ගැහැනු ලමයෙකුට පිරිමි ලමයි දෙන්නෙක් අමානුශික ලෙස පහර දෙනව

#‎SriLanka‬ ‪#‎ViolenceAgainstWomen‬ ‪#‎AbuseOfPower‬ ‪#‎AbuseOfHumanRights‬
ගැහැනු ලමයෙකුට පිරිමි ලමයි දෙන්නෙක් අමානුශික ලෙස පහර දෙනව බලන් ඉන්නත් දුකයි. මේවා ප්‍රචාර කරෙ නැත්නම් මේවගෙ මීනිස්සු ඉන්නව කියල අනෙක් මිනිස්සු දන්නෙත් නැ. මේ අධමයින් දෙන්න අහිංසක කෙල්ලෙකුට වට කරගෙන ගහන එක වීරකමක් වගෙ ඇගට දැනෙනවනම් එකෙන් කියවෙන්නෙ ඔවුන්ගෙ තියෙන බියගුලු ස්වභාවය සහ මෝඩකම. ඒත් මේව ඉවසිය යුතු දෙවල් නෙවෙ. හෙලා දකින්න ඔනෙ, දඩුවම් පමුනුවන්න ඔනෙ, අනෙක් අයව දැනුවත් කරන්න ඔනෙ, කාන්තා හිංසනය පිටුදකින්න නම්.

මෙතන සිද්දියට හේතුව එතරම් පැහැදිලි නැති උනත් රුවන් චෝදනා කරනව යාලුවෙලා ඉන්න කෙල්ලට ඇය කල වරදක් ගැන. මොකද්ද වරද කියල පැහදිලි නැහැ. කෙල්ල නැවත නැවතත් අහනව කොල්ලට (රුවන්ට ) උත්තර හෝ සාක්ශි නැහැ. රුවන් කරන්නෙ කෙල්ලට පහරදිම පමනයි. රුවන් චොදනා කරනව රුවන්ගෙ කදුලුවලට කෙල්ල වග කියන්න ඔනෙ කියල. එතකොට කෙල්ලගෙ කදුලු වලට කවුද වග කියන්න ඔනෙ රුවන් කියල රුවන් ට වැටහෙන්නෙ නැහැ. රුවන්ගෙ යාලුවත් රුවන්ගෙ කෙල්ලට ගහන එක කොහොම සාධාරනිකරණය කරන්නද?

කොටින්ම මෙතන වෙන්නෙ වඩා ප්‍රභල පුරුෂාධිපත්ය සහ බලපුලුවන්කාරකම නිර්ලජ්ජ ලෙස දුබල ස්ත්‍රියකට ප්‍රදර්ශනය කිරිම පමනයි. නිතිය ක්‍රියාත්මක විය යුත්තෙ මෙවැනි අධමයින්ගෙන් සමාජට වෙන (විශෙශයෙන් දුබලයට වෙන ) හානි වලක්වන්න.

Putin’s new world order: An analysis of Putin's UNGA 2015 speech

The Russian president, far from ostracized, is the center of global attention.

Reading between the lines of Putin’s U.N. address on Monday | Getty

(This article was originally published by Paul R. Gregory on 9/29/15 available online link http://www.politico.eu/article/putin-new-world-order-syria-united-nations-new-york/

The president of Russia uses a Putin-speak in his speeches that we must parse word for word, in our own best interests. Only after translating them into normal speech do we learn what he has said and why. His speech Monday to the United Nations General Assembly made seven overlapping and interdependent points that are worth translating.

Unlike Barack Obama’s passionate address, Putin delivered his remarks in the measured and moderate tones of a world statesman. They were still words of warning: Join us in a broad coalition and leave nondemocratic regimes alone, or catastrophe will strike.

Following are the major points that Putin wished his audience to take back to their respective countries:

First, the United States and its Western allies are responsible for the sad state of world affairs owing to their foolhardy interventions on behalf of democratic revolutions. Democratic revolutions are the dreams of those who have unrealistic views of the world. The USSR learned that it could not export socialist revolution; the West must learn that it cannot export democratic revolution.

Second, the United Nations, not some agglomeration of prosperous Western powers, should guarantee peace and security for all, not just to a select few singled out for narrow benefit. Only the U.N. can form a broad coalition that can put an end to the terrorist threats of ISIL. The matter is urgent. If such a coalition is not formed soon, the migrant flow to Europe will reach into the millions, not tens of thousands, and no country will be safe from terrorist attack, says Putin.

Three, Russia’s status as a veto-welding member of the U.N. Security Council is not affected by Russia’s recent disagreements — namely, the United Nations’ condemnation of the Crimean annexation and Russia’s veto of a criminal tribunal to punish those responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines MH17. Such disagreements, even among the major Western powers, have disrupted the work of the Security Council since the U.N.’s founding. Putin tells his audience that the fact that Russia disagrees with certain U.N. resolutions is normal and does not affect its veto power.

