quick publicity. Under the circumstances, the authorities, including the Ministry of Agriculture and the Registrar of Pesticides, have acted very responsibly in submitting samples to a duly accredited laboratory, the Industrial Technology Institute, for verification, the statement noted.

Even if arsenic is found in water and soil in the North Central Province, that does not constitute sufficient evidence to attribute causation of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) to arsenic. We urge that the detailed methods used, including the sampling of water sources, collection of samples, the analytical method used, its validation and detailed results, as well as the body of evidence published or presented for review as early as possible.

There is another serious issue which casts grave doubts on the credibility of the claims made by the Kelaniya group. The Press has publicly identified as the leader of this group an individual, who despite holding a responsible position, professes a disdain for "Western" science. He has publicly claimed supernatural revelations ("samyak drushtika devivaru’) as the source of his group’s information and even methods. While recognising that many scientists are deeply religious, the SLAAS wishes to state categorically that superstition and the supernatural have no place in science, and that scientific results inspired by such sources are highly suspect because of a probable bias on the part of the investigator, it said.

We also note that the other researchers in the group have yet to distance themselves from the eccentric statements of their leader, and they need to do this if they wish to be taken seriously as scientists. Finally, the SLAAS considers it extremely unfortunate that the Dean of a Science Faculty should make it his publicly stated aim to run down science and bring it into disrepute".

The (then) Dean and the leader of the group referred to is none other than the authour, and I have replied to these in lengthy articles to “The Island” on so called scientific method, peer reviewing and Devivaru. I am not concerned with so called peer reviewing and publishing in so called prestigious international journals though in my youth I was inclined to do so having published two articles in “Nature” and other journals. Publishing in these journals is good for promotions but for the last twenty five years or so I have published only with people in my mind. However, I must mention that the Kelaniya group did follow the “accepted” methods of sampling, analyzing etc.

In any event the WHO has now confirmed the findings of the Kelaniya group, though I am not particularly interested in their confirmation. It is unfortunate that the real leader of the group Prof. Priyani Paranagama, Prof. Mala Amarasinghe and the research student Dr. Channa Jaysumana and the Faculty of Science at Kelaniya were deprived of their due credit and recognition as a result of malicious scheming by some members of the Faculty itself and their friends. To add insult to injury some of them are now trying to make life difficult for Prof. Paranagama and Dr. Jayasumana but it is heartening to note that despite these obstacles they are now involved with finding a cure for this deadly disease needless to say with the help of Natha Deviyo and Vipassaka Deviyo who has treated me on several occasions with utmost success.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාවේ නොයෙල් මුදලිගේ

ඊනියා පෙරටුගාමී සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂය ගැන කතාකිරීමට සිදු වී ඇත්තේ ඒ පක්‍ෂයෙහි ඇති වැදගත්කමකට නො වේ. මාක්ස්වාදීන්ගෙන් හා පශ්චාත්මාක්ස්වාදීන්ගෙන් යුත් එම පක්‍ෂයට දීර්ඝ කාලීන වශයෙන් කළහැකි කිසිවක් නො වේ. තමන් ඉංගිරිසියෙන් කියවන දේ තමන්වත් හරිහැටි තේරුම් නොගෙන සිංහලෙන් ලිවීම එහි සිටින පඬියන්ගේ සිරිත වෙයි. එහෙත් ඔවුන්ට තමන් ලියන්නේ කුමක් ද යන්න පිළිබඳ ව අවබෝධයක් නැත. මේ පක්‍ෂය වැඩිකල් නොගොස් එහි කසිකබල් මාක්ස්වාදී ස්වභාවය නිසා ම තවත් මාක්ස්වාදී ත්‍රිරෝද පක්‍ෂයක් බවට පත්වනු ඇත. යථා කාලයේ දී යමකුට මුළු පක්‍ෂ සාමාජිකත්වය ම පැහැර ගෙන යෑමට අවශ්‍ය නම් ඒ සඳහා ත්‍රිරෝද රථයක් ප්‍රමාණවත් වනු ඇත. පෙරටුගාමි සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂයෙහි අඩුම තරමෙන් කොටස් දෙකක් වෙයි. එක් කොටසක් ජ වි පෙරමුණෙන් කැඩී ආ දෙමළ ජාතිවාදී පිරිස් ය. (මාක්ස්වාදීහු සියළු දෙනා ම පාහේ සිංහල විරෝධී දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීහු වෙති. ඔවුහු අද බටහිර ධනවාදී පාලකයන් සමග එකතු වී සිංහලයන්ට පහර දෙති.) අනෙක් කොටස පිටුපසින් සිට උපදෙස් දෙන්නේ යැයි සිතිය හැකි එක්ස් කණ්ඩායමෙන් කැඩුණු පශ්චත් මාක්ස්වාදීන් යැයි කිව හැකි දෙමළ ජාතිවාදීන් කිහිප දෙනෙකි. ඔවුන් අතර විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනයේ ඉහළ ම නායකත්වයේ අයකු ද වන බව දන්නෝ දනිති. සුද්දන්ගෙන් ඉගෙන ගත් ඉතිහාසය හැරෙන්නට වෙනත් ඉතිහාසයක් නොදන්නා මොහු සතිපතා ඒ පක්‍ෂයේ පුවත්පත වූ ජනරළ පඩංගුවට අනුරාධපුරයේ තිබී යැයි කියන රජවරුන්ගේ හා භික්‍ෂූන්වහන්සේලාගේ සුද්දන්ගේ ඉතිහාසයට හසුවන ඊනියා වැඩවසම් සමාජයක් ගැන ලියයි. පක්‍ෂයේ නමේ පෙරටුගාමී කොටස පශ්චාත්තාපවාදීන්ගේ් යෝජනාවක් අනුව එකතු වී ඇති බව පැහැදිලි ය. එක්ස් කණ්ඩායමේ තවත්් කොටසක් පෙරටුගාමී පක්‍ෂය නමින් දැන් හැඳින්වෙයි. ඔවුහු දැනට රනිල්ගේ එ ජා පක්‍ෂය වටා භ්‍රමණය වෙති. තුන්වැනි කොටස සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාස - රෝසි සේනානායක වටා කරකැවෙයි. පශ්චාත්නූතනවාදීන් ලෙස එකල පෙනී සිටි එක්ස් කණ්ඩායමට සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී චන්ද්‍රිකාගේ අවලම් තවලමේ සුදු නෙළුම් රැගෙන ගිය අද වචනයේ පරිසමාප්තාර්ථයෙන් ම රනිල්ගේ පක්‍ෂයේ කටයුතු කරන මෙරට දේශපාලන අනාථයා මාතොටින් ආධාර කළ බව ද රහසක් නො වේ. පෙරටුගාමී සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂය පිටුපස ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානුවන් හා ඔවුන් ද පිටුපස එංගලන්තය හා ඇමරිකාව ඇති බැවින් මේ පක්‍ෂය හා කුමාර් මහත්තයා ගැන ලිවීමට සිදු වී ඇත.

