Sri Lanka II

2-day ceasefire not enough, Tamil protesters say

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ceasefire+enough+Tamil+protesters/1490206/story.html

Concern grows for group of Tamils on hunger strike

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Concern+grows+group+Tamils+hunger+strike/1488736/story.html

Ottawa under stress as Tamil protest enters day 6

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090412/Tamil_Prote...

well it's good that the US is trying to get a long ceasefire, a week of course isn't enough, but the contortions are bizarre.

the contortions resulted because a few Bush-era warmongers decided to call everyone on the planet 'terrorists', except a few of their profiteering buddies. so Tamils defending their homeland are called 'terrorists', just like the democratically-elected Hamas government officials are called 'terrorists'.  and like Galloway, if we support the Tamil or Gazan residents who are getting massacred, we get slapped with labels too.

what a load of bunk.

as the Tamil protesters in Ottawa are saying today, lose the labels, please.

discriminatory terms are preventing relief of horrific human suffering.

LTTE reiterates need for permanent ceasefire

[TamilNet, Monday, 13 April 2009, 17:52 GMT]
The Liberation Tigers of Tamileelam (LTTE) Political Division, in a statement issued in Tamil on Monday called the Sri Lankan announcement of restricting military operations for two days as an eyewash to create an impression of engagement on false premises. Condemning the move as a "political drama" aimed at "deceiving the International Community and the Tamil people", the LTTE said the Sri Lanka Army was continuing indiscriminate shelling and gunfire on civilians. The LTTE statement categorically stated that the Tigers were calling for a politically and militarily meaningful ceasefire with humanitarian considerations.

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29035

SLA continues offensive at the doorstep of 'safe zone'

[TamilNet, Tuesday, 14 April 2009, 12:32 GMT]
Sri Lanka Army (SLA) has intensified offensive push at the doorstep of safe zone since Monday 3:00 p.m. firing shells and Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs) into the civilian zone, according to the latest reports. The makeshift hospital at Puthumaaththa'lan reported Tuesday that it admitted at least 43 wounded civilians up to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday. Many of the wounded had gunshot injuries. More than 240 explosions were registered within the safety zone. At least 25 RPG rockets, 65 shells and 150 canons (40 mm) were fired by the SLA into the safety zone since 3:00 p.m. Monday. Initial reports also said that a 44-year-old Red Cross (ICRC or SLRC) worker had sustained injuries on Monday.

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29039

US should intervene directly with GoSL, LTTE to protect civilians - Professor Boyle

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29042

so from the article at post #62 we find that Canada's designation of the LTTE as a so-called 'terrorist' organization helped contribute to the massacre of Tamil civilians.

and from  the article at post #61 we find that Canada, and every other country in the world, as signatories to the Geneva Conventions, are obliged legally to intervene directly in stopping the massacre of Tamil civilians.

this would be a moment of taking responsibility.

Does the Harper government have it in them?

of "the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949. Common article 1 thereof provides: 'The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.'" -from the article at post #61.

that would include war crimes inflicted on Tamil civilians.

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE !!!

the rest of the story today is horrific;                              http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29048

"The seriously wounded civilians are dying as their transport has been blocked by the SLA firing on medical transport carrying white flags. The casualty figures are expected to rise," said TamilNet correspondent....There are civilians lying dead and wounded inside their tarpaulin shelters, said civilians arriving from Valaignarmadam," TamilNet correspondent said, reporting amidst shelling and gunfire.
"Thousands of civilians are lying on open terrain, as there are not enough bunkers in the area between Valignarmadam and Mu'l'li-vaaykkaal, that has come under SLA barrage..."

Guys, this article was sent by email, so sorry for posting the full article.

Does Britain have a right to intervene in Sri Lanka?

by Prof. M Sornarajah

I have been asked by some British citizens of Tamil origin to give an opinion on the status of the British Government to intervene in the present humanitarian crisis caused in Sri Lanka by the shelling of safety zones declared by the Government of Sri Lanka by the Sri Lanka armed forces and the indiscriminate bombing of Tamil civilians. This shelling, as well as other indiscriminate targeting of objects, has resulted in massive civilian casualties. The extent of the duty to protect the civilians caught up in the hostilities and the competence of the British Government to provide such protection through intervention are the subjects of this opinion...