Fourth, the West must understand that the choice between governmentalism (‘gosudarstvennost’) and chaos must be made in favor of the former. The Assad government may not be ideal, but it is the only institution of statehood that exists. Libya’s Gaddafi regime was tyrannical, but what came afterward has been worse. Well-intentioned actions that destroy a nation’s “governmentalism” leave vacuums that forces of evil, such as ISIL, fill. The ranks of ISIL, for example, were populated with the disaffected remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime. No such thing as a moderate opposition exists, as shown by America’s comedic efforts to train and arm anti-Assad forces.

Fifth, the West must suppress its appetite for supporting democratic opposition forces that challenge “governmentalism” in regimes whose human rights, press freedom, and election procedures fall short of Western ideals. (Not stated by Putin is that he includes Russia in this category; hands off Russia’s internal affairs.) The West’s meddling in Ukraine had the unanticipated consequence of what Putin calls a “spontaneous civil war,” with over 8,000 deaths.


Sixth, the world must return to normal trading patterns, “harmonized” by the World Trade Organization and the U.N. This new order cannot be a diktat of the strong but must be fair and even for all, perhaps including a common market between the European Union and Putin’s proposed Eurasian Union. Sanctions, which are imposed for political reasons and personal financial gains, would have no room in such a world order. The sanctions against Russia must be lifted immediately. The West knows they are not fulfilling the purposes for which they were levied.
Seventh, the Western world must respect the security concerns of Russia over NATO expansion. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO enlargement can only be seen as encircling and threatening Russia’s sovereignty. If the world goes to a common market of common markets (European Union with Putin’s Eurasian Union), there is no reason to be concerned about the EU expanding to include Ukraine.

* * *

Putin’s U.N. speech did not deviate from previews he gave weeks earlier. His broad coalition will include the Assad government as a non-negotiable condition. Putin portrays himself as the knight on a white horse galloping in to save the day for the bumbling Obama. Putin is betting his new world order on the U.N., where less than half of its members are classified as free and where his “leave bad regimes alone” message resonates.

Putin cleverly weaves together points to which Western audiences would agree (we have indeed made a mess of the Middle East and Ukraine) with ideas that are wrong or inoperable. He does not explain how a broad coalition can be formed that includes warring Sunni and Shia factions. Nor does he tell us how his Eurasian Union can blend with the European Union, when both are founded on completely different economic and political principles. Are the Western countries supposed to lift sanctions if Putin’s armed forces fight only against anti-Assad forces? Is the West supposed to tolerate ruling regimes, no matter how terrible, just because they can promise a state that prevents vacuums from being formed?”

Putin was the center of attention in New York. This is what drives him. Instead of Putin the ostracized, he is now Putin the creator of a new world order.

Paul R. Gregory is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution. He holds an endowed professorship in the Department of Economics at the University of Houston, Texas, is a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin, and is emeritus chair of the International Advisory Board of the Kiev School of Economics.



Source: Politico http://www.politico.eu/article/putin-new-world-order-syria-united-nations-new-york/

'Do you realise what you've done?' Putin addresses UNGA 2015 (FULL SPEECH)

Accountability for Crimes Against Humanity in #Iraq, #Afghanistan #Libya #Syria and training terrorists (Talibans, ISIS and other rebel groups) to kill people for Regime Change by #US #NATO #EU are unaccounted at #UN! If #Russia #China didn't have veto power at #UNSC imagine the fate of mankind!

Russia's president blamed foreign intervention in North Africa and the Middle East for creating a terrorist-fueled "anarchy." (Reuters) Video link RT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=112&v=q13yzl6k6w0








Full Text Courtesy:  Washington Post: Read Putin’s U.N. General Assembly speech


Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Monday and said the West was making an "enormous mistake" by not cooperating with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the fight against the Islamic State militant group. Here is the full text of his remarks.


PUTIN (THROUGH INTERPRETER): Your excellency Mr. President, your excellency Mr. Secretary General, distinguished heads of state and government, ladies and gentlemen, the 70th anniversary of the United Nations is a good occasion to both take stock of history and talk about our common future.

In 1945, the countries that defeated Nazism joined their efforts to lay solid foundations for the postwar world order.

But I remind you that the key decisions on the principles guiding the cooperation among states, as well as on the establishment of the United Nations, were made in our country, in Yalta, at the meeting of the anti-Hitler coalition leaders.

The Yalta system was actually born in travail. It was won at the cost of tens of millions of lives and two world wars.

This swept through the planet in the 20th century.

Let us be fair. It helped humanity through turbulent, at times dramatic, events of the last seven decades. It saved the world from large-scale upheavals.

The United Nations is unique in its legitimacy, representation and universality. It is true that lately the U.N. has been widely criticized for supposedly not being efficient enough, and for the fact that the decision-making on fundamental issues stalls due to insurmountable differences, first of all, among the members of the Security Council.

However, I'd like to point out there have always been differences in the U.N. throughout all these 70 years of existence. The veto right has always been exercised by the United States, the United Kingdom, France, China, the Soviet Union and Russia later, alike. It is absolutely natural for so diverse and representative an organization.

When the U.N. was established, its founders did not in the least think that there would always be unanimity. The mission of the organization is to seek and reach compromises, and its strength comes from taking different views and opinions into consideration. Decisions debated within the U.N. are either taken as resolutions or not. As diplomats say, they either pass or do not pass.