පෙරටුගාමී සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂයෙන් බටහිරයන් අපේක්‍ෂා කරන්නේ ඉතා ඉක්මණින් කැරළි ඇති කිරීම ය. ඒ සඳහා පෙරහුරු කටුනායක දී හා හලාවත දී දැනටමත් සිදු කෙරී ඇත. තරුණයන් ප්‍රකෝප කර ආරක්‍ෂක හමුදා සමග ගැටෙන්නට සැලැස්වීමත් ඉන්පසු ඊනියා මානව අයිතිවාසිකම් කඩවීම් ගැන කතාකරමින් ජෙනීවා යෝජනාව ද ඔස්සේ ආර්ථික සම්බාධක පණවා යථා කාලයේ දී ඒ සියල්ලෙන් ම බැරි නම් අවසානයේ දී ආක්‍රමණයකින් ආණ්ඩුව පළවා හැර දේශපාලනය ගැන නොදන්නා සරත් ෆොන්සේකා යටතේ බටහිර ගැති රූකඩ ආණ්ඩුවක් පිහිටුවා තම අවශ්‍යතා ඉටුකර ගැනීම බටහිරයන්ගේ අරමුණ වෙයි. ඒ සියල්ලෙහි ප්‍රධානියා එංගලන්තය ය. ඇමරිකාව හා ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව ලේ නැකමට හා බටහිර ක්‍රිස්තියානි නූතනත්වයේ නෑකමට ඒ සඳහා එංගලන්තයට ආධාර කරයි. පෙරටුගාමි සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂයේ අතකොළුවක් වූ අන්තර් විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ශිෂ්‍ය බල මණ්ඩලය නමැති නීති විරෝධී සංවිධානය මගින් ශිෂ්‍යයන් අතර කලබල ඇතිකිරීමට ගෝලයන් කටයුතු කරන අතර ගුරා ජ වි පෙ හා එ ජා ප ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ සහාය ඇතිව විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනය මගින් ආචාර්යවරුන්ගේ වැඩ වර්ජන සංවිධානය කිරීමට උත්සාහ ගනියි. බොහෝ ආචාර්යවරුන් ද නොදනිතත් අද විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ශිෂ්‍යයන් මෙන් ම ගුරුවරුන් ද මෙහෙයවනු ලබන්නේ එකම මධ්‍යස්ථානයකිනි. විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ආචාර්ය සමිති සම්මේලනයේ නායකත්වයේ සිංහල බෞද්ධ ජාතිකත්ව මතවාදයක් දරන්නෝ කොපමණ වෙත් ද? එහි තීරණ ගැනීමේ දී බලපාන අයගෙන් වැඩි දෙනා සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධීහු වෙති. විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ආචාර්යවරුන්ගෙන් සිංහල ගොවිකමට (කොම්පෝස් පොහොර යොදා කරන අකාර්යක්‍ෂම බටහිර කාබනික ගොවිකම නො වේ) වෙදකමට වැව් තාක්‍ෂණයට සංගීතයට දර්ශනයට ඉතිහාසයට හා වෙනත් විෂයයන්ට අදාළ පර්යේෂණ කරන්නවුන් කොපමණ වෙත් ද? සිංහල සංගීීතය හා රාගධාරී සංගීතය අතර ප්‍රධාන වෙනස දන්නෝ කී දෙනෙක් වෙත් ද? රාගයක් නැති සිංහල සංගීතයෙහි ස්වර එකසිය ගණනක් ඇති බව කීදෙනෙක් දනිත් ද? සමස්තයක් ලෙස ගත්කල සීමිත දැනුමක් ඇති විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයීය ගුරුවරුන්ගෙන් රටට සිදු වී ඇති සේවය කුමක් දැයි ප්‍රශ්න කළහොත් දිය හැකි පිළිතුර කුමක් ද? ඔවුන් මැකෝලේගේ දරුවන් බිහිකිරීම හැර වෙනත් යමක් කර නැත. මෙරටට අදාළ ගොවිකම හා වෙදකම සම්බන්ධයෙන් කැලණිය විශ්වවිද්‍යලයේ කෙරී ගෙන ගිය පර්යේෂණ නැවැත්වීමට අද සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී මැකෝලේගේ දරුවෝ ක්‍රියා කරති. එයට සම්බන්ධවූවන්ගෙන් ඔවුහු පලිගනිති. ඔවුන්ට විශ්වවිිද්‍යාලයේ පුස්තකාල වසා දැමීම ප්‍රශ්නයක් නො වේ. සිංහල බෞද්ධ විරෝධී නියම ඩයස්ලාට අවශ්‍ය සිංහල බෞද්ධ ජාතික මතවාදයකට පක්‍ෂ පුස්තකාල සේවකයන්ගෙන් වුව ද පලිගැනීම ය. උසස් අධ්‍යාපන අමාත්‍යංශයේ හා විශ්වවිද්‍යාල ප්‍රතිපාදන කොමිසමේ දඩබ්බර හා පතෝල නිලධාරීන්ගෙන් මේ ප්‍රශ්නවලට පිලිතුරු බලාපොරොත්තුවන අය මුග්ධයෝ වෙති. මේ පලිගැනීම්වලින් සිංහල බෞද්ධ චින්තනයට තිත තැබීමට මැකෝලේගේ දරුවන් සිතන්නේ නම් එය අවසානයේ දී ඉච්ඡා භංගත්වයකට තුඩු දෙනු ඇත.

