attacks on Christians' on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka

[Hrothbern]

That is the question I'm asking, yes. What are your thoughts? Do you think certain social media posts by political leaders, the media and the masses in general when Islam is involved are handled very differently and indeed carefully when compared to other groups?

Is that not also related to some degree with in-group out-group ?
When I had as kid a quarrel with my 1.5 year older brother, it was often, at least under four eyes (no-one else there), much more inconsiderate forceful and hefty, than when I had a quarrel with a nephew, or someone living two streets away from my street.
The better you know someone, the better the natural bonding... the more easily you know where you really get in borderline area with unexpected escalations.

Seems in general a good practice to have more respect for bigger distance because of risks of the don't know type.


Which does not take away that I believe that the overcautious velvet gloves of political leaders to be "straight" is often not helpful at all.
Especially not when you can smell that they think at the same time something else and do themselves not really back what they say.

But that balance is very much a matter of culture, and the faster a culture changes, and the more atomised, fractured a society culture is... the more difficult it all becomes.

I think that the inability, or the laziness of many politicians to be more candid and sincere, if not blunt, spoken in more "normal" language, still in balance with their public position, had a disconnecting effect, a dis-cohesive effect.

But yeah... how often do you hear a politician, asked for his opinion on an event, say: "IDK, I have to think about it"

My eye-opener there was a book I did read on that civilian KAL 007 flight shot down by Russian fighter jets, when it entered Kamchatka Russian air space by mistake (the simple version). Cold war 1983. 269 casualties.
The Korean minister said after six hours already that "the plane had been forced to land, with passengers and crew safe." which was a BS lie.
IIRC a Japanese minister was asked for his opinion and gave that answer "IDK, I have to think about it", and spend according to the book the evening and part of the night sitting on his veranda to think about all the consequences.

And politicians in public positions that are no more than an amplifier at tweet-retweet speed..... hm... don't expect them to help solving the disconnect for more societal cohesion and tolerance.

 

[Farm Boy]

I think your «questioning» is insincere, loaded, and «dog whistling», and I find it deeply problematic.

If you're in a church service in the west, Sri Lanka is probably covered about as much as Christschurch. It was a significantly worse attack, for one, against an extended ingroup. If you spend a lot of time in the mental space of Twitfaces and internet people who livestreamed the slaughterporn of hatred, New Zealand was louder. It can skew the perceptions.

 

[Patine]

But to be virtuous is a very important human trait, prompting a dopamine hit from the brain, you get that good feeling about you when you've done something that you feel is good, unfortunately with virtue signalers they don't do anything productive, they are actually counter productive, they're happy to post a rant on Facebook about climate change, poverty or inequality all the whilst traveling to the four corners of the world pumping out who knows how much C02, enjoying 6 glorious meals a day and happily buying clothes made in a sweatshop from a third world country whose workers are payed $1 a day, you see they don't want to change THEIR lifestyle, they want to lecture and judge everyone else to change their lifestyle, then maybe they might decide to cut back to 2 cafe lattes a day rather than 5. These posts are normally followed be several likes and positive comments from friends hence the dopamine hit, they still get that dopamine rush for doing nothing because no one really want's to call them out on it...

Of course, the limits of modern civilization restricts the power of the majority to act on their sense of virtue, justice, and charity directly, except through middle-men and channels we are "encouraged to trust." It is a sad fact of the world we live in and the "soft" and/or "hard" that govern every nation on Earth and sit at the apex of every big, edifice, organized religious group of any sort, and direct international organs of power and commerce. I'm curious as to what glorious feats of self-sacrifice, risk-of-life-limb-and-freedom, globe-trotting, pure risk you engage in daily to show YOUR OWN virtue, if I may ask?

 

[Patine]

Certain people are trying to blame an accident in Notre Dame on Muslims, and you're suggesting that we as a society have been brainwashed to tolerate Islamic-inspired terrorist attacks?? Your «non-loaded question» is suggesting the existence of a conspiracy to weaken «native» Western populations against the onslaught of Islam?!

The two situations are different because of what I wrote: Most Western people think people in New Zealand as in a closer in-group than people in Sri Lanka, and the attack in New Zealand was committed by someone most of us would have considered in our in-group.

Absolutely it goes both ways, when a terrorist attack occurs, which particular religion is usually the first to be named even before any evidence becomes available? Why is this? Is this a normal human reaction? A social construct? Conditioning? Ignorance? Bigotry? What do you think when you first see a headline of yet another terrorist attack somewhere in the world, do you get a brief thought of whom might be responsible?



That is the question I'm asking, yes. What are your thoughts? Do you think certain social media posts by political leaders, the media and the masses in general when Islam is involved are handled very differently and indeed carefully when compared to other groups? When was the last time the secular West had blasphemy laws? How far away are we from citizens that live in the West that criticize Islam being charged and thrown in Jail?



Not so much a conspiracy but media and political rhetoric that somehow Islam really isn't as bad as people think and that it is actually compatible with Western culture and values.