Whatever actions any state might take bypassing this procedure are illegitimate. They run counter to the charter and defy international law. We all know that after the end of the Cold War — everyone is aware of that — a single center of domination emerged in the world, and then those who found themselves at the top of the pyramid were tempted to think that if they were strong and exceptional, they knew better and they did not have to reckon with the U.N., which, instead of [acting to] automatically authorize and legitimize the necessary decisions, often creates obstacles or, in other words, stands in the way.

It has now become commonplace to see that in its original form, it has become obsolete and completed its historical mission. Of course, the world is changing and the U.N. must be consistent with this natural transformation. Russia stands ready to work together with its partners on the basis of full consensus, but we consider the attempts to undermine the legitimacy of the United Nations as extremely dangerous. They could lead to a collapse of the entire architecture of international organizations, and then indeed there would be no other rules left but the rule of force.

We would get a world dominated by selfishness rather than collective work, a world increasingly characterized by dictate rather than equality. There would be less of a chain of democracy and freedom, and that would be a world where true independent states would be replaced by an ever-growing number of de facto protectorates and externally controlled territories.

What is the state sovereignty, after all, that has been mentioned by our colleagues here? It is basically about freedom and the right to choose freely one's own future for every person, nation and state. By the way, dear colleagues, the same holds true of the question of the so-called legitimacy of state authority. One should not play with or manipulate words.

Every term in international law and international affairs should be clear, transparent and have uniformly understood criteria. We are all different, and we should respect that. No one has to conform to a single development model that someone has once and for all recognized as the only right one. We should all remember what our past has taught us.

We also remember certain episodes from the history of the Soviet Union. Social experiments for export, attempts to push for changes within other countries based on ideological preferences, often led to tragic consequences and to degradation rather than progress.

It seemed, however, that far from learning from others' mistakes, everyone just keeps repeating them, and so the export of revolutions, this time of so-called democratic ones, continues. It would suffice to look at the situation in the Middle East and North Africa, as has been mentioned by previous speakers. Certainly political and social problems in this region have been piling up for a long time, and people there wish for changes naturally.

But how did it actually turn out? Rather than bringing about reforms, an aggressive foreign interference has resulted in a brazen destruction of national institutions and the lifestyle itself. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social disaster. Nobody cares a bit about human rights, including the right to life.

I cannot help asking those who have caused the situation, do you realize now what you've done? But I am afraid no one is going to answer that. Indeed, policies based on self-conceit and belief in one's exceptionality and impunity have never been abandoned.

It is now obvious that the power vacuum created in some countries of the Middle East and North Africa through the emergence of anarchy areas, which immediately started to be filled with extremists and terrorists.

Tens of thousands of militants are fighting under the banners of the so-called Islamic State. Its ranks include former Iraqi servicemen who were thrown out into the street after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Many recruits also come from Libya, a country whose statehood was destroyed as a result of a gross violation of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973. And now, the ranks of radicals are being joined by the members of the so-called moderate Syrian opposition supported by the Western countries.

First, they are armed and trained and then they defect to the so-called Islamic State. Besides, the Islamic State itself did not just come from nowhere. It was also initially forged as a tool against undesirable secular regimes.

Having established a foothold in Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State has begun actively expanding to other regions. It is seeking dominance in the Islamic world. And not only there, and its plans go further than that. The situation is more than dangerous.

In these circumstances, it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make loud declarations about the threat of international terrorism while turning a blind eye to the channels of financing and supporting terrorists, including the process of trafficking and illicit trade in oil and arms. It would be equally irresponsible to try to manipulate extremist groups and place them at one's service in order to achieve one's own political goals in the hope of later dealing with them or, in other words, liquidating them.

To those who do so, I would like to say — dear sirs, no doubt you are dealing with rough and cruel people, but they're in no way primitive or silly. They are just as clever as you are, and you never know who is manipulating whom. And the recent data on arms transferred to this most moderate opposition is the best proof of it.

We believe that any attempts to play games with terrorists, let alone to arm them, are not just short-sighted, but fire hazardous (ph). This may result in the global terrorist threat increasing dramatically and engulfing new regions, especially given that Islamic State camps train militants from many countries, including the European countries.

Unfortunately, dear colleagues, I have to put it frankly: Russia is not an exception. We cannot allow these criminals who already tasted blood to return back home and continue their evil doings. No one wants this to happen, does he?

Russia has always been consistently fighting against terrorism in all its forms. Today, we provide military and technical assistance both to Iraq and Syria and many other countries of the region who are fighting terrorist groups.

We think it is an enormous mistake to refuse to cooperate with the Syrian government and its armed forces, who are valiantly fighting terrorism face to face. We should finally acknowledge that no one but President Assad's armed forces and Kurds (ph) militias are truly fighting the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations in Syria.

We know about all the problems and contradictions in the region, but which were (ph) based on the reality.

Dear colleagues, I must note that such an honest and frank approach of Russia has been recently used as a pretext to accuse it of its growing ambitions, as if those who say it have no ambitions at all.