ආණ්ඩුව කාලයක් තිස්සේ ප්‍රේම්කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් සෙවූ බව රහසක් නො වේ. ඒ කසිකබල් පෙරටුගාමී සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂය පිහිටුවීමේ තීරණය ප්‍රකාශ කිරීමට බොහෝ කලකට පෙර ය. ගුණරත්නම් 1987 –- 90 කාලයේ අපරාධ ගණනකට සම්බන්ධ යැයි පැවසෙයි. ඒ කෙසේ වෙතත් දැන් වාර්තාවන ආකාරයට ඔහු පසුගිය වසරවල කිහිප වතාවක් ම ලංකාවට පෑමිණ ගොස් ඇත. පසුගිය සතියේ ඔහු අතුරුදහන් විය. එය කවුරුන් විසින් කරන ලද්දක් දැයි පැහැදිලි නැත. එය කළේ ජ වි පෙරමුණ ද, ප්‍රචාරයක් ලබාගැනීම සඳහා කෙකරගාමී (පෙරටුගාමී) සමාජවාදී පක්‍ෂය ද, ලංකාණ්ඩුව අමාරුවේ දැමීම සඳහා ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව ඇතුළු බටහිර රටවල් ඊනියා සිවිල් සමාජය ආධාර කරගනිමින් ද වෙනත් කවුරුන්වත් දැයි නිශ්චිත ව කිව නො හැකි ය. එහෙත් ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව ක්‍රියාකර ඇත්තේ සැක කටයුතු ආකාරයකට ය. ආණ්ඩුව මේ අවස්ථාවේ පැහැර ගැනීමක්් කරාවියැයි සිතිය නො හැකි ය. කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් සිඩ්නි නුවර දී තමා පැහැර ගනු ලැබුයේ ආරක්‍ෂක අංශ විසින් යැයි පවසා ඇත. ඔහුට ලිංගික අතවර ද සිදුවිණි යැයි ඔහු කියා ඇත. ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු රජය මැදිහත් නොවන්නට ඔහු ජීවතුන් අතර නොසිටින්නට තිබිණි යැයි ද ඔහුගේ ප්‍රකාශයෙහි වෙයි. මේ ප්‍රකාශයෙහි සත්‍යාසත්‍යතාව දැන ගැනීමට අදාළ සිද්ධි මාලාව විග්‍රහ කරමු.

