|
THE AMBASSADOR to Sri Lanka from the US in a recent speech says “We
Americans don’t mince words”.
Hence without mincing words can he ask his own Republican Right Wing
Government why American Security contractors (Mercenaries) making top
dollar in Iraq are above the law? A recent attack on civilians in
Baghdad killed 11 innocent Iraqis.
News reports suggest that Iraqi investigators have a videotape that
shows Blackwater USA mercenaries opening fire against civilians without
provocation first.
Blackwater is a highly politically connected US security firm which
has been given lucrative contracts in Iraq at American taxpayers’
expense. They are not accountable to anyone. They are above Iraqi
sovereign law and also immune to prosecution. Why?
Thirty billion American dollars are unaccounted for in Iraq expenses.
Why? Is that corruption? 200,000 weapons cannot be accounted for.
I agree with him when he says Sri Lanka’s military gains are
tactical. Does he agree the quagmire caused by his administration in
Iraq also will not have a ‘winner’ unless the US changes its policy
towards the burning issues in the Middle East?
How much misery has the US caused in Iraq? Do you feel accountable
for the exponential spread of hatred against your own nations interests
because of this war?
Do you believe Bush when he says “The terrorist hate us because we
are free and they hate our lifestyle” or is there more insidious reasons
for them to hate us?
Or could it be because of over 60 years of selective policies of
installing dictators, supporting oppressive feudal Arab regimes, playing
one nation against the other to ensure cheap uninterrupted oil supplies,
backing Saddam against Iran during Republican Reagan’s time, ignoring
Palestinian issues, supporting Israel that may be the cause of this
exponentially rising hatred towards American interests? Any battlefield
gain US soldiers make are also only ‘tactical’.
You cannot win in Iraq or Afghanistan unless and until you address
the root causes and acknowledge the real reason for interfering in the
Middle-East.
Two million refugees, horrible sectarian violence, a totally
traumatised society, absymal backward infrastructure compared to before
the invasion are all legacies of ‘mission accomplished’.
Australia’s Defence Minister, Brendan Nelson, blurted out in July
that the real motive for invading Iraq was oil: “Obviously the Middle
East itself, not only Iraq but the entire region, is an important
supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world.
Australians and all of us need to think what would happen, if there was
a premature withdrawal from Iraq.”
And on September 17, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve a
Libertarian lifelong Republican Alan Greenspan said , “I am saddened
that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows:
the Iraq war is largely about oil.”
Shall we have some typical American straight shooting on this too?
R. F. GUNASEKERA
-------------
A vast amount (Rs. 20 billion?) is spent annually on milk imports. In
spite of this, malnutrition among children and mothers is rampant. Hence
we need more and more milk imports even with the present population
remaining static.
We certainly have the natural resources and expertise to make Sri
Lanka self sufficient in milk in about three - four years, if one has
the mind and the determination to do so. If this is to bear fruit,
obviously more and more people will have to raise cattle in farms,
private holdings etc.
The chances of a calf being male or female are 50 - 50. Under any
type of dairy farming, the male calves have to be culled meaning
slaughter. Very few are now used as draught animals and still fewer in
ploughing rendering male calves redundant.
In short, does not an attempt to make the country self sufficient in
milk lead to large scale cattle slaughter? In a country where about 75
per cent of the population are Buddhists to whom any kind of killing is
detestable or should be so, how does one face the dilemma?
One could argue that in other forms of livestock farming too (goats,
poultry) a similar situation exists where killing becomes necessary for
the industry to survive - but in the case of cattle it is special.
GAMINI PEIRIS –
Panadura
-------------
THIS refers to the letter published in the Daily News on September 18
with the caption ‘Disgraceful wedding dresses and blind grooms’. The
writer of the article happened to be one Christine Taylor of Kotugoda.
I read this letter with much interest and also noted that there was
an earlier letter had been written by Dr. Mareena Thaha Raffai of
Dehiwala. I take this opportunity in extending my gratitude to both of
them for their valuable contributions for the uplift of the society.
I fully agreed and endorsed what Christine Taylor had mentioned and
unfortunately could not read Dr. Raffai’s letter. Just to extend and
expand the scope of the subject matter, I wish to mention that this type
of ‘body exhibition’ happens even other times other than matrimonial
occasions. This ‘exhibition of flesh’ as mentioned by these two writers
may happen due to certain reasons.
The voluntarary desire of the person to exhibit her body. She may
think she has a right of liberty to wear anything of her choice and
there cannot be any restriction or opposition from others in this
respect.
It may be the desire or encouragement or inaction of her parents,
brothers and sisters, spouse or boyfriend for this type of body
exhibition, or it may be the creation of the designer/s of the dress/es
who vitiate the wishes of the person and create a dress which exhibits
her body making her understanding that it is the latest fashion.
Apart from the above mentioned situations, in some other situations
such as in the cases of films/dramas, it may be the desire of the
director to come with this type of dresses to be worn by the actress and
they have no choice about their choice.
Whatever the reason for this type of body exhibition, whether a
person has a right to do so. Some may argue they have a fundamental
right to wear what they want. Is that thinking right? On the other hand,
some others may argue that this type of body exhibition is bad for
morality, specially we being Asians and Sri Lankans.
As there may be two opposing lines of thought, who would be the judge
to decide whether individual liberty must not be disturbed or whether it
must be opposed as it was a social evil.
Whatever the reason may be, the lady and her kith and kin need to
understand that exhibit or exposure of woman’s body would be a social
evil and will be harmful to the particular person and also to their
relatives.
I have a memory of one Ms. Taylor in mid 1960’s at the Peradeniya
University and at that time she was blessed with beauty and personality
who was wearing clothes decent. Everybody was pleased with the way how
she was dressed.
I wish to quote another occasion just to emphasise the point that in
the early part of 1980’s where an American film The Further Adventures
of Indiana Jones filming in Kandy, Pallekalle. The main actor was the
famous Harrison Ford. We were involved in that film for sometime with
them.
The fiancee of Harrison Ford who happened to be a very beautiful,
smart and with pleasing personality was wearing clothes covering her
full body with reserved qualities. Everybody was admiring her for the
way she was dressed and behaved.
What I am trying to emphasise is that if a girl/women is wearing
clothes decently, it will be appreciated by everyone. Women with less
clothes although certain people like to have a glimpse, the majority
will hate them, criticize them and say they are vultures, indecent and
sexy.
To correct this menace, at school level the authorities can educate
about these ills and also it would be good for others also to educate
these women who desire exposure of their body unnecessarily and
unreasonably.
T.H. UPASENA –
Nugegoda
--------------
WITH monotonous regularity wide publicity is afforded in the local
dailies of special concessions and attractive privileges offered to
Senior Citizens by various business establishments and even State banks.
The facilities offered relate essentially to special concessions in;
1. Banking - enhanced interest on deposits.
2. Health Care - special concessions.
3. Special telecommunications packages
4. Insurance - age concessions and special privileges
Despite the wide publicity afforded either by advertisements or news
items when you attempt to make use of the afforded
privileges/concessions inevitably there is ‘a hitch’, ‘a slip between
the cup and the lip”.
Most advertisements have been misleading and not genuine.
My experience has been most frustrating, irritating and totally
disappointing in attempting to;
(A) Invest some money at a special rate in a bank.
(B) Obtain a cellular phone on a special package.
When I visited the bank that had advertised offering special rates I
was told that the facility had since been withdrawn and only if a very
large sum of money is deposited, a special rate can be granted.
My inquiry from the mobile phone company that offered a special
package was equally disappointing.
They were vague and said that the modalities of the scheme had not
yet been worked out and no distinct concessions were evident.
My humble and timely plea to ‘Senior Citizens’, do not be duped by
the various business institutions that offer special privileges and
concessions.
There is always a hitch when you visit the institutions in response
to their advertisements they offer other schemes.
In the words of Albert Camus “to grow old is to pass from passion to
compassion”.
JOSEPH FERNANDO -
Nawala
|