However, it's not about Russia's ambitions, dear colleagues, but about the recognition of the fact that we can no longer tolerate the current state of affairs in the world. What we actually propose is to be guided by common values and common interests, rather than ambitions.

On the basis of international law, we must join efforts to address the problems that all of us are facing and create a genuinely broad international coalition against terrorism.

Similar to the anti-Hitler coalition, it could unite a broad range of forces that are resolutely resisting those who, just like the Nazis, sow evil and hatred of humankind. And, naturally, the Muslim countries are to play a key role in the coalition, even more so because the Islamic State does not only pose a direct threat to them, but also desecrates one of the greatest world religions by its bloody crimes.

The ideologists (ph) of militants make a mockery of Islam and pervert its true humanistic (ph) values. I would like to address Muslim spiritual leaders, as well. Your authority and your guidance are of great importance right now.

It is essential to prevent people recruited by militants from making hasty decisions and those who have already been deceived, and who, due to various circumstances found themselves among terrorists, need help in finding a way back to normal life, laying down arms, and putting an end to fratricide.

Russia will shortly convene, as the (ph) current president of the Security Council, a ministerial meeting to carry out a comprehensive analysis of threats in the Middle East.

First of all, we propose discussing whether it is possible to agree on a resolution aimed at coordinating the actions of all the forces that confront the Islamic State and other terrorist organizations. Once again, this coordination should be based on the principles of the U.N. Charter.

We hope that the international community will be able to develop a comprehensive strategy of political stabilization, as well as social and economic recovery, of the Middle East.

Then, dear friends, there would be no need for new refugee camps. Today, the flow of people who were forced to leave their homeland has literally engulfed first neighboring countries and then Europe itself. There were hundreds of thousands of them now, and there might be millions before long. In fact, it is a new great and tragic migration of peoples, and it is a harsh lesson for all of us, including Europe.

I would like to stress refugees undoubtedly need our compassion and support. However, the — on the way to solve this problem at a fundamental level is to restore their statehood where it has been destroyed, to strengthen the government institutions where they still exist or are being reestablished, to provide comprehensive assistance of military, economic and material nature to countries in a difficult situation. And certainly, to those people who, despite all the ordeals, will not abandon their homes. Literally, any assistance to sovereign states can and must be offered rather than imposed exclusively and solely in accordance with the U.N. Charter.

In other words, everything in this field that has been done or will be done pursuant to the norms of international law must be supported by our organization. Everything that contravenes the U.N. Charter must be rejected. Above all, I believe it is of the utmost importance to help restore government's institutions in Libya, support the new government of Iraq and provide comprehensive assistance to the legitimate government of Syria.

Dear colleagues, ensuring peace and regional and global stability remains the key objective of the international community with the U.N. at its helm. We believe this means creating a space of equal and indivisible security, which is not for the select few but for everyone. Yet, it is a challenge and complicated and time-consuming task, but there is simply no other alternative. However, the bloc thinking of the times of the Cold War and the desire to explore new geopolitical areas is still present among some of our colleagues.

First, they continue their policy of expanding NATO. What for? If the Warsaw Bloc stopped its existence, the Soviet Union have collapsed (ph) and, nevertheless, the NATO continues expanding as well as its military infrastructure. Then they offered the poor Soviet countries a false choice: either to be with the West or with the East. Sooner or later, this logic of confrontation was bound to spark off a grave geopolitical crisis. This is exactly what happened in Ukraine, where the discontent of population with the current authorities was used and the military coup was orchestrated from outside — that triggered a civil war as a result.

We're confident that only through full and faithful implementation of the Minsk agreements of February 12th, 2015, can we put an end to the bloodshed and find a way out of the deadlock. Ukraine's territorial integrity cannot be ensured by threat of force and force of arms. What is needed is a genuine consideration for the interests and rights of the people in the Donbas region and respect for their choice. There is a need to coordinate with them as provided for by the Minsk agreements, the key elements of the country's political structure. These steps will guarantee that Ukraine will develop as a civilized society, as an essential link and building a common space of security and economic cooperation, both in Europe and in Eurasia.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have mentioned these common space of economic cooperation on purpose. Not long ago, it seemed that in the economic sphere, with its objective market loss, we would launch a leaf (ph) without dividing lines. We would build on transparent and jointly formulated rules, including the WTO principles, stipulating the freedom of trade, and investment and open competition.

Nevertheless, today, unilateral sanctions circumventing the U.N. Charter have become commonplace, in addition to pursuing political objectives. The sanctions serve as a means of eliminating competitors.

I would like to point out another sign of a growing economic selfishness. Some countries [have] chosen to create closed economic associations, with the establishment being negotiated behind the scenes, in secret from those countries' own citizens, the general public, business community and from other countries.

Other states whose interests may be affected are not informed of anything, either. It seems that we are about to be faced with an accomplished fact that the rules of the game have been changed in favor of a narrow group of the privileged, with the WTO having no say. This could unbalance the trade system completely and disintegrate the global economic space.