I agree with this. Humans still do exhibit signs of tribal identity, no doubt, but this still doesn't answer the question as to why politicians, the media and the masses in general portray these equally evil and despicable terrorists attacks differently, every attack in Western countries before Christchurch was handled very differently. Maybe you don't agree with this premise and that's fair enough.

There is no actual, real, identifiable crime that's meaningful in separate definition called "terrorism." The term, first coined by journalists, has become a label for law-enforcement to apply at the start of an investigation to strip a suspect of many meaningful rights and protections that otherwise would be guaranteed to them during law-enforcement, interrogation, detention, trial, and sentencing. It is a label so vaguely and loosely defined that it is also a tool waiting to be picked up for much more ruthless and widespread use by more overtly tyrannical governments in the future. Also, a special politicized "crime" is utterly unnecessary. Let's look at the criminal we already have on the various groups for whom this label was obstensibly made for:
-First degree murder (often multiple counts per incident)
-Destruction of public and private property
-Illegally commandeering vehicles for criminal purposes
-Kidnapping and hostage taking
-Criminal trespass
-Illegal possession of firearms (including military calibre) and ordinances
-Illegally entering the nation where incident takes place
-Espousing the overthrow of, and advocating insurgency against, the nation where incident takes place
-Religious, ethnic, and gender-related (and, in at least one instance, sexual-orientation based) "hate" crime motivation
-Criminal fundraising
-Extortion, blackmail, and making threats of death and destruction
-And a few others
With several (at least) of the crimes above relevant to each and every instance, what the Hell is the need to construct up a new, conjured crime on top of it all - unless there's longer-term, more sinister ulterior motives to such laws being passed firmly in times of fear. But that would make the various governments involved who passed those laws very nasty, and very deceitful, criminals themselves, who should also be brought to be criminally made accountable, tried, and punished for their crimes against their very peoples and nations.

 

[JollyRoger]

Not according to Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton, it's "Easter Worshipers", not Christians, the victims weren't Christians, they were Easter Worshipers.

What a bunch of PC snowflakery. Not even Trump used the word Christian in his tweet on the matter.

"138 people have been killed in Sri Lanka, with more that 600 badly injured, in a terrorist attack on churches and hotels. The United States offers heartfelt condolences to the great people of Sri Lanka. We stand ready to help!"

 

[Ajidica]

Not according to Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton, it's "Easter Worshipers", not Christians, the victims weren't Christians, they were Easter Worshipers.

That's fairly standard language in the US, at least where I'm from. Local paper (paywalled unfortunately) had photospread yesterday with one of the pictures captioned "'Easter Worshippers' enjoyed the good weather for light refreshments after mass" or something to that effect.

 

[Patine]

If you're in a church service in the west, Sri Lanka is probably covered about as much as Christschurch. It was a significantly worse attack, for one, against an extended ingroup. If you spend a lot of time in the mental space of Twitfaces and internet people who livestreamed the slaughterporn of hatred, New Zealand was louder. It can skew the perceptions.

What ethno-religious groups hasn't died in wars, other than, seemingly, the millennia-old Norte Chico civilization. Human dignity and respect demands equal, proper, and sober coverage and viewpoints whenever ANY such tragedy happens to ANYONE - even if the victims were, for instance, members of a highly-questionable and secreitve cult...

 

[r16]

the Turkish media coverage centers on two -Muslim- engineers working on the construction of (no doubt terror-proof and new) US Embassy building . Caught in breakfast at a hotel , parent of one is saddened by the thing that they texted him they had heard of terror attacks in Sri Lanka and he should be indoors . Additionally the richest family of Danemark losing 3 of their 4 kids .

Now that's a lack of education, perspective, and understanding and succumbing to bad stereotypes and myths directly comparable to the worst the most backwater rural White Supremacist Imperialist U.S. group would espouse. The world would be better off without BOTH your ilk's staining it and it's people with your myopic, half-blind trash rhetoric.

am baffled by this thing that supposes am an American with bad grammar . Or an equivalent . The only thing one might accept about me is that am an Admiral of the Starfleet . Things not just go whooshing in the Dark , but also travel interstellar .

otherwise the thing should stay . Al Crusading -which is Al Jazeraa to those who can't tell- speaks of a hate preacher the Muslim Council of the country ratted to the Authorities . The first tip off is now officially taken to months before , because the initial 10 days idea would suggest the "foreign" orders were tracked , even from its source , which is most shameful . For whomever that might have passed the orders to those who ordered their lessers to blow themselves up . Even if Indians are not exactly slouches in espionage affairs . So , are you suggesting it's bad form on me to suggest this would indeed be used as justification ? Just like Saddam suddenly discovered he was #1 supporter of Bin Ladin ? Or there have been movies about some CIA agent that saw Iraq was not taking delivery Nigerian (?) Uranium and said so and was eaten alive by her comrades of years ?

 

[H4run]

members of a highly-questionable and secreitve cult...

are you refering to llluminati or one of the scooby doo episodes?

 

[Modder_Mode]

I know