The British Government has not traditionally subscribed to the notion that a state may intervene in order to prevent humanitarian catastrophes in other states. But, the British Government reversed this policy in 1998 just before the NATO intervention in Kosovo and participated in the NATO intervention. A lachrymose Mr Blair, then Prime Minister, in justifying this change of policy, apologized for not having made a similar intervention in Rwanda to prevent the massacres that took place in that country. After the NATO intervention, the Secretary of State for Defence, justifying the intervention, stated that "in international law, in exceptional circumstances and to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe, military action can be taken and it is on that legal basis that military action was taken" (Statement reproduced at 1999, Vol.70, British Yearbook of International Law, p.586).

The next year, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs made a statement (19th July 2002) stating that "no one can claim any longer that massive violation of humanitarian law or crimes against humanity fall solely within a state's domestic jurisdiction." Mr Robin Cook, the then Secretary at the FCO indicated that Britain had submitted clear principles to the United Nations to guide intervention by the international community. There were six principles in the guidelines. Among the principles he stated, was that "when faced with overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe, which a government has shown it is unwilling or unable to prevent or is actively promoting, the international community should intervene." At the present moment, there is a humanitarian catastrophe entirely caused by the Government of Sri Lanka. Britain and the international community have a duty to act to prevent the loss of lives as a result of the actions of the Sri Lankan Government.

There is nothing to indicate that the policy of the British Government has changed since this time. It must be taken that since then the UK policy has been to accept the right of humanitarian intervention, even through forcible means, to put an end to internal civilian suffering caused by a state intent on massacring a part of its population identifiable on the basis of race, language or religion.

There are obvious objections to forcible unilateral humanitarian intervention. The dilemma is that the doctrine could be abused by strong states which would use it to influence political courses in states but, at the same time, it becomes necessary that states not stand by when harrowing incidents of genocidal killings take place. In Bangladesh, Cambodia and Uganda, unilateral interventions took place which the world condoned because the killings in Bangladesh by the Pakistani forces, the massacres of Pol Pot in Cambodia and the ruthlessness of Idi Amin in Uganda had to be brought to an end. The forcible interventions in these incidents by India, Vietnam and Tanzania were silently applauded by the international community. None of these governments sought to justify their actions on the basis of humanitarian intervention. The NATO intervention in Kosovo, however, was justified by the UK and other NATO members on the basis of a principle of humanitarian intervention. The intervention in Kosovo by NATO was necessary because two members of the United Nations Security Council (China and Russia) vetoed United Nations action. Such a veto is to be expected whenever internal massacres are discussed, as both China and Russia have minority problems in Chechnya and Tibet which they do not want to hold out to international scrutiny. Neither do they want to contemplate the future possibility of an intervention to deal with such issues. Collective exercise of forcible humanitarian intervention under United Nations auspices, therefore, remains remote.

It is in the light of the dilemma presented that the international community came up with the idea of the duty to protect. The duty to protect was promoted largely by Canada and Australia. Two former foreign ministers of these two states, Mr Lloyd Axworthy (Canada) and Mr Gareth Evans (Australia) were instrumental in pushing the idea. A commission set up by the Canadian Government issued a report on the scope of this right. The idea was to ensure that, whatever the international law position on the principle of humanitarian intervention is, there is a right recognized by the international community to provide assistance to a civilian people who are caught up in the hostilities between the armed forces and insurgents.

The Responsibility to Protect is now well recognized in international law. It results from an international instrument which the General Assembly of the United Nations approved in 2005 at the World Summit. The Responsibility to Protect is a duty every state owes its minorities. The Responsibility requires that the minority not be subjected to atrocities involving genocide or crimes against humanity like torture. Where this duty is violated by the state, it is incumbent on other members of the international community to intervene and ensure that the persecuted group is protected. Such intervention is legitimate in international law. It is opposed only by a few states like China, Russia, Sudan and Zimbabwe, fellow travelers with the government of Sri Lanka and persistent violators of the rights of their own citizens.

It is the duty of the international community to ensure that the devices that it has created are meaningful. In the case of the British Government, its duty is clear in this regard. It, now, subscribes to a principle of humanitarian intervention, which justifies even the use of unilateral armed force in order to achieve humanitarian ends, such as the protection of the civilians caught up in the hostilities in the North of Sri Lanka. Failing the use of this doctrine, it has the duty to ensure their protection as a result of the new doctrine relating to the Responsibility to Protect.