These issues affect the interest of all states and influence the future of the world economy as a whole. That is why we propose discussing them within the U.N. WTO NGO (ph) '20.

Contrary to the policy of exclusiveness, Russia proposes harmonizing original economic projects. I refer to the so-called integration of integrations based on universal and transparent rules of international trade. As an example, I would like to cite our plans to interconnect the Eurasian economic union, and China's initiative of the Silk Road economic belt.

We still believe that harmonizing the integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union and the European Union is highly promising.

Ladies and gentlemen, the issues that affect the future of all people include the challenge of global climate change. It is in our interest to make the U.N. Climate Change Conference to be held in December in Paris a success.

As part of our national contribution, we plan to reduce by 2030 the greenhouse emissions to 70, 75 percent of the 1990 level.

I suggest, however, we should take a wider view on this issue. Yes, we might defuse the problem for a while, by setting quotas on harmful emissions or by taking other measures that are nothing but tactical. But we will not solve it that way. We need a completely different approach.

We have to focus on introducing fundamental and new technologies inspired by nature, which would not damage the environment, but would be in harmony with it. Also, that would allow us to restore the balance upset by biosphere and technosphere (ph) upset by human activities.

It is indeed a challenge of planetary scope, but I'm confident that humankind has intellectual potential to address it. We need to join our efforts. I refer, first of all, to the states that have a solid research basis and have made significant advances in fundamental science.

We propose convening a special forum under the U.N. auspices for a comprehensive consideration of the issues related to the depletion of natural resources, destruction of habitat and climate change.

Russia would be ready to co-sponsor such a forum.

Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, it was on the 10th of January, 1946, in London that the U.N. General Assembly gathered for its first session.

Mr. Suleta (ph) (inaudible), a Colombian diplomat and the chairman of the Preparatory Commission, opened the session by giving, I believe, a concise definition of the basic principles that the U.N. should follow in its activities, which are free will, defiance of scheming and trickery and spirit of cooperation.

Today, his words sound as a guidance for all of us. Russia believes in the huge potential of the United Nations, which should help us avoid a new global confrontation and engage in strategic cooperation. Together with other countries, we will consistently work towards strengthening the central coordinating role of the U.N. I'm confident that by working together, we will make the world stable and safe, as well as provide conditions for the development of all states and nations.

Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

END

අවසාන ප්‍රේමයයි මාගෙ Awasana premayayi (Dimanka Wellalage) by a school girl

පාසැල් සිසුවියක් ගයන මියුරු ගීතයක්. #DimankaWellalage
දිමන්ක වෙල්ලලගෙ ගෙ "අවසාන ප්‍රේමයයි මාගෙ"  with lyric
http://youtu.be/nna9R7Og-AA
(Tribute to uploader and unknown girl with talent for singing)
Original song by Dimanka Wellalage


More songs from Dimanka Wellalage at Anan Manan

අවසාන ප්‍රේමයයි මාගෙ
නෑ පතන්නෙ.. කෙනෙක් ආයෙ
ඉවරයක් නෑ කදුලු දෙනෙතේ
මාව හැර දාලා ඔයත් යන්නට ගියා

කවුරුත්ම එන්නෙපා
රවටන්න ආයෙ මේ.. මා..
තනි කම හොදයි පලුවෙ
මේ උනන කදුලට වඩා

හීන අතරේ සෙනෙහෙ සොයලා
හිතට වෙහෙසයි දුකම විදලා
කවුරුත්ම නෑ මට පෙම් කලෙ
මමම විතරයි ආදරෙ කලෙ

ආයෙ රැවටෙන්න බෑ
කවුරුවත් ඔනෙ නෑ
තනිවෙලා ඉන්න
හිතට පුලුවනි සදා

කවුරුත්ම එන්නෙපා
රවටන්න ආයෙ මේ මා
තනි කම හොදයි පාලුවෙ
මේ උනන කදුලට වඩා

ඔබෙ මත්තෙ නැහිල නැහිලා
මගෙ හිත දැන් නොමැරි මැරිලා
හදුනන්නෙ නෑ ආයෙ ඔබ මා
මතක පොත දැන් හොදට පිරිලා

ආයෙ රැවටෙන්න බෑ
කවුරුවත් ඔනෙ නෑ
තනිවෙලා ඉන්න
හිතට පුලුවනි සදා

කවුරුත්ම එන්නෙපා
රවටන්න ආයෙ මේ.. මා
තනි කම හොදයි පලුවෙ
මේ උනන කදුලට වඩා

අවසාන ප්‍රේමයයි මාගෙ
නෑ පතන්නෙ කෙනෙක් ආයෙ
ඉවරයක් නෑ කදුලු දෙනෙතේ
මාව හැර දාලා ඔයත් යන්නට ගියා

කවුරුත්ම එන්නෙපා
රවටන්න ආයෙ මේ.. මා
තනි කම හොදයි පලුවෙ
මේ උනන කදුලට වඩා

Saman Ekanayaka Kavi - Mahinda Rajapaksa Rally

Saman Ekanayaka Kavi - Mahinda Rajapaksa Rally මහින්ද ගැන කවි ගයා ජන හද දිනා ගත් ආදරණීය කලාකරුවාගේ අලුත්ම කවි... අහලම බලන්න.....

IMF Government Finance Statistics Manuals and Guides

Government Finance Statistics Manuals and Guides.
Th e Government Finance Statistics Manual 2014 (GFSM 2014) is part of a series of international guidelines on statistical
methodologies that have been issued by the International Monetary Fund. 

ITN In-depth interview with General Sarath Fonseka

#SriLanka #ITN #Sathyagaraya #Sannasgala In-depth interview with General #SarathFonseka on 2015.02.19 1 hr 52 min https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_ELJwLdgQVY

දිනූ නිදහස අනතුරක ජාතියේ අභියෝගය ජය ගැනීමට පෙළ ගැසෙමු! Azath Sally Quit!

#SriLanka #NugegodaRally supporting #MahindaRajapaksa gets more than 500,000 people.


Island: WP Chief Minister pledges support for Nugegoda rally


MR’s spokesman responds to erroneous reports.

A rally aimed at bringing back former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to
active politics after the dissolution of the Parliament in April is to
be held this Wednesday (February 18) in Nugegoda.

The National Freedom Front (NFF), the MEP and the Democratic Left Front
(DLF) want the SLFP to declare Mahinda Rajapaksa as the UPFA’s Prime
Ministerial candidate..

Central Provincial Councilor Azath Salley has ridiculed sating that if
the Nugegoda rally was able to attract 5000 people he would quit active
politics,

WP Chief Minister pledges support for Nugegoda rally
MR’s spokesman responds to erroneous reports.

Western province Chief Minister Prasanna Ranatunga yesterday declared
that he would participate at today’s Nugegoda meeting organised by some
of UPFA’s constituents calling for former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s
return to active politics.

The National Freedom Front (NFF), the MEP and the Democratic Left Front
(DLF) want the SLFP to declare Mahinda Rajapaksa as the UPFA’s prime
ministerial candidate.

Ranatunga said that he couldn’t turn his back on the former President
after having faithfully supported his recent presidential election
campaign.

Ranatunga pointed out that the likes of Azath Sally had ridiculed the
former President by claiming that the Nugegoda meeting wouldn’t attract
even 5,000 persons.

Meanwhile, former President’s spokesman Mohan Samaranayake told The
Island yesterday that various interested parties had been propagating
lies to undermine Rajapaksa’s political career. Samaranayake emphasised
that there was absolutely no basis for recent speculative reports that
the former President had confided to some close associates that he
wasn’t keen to continue in politics.

Referring to a letter dated Feb. 14 sent by the former President to the
SLFP Central Committee, Samaranayake said that the veteran politician
had stated in no uncertain terms that he remained with the party and
wouldn’t desert supporters under any circumstances. (SF)

Azath Sally should resign and deliver the promise he has given to people!

Azath Salley: "if #NugegodaRally gets more than 5000 people, I quit politics" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TNPyqStV_U #Allah is watching you!


Dan thiyenne yahapalanye #My3 #GoodGovernance eke thawath poronduwak itu kirima. e thamayi janathawata wunu porondu itu nokarana janatha noyojithayin, deshapaalakyin, gedara yawana poronduwa. Asath Sally janathawata porondu unaa #NugegodaRally yata 5000k awoth deshapaalanayen samu ganna bawa. karunaakarala e poronduwa itu kirima prathipaththigaruka mahajana niyojithaku washayen Azath Sally ge wagakimayi.




Related Post:

Campaign to bring back MR for politics

Azath Salley: if Nugegoda rally gets more than 5000 people, I quit politics

#SriLanka Azath Salley: "if Nugegoda rally gets more than 5000 people, I quit politics."


Deliver the promise Azath Salley!

Truth vs Hype: Sri Lanka - hope or illusion? Full autonomy to Tamil areas - Ranil

#SriLanka #RanilWickremasinghe promised autonomy to #Tamil areas #NDTV reports. #MY3 reforms should take place in April 2015 with new parliament.

Here is a full transcript of the interview of NDTV and PM Ranil Wicremasinghe and TNA leader R Sambandan (below NDTV transcript of Ranil) where the coalition partners have disputes in Tamil demands.

Source of transcript: http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/rajapaksa-played-china-and-india-against-each-other-says-sri-lankan-prime-minister-ranil-wickramasin-650555

Here the controversial Tweet of #NDTV: "In principle, we have agreed to full autonomy to Tamil areas, Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe tells NDTV"  The question arise here is who gave mandate to Ranil Wickremasinghe to give full autonomy to Tamils in North and East of Sri Lanka? People of Sri Lanka elected President #MaithripalaSirisena (#MY3) for #GoodGovernance, #Democracy and #AntiCorruption. Current parliament is not elected by #MY3 manifesto. If PM Ranil wants to decide future of Sri Lanka giving self autonomy to Tamil people he must be re-elected by people on #MY3 manifesto to parliament and win majority of votes in parliament to become as PM. Then only he can promise self autonomy to Tamil people. If he acts as a dictator in his PM capacity without consulting his coalition partners, he is mere another dictator. People will decide the fate of such dictators. Ranil Wickremasinghe once gave self autonomy to Tamils in 2002 and we as peace loving Sri Lankans saw how self autonomy worked in North and East. Tamils formed a separate state in Sri Lanka. We dont want that happen again!

රනිල් උතුර-නගෙනහිර දෙමල ජනතාවට ස්වයං තීරන අයිතිය දෙනව කියන්නෙ කාගෙන් අහලද? අපි ජනාධිපති වරයෙක් පත් කර ගත්ත. ඒ මෛත්‍රිපල සිරිසේන. දැනට තිබෙන පාර්ලිමේන්තුව මෛත්‍රි ආන්ඩුවේ ප්‍රතිපත්ති වලට පත් වුන පාර්ලිමෙන්තුවක් නෙවේ. එනිසා රනිල් අගමැතිතුමා වෙන්න නම් ජනතාව විසින් නැවතත් පත් කරගත යුතුව තිබෙනව. අගමැති ලෙස රටේ අනාගතය ගැන තීරන ගන්න ඕනෙ පවතින ගැටලු විසදන ප්‍රතිපත්ති ජනතාව විසින් අනුමත කරල ඔවුන් විසින් පත් කල පාර්ලිමේන්තුවක් විසින්. ඒ නිසා රනිල් මෛත්‍රීගෙ ප්‍රතිපත්ති වලින් ජනතාව අතරට ගිහිල්ල ජන්දෙ දිනාගෙන පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට තේරිල, පාර්ලිමේන්තුවෙ වැඩි ජන්දෙන් අගමැති ලෙස නැවතත් තොර පත්කරගත්තට පස්සෙ මේ වගෙ තීරනයකට ආවනම් සාදාරනයි. නැති නම් රනිල්ට කියන්න වෙන්නෙත් එකාධිපතියෙක් කියලයි. එකාධිපතියන්ට හිමිවෙන්න ඕනෙ ඉරණම ජනතාව දන්නව.

NDTV: Many believe that Maithripala Sirisena's dramatic victory in the Sri Lanka elections would not have been possible were it not for the support of Ranil Wickramasinghe, one of the most seasoned politicians in Sri Lanka and who's now back as Prime Minister for the third time- sworn in almost immediately after President Sirisena took charge. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Wickramasinghe for joining me and is that a fair assessment, that without you Sirisena would not have won? You are the true kingmaker of this election?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: The kingmakers are the people who wanted a change. They didnt want a king, they wanted a president and the abolishment of the executive presidency. So we decided to have a common candidate. The UNP was the largest party in the opposition and certainly ran the organisations on the ground outside the northern province.

NDTV: But you know the change many believe came peacefully, except news came that actually there was an attempted coup by former president Rajapaksa. Now you actually came to visit him here at Temple Trees, the official residence, early  that morning, where he finally conceded. Did he concede immediately or was there some sort of planned coup?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: President Rajapaksa sent me a message, wanting me to give him a telephone call . that he had lost the elections. I replied that I will come there and discuss the transition with him rather than do it over the phone. So when i came here, President Rajapaksa conceded defeat and we discussed the details of the transition.

NDTV: He didn't put up a fuss or anything?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: No there was no fuss when he met me, no.

NDTV: But you know the fact is that many believe that you are going to be the real power behind this throne; this is actually going to be a Ranil Wickramasinghe government, not a Sirisena government. Is that true?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: Well we have made Mr Maithripala Sirisena the President and the parties constituting the government will run that jointly.We want to bring an Amendment to the Constitution this month to abolish executive presidency. Then in June, most probably May or June, we'll hold parliamentary elections and the people can decide who should be the Prime Minister and head the government.

NDTV: Okay. You're saying that you're a transitionary government but many believe that it's a Wickramasinghe government because all the cabinet ministers are from your party.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: No the major party as I said was the UNP so therefore the major number of ministers are from the UNP. But, we did set apart a number of ministries to be offered to the members who supported President Rajapaksa in the SLFP.

NDTV: Now let's look at three big issues which India is concerned about. Number one is whether you will grant full autonomy to the Tamils or will that just remain a promise on paper?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: Well the agreement is that the 13th Amendment be implemented,  and that's the discussion we are having with the TNA. In principle all have agreed that the 13th Amendment should be implemented.

NDTV: You're okay with that?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: We are with that. We're only having discussions about the police powers and how it should function, that's all.

NDTV: But that's the key thing.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: No, police powers is a provincial subject but there are certain concerns Once we bring the independent commission in, how do we do that? To ensure that..there is big fear in the country, not only the North, that the nine ministers.. chief ministers may turn the police into their own private army. We're all concerned, even the TNA is aware of it, so we've got to have safeguards against it

NDTV: But you're not in principle against it? You're not in principle averse to granting full powers?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: The 13th Amendment will be implemented in full and then there's a question not only of an independent police commission; there's going to be independent public service commissions. So how that relates to the provinces also has to be discussed.

NDTV: The second is of course to do with the exaggerated pro China tilt by the Rajapaksa government. Will you rectify that? Because that's a matter of great concern for India.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: As far as we are concerned we will continue the tradition of a policy of friendship with India while we maintain our friendship with China, Japan and the other countries.

