Do NOT try this at home!!

One of the first blog posts I ever read (no idea whose) was about how the older (Sri Lankan) generation has given us a shitty li'lcountry with a lot of shitty problems and now we, the new generation, are going to have to deal with the end result of all that crap. Now I was e-mailed this li'l experiment early this mornin which I thought might just be relevant:

What you Need:

- 1 cage

- 1 banana

- Some stairs

- A water hose

- Lots of monkeys (at least 10)

What to Do:

Set up the cage with the banana hanging inside and the stairs placed under the said banana. Next send in five of the monkeys. Now be patient (and have the hose ready). Soon one of the monkeys will move away from the group and start to climb the stairs to get to the banana. As soon as this happens spray water at all the monkeys (and thereby detering the adventurous monkey as well). In a while more, another monkey will try to go for the banana - repeat as above and douse them monkeys with water. Let a couple more of the monkeys go for the banana and repeat process. Soon enough, when a monkey tries to go for the banana, the rest of the monkeys will attack it to stop it even if you don't spray water on them cos they expect the water anyway. Now comes the interesting bit.

Take a monkey out of the cage and replace it with another (who does not know this process obviously). Now this new monkey will try to go for the banana. And the poor monkeys in there who still remember the water will attack the new dude to stop it. This will happen everytime he tries to go for the banana. Then take a second monkey out of the cage and replace it with a new one. New one will go for banana, others will attack..including the first new one who has no idea why he's attacking - he just knows he must stop this new dude cos all the other monkeys think so. Then take a third monkey out and replace him. This third one will be attacked by 2 monkeys who have no idea why they're attacking him and 2 old ones who remember the water. Then a fourth one - he will be attacked by 3 monkeys who've no idea why and one old monkey who remembers. Then replace the final one. This will be attacked by the other four (= all) monkeys - though none of them really have any idea why exactly they're trying to stop him. So there's no more need for water cos none of the monkeys will go near the banana again without being attacked by the others.

What to Think:

Why is this? Cos that's the way things were done, and that's the way things should continue to be done.

What to Question:

Now, can we really blame the old monkeys who remembered and not the new monkeys who fell in line?

However, seeing as I don't know just how intelligent monkeys generally are, I can't say how far they're capable of any independent thinking really.

Future of Sri Lankan Elephants: the wild or the sheltered?

I was watching a tv prog today about Sri Lankan Elephants. And what did I learn from it? I really don’t know for it left me asking more questions at the end than I had at the beginning. Especially since I’d just heard that SB Dissanayake had requested Ranil W to appoint him as the Assistant Leader of the UNP. Kinda funny ain’t it? Me ! Me! Did I say Me?

Anyways, to get to the Elephant story:

Elephants in Sri Lanka are respected and held in high-esteem. One man (in the tv prog) even went as far as to say that if there are no elephants, there is no country. However this sentimental view is not wholly shared by villagers who can’t sleep at night for fear of elephant attacks. They don’t see the elephant through the rosy hue that others do. For them, it’s not about the “elephants”. It’s about the one elephant that terrorizes them every night. The Wild Elephant.

The Wild Elephant, the one that is unloved for his uncouth ways. He does not fit in with the elephants that are respected at all those dignified Perahera’s. So what do the people think should be done to him? Killed? No, no, a village woman says. Elephants need not be killed. Just this wild uncouth one must be removed so that they can get on with their lives in peace.

A conservationist later talks of the problems brought about by elephant orphanages – they were meant to be (and still are) institutions which care/d for orphaned elephants. However, the elephants within those gates have doubled and tripled over the years and none of them can now be released into the wild for they were born “in captivity” and could not survive “in the wild.” What a conundrum this is. But then again, nevermind elephants, even men with the best of intentions, born in captivity and shelter, can't really and truly survive in the wild these days can they?

There was more in the prog about people and elephant migration and several what-to-do's that were not all that interesting, hence shall not be repeated here.

But, now I’m left trying to answer questions I had not thought of before.