In the case of Britain, its exercise of this duty arises not from its membership of the international community or from a moral duty alone. It bears a historical responsibility in the problem that affects Sri Lanka. The distinguished British political scientist, Bertram Hughes Farmer detailed in his book, Ceylon: a Divided Nation (Institute of Race Relations, Oxford, 1963), nearly half century ago, how the British had brought under one rule an island divided on the basis of ethnicity into three kingdoms for the sake of their administrative convenience. They left behind the same system of a single government for an island that had contained three separate kingdoms. He predicted that the constitutional arrangement that the British created on granting independence to Sri Lanka had to break down as it did not give the minorities in Sri Lanka sufficient protection. Much of the blame can be placed at the doors of Britain. Events unfolded exactly as Farmer had predicted.

The unitary government of Sri Lanka came under Sinhala chauvinists, who outdid each other in their racial and religious fanaticism against the minorities, declaring Sinhala the only official language and the peaceful religion of Gautama Buddha, the renouncer of his own kingdom, the state religion. They adopted a national flag of violence, which symbolized the creation myth of the Sinhala race, a lion holding a sword, symbolizing violence against those who opposed Sinhala supremacy. All minorities were excluded from participation in government and as the head of the armed forces declared without being contradicted, Sri Lanka belongs to the Sinhalese and others live in it only upon tolerance. Several pogroms have been unleashed against the Tamils, resulting in a flood of refugees accounting for a large Tamil diaspora in the capitals of the world. Unfortunately, this was a result that the Sinhala chauvinists did not anticipate. While they kept their own people mired in a blinkered existence of hatred, the minorities in Sri Lanka have been well received in the capitals of the West where they have prospered and grown in influence.

In the light of the terror that has been unleashed on the Tamils by successive governments, a right to self-determination has arisen in them. The modern scope of that right has been discussed authoritatively by the Canadian Supreme Court in Attorney Generals Reference on the Quebec Secession (1998) and by the Badinter Commission set up by the European Union to consider the issues relating to Kosovo and Yugoslavia. Essentially, such a right is held in abeyance where the right to equality is recognized in a plural state held in good balance through its political structure, as it is in Canada, where four successive Prime Ministers were French Canadians. But, whereas in Sri Lanka, there is not only the persistent violation of the right to equality of the Tamils but a course of violence unleashed by government forces on the civilian population, a right of secession arises in them. Such a right can be asserted through violence. It is inapposite to describe such violence as involving terrorism. Right down history from the American War of Independence to the struggle of Mandela against apartheid, violence has been used for the assertion of lawful rights. Though it is obviously preferable that, as in the case of Mahatma Gandhi, peaceful methods should be used in the pursuit of rights, such peaceful methods of protest used by early Tamil leaders in Sri Lanka failed miserably. It is only after the peaceful methods of protest had failed that violent means were adopted by Tamil youth. It is evident that the Tamil diaspora supports their struggle.

The present situation arises because of the hostilities between the two contending forces. The Tamil Tigers are fighting a war of secession in a lawful manner as combatants wearing recognizable uniforms. The civilians have sought refuge in zones designated as safe zones by the Government of Sri Lanka, but are still being massacred by government troops. Those who have escaped the war zone are kept in detention camps in reportedly miserable conditions of captivity for the simple reason that they are Tamils.

In this context, a clear duty of protection arises and this duty, for reasons explained, is the greater in the case of the British Government. It is a duty enhanced by the fact that the relatives of many of its citizens are caught up in the war zone. Though the British government owes a special historical responsibility, this responsibility attaches to the whole international community. The NATO members in particular, having set a precedent in Kosovo, have, at least, the duty to take the lesser route of intervening to protect the Tamil civilians.

Today, we try the henchman of Pol Pot. Fujimori of Peru has just been convicted. Tomorrow, the international criminals in the present Government of Sri Lanka responsible for the atrocities against the Tamils in Sri Lanka will surely be tried for their callous massacre of thousands of Tamil civilians. But, it is today that is relevant. It is today that the hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilian lives under the threat of massacre by the Sri Lankan Government must be saved.

thanks thirusuj for that article by M. Sornarajah (haven't read the others yet).  This is excellent:

"it is today that is relevant. It is today that the hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilian lives under the threat of massacre by the Sri Lankan Government must be saved."

thirusuj wrote:

Uproar over 'freedom flag'

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/OttawaAndRegion/2009/04/15/9116691-sun.html

I hear from friends in the UK that the police there were wading into crowds to remove the flags. Scary stuff -- even the symbol may not be shown, as the killings are hidden? 

These are amssacres, and Canada should act to help stop them, not to cheer on the killers. 

It seems trivial to ask about the flag at a time like this, but of course symbolic politics are about much more than just symbolism. It seems to me from the linked article and looking around that the Tamil flag is completely linked to the LTTE. But maybe someone more knowledgeable can enlighten...

Quote:

Earlier, the Tiger flag which had been created by Vellupillai Prabakaran became the flag of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam from 1977. In 1990, the letters on the flag were removed and declared as the National Flag of Tamil Eelam by the LTTE Leader. On November 21st 1990, on the commencement LTTE’s second heroes day week, for the first time, the flag was hoisted as the National Flag of Tamil Eelam by Prabakaran at one of his base in Vanni.

[url=http://www.asiantribune.com/oldsite/show_news.php?id=16739]Asian Tribune[/url]

[url=http://flagspot.net/flags/lk-tamil.html#des]Flags of the World shows an alternative flag for Tamil Eelam[/url]

Ze, I don't know the meaning of the Tamil flag, but it seems a blatant attempt to suppress an independent state. 

It reminds me of when various brutal occupiers outlawed the Ukrainian flag. 

'No flag, no people, no problem.'

[DOESN'T WORK].

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Dear Canadian/Quebecois Elected Officials and UN Security Council Permanent Mission Representatives;

Please call on the government of Sri Lanka to immediately stop its military assaults on Tamil civilians, which, occurring within internment camps, and so-called 'safe zones', have all the markings of genocidal action and war crimes. 

Please provide immediate humanitarian assistance to those trapped inside the residential areas which the Sri Lankan military and bombers are targetting.

Please stop the Sri Lankan Army and the Indian Army from using chemical weapons on the civilians in Vanni.

Please lift the ban on the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.  There is urgent need for direct dialogue. 

We have received news that civilians continue to be slaughtered in Tamil areas, even this morning and evening.  The dead are buried where they are.  There are reports that preparations are being made for mass burials, of those who may be attacked in coming days.  There have been reports of previous use of chemical weapons, and new training in the use of gas masks by the Sri Lankan military.  At the same time the Sri Lankan state refuses to allow independent observers and media into the region.

The world can no longer stand by and watch further massacres of the Tamil people.

It is incumbent upon you, as signatories with Sri Lanka, to uphold the Geneva Conventions in opposing war crimes.  Following precedents of earlier interventions, there is an immediate need for you as leaders in the international community to call a halt to civilian slaughter and threatened genocide. 

Please use the most effective tools to accomplish this humanitarian goal, including direct communication, and withdrawal of financial support for the Sri Lankan army, so that it cannot continue its crimes.

Thank you for your urgent action to stop the massacre of Tamil people.

Sincerely,

Issues with Tamil Flag

http://video.ottawasun.ca/video/featured/issues-with-tamil-flag/19564131001

Tamils pray as protests continue

http://video.ottawasun.ca/video/_/_/5790928001/_/19834163001

response from US Mission to the UN Security Council, just received.  a pathetic apologetic. 

my favourite inconsistency?

" 'We will keep you posted as the situation develops...'Did you discuss press freedom?'...'No we have not discussed it.' "

They don't know what the hell is going on and are relying on their collaborators' spin.

I'm going to send them the photos posted at http://www.tamilsforum.com/Current020309.pdf .

"Thank you for your email:

Like you, the United States is concerned by the deteriorating situation in Sri Lanka and are engaging this issue through multiple channels.  Yesterday, the United Nations Security Council held a meeting on the topic.  What follows are remarks made by Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo, America’s Alternate Representative to the U.N. for Special Political Affairs, regarding the meeting.

We will keep you posted as the situation develops.  For more information on this and other issues of international concern, visit our Web site at www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov. 

Thank you for your active engagement,

United States Mission to the United Nations

Office of Press and Public Diplomacy

140 East 45th Street

New York, NY 10017

(212) 415-4058

USUNPRESS RELEASE #061                                                                    March 26, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Remarks by Ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo, U.S. Alternate Representative to the U.N. for Special Political Affairs, on Sri Lanka, at the Security Council Stakeout, March 26, 2009

Ambassador DiCarlo:  OK, the meeting is still going on.  We had a very interesting briefing from Under Secretary General Holmes, a sobering briefing I would say, and we had the Representative of Sri Lanka who also made some comments. 