පසුගිය සතියේ කුමාර් මහත්තයා අතුරුදහන් වීමෙන් පසු ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු මහා කොමසාරිස්වරිය වහාම එයට මැදිහත් වූවා ය. ඇය කුමාර් මහත්තයා ගැන ආණ්ඩුවෙන් තොරතුරු ඉල්ලා සිටියා ය. ආරක්‍ෂක ලේකම් ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්‍ෂ මහතා එයට ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වමින් කියා සිටියේ කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් කෙනකු ඕස්ටේ්‍රලියාවෙන් ලංකාවට පැමිණ නැති බව ය. කලබලයට පත් වූ ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු මහා කොමසාර්ස්වරිය එවිට ඉතා කඩිනමින් කියා සිටියේ ඔහු පැමිණ ඇත්තේ මුදලිගේ නොයෙල් නමින් බවත් ඔහුගේ ගමන්බලපත්‍රය ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු ෆෙඩරල් රජය විසින් නිකුත් කෙරී ඇති බවත් එහි අංකය එන් 1016123 බවත් ය. ඔහු සැප්තැම්බරයේ ලංකාවට පැමිණ ඇති බවත් තම විසා බලපත්‍ර කාලය ඉක්මවා මෙරට රැඳී සිටි බවත් හෙළිදරවු විය. පැහැදිලිව ම ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු මහා කොමසාරිස් කාර්යාලය කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් නම් තැනැත්තා මුදලිගේ නොයෙල් නමින් මෙරට සිටි බව සපේතැම්බරයේ සිට ම දැනගෙන සිටියේ ය. එහෙත් ලංකාණ්ඩුව ඔහු ගැන සොයන විට ඊනියා මිත්‍ර රටකට අවශ්‍ය තොරතුරු ලබාදීමට ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු මහා කොමසාර්ස් කාර්යාලය ඉදිරිපත් නො විණි. අඩු තරමින් කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් ආපසු ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාවට යැවීමටවත් කටයුතු කර ඇති බවක් නො පෙනෙයි. අද කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම්ගේ “බිරිය” සිඩ්නි නුවර සිට ප්‍රකාශ කරන්නේ ඔහු ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු පුරවැසියකු වීමේ දී නම මාරු කළ බව ය. එහෙත් ටික කලකට උඩ දී ඇය කියා සිටියේ කුමාර් මහත්තයා ඇගේ විවාහක පුරුෂයා නොවන බව ය. ඇයට තමා කියන්න සනාථ කිරීමට බටහිර් ක්‍රමයටවත් පිළිගත හැකි සාක්‍ෂි ඉදිරිපත්කිරීමට නොහැකි බව පැහැදිලි ය. කෙසේ වෙතත් කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් සහ මුදලිගේ නොයෙල් එකම තැනැත්තකු බව ඕස්ටේ‍රිලියානු රජයත් මෙරට ඕස්ටේ‍රිලියානු මහා කොමසාර්ස් කාර්යාලයත් දැන සිටි බවත් කුමාර් මහත්තයා ලංකාවේ රැඳී සිටියේ ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු රජයේ අනුදුනුම හා අනුග්‍රහය මත බවත් පැහැදිලි ය. කුමාර් මහත්තයා කොහේදෝ සිට අපරාධ පරීක්‍ෂණ අංශයේ කාර්යාලයකට පැමිණ ඇත්තේ ගමන් බල පත්‍රය නැතිව ය. එහෙත් පසුදින උදෑසන ම ඕස්ටේලියානු මහා කොමසාර්ස්වරිය අදාළ ගමන් බලපත්‍රය ලබා දී ඇත. අද එ ජා පක්‍ෂයේ මන්ත්‍රීවරු සුපුරුදු අයුරෙන් මේ සිද්ධියෙන් ලංකාණ්ඩුව අපකිර්තියට පත් වී ඇති බවක් කියති. එහෙත් මෙහි දී් ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව ක්‍රියා කර ඇත්තේ සටකපට ආකාරයකිනි. කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් මහතාට නම් කීයක් තිබේ ද ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු රජයේ අනුග්‍රහයෙන් ලබාගත් ගමන් බලපත්‍ර කීයක් තිබේ ද ආදිය ගැන පසු දිනෙක ඔහුගේ (විවාහක නොවන?) බිරිය හෝ මහා කොමසාර්ස්වරිය හෝ කියන තෙක් අද අපට කළ හැක්කේ උපකල්පන කිරීම පමණකි.

කෙකරගාමී පක්‍ෂවලට දීර්ඝකාලීනව මෙරට කළහැකි දෙයක් නැත. ඒ පක්‍ෂ ඇතුළට වැටෙන තුරු ඉතිහාසයේ කුණු කූඩය ඉතා ඉවසිල්ලෙන් බලා සිටියි. එ ජා පක්‍ෂයට ද ඒ ඉරණම අත් නොවීමට නම් ඔවුන් කුමාර් ගුණරත්නම් ගැන ක්‍රියා කළ අන්දම පිළිබඳ ව ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාව විවේචනය කළ යුතු ය. එහෙත් මැකෝලේගේ දරුවන් සුදු හම ඇත්තන් හා ඇත්තියන් විවේචනය කරන්නේ කෙසේ ද? ජෙනීවා සිද්ධියෙන්, සුදු කොඩියෙන්, සරත් ෆොන්සේකාගෙන්, මතුවට ඇතිවිය හැකි කැරළිවලින්, ආර්ථික සම්බාධකවලින් හා ආක්‍රමණවලින් කුමාර් මහත්තයා වෙන්කළ හැකි නො වේ. අප ඒ සියල්ලට මුහුණ දීමට හිස ගිණි ගත්තවුන් මෙන් සූදානම් විය යුතු ය. ඒ අතර නොයෙල් මුදලිගේලා වැනි ලංකාවෙන් ගොස් සිටින ඕස්ට්‍රේලියානු පුරවැසි මාක්ස්වාදී සමාජවාදීවාදීන්ට කළහැකි දෙයක් වෙයි. ඒ ඕස්ට්‍රේලියාවේ ඇංග්ලො සැක්සන් නොවන සංස්කෘතීන්ට හා ඉංගිරිසි නොවන භාෂාවන්ට හිමි විය යුතු තැන ලබාදීමටත්, එහි කම්කරු පංති විප්ලවය සාක්‍ෂාත් කර ගැනීමටත් උර දී කටයුතු කිරීම ය.