At the end of the day, which ones are the best?

Those born in shelter who knows not the ways of the world?

OR

Those born in the wild who knows not common decency and self-respect?

Elephant and Baby - Wasgamuwa Park (Dec 2004)

"Protesters" "protest"

This is so bloody hilarious I absolutely had to post it! ;o)

So the Govt and the LTTE have once again agreed on talks. The JVP is once again getting their knickers (or is bloomers the right word?) about 'foreign intervention' and what not. Nothing new. What's so funny though?

This: there were protests outside the Norwegian embassy with protesters carrying banners saying things like "Hands off Sri Lanka", "We must defeat the LTTE" and "Don't divide power."

"But protesters said they had been bussed in by the Marxist JVP party and were unsure why they were there.

'Our political party informed us to come here,' said 48-year-old farmer Hiram Ariyadasa from north-central Sri Lanka, holding a banner that read "Hands off Sri Lanka".

'I don't know what it says. I don't know why I'm here,' he added, before JVP handlers ordered journalists to stop talking to demonstrators." (See this report on AlertNet)

Well, nothing new again I guess.

Excuse me while I go fall off my chair...he he he

A Lovely Bunch of Coconuts

This weekend I came across a story called "A Lovely Bunch of Coconuts" (written by Dennis Reader) and promptly bought it. It's a children's book - 13 pages with very little writing and LOTS of pictures! But I found the story so interesting I thought I'll share a shortened version of it here:

"Once, on a little island, shaded by a single coconut palm, there lived a happy man. Across the water lived a greedy king who was always looking at the little island thru his binoculars. The king wanted the man's little island for himself.

'Why do you want his little island?' asked the queen.

'Because I want that lovely bunch of coconuts,' said the king.

'That's all he's got,' said the queen.

'That's all I want,' said the king.

... One day the king took action. He summoned his champion Olympic swimmer, his head gardener, his pet vulture, his cousin the pole vaulter and the palace cook. 'I want that island,' said the king. 'One of you must get it for me.' He pointed to the swimmer. 'You first.' ...

The champion Olympic swimmer didn't really want to go, but the king's word was law and so he dived into the water... But when he reached the little island, the man hit him with a coconut. The Olympic champion swam back with a bump on his head...

[the gardener tunnel-ed his way to the island, the vulture flew to the island, the cousin pole-vaulted to the island, the cook sailed there with her most terrible trifle, but they all suffered the same fate - they were all hit by coconuts and sent packing.]

The greedy king looked all about him. he had lost his champion Olympic swimmer, his head gardener, his pet vulture, his cousin the pole vaulter and even the palace cook.

'I'd like to come over and talk peace,' shouted the king. The man smiled and beckoned him across.

'You put up a good fight,' said the king. 'Yes,' said the man. "Have some coconut.' And they ate the last one from the tree.

'He seems a nice fellow,' said the king to the queen. 'I won't take his island after all.'

'Because he's a nice fellow?' asked the queen.

'No,' said the king. 'Because he hasn't got any more coconuts.'"

The story ends with the king watching the man sitting on his island under an de-coconut-ified palm tree.

BUT there is a twist.

What the king does not see is a stash of coconuts almost as tall as the man's house hidden behind his house, well away from the king's line of vision.

None of the violence worked, but the peace seemed to. Yet, while the 'peace talk' was going on, all along there was that HUGE stash of coconuts hidden from view.

Made me wonder how many other people could be out there who stashed piles of lovely coconuts away from view while they talked peace in full view of the rest of the world?

Boiling the Frog..what does it mean??

Recent convo with a friend ran thus:

Friend: bla bla bla..it's a classic example of boiling the frog I tell you!..bla bla

Me: Wait! What does 'boiling the frog' mean?

Friend: Oh. You say it to mean sorta culturing people to think or feel a certain way. Without them knowing that this is being done to them. Ok?

Me: Ok. But what does the phrase itself mean? Why frog? Why not..er..boiling the ant? Or elephant?

Friend: Dunno. That's the phrase. So listen.. bla bla bla.

