Tamil Protesters Sacrifice Children In Toronto

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Wait, so you are white if you have a white ancestor, but only native if all of your ancestors are native?

You know natives didn't have any stricter racial controls than anyone else (well, most tribes, some were bigots).

If someone has a white parent and a native parent they can be natives. If that person has a white spouse their children can be native too as one parent is still native. Why would they be "white boys"? Thats some pretty blatant racial purity BS right there.
In Snott's defense Z..

I don't think actually believes what he said to me. He's just trying to deflect because of his inability to support his claim that the Gov't and the Police are savages. Not that this isn't a tactic you and I haven't seen a hunderd times though.

By calling me a liar and labelling me, he feels justified in not answering my post maturely and with some tact, largely due to the fact that he hasn't the ability to understand that not all Natives support the status quo and tow the media version of our community (Which is likely where he gets his "all the Natives I know" attitude).

But seriously, I don't think he actually thinks like that. In fact, I bet if I supported his irrational assertions, my Grand Mother could have brushed up against an 'Injun' 60 years ago and he'd say, it's what's in your heart that matters...lol...
 
Last edited:

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,892
129
63
Now the protests can stop; at last the effing twit is dead.

Sri Lankan rebel leader 'killed'

The leader of the Tamil Tiger rebels, Velupillai Prabhakaran, is dead, the Sri Lankan military has said.
The announcement on state television came shortly after the military said it had surrounded Prabhakaran in a tiny patch of jungle in the north-east.
The head of the Sri Lankan army Lt Gen Sarath Fonseka said the military had defeated the rebels and "liberated the entire country".
The claims cannot be verified as reporters are barred from the war zone.
"Today we finished the work handed to us by the president to liberate the country from the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam)," Gen Fonseka said in the broadcast.
He said troops were working to identify Prabhakaran's body from among the dead.
Sri Lankan forces had routed the rebels in the past few weeks, over-running their territory and bringing the 26-year war to its conclusion.
The broadcast quoted military officials as saying Prabhakaran was killed along with two of his deputies.
It said Prabhakaran, his intelligence chief Pottu Amman and Soosai, the head of the rebels' naval wing, were shot dead in an ambush in the Mullivaikal district while trying to escape the war zone in an ambulance.
Earlier, at least three senior rebel leaders were killed, including Prabhakaran's eldest son, Charles Anthony, the military said.
State TV broadcast images of what it said was Charles Anthony's body.
Military spokesman Brig Udaya Nanayakkara confirmed Prabhakaran's death, saying 250 Tamil Tigers were also killed overnight.
The government's information department also sent news of Prabhakaran's death by text message to mobile phones across the country.
In the past few days, the LTTE had been hemmed into a 300 sq metre (3,230 sq ft) patch of land - a tiny part of the 15,000 sq km territory they had controlled until recently.
The BBC's world affairs correspondent Adam Mynott says Prabhakaran was a shadowy figure, constantly under the threat of arrest or assassination.
He says he fashioned a ruthless and uncompromising fighting force, which assassinated several Sri Lankan political leaders and the former Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Ghandi.
Under Prabhakaran's leadership the LTTE was branded a terrorist organisation by many countries, and he was wanted by Interpol - the global police network - for murder, terrorism, organised crime and conspiracy.
Anger and jubilation
There is still widespread international concern about civilians who may have been caught up in the fighting.
Sources in the UN say significant numbers of civilians were still in the combat zone but the Sri Lankan government said all civilians had left.
There have been street celebrations in the capital, Colombo, but also an angry demonstration against Britain, with protestors accusing it of seeking to help the rebels by earlier calling for a ceasefire.
More than 1,000 Sri Lankans protested outside the British High Commission. Some protesters threw stones and burnt an effigy of UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband.
A High Commission spokesman said it was "an outrage" that the Sri Lankan authorities let the demonstration become so violent.
The Tigers had been fighting for a separate state for Tamils in the north and east of Sri Lanka since the 1970s.
More than 70,000 people have been killed in the conflict and thousands displaced.
Story from BBC NEWS:
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Sri Lankan rebel leader 'killed'
Published: 2009/05/18 11:02:34 GMT
© BBC MMIX
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Now the protests can stop; at last the effing twit is dead.

Sri Lankan rebel leader 'killed'

The leader of the Tamil Tiger rebels, Velupillai Prabhakaran, is dead, the Sri Lankan military has said.

Is this the end, or merely the begin of the next chapter?

Martyrs have a way of coming back to haunt.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Martyrs don't try and run away hiding in an ambulance. He was a thug and a tyrant.
Who will undoubtedly be exulted and hoisted high as a banner of resistance against the tyranny of the Sinhalese and India.

People in crisis oft have little or no objectivity.

They will not see his cowardice, they will only see his sacrifice.

IMHO.
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
Libya is a perfect example of how they should have been treated. A state sponsor of Terrorism.

What the Tamils did goes beyond state sponsor of terrorism to me. There was no distinction between the people running the de facto state and those blowing up civilians, ethnically cleansing villages, forcibly recruiting child soldiers, etc. "Sponsoring" implies they just help the people doing bad things. They WERE the people doing bad things.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
What the Tamils did goes beyond state sponsor of terrorism to me. There was no distinction between the people running the de facto state and those blowing up civilians, ethnically cleansing villages, forcibly recruiting child soldiers, etc. "Sponsoring" implies they just help the people doing bad things. They WERE the people doing bad things.