NDTV: But do you agree that the tilt towards China had gone a little too far during the Rajapaksa time? A lot of contracts were signed.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: I have always said that President Rajapaksa's regime tried to play China against India and India against China and they came a cropper.

NDTV: But what about the contracts? Many of these projects that Rajapaksa had signed during his time. The president was funded by the Chinese. You yourself have asked for investigations into some of them.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: We are looking into all foreign contracts and local ones and where there is corruption, we will certainly ensure we take action whether it be Chinese or any other country. We are also reviewing the port city project because we have not yet seen the feasibility study and the environment impact assessment. I asked..when i was with the opposition, I asked the government to table it in parliament. They didn't do so. Therefore we will have to look into the environmental and feasibility aspects.

NDTV: You will be looking into that? Do you believe there was corruption there?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: We're looking mostly into the two reports. Then we will know whether there has been corruption or not.

NDTV: What about the question of prosecution of war crimes?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: Our position has always been that whatever we do has to be within our domestic jurisdiction.

NDTV: So you're saying no international probe is going to be allowed?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: No, we're saying the jurisdiction to try any person who's committed a crime lies with Sri Lanka.

NDTV: So your stand remains the same as the previous government? A UN probe is not welcome; you will do your own  internal probe?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: No, UN can give its probe. We'll engage the UN on these issues. That's the difference. We're going to engage the UN Human Rights Council on these issues. All we're saying is any criminal jurisdiction must be exercised in Sri Lanka. Any civil jurisdiction has to be exercised in Sri Lanka. Only the Sri Lankan courts can determine this issue. The same as India or USA. We are no different from anyone else but we will restore the independence of the judiciary.

NDTV: Okay, but you concede that these war crimes did take place?

Ranil Wickramasinghe:  Whatever the violations of human rights, we are looking into it. Anyway, the UN is going to send its own reports so there after we will decide what we're going to do. But we will have engagement and the UN report is not about going to the international criminal court. It's about whether violations took place or not.

NDTV: Is Sri Lanka essentially a unitary state? A Sinhala state? Or is it a state that includes all its people? This is a concern that was there with the previous regime. There are concerns whether there's going to be any change in that position.

Ranil Wickramasinghe: The 13th Amendment is on the basis of the present Constitution which India has accepted.  It's unitary and it's Sri Lankan. It's a country for Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, everyone. And that is accepted by everyone here.

NDTV: Will former president Rajapaksa face justice for the charges that have been leveled by you during the campaign or has there been some kind of a deal that has been done?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: Yeah, we are looking into everything and if we need to take action, we will take action.

NDTV: You will? And right now what would you say is your single biggest challenge as Prime Minister?

Ranil Wickramasinghe: Our challenge now is first to get the Constitutional Amendments through.

NDTV: Right

Ranil Wickramasinghe: And to give the relief to the people and restore democracy.

NDTV: Right. Prime Minister, I wish you all the very best. It's a challenging time for Sri Lanka, but a remarkable one. Thank you.

Story First Published: January 18, 2015 22:31 IS

Here is a transcript of interview between NDTV and TNA leader R Sambandan

You Tube link http://youtu.be/iWuT6MMOjAg?t=9m08s

NDTV: One of the reasons credited for President Sirisena's (#MaithripalaSirisena) victory was the fact that  the coalition of Tamil Parties known as the #TNA (#TamilNationalAlliance) came out and endorsed him (#MiathripalaSirisena) at the very last minute leading to an over whelming vote for him in the Tamil areas of the North and the East of Sri Lanka. But are you convinced that that is going to result in this finally bein able to meet the demands of the Tamil population of Sri Lanka which is concrete greater autonomy?

SAMBANDAN: We have discussed it (Autonomy to Tamils) with the President after the election. Other political leaders in the alliance are aware of the Tamil position.

NDTV: What did he (President Sirisena) say when you spoke to him?

NDTV with TNA Leader R Sambandan

SAMBANDAN: I think he is positive.. I am not... eh... saying that.. eh... he would... eh..  do everything possible and.. eh.. that eh,, I am confident that he'll (President Sirisena) come up with an excellent scheme of devolution or what ever...

NDTV: What's that meaning?

SAMBANDAN: We want something more credible..

NDTV: So, then you are talking about something?

SAMBANDAN: which would give us power in the areas of our competence...

NDTV: Which is? like what?

SAMBANDAN: Jurisdiction and subvention of what sense. We will take care in the provinces in a manner that will enable  the provinces where adequate measures of self rule (for Tamils) regarding matters of economic concerns, social concerns, cultural concerns, political concerns,

NDTV: So police power, land power... all that?

SAMBANDAN: Of course YES.

THAT MEANS:

-FULL AUTONOMY TO TAMIL PEOPLE WAS DEMANDED BY TNA AND AGREED BY #MY3 COALITION.
-RANIL WICKREMASINGHE AND MAITHRIPALA SIRISENA HAVE AGREED TO ABOLISH  13A AND ABOLISH EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?