The convo ended thus. My question then was where is this phrase rooted??

And at last I've found the answer!

Apparently (I've not tried this and have no wish to and hence will rely on hearsay) if you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water it'll try to jump out cos it'd rather not get boiled to death. But if you throw it into cold water and slowly bring the water to boiling point it will not realize it is overheating and will die.

Apparently this is cos frogs are cold-blooded and so takes on the temperature of its surroundings. Hence the frog will continue to warm, adjusting to the temperature of the slowly boiling water till it overheats.

So, this could work in terms of implicit prejudices- over-exposure to the same bias can cement it unknowingly or at least till it's too late.

Let's see if this works in other contexts:

If someone (let's say a govt for the lack of a better example) announces: Today you will go to war. Today your loved ones will kill people. Today your loved ones will possibly die.

There could possibly be lotsa people jumping up and down protesting just as the frog will try to jump out of the boiling water.

BUT if someone (let's use say the govt again! Just for fun!) were to say it thus: people such as you and I have been wronged. They're being hurt and continue to be hurt (by whatever way). So let us go save them. Let us go defend them. Now, that that is done, let us go see if we can defend some other parts/ peoples. Some of your loved ones can die doing this. Let us go on an offensive to retake what is yours and mine. It is only cos of your loved ones that today we have what we have. Let us thank those who died for us.

The frog never really stood a chance, did he? Poor sucker.

Now, this works with frogs cos of their cold-blooded nature. But we humans are warm-blooded creatures. Therefore we should not (biologically) take on the temperature of our surroundings.

Now think.

Warm-blooded? Cold-blooded?

Frog? Human?

A National Government? No, no, it's a PLOT!

SB Dissanayake sees a plot in MR's invitation to the UNP to form a national government. Give me a sec, I need to go laugh.

Yesterday's Daily Mirror gives SB's analysis of the motivation behind MR's invitation "as far as [he] can see, this is an attempt to create unnecessary rifts within the [UNP]" followed by "the President was planning to go for a snap general election by April next year, after weakening the UNP." As far as he can see? It certainly can't be very far then.

The primary problem here apparently is that MR's letter was sent to Karu J and not "the leader" himself. So again for the UNP, it's all about the party & its leadership first, the country second. (Was it possible MR sent Karu J the letter cos Ranil was abroad at the time? Noooooo, not possible. What is possible is it that it is all a PLOT!)

National governments are usually formed when a country is faced with a threat/catastrophe. In such a context, the democratic principle of having a 'strong' opposition doesn't apply since unity is needed to first face the threat. MR is asking for a national government now cos this is precisely what Sri Lanka is facing right now - the first "thing-to-do" in everyone's agenda is an end to the "national question" . At least I would hope it is the first.

Surprisingly, the JVP & JHU came up with winners this time around - "The JHU said it would welcome the President’s move for a national government..." & even better from Anura Kumara Dissanayake "the structure of the proposed national government is not important. Only the objective is important. A national consensus is needed to defeat terrorism and build ethnic harmony among all the communities" (both from The Daily Mirror, 28 Aug) but the surprise was shortlived for now it seems the JVP is saying no, no, not till you do exactly as we say first!

In an article in The Sunday Times (27/08), the writer talks of the 1965 national govt - the UNP, under Dudley Senanayake, won the most number of seats but it wasn't enough to form a govt - & hence the national govt. This national govt consisted of (I quote):

* K.M.P. Rajarathne, the symbol of Sinhala extremism,

* S.J.V. Chelvanayakam, the symbol of Tamil extremism,

* G.G. Ponnambalam, who had once asked for fifty-fifty representation in Parliament,

while

* Philip Gunawardena, the 'Father of Socialism' in Sri Lanka,

* J.R. 'Yankee Dickie' Jayewardene, the greatest proponent of the open market economy

were in the same cabinet.

That govt stayed in office for its 5 full years.

(Sourced: Sunday Times (27 Aug) - "An Exemplary Political Guide" by Dr K.Kodithuwakku)

But today's UNP? Still "considering" the issue of national govt to see if "[MR's] policies tally or have only little difference with our policies" (Tissa Attanayake) though GL Pieris said on Tue "we should assist the government in power, to arrive at a solution." Then today SB's discovery of MR's Plot.

I would have hoped the UNP would learn from its ancestors. But then again, how does one learn from ancestors it never knew? How could one learn from ancestors when the pot is so mixed up with all the hopping around people seem to do these days that they themselves would have no idea who their ancestors were?

Child Sex Tourism (CST) in Sri Lanka

Recently the Sri Lankan Tourist Board & UNICEF launched the ‘Zero Tolerance for Child Sex Tourism’ campaign in Sri Lanka.

CST rarely happens cos a 'tourist' looking for sex happen upon a child & offers him/her a gift in return for the favour – though it apparently does. It’s a wide-scale problem cos of the commercial nature it has taken – a ‘business’ run by a person ‘employing’ children & selling them off with a tidy commission for himself. There are even employees to ‘market’ the children. Apparently there are websites where paedophiles can actually ‘order’ children –by colour, height, age–I can’t verify that at this point though. There isn’t much that gets more twisted than this!

SL Stats: 100,000 children (6-14 yrs) are kept in brothels; an additional 5,000 children (10-18 years) work in tourist areas. (Sourced NCMEC)

The 'Zero Tolerance' campaigns through TV/radio ads(see pic), billboards, banners, car stickers, flyers, in-flight mags & disembarkation cards which publicize the msg. Well, kudos for the initiative. But, is it enough?

To see these ads, banners, etc one must already be in SL; to see the in-flight magazines one must already be in-flight! Would a paedophile read the notice & get off the flight or take a return flight back or just be extra careful? It is an underground trade after all! And how many peoples would arrive for a sunny holiday & suddenly be tempted to use a child for sex?

Realistically, without the poverty issue being resolved it’s unlikely there’ll be a significant change. CST is an underground trade – and will continue to be so. Skills training is catching around fast so there is hope!

Other Do-ables:

1. A tip-off system - tip offs to authorities who act IMMEDIATELY

2. Ban paedophiles. How? Stamping a holiday visa on arrival may encourage tourism, but it also encourages convicted paedophiles (either in their native countries or elsewhere). Technology which link international offender databases do exist. Scan a passport – scroll down past sexual offences – & wave him bye-bye!

3. Most importantly - empowering children. As Yasmin Haque (SL Unicef) said– “We…hope…the children…are able to say ‘no’…that they feel safe in saying ‘no’ to being pulled into the sex industry.” (my emphasis)

The ‘Zero Tolerance’ campaign needs to be commended for drawing attention to the issue. But we need MORE. Fast. Where are the funds? How about the private sector?

How much would it cost SL to gain access to such technology?

How much would it cost SL in the loss of childhoods? In traumatized future generations?

Must we sell our children to boost our economy?

Another Sri Lankan First!!

An hour ago AlertNet reported this:

"Long associated with sectarian violence in the Middle East, the suicide attack has been refined by Sri Lanka's secularist Tamil Tiger rebels into a sophisticated weapon of war.

Analysts generally agree that the Tigers pioneered the use of the concealed suicide bomb vest -- a technology now used to deadly effect across the world.

'There is no doubt about it, they have perfected the art of the suicide bomb,' said one Western diplomat.

'Security experts say the Tamils have adapted the strategy to battles on land and, most notably, at sea, where suicide "swarm tactics" against the Sri Lankan navy have been highly effective.

A survey of suicide attacks worldwide between 1980 and 2003 found that 24 percent were the work of the Tigers, outpacing such Middle Eastern armed movements as Hamas and Islamic Jihad." (My emphasis)

Another Sri Lankan FIRST!!

Painting:
The Scream,
Edvard Munch

What happened in Sri Lanka Yesterday

This is what happened in Colombo, Sri Lanka yesterday:

"On Thursday, around 1,000 people marched in Colombo then gathered in a park to urge an end to the fighting. Reuters journalists said scuffles broke out between the peace activists and hardline Buddhist monks who oppose concessions to the rebels.

The scuffles turned into an open fight after the shaven-headed, saffron-robed monks took over the stage, forcing religious leaders from Hindu, Christian and Muslim communities as well as other Buddhist monks to flee.

'They were saying we should go to war,' said pro-peace monk Madampawe Assagee. 'We like to listen to other opinions so we let them do that but then they started fighting and we couldn't control some of our people.' There were no reports of serious injuries."

Full report here.

It's not the scuffle I find so bloody ridiculous. It's these three words: hardline Buddhist monks.

I thought Buddhists were advised to take the middle path, to not go to extremes, to say no to violence.

Guess I thought wrong.

OR maybe Buddhism gives different advise to those monks who live in temples and those who sit in Parliament? That must be it. So no worries then.

And in other news, the South African cricket team has flown home due to a security report on the state Sri Lanka is at the moment. Today's Daily News headlined the departure as "Shame: South African cricketers chicken out" while the Daily Mirror stated the South African team flew out "amid fears of losing rather than bombs."

To all of us who looked forward to the cricket, after all the endless reports of killing - what disappointment. We, who've lived all, if not most, of our lives during the war, the security situation is not one that makes us think of fleeing the country asap (if we possibly could). This in itself is sad cos to some extent it means we're immune to violence. And even more sadly, there are so many people for whom the war is "in the North" and of no real concern - unless a bomb blast in Colombo either injures/ kills a loved one or catalyses a curfew when they were so looking forward to going out clubbing..what tragedy! *Manshark rolling eyes* (not a pleasant sight!)

To most non-Sri Lankans, or even Sri Lankans who've left the country, fighting in Jaffna, fighting maybe even 300 or 400km away is so scary they'll be shitting in their pants. *Manshark rolling eyes again* So how can you blame the South Africans?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is a postscript to the above post.

I just read this (the article on the South Africans leaving SL) - the website title should have alerted me - but guess I was a bit slow today. Anyways, this article claims the South Africans left SL cos "the past happenings in South Africa indicates that some political elements in the country having a hidden political agenda in promoting and sympathizing with the LTTE Tamil terrorists. The top ranking murders of LTTE have been given rousing welcomes in South Africa. Is this plot a part of their hidden agenda to provide undue publicity to ruthless LTTE terrorists who don’t have a scant respect to the human lives and children rights."

Where/ what do these fuckwits crawl out of?? Seriously.

The CPA said..in Memory of K. Loganathan

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) said:

"We will have a demonstration this Wednesday (16th August) at 4: 30 pm at Lipton Circus to protest against the ongoing violence here. For this week we would like to ask everyone participating to do a board of their own focusing on a person, friend, individual or any other group that have been killed or assassinated because of ethnic conflict.

We will do about 15 with names of people who have been killed for those who do not have time to do their own. Please do one of your own choice if you have any. We would like to focus mostly on unarmed, civilian activists, politicians who have tried to intervene in this conflict and have been killed as a result.

This protest is in the memory of Kethesh Loganathan who was killed this Saturday and the many others like him.

Please bring any one else who may be interested in coming."

A Story from Another World

I don't know why I'm writing this blog and this story, but I needed to - perhaps cos I think could this have been my sister? My fiance's sister? My best friend? Me?? In another life?

The year was 2004.

There was a teenager called Atefah Sahaaleh who was 16 years old and lived in Iran. She had lost her mother to a car crash as a child after which her father spiralled into drug addiction. Her life, amongst the teenage angst we all went through/ are going through, consisted of cooking and cleaning for her grandparents. A psychologist who examined her reported that she was desperately looking for love. Not an unusual story.

On a previous occassion after being seen in a car with a boy, her chastity was called into question. She received 100 lashes as punishment.

When she was 13 she started a relationship with a man, a taxi driver by profession, who was quite a bit older than her (some reports say he was about 51 years old). This relationship, if it was of a sexual nature, would be - in most, if not all, Western countries - what is called statutory rape. She claimed she had been raped by the 51 year old man - but rape is almost impossible to be made out in Iran where the age of consent for a girl is 9 years. Let's assume, there was no rape and she had had a "relationship" with this man. It's still an adult taking advantage of a child. It's a desperate little girl looking for love - from wherever she can find it.

Under the Islamic law code in Iran, a girl in a sexual 'relationship', over the age of consent (9 years) takes the responsibility of having "tempted" a man.

Her documents, for some reason, stated her as 22 - the legal age after which the death sentence can be imposed as punishment. She was convicted of committing acts acts which were 'incompatible with chastity'.

One of her other "crimes" was arguing with the Judge at her trial. (I guess sort of like SB Dissanayake, in Sri Lanka, who was given 2 years RI for contempt of court - an unfair sentence in terms of precedent, in general legal opinion.) The difference though? Atefah had no access to legal counsel.

She was convicted and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court upheld the sentence.

Where were you two years ago (Aug 15th) yesterday??

Two years ago yesterday Atefah was dragged through the town square and hanged - the noose applied by the trial judge himself.

Human Rights live on. So does cultural relativism.

For more info.

If Children = Terrorists - what is "right"??

This is the ethical dilemma that I cannot think my way out of.

The LTTE claims that the SL forces bombed an orphanage and have killed at least 61 schoolgirls and injured at least 150 more.

The govt categorically denies this allegation.

"It is a lie to say that schoolchildren were targeted," government spokesperson Chandrapala Liyanage told the AFP news agency. "The air force had bombed a LTTE training centre. We don't know if they had moved child soldiers there" - I've sourced this from the BBC.

I think I can safely make these two assumptions:

1. Terrorism should never be tolerated.

2. Children have nothing to do with war - they should be kept as far away from it as possible under the circumstances.

BUT IF (I'm saying IF here so don't get your pants in a twist!) children are/ were being used by terrorists, not as shields, but as cadres - they're being trained to become potential terrorists. If the children are of an age between 15-18 where if they are brainwashed "trained" well enough they are potential suicide bombers, is it still wrong if they are taken out by security forces?

What does everyone think??

What is the "right" and/or "ethical" answer?

What is the "political" and/ or "legal" answer?

Does anyone care about what is right or wrong when it comes to politics and the military and war?

Liberty Plaza Bomb Blast

The bomb blast near the Liberty Plaza shopping centre, which has taken 7 lives and injured at least 17 is said to have been targeted at a military convoy which was escorting a VIP according to TamilNet news while the Pakistan Foreign Ministry confirmed their Ambassador to SL was targeted.

The blast "came after the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) said Air Force jets bombed an orphanage in the northeast, killing 43 schoolgirls aged 15-18 and injured 60" according to AlertNet. The military confirmed there had been air raids but denied knowledge of such an incident according to BBC though the LTTE Peace Secretariat photos show otherwise.

Moragoda a sanctimonious humbug: Mohamed

...ran the headline on one of yesterday's (Monday July 17th) front page stories on the Daily Mirror.

The article ran thus (this is an edited version of course!):

"Referring to a letter Mr. Moragoda reportedly sent to UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe...'There never was so outstanding an example of sanctimonious humbug,' Mr. Mohamed said."

"Mr. Mohamed explained that Mr. Moragoda had made a passionate appeal to members of the party, to rally round the leader, after sending a letter to deputy leader Karu Jayasuriya, in the form of an MoU, under which he supported the latter for his appointment as leader of the Opposition, if Mr. Jayasuriya took action to secure the appointment of himself as the deputy leader of the party. "

"In addition, Mr. Mohamed said that Mr. Moragoda deserves a very special accolade for his role in the unprecedented tragicomedy in the present state of affairs of the Colombo Municipal Council."

Isn't it SO refreshing when someone speaks their mind?? My faith in Sri Lankan politicians have been somewhat remedied..I think!