The Tamil.... People or Tigers? I suppose if what happened to the Tutsis happened to the Tamil it would be proper?
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
72
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Again, that brings in ALOT of states into the equation.
Yes, it does.
I am not claiming they are not bad people. A rapist and a serial killer are both bad people too, but they each have their own specific names.
Yes, they do but they are also terrorists. They instill terror in their victims don't they?

Are you seriously trying to pretend the tigers even hold a damn candle to north korea in terms of civilians killed, terror inducing tactics?
Nope. I wasn't comparing anyone.

Libya is a perfect example of how they should have been treated. A state sponsor of Terrorism.
Yup.
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
The Tamil.... People or Tigers? I suppose if what happened to the Tutsis happened to the Tamil it would be proper?

Where did I say anything of the sort?

When I said the Tamils, I meant to type Tigers. The Tigers killed a fair number of Tamils btw. To claim you simply want a homeland for your people who are being oppressed and then kill them if they aren't radical enough seems a little ironic to me.
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
This is a picture I took Friday night, and you wonder why people resent their protests? The fact that they cannot protest without making the whole thing a tamil tiger support group speaks volumes about the protesters. The lack of leadership within their community allowed a worthy protest turn into a debacle that turned people off of their cause.

 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Where did I say anything of the sort?

When I said the Tamils, I meant to type Tigers. The Tigers killed a fair number of Tamils btw. To claim you simply want a homeland for your people who are being oppressed and then kill them if they aren't radical enough seems a little ironic to me.

Do you understand their culture? Deliberate killing of your own seems inexcusable to me too ... but then again, I was raised in a way that may seem completely alien and ridiculous to the Tamil too. A bomb is indiscriminate no matter who sets it off.
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
Do you understand their culture? Deliberate killing of your own seems inexcusable to me too ... but then again, I was raised in a way that may seem completely alien and ridiculous to the Tamil too. A bomb is indiscriminate no matter who sets it off.

Yeah, a bomb is indiscriminate. I get the concept of collateral damage. They also intentionally killed other Tamils. That tells me they are not the sole group to represent their people. They turned out to be the most lethal. Now they've lost. Demanding a ceasefire simply because you're losing isn't likely to be agreed to by your enemies as this case illustrates. It's unfortunate for them, but it's hardly shocking.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Yeah, a bomb is indiscriminate. I get the concept of collateral damage. They also intentionally killed other Tamils. That tells me they are not the sole group to represent their people. They turned out to be the most lethal. Now they've lost. Demanding a ceasefire simply because you're losing isn't likely to be agreed to by your enemies as this case illustrates. It's unfortunate for them, but it's hardly shocking.

Could it be, in a unified Sri Lanka, ruled by the favoured Sinhalese, Tamil saw the Tigers as the lesser of two evils?
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
Could it be, in a unified Sri Lanka, ruled by the favoured Sinhalese, Tamil saw the Tigers as the lesser of two evils?

Some Tamil, I'm sure. But have you ever read how that group became the most powerful? It was largely by murdering their fellow Tamil rivals. Were they the lesser of two evils, or did they inspire enough fear to take control?
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Some Tamil, I'm sure. But have you ever read how that group became the most powerful? It was largely by murdering their fellow Tamil rivals. Were they the lesser of two evils, or did they inspire enough fear to take control?

Who wrote your intel? Do you know if the writer was biased? I suppose, neither of us having actually been there, your guess is as good as mine.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
What the Tamils did goes beyond state sponsor of terrorism to me. There was no distinction between the people running the de facto state and those blowing up civilians, ethnically cleansing villages, forcibly recruiting child soldiers, etc. "Sponsoring" implies they just help the people doing bad things. They WERE the people doing bad things.

Which doesn't mean they aren't a state.

All of those things are done by states too. And enemy states are treated differently in war, it could have diffused the situation by allowing real negotiation.

But in the end military victory occurred. If the Sri Lankans can hold it then maybe it was the right choice.

@ L Gilbert

No they are not both terrorists. When you expand a word to encompass everything you devalue it.

Technically every military and police force would be a terrorist organization then because they inspire terror in their opponents. In making such a definition the word is devalued from its true meaning.
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC


Yep, that was a great come back...I must be lying because I don't tow the company line. I have my own thoughts and use objectivity in my life, unlike some of my follow community members, including some of my own relatives in the MWS. But hey, you say I'm lying so the 4 years of battling bigots and ignorant people about Native issues at this site and many others was just for show...

You really should have taken a walk through my threads and posts before making yourself look so foolish Snott.

All these accusations and slanderous comments because I question your objectivity and rationality, minus insults? Wow, you're as big a joke as SJP and MHz.

I really did have to leave. I had no way of knowing you were going to show up and pick a fight with me.

Anyway, I don't feel even slightly foolish. I don't believe your native. Your argument that you are, for me, based on my experiences with native people, is not prima facie. You can infer whatever you like from that and make whatever claims about me you want but trying to bully me will not change my opinion. You can pretend to be whatever you like - have fun, I really don't care, but I will call your BS.

BTW, I have defended native rights and fought bigotry too but that doesn't make me native. :roll:

lol...
 
Last edited: