The UK House of Commons spent hours yesterday discussing the human rights and economic situation in Sri Lanka. Although they say they are talking about Sri Lanka, they seem to have taken it as an opportunity to express their “overwhelming love” for the Sri Lankan Tamil people living in the United Kingdom in order to preserve their political clout. It is quite ironic how a new generation born to a generation of ancestors who plundered countries including Sri Lanka psychologically, physically and in every other aspect for hundreds of years is not only bragging about human rights but also commanding other nations who are poor just because their wrongdoings how to protect human rights. We were watching carefully the fake performance that was carried out yesterday by that group of hypocrites calling it a debate but in the real sense, they have ridiculed the principles of humanity. However, we should be glad to watch such entertaining plays of this nature especially in a socio and political context, where a man who has represented an ethnic group which was largely discriminated against by the common psyche of the United Kingdom was finally chosen as their new “Raj”. Their “overwhelming love” for the Tamil people to retain their political power is clearly visible through such dramas. We suggest that it should be capitalized very well by the Tamil community in the UK because, in another ten years or so, a person of Sri Lankan origin can open the path to rule the United Kingdom.
The so-called debate held by British politicians yesterday was a pathetic attempt to offer a legal framework for the alleged genocide in Sri Lanka that should be carefully looked at. No Genocide, but yes, there were some violations from both sides that should be investigated and prosecuted domestically. The real genocide was committed by the British colonialists. They have not yet paid compensation for that. At least they should return stolen valuables. Who can say that it is wrong to vanquish a brutal dictator and his gang who were oppressing unarmed civilians, expelling fellow folks of ethnicities who lived harmoniously within 24 hours and forcing their children into child soldiers? Do you know that we have experienced this heinous reality in our real life, Right Honourable Members? Tell us, will you allow someone to grab your kids and install them on war fronts? Tamil people contributed the most to this humanitarian operation because it was right. That is the truth. That is why these ladies and gentlemen who shed crocodile tears about human rights should stop betraying the noble principles of these subjects for their political survival. They talked about Sri Lanka at length based on secondary information and rhetoric. Anyone who has a simple understanding of the situation in the country will understand that these backbench MPs are continuously trying to fabricate blatant lies for their political survival.
The basic idea presented by a young politician was that since Sri Lanka is a member country of the Commonwealth of Nations, strict measures should be taken against Sri Lanka. We have no idea what the common in wealth of those members of the so-called “commonwealth” is, but we see the wretched inequality between us and them. They robbed us to enrich themselves. Then they tell us, you are a part of “the commonwealth”. Truth is there is nothing in common, but we are a substantive part of their wealth. Not only Sri Lanka but many other nations were deceived by the nominal commonwealth until the power of the degenerate colonial master faded in recent times. The inconsistency here is that this whole event is labelled a “debate”. From school we are taught that debate is about at least one side opposing the other side’s point of view and letting the public/jury decide who does better. The irony is that the British taught us the culture of debate in the formal education system implemented during the period when they administered Sri Lanka as a subordinate state. But in this so-called debate, nothing was said that contradicted any point that one was trying to establish for his or her political existence. No opportunity for other side of the story. Is it fair in democracy? What is important is accurate data, not rhetoric based on assumptions. So do we need commentary to understand this usual fake play? Do they really worship the principles of democracy or the legacy of Joseph Goebbels? Over to you, Right Honourable Members?