RoP brags while more and more RCKD patients RIP

The Registrar of Pesticides (RoP) Dr. Anura Wijesekera has written to ‘The island” on 1st March 2012, on “Pathological Science Arsenic CKDU and Pesticides” soon after the College of Forensic Pathologists awarded the Silver Medal to a paper presented by the “Arsenic Group” on “Chronic arsenic toxicity among patients of Chronic Kidney Disease of unknown etiology in Padavi Sripura in Sri Lanka” at their 10th Academic Sessions held on 25th February 2012. The authours of the paper are Profs. P. A. Paranagama and M. D. Amarasinghe, and Drs. V. K. Senanayake, K. S. Dahanayake, M. A. C. S. Jayasumana, L. Rajakaruna, C. Wijewardena, A. M. P. Mahamithawa, U. D. S. Samarasinghe, and Mr. S. I. Fonseka. The first three are on the academic staff in the Faculty of Science at the University of Kelaniya, while the last named is a graduate student in the same faculty. The rest are western medical doctors serving in either Universities or government hospitals. When I read the title of the article I first thought that Dr. Wijesekera has been annoyed with the Pathologists for awarding the Silver Medal to the above paper. However, I soon realized that he was supporting me on certain aspects of western science while of course opposing the “Arsenic Group” which I led while being the Dean of the Faculty of Science at Kelaniya. I must mention that as far as I am concerned, the Silver Medal awarded by one of so many Colleges to the paper by the Arsenic Group does not add any value nor recognition to it though the Scientific Community in Sri Lanka, which go by such accolades would now begin to think that some scientific work worthwhile has been carried out at Kelaniya on Arsenic in Pesticides.

Let me digress from “Arsenic Research”, to thank Dr. Wijesekera for writing on Pathological Science. Dr. Wijesekera like many other Sri Lankan scientists has to quote a westerner on important concepts, theories etc. He says “the term Pathological Science was coined by the Nobel laureate Chemist Irving Langmuir in 1953. He defined pathological science as an area of research that do not go away long after it was given up as false by the majority of scientists in the field. In other words it is the science of things that are not so”. My problem with this definition is on the usage of the word majority. I am not sure whether the majority of scientists, let alone the majority of Physicists are aware that the Newtonian Theory of Gravitation is false. It was only the other day that a senior lecturer in Chemistry with a Ph. D. from Cambridge told me that he could feel gravitation. However, when I wanted to examine his particular sense organ which was instrumental in giving this extraordinary feeling he was somewhat embarrassed as he could not exhibit such sense organ. Now Newtonian Theory of Gravitation does not go away nearly a century after it has been replaced by Einsteinian General Relativity and has been “shown to be false” almost from the very beginning in Newton’s time, in spite of Popper and his “golayas” who can only quote him. Though the majority of scientists including that senior lecturer who can feel gravitation may not have given up Newtonian Gravitation, we may consider it too as Pathological Science. There are other Pathological Sciences such as Quantum Physics with its Copenhagen Interpretation and I would appreciate it if Dr. Wijesekera could enlighten the readers on Pathological Sciences in the areas of Pesticides and Agriculture.

Since Prof. Mala Amarasinghe and Dr. K. S. Dahanayake, who are two members of the “Arsenic Group” have replied in their article of 5th March 2012, on the “scientific” aspects of Dr. Wijesekera’s article, I would like to concentrate on some of its political aspects. No science or knowledge for that matter constructed by the “prthagjanas”, is devoid of politics, though not necessarily of party politics. After all, the struggle between the Pope and Galileo was political as it was between the Catholic Chinthanaya, which is concrete and collectivistic, and Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya, which is abstract and individualistic. I know the difficulties we had with our work on Arsenic at Kelaniya and I stayed after my retirement for about an year as the Dean of the Faculty of Science on an extension given by the cabinet of ministers in my substantive post as a Professor in the Department of Mathematics, in order to complete the work we had initiated. The “Arsenic group” would not have survived without me, as I could stand up to pressure applied by people with vested interests who finally used the SLAAS as well. I do not hide the fact that we received information on the presence of Arsenic in the soil, water and flora in the areas affected with RCKD from “Devas” but we carried out tests in the laboratories at Kelaniya according to the standard practices in western Chemistry and Botany under the supervision and involvement of Profs. Priyani Pranagama and Mala Amerasinghe who are Professors in Chemistry and Botany respectively at Kelaniya. There were some Professors in Chemistry who went round saying that we had not carried any laboratory tests and we were relying only on the word of “Devas”. They were not open to any dialogue but were interested only in demeaning our work. It was a struggle between the Greek Judaic Christian Chinthanaya and Sinhala Buddhist Chinthanaya and from the very beginning the political aspects were clear. I had challenged the hegemonic western science and the Chinthanaya on which it is based and I had no problem in seeing the politics behind Arsenic.

Contrary to what Dr. Wijesekera says we never gave up our position that Arsenic is found in rice under political pressure but we concentrated on Arsenic in pesticides for the simple reason that if we could convince the authorities to ban pesticides with toxic matter then our battle was won. We are agitators o doubt, and I would ask Dr. Wijesekera to mention any non agitator on his side. The fact that he is writing articles on pesticides bragging that it was he who banned certain pesticides, when he and others have a case against then in the courts of law for releasing containers that had pesticides with Arsenic, Mercury and other materials, without going through “the proper channels” gives ample testimony to the agitation carried out by him. He ends up his article with the following words. “I will let you decide to which type the parties involved in the Arsenic fiasco belongs to”. In essence he wants the readers of “The Island” to decide. I agree with him, these are political matters and finally will be decided by social forces and even those who are called experts are merely agents of social forces, which need not be based on economics only. The western scientific enterprise is tied up with producers of pesticides with toxic matter and I would have been surprised if the “scientists” who are financed by various worldwide organizations remained silent when we said that the cause of the RCKD was Arsenic in pesticides. The producers nor the importers of pesticides are not “Vessantharas” and we would not have anticipated anything but hostile response to our work from them.

Dr. Wijesekera mentions that he and the members of The Pesticide Technical and Advisory Committee had discussions with the stakeholders before coming to a decision. I would like to know whether he summoned the “Arsenic Group” to find out their views. These Committees and even the SLAAS have been given power under Acts passed by the legislature within western Christian hegemony and during transition periods from one paradigm to another, not to mention from one Chinthanaya to another, differences of opinion among members of such committees are bound to arise as the PoR has experienced during the past few weeks. I do not attach much value to reports by the World Health Organization, but I wonder why the latest report by this august body is not released to the public. I am sure that Dr. Wijesekera himself would like it to be released as it would help the readers to decide on the types of the “parties involved in the Arsenic fiasco”.

The problem is that one death occurs every two days in the areas affected with RCKD, whose etiology according to western medicine is unknown. We do not know the etiology of the CKDU in other countries but we are certain in the affected areas in Sri Lanka it is Arsenic in pesticides, of course tied up with the soil and water in such areas. Tests have been carried out at the University of Kelaniya that established the presence of Arsenic (Arsenates) in pesticides, soil and water and in spite of our invitation to the other stakeholders to see for themselves how the tests were being carried out nobody had accepted the invitation while I was the Dean of the Faculty of Science. Whether Arsenic or Arsenates are found naturally in our soil, the question is why in certain areas people are dying with RCKD only during the last few decades. After all it is not reported of such disease during the days of the Sinhala kings when the Sinhala people did not use agrochemicals. We have given our answer and it is up to the people to decide on remedial action without letting more and more people to succumb to this disease which cannot be claimed to be due to their fault.

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

Mathematics and Physics(NP)

Let me first deal with banter of Prof. Carlo Fonseka as it is relevant to our discussion. I am younger now than when I went to the UK to write that thesis, does not mean that I am younger due to the air travel. After coming back to Sri Lanka I grew older until about the year 1980, repeating like many others what the westerners had taught me. My so called research confined to some peripheral problems in western science without challenging its concepts or theories. However, after that year new ideas came to me in a “procession” and it is generally believed that it is the young who are endowed with new ideas. I have been able to think a fresh creatively since then, and I am happy that I am growing younger, though many, especially in the academia may not like my original ideas. Prof. Carlo Fonseka does not belong to that category and that is one of the reasons I respect him.

Prof. Fonseka does not seem to have grasped the essence of time dilation in Special Relativity. It is essentially regarding the time interval between two events as measured by observers moving relative to each other. In special relativity objects cannot travel with velocities faster than light though there appear to be evidence recently to the contrary. For a particle travelling with a velocity less than that of light the time as measured by a clock moving with it (proper time) increases and a person does not become younger by going in an airplane. The clocks that were taken round the earth referred to by Prof. Fonseka registered different times due to general relativistic effects and rotation, and is not related to the so called twin paradox in special relativity. In any event my being younger now has nothing to do with traveling in airplanes with or without that young lady called Bright.

What I said on imposing ideas is the following. “After coming back from the UK to Sri Lanka then known as Ceylon in another Air Ceylon airplane (could have been the same airplane) I have realized that the westerners have imposed their needs on us through colonialism.”. Prof. Fonseka states that “In any case, my position has nothing to do with westerners having "imposed their needs on us through colonialism’ as claimed by Prof. Nalin”. Prof. Fonseka is of course entitled to think that way but it is not a secret that the schools we attend, the universities where we study and of course the books we read have an immense influence on us unless we for some reason or other make a deliberate attempt to break away from that influence and succeed. What are (western) schools and universities for if not for imposing not only western needs, but also western attitudes, western knowledge, western culture etc.? Personally I am aware how I changed from my semi rural and semi urban knowledge and attitudes to western scientific knowledge and attitudes at schools and the universities, and then how I went back to my cultural identity having realized the inadequacies, weaknesses, inconsistencies, inhumanness etc. in the western Chinthanaya that gave rise to western science. There are many people who talk of Principle of Superposition in Quantum Physics without realizing that it cannot be explained in western thinking. Quantum Physics may be working but as Feynman has said nobody (in the western sciences – my emphasis) understands it. How does one understand that a particle can exist at two or more places simultaneously in Aristotelian logic? At home and the village temple I was brought up in a culture that did not seek comfort but emphasized on avoiding “kamasukhallikanuyogaya” and also “attakilamtanuyogaya” and taught me of “alpecca” and sallahuka” form of life. My upbringing as a child did not allow me to be “bahubhandika”, and today I have no problem in traveling by bus and sparingly using my old car bought in 1978 (before 1980). Full option cars are not for me now, and I am reminded of the “nembiliya” in this regard. “Nembiliya” is used to separate rice from other material found in rice and having constructed and developed it to a certain level, Sinhala people did not want to “improve” it to a full option nembiliya, wasting energy and resources. The concept of comfort is determined by culture and it is not only the bodhisathva who find “dukkha” in comfort. In my series on so called scientific knowledge I will go into detail on this and show how a Science based on Sinhala Buddhist culture or Tamil Hindu culture is different from western science.

Prof. Fonseka says “For my part, my understanding of what the Buddha taught about the way to achieve well-being and happiness through the elimination of greed, hatred and delusion is quite compatible with my understanding of the modern scientific outlook.”. However, greed, competiveness, sensory pleasures etc., are behind modern western consumerism and living in general and more and more possessions will not guarantee happiness to people. It will only destroy the natural resources, increase competitiveness, and I do not think that I have to elaborate on this. In connection to what Buddha had taught there are many scholars who would be happy to show that Buddhism is (western) scientific and rational meaning conformity with Aristotelian logic. It is not so, and I remember Prof. Fonseka himself trying to present Kalama Sutta as evidence for the so called scientific method. However, he has now realized that there is a Part II to Kalama Sutta referring to the Vinnus .

Prof. Fonseka states: “Prof. Nalin’s answer to his question about the effectiveness of western physics based on western mathematics is their ‘abstractness’”, and that in his view “the effectiveness is the outcome of their concreteness and empirical nature.” However the question I asked was "why western mathematics ‘the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true’ has been so effective in western physics" It is different from Prof. Fonseka’s formulation. Western Mathematics is very abstract and western Physics is abstract to a very high degree. It is said that we do not know what we are talking in Mathematics nor whether what we are saying is true, but I presume that Physics is trying to arrive at truth. How can Mathematics with those properties be so effective in Physics as such? On the other hand, if I were to ask Prof. Fonseka why western Mathematics is not effective in Physiology what would his answer be? Concreteness was and is not the hallmark of western science that looks for generalized theories. Even the patients in western medicine are generalized patients and not concrete patients. Finally this talk of empirical nature becomes a travesty when it is claimed that if the appearances (what is grasped through the sense organs) are true, then there is no need for a science. It is said that one starts with observations (experiments, controlled experiments,) then theorize and come back to observations to test the theories. Observations are appearances and how does one know that the theories are true or let us say approaching the truth by comparing the deductions from theories with observations?

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva

TNA wants nothing but war

It is said very often that the TNA is following the LTTE policies and is adamant that the so called thirteen plus is implemented. However, though it may appear that the TNA is following the LTTE it is not so. It was the LTTE that followed the policies of the TULF, ITAK (Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi – Lanka Tamil State Party or the so called Federal Party), TC (Tamil Congress of G G Ponnambalam), Hindu Mahajana Sabai of Ponnambalam Arunachalam formed way back in 1921 as the first racist political organization in Sri Lanka (Ceylon), the racist policies of Ponnambalam Ramanathan that were all instigated by the English. The LTTE did not appear in the political scene all of a sudden and it was only a product of the evolution of anti Sinhala Buddhist policies of the English and of the Dutch prior to that. The Tamil Vellala leaders in Sri Lanka and of course the non Vellala Prabhakaran were used by the English to suppress the Sinhalas especially the Sinhala Buddhists. I do not want to go into details as I have analyzed racist Tamil politics in “An Analysis of Tamil racism in Sri Lanka” and in many articles written to “The Island” and “Divaina” but it has to be re-iterated that had the Sinhalas accepted the Vellala Coomaraswamy – Ponnambalam family as the leaders in the nineteenth century as the English expected, we would not have had the so called ethnic problem. However, it is to the credit of Sinhala majority outside Colombo and the then English speaking Sinhala Christian (both RC and non RC) lay leadership in Colombo that they did not want to follow the majority of the English speaking Sinhala Buddhist leaders in Colombo and accept the aforesaid family as the leaders of Sri Lanka.

The contemporary history of Sri Lanka is full of ironies. The Coomaraswamy – Ponnambalam family (the much talked about Annada Coomaraswamy in connection with the Nelum Pokuna Mahinda Rajapakse Rangahala and the Nelum Pokuna Mawatha was a cousin of the Ponnambalams) belonged to the Vellala clan who were descendants of the agricultural labourers imported by the Dutch for their tobacco cultivation and had been uplifted in the Hindu hierarchical society from Shudra to much more than Vaishya by the Dutch, English and finally theoretically by Shri Arumugam Navalar. The Tamil Hindus in Sri Lanka did not have the same social structure as the Hindus in India and we do not find either Kshathriyas or Brahmins among the Hindus in Sri Lanka. This fact itself shows that the Tamil Hindus in Sri Lanka do not have a history going back to time immemorial but has tried to follow the Sinhala social hierarchy that itself was a recent phenomenon encouraged especially by the English. The Vellalas were equated to the Govigama or better Radala, and the Sinhalas who lived in the Jaffna peninsula when the Dutch arrived in Sri Lanka were absorbed into the Tamil Hindu society and pushed down the social ladder into the Koviar and other castes.

In the first election to the Legislative Assembly held in 1912 with very limited franchise the English had wanted Ponnambalam Ramanathan to be elected as the representative of the so called educated Ceylonese. Perhaps the English were able to maneuver and get the support of the Sinhala Govigama leaders for the Tamil Vellala leader. However opposition came from the English speaking Sinhala Christians and Catholics who were mainly non Govigama and it became a contest between the Vellala – Govigama and the Sinhala non Govigama who had nominated a Karava candidate. The English educated Sinhala Buddhist Govigamas had become Olcott Buddhist (not to be confused with those who studied at the Buddhist schools) Govigamas by that time and the Sinhalese among the English speaking was represented mainly by the non Govigama Sinhala Christians and Catholics. The politics among the English educated Tamil Hindus revolved round wining the leadership of the entire country with the support of the English and at the same time repressing the non Vellala Tamils. It was after the general elections to the first Parliament in 1947 that Chelvanayakam realized that no Tamil Vellala could become the leader of the entire country through elections and he formed ITAK aka FP to fool the Sinhalas, to establish a separate state in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. In order to justify his aspiration he later claimed that the two provinces were Tamil homeland and that the Tamils were discriminated by the Sinhalas. All these aspirations and claims were finally incorporated into the infamous Vadukodai resolution in 1976, that became a basis for Tamil racist politics thereafter. However, by this time the terrorist “boys” had taken up arms not satisfied with the “methods” adopted by the elders to establish a Tamil Eelam.

The terrorists were only carrying out the politics of the elders in the TULF with arms. However there were groups among the “boys” who had another motivation, namely to fight against the Vellala domination in the Jaffna society. While the anti Sinhala campaign was mainly led by Marxist elements among the terrorists, the fight against the Sinhalas as well as the Vellala leadership was carried on by non Marxists under Prabhakaran. Finally the leadership battle among the terrorists was won by Prabhakaran not in Sri Lanka but in the streets of Chennai. The defeat of Vellala Uma Maheswaran symbolized the passing of the leadership to a Non Vellala (Karaivar) Prabhakaran who went on to murder many a Tamil Vellalas before he turned his guns against the Sinhalas. The clergy of the Catholic and Christian churches who mainly belonged to Non Vellala communities supported Prabhakaran. It is ironical that the leadership among the Vellala Hindus had to support a non Vellala with the backing of the Christian and Catholic churches in order to establish a separate state in the Northern and Eastern provinces. The TULF and later the TNA accepted that the LTTE that carried their anti Sinhala campaign as the sole party that represented the Tamils in Sri Lanka. The English had no problem in supporting Prabhakaran as they were interested only in using the Tamil community as a force against the Sinhalas, especially the Sinhala Buddhists. The church leadership in the country as a whole who in their eagerness to defeat the Sinhala Buddhists supported Prabhakaran and the LTTE wholeheartedly, though there were some priests and many laymen among Sinhalas who did not agree with their shepherds.

All these fights were political and the Sinhalas never agreed with the demands of the Hindu Mahajana Sabai or the TULF or the LTTE. At Thimpu if the Sinhalas had agreed with the Tamil racist demands which were supported by the English and the other western Christian nations ( Norway was only the puppet of English and Americans and Solheim a mere messenger whose position was inflated by the western press in order to hide the real culprits the English.) and of course the Indians. The Sinhalas resisted all these forces and even the thirteenth amendment that was based on the Indo Lanka Accord that recognized Tamil Historical Habitats in other words a homeland was rejected. It was clear that the so called peace talks were leading nowhere but to a Tamil Eelam following the little now more later policy of Chelvanayakam and the Tamil racism and it came to a stage that the anti Sinhala campaign had to be defeated in the battle field which is only an extension of politics using the armed forces. The anti Sinhala campaign was finally defeated at Nandikadal and there is no separate political problem to be solved now, as a military solution is also a political solution. Tamil racist politics continue to exist with the backing of the English and the other western Christian countries and if not for the dispersed Tamil community in those countries, the TNA leadership and the Christian clergy, the westerners would have found it difficult to make an issue against the Sinhalas. It is clear that the west is trying to use so called war crimes and the human rights problem against the President and the Secretary to the Ministry of Defense, and the recent letter from Hilary Clinton to the Minister of Foreign Affairs demonstrates what is in store for the country.

TNA realizing that the Nandikadal victory can be reversed only through a military exercise is now preparing the ground for another “war”. This time it is not going to be another non Vellala Prabhakaran who would lead the fight against the Sinhalas but the Anglican Christian David Cameron. The TNA is aware of what they are doing and Hillary Clinton would press the minister G L Peiris to accept that war crimes had been committed in the last stages of the humanitarian operations. The TNA does not want a Parliamentary Select Committee nor anything else but war and only war. The war this time would be fought by the western mercenaries with some remnants of the LTTE, Janarala of JVP, the NGOs again funded by the western governments, the free media people living in the west under the auspices of the western countries and of course some disgruntled elements of the UNP. If the other groups unite under the leadership of the President Mahinda Rajapakse the mercenaries would learn a lesson that they could not learn in the Arab world.(12/02/08 - non published)

Copyright Prof. Nalin De Silva