I just want to express my Government’s deep concern about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka.  We are very concerned about the individuals who are trapped between the guns of the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE.  The UN estimates, and this is what we were informed of today, that there are between 150,000 to 190,000 people who are trapped in the conflict zone.  We are very concerned that the Government of Sri Lanka continues its shelling of areas where there are large number of civilians very close to hospitals, very close to civilian facilities.  We understand that quite a number of civilians have perished because of these attacks. 

We have urged the Government of Sri Lanka to cease the shelling near civilian areas.  We have promises, but we need to see results.  Now we have also joined others in calling for a humanitarian pause.  We think that it is absolutely essential in order to get aid in.  We have reports from the UN, from aid agencies about the lack of food, the lack of medicines, it’s a very critical situation so a pause would help certainly. 

Now I just want to address the LTTE.  We condemn the LTTE.  You know it is designated by the U.S. Government as a terrorist organization and we certainly condemn the fact that they use civilians as human shields.  But we asked and called on them as others have to lay down their arms, to renounce violence, to negotiate with the government of Sri Lanka.  We nevertheless feel that in its actions to address this situation, the Government of Sri Lanka must pay more attention to protecting the civilian population in this conflict. 

Reporter:  (inaudible) have any offer to actually help extract trapped civilians?  And do you have any view on what should happen in the longer term between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Tamil population that sort of gave rise to the conflict? 

Ambassador DiCarlo:  Well first of all, you know, we have worked very closely with the United Nations and I should add that we are very very grateful to the Secretary General, to Under Secretary General Holmes, and all the UN agencies who are there, who are doing a fabulous job and stepping in.  The Government of Sri Lanka has worked with the UN when it has not worked with or worked well let’s say with other aid agencies, and the United Nations has tried very hard to negotiate and to allow for the release of the civilians who are trapped, calling on both side to address this situation. 

As far as the long term process, obviously we want to see the Government of Sri Lanka to come forward with a program or with an initiative that allows Tamil citizens to have a viable role in the society, and we are talking about those who renounce violence, who are very separate from the LTTE.  We think that will make a very big difference in the final resolution of this problem. 

Reporter:  Does the U.S. think that the UN or its own funds should be used for these camps set up outside the zone of conflict in which people can’t leave and they are not allowed to receive visitors? 

Ambassador DiCarlo:    My understanding is that UNHCR is allowing funds for three months, that’s my understanding, but that’s something you would have to ask Under Secretary General Holmes, that is what I believe we have heard. 

But obviously these camps are not long term camps.  I think it is extremely important that conditions are created so that those who are in the camps can return home soon. if they should choose, or relocate to places where they would like to live.  These are meant to be temporary interim camps and we want to see the Government of Sri Lanka actually move forward to create those conditions so they can leave those camps very soon.  We have also called for in the past and continue to call for access to these IDPs, not only by aid agencies, but also by their families. 

Reporter:  Did you discuss press freedom? 

Ambassador DiCarlo:  No we have not discussed it.  We have discussed the humanitarian situation thus far. 

Thank You.  "

Onslaught of civilians continues, more than 57 killed, 300 wounded Thursday

[TamilNet, Thursday, 16 April 2009, 17:36 GMT]
While Sri Lanka's President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited Ki'linochchi to boost the morale of his forces, shelling and cannon fire by his troops in Mullaiththeevu district killed more than 57 civilians within the so-called safety zone on Thursday, according to TamilNet correspondent in Vanni. Nearly 1,500 shell explosions were registered by the correspondent as fired by the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) on Thursday and around 600 of them hit the safety zone while about 150 cannon shots hit the coastline.

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29064

An aggressor relentlessly attacks minorities over the years, then herds them into compounds and bombs them, continuously.   Those who attempt some self-defense are called 'terrorists'.

[i'll try again to access that thirusuj, it requires alot of additional sign-up & download, which limits some]

"While more than 1500 shells fired by the SLA, and around 600 of them hit the so-called safety zone, killing 57 civilians on Thursday, the government spokesman Brigadier Nanayakkara over telephone to New York Times denied any activity of the government on the battlefield Thursday.

All witnesses out, IC winking, India abetting and international media failing in its duty, the civilian massacre and subjugation can be completed with much ease, Colombo observers said.

“It is now a genocide openly perpetrated by the IC” [international community]."

http://www.tamilnet.com/art.html?catid=13&artid=29066

I went to the New York Times site and read the aforementioned article.  It was very disturbing, saying it was the LTTE blocking civilians from leaving, when it fact it is the Sri Lankan state and army which have set up multiple blockades and checkpoints, and subjecting civlians to even more abuse there.  This in the context of rape, torture, and murder by Sri Lankan soldiers within Tamil communities.  Why on earth would any person put themselves voluntarily into the hands of these soldiers???

But then, as in the past, the New York Times is not conducive to actually reporting Crimes Against Humanity, nor genocide.  It prefers to whitewash the truth, for the profits of the establishment. 

Take the example of Stalin's Holodomor in Ukraine.  The NYTimes sent reporter Duranty to the region, and while millions of people were starving and dying, with Stalin's thugs standing guard at their grain silos and exporting their food to the west, Duranty returned to the Times and reported everything was hunky-dory and got a Pulitzer Prize.  Some things haven't changed- the NYTimes just digs itself deeper into it's own hole of cheap cowardice and lies.

Holmes is an abject failure as a spokesperson for the UN.  A ceasefire might be possible if the US clearly talked of sanctions for the Sri Lankan agressors.  But no, he blames the Tamils for their self-defense in the face of Sri Lanka's aerial and ground massacre with chemical weapons, inside the zone which Sri Lankan soldiers have cordoned off.  Bizarre.

Britain and France (joint Miliband/Kouchner stmt:) http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/newsroom/latest-news/?view=PressS&id=16407679 have voiced a minor slap on the wrist of Sri Lanka, and asked Rajapaska to provide more of a 'pause' (!!!) but continue with the ridiculous notion that Sri Lanka's fences, and vicious soldiers have nothing to do with civilians unwillingness to jump into their arms.  Their request that humanitarian aid workers be allowed in is a gesture, but again they pass the buck of responsibility and show no action in upholding their own obligations w.r.t. the Geneva Conventions.

And the rest of us have to live with the fact that our taxdollars are going to arm bombers which are dismembering innocent kids and their families a plane ticket away.

-from the last article noted at #86

" He said, 'LTTE’s armed struggle is the historical product of injustice against the Tamil Nation in the island, and if the International Community could achieve a just political solution to the conflict, the need for an armed struggle would cease to exist'.

The LTTE has again called on the International Community to act urgently at this crucial juncture to bring about an immediate and permanent ceasefire which would create a conducive environment for humanitarian relief operations and to commence a process that would lead to a just political solution.

'We assure the International Community that the LTTE is ready to participate in political negotiations and fight to meet the political aspirations of the Tamil nation at the negotiating table through political means if an immediate and permanent ceasefire is ensured and the human sufferings of the Tamil people are addressed' Mr Pathmanathan has stated. "

sounds eminently reasonable.

Sri Lankan troops attack rebel defenses

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/16/AR200904...

just a note here to say that my own computer is having internet problems, i'm writing from another one, and this one will soon be unavailable, for other reasons, as well.

when i get this sorted out i'll be back in touch. 

will rely on babblers here

If you want to read the Tamil Side of the news in English, check out:

Tamilnet.com

http://www.lankasrinews.com/
InfoTamil.ch/en
http://www.tamilcanadian.com/news/
http://tamilnational.com/
http://tamilinsight.org/mydesk/
http://eurotvlive.com/ - Raw Footages of The Genocide in Sri Lanka

Information Database:

http://tamilnation.org/

http://sangam.org/

thanks thirusuj for the links, esp. the Tamil Canadian site.

some of the comments in this article were also helpful, it seems that at least some at the UN are concerned about the pending bloodbath (as if there hasn't been enough blood already), concerned enough to send some ships, hope they do !

most importantly, i hope that major global powers continue to push Sri Lanka to call off its assault and implement permanent ceasefire, allow the Tamil nation to live in peace .

http://tamilnational.com/news-flash/663-unsgs-chief-of-staff-in-sri-lank...

Sri Lankan leader rejects UN

http://tamilnational.com/news-flash/683-sl-rejects-un-truce-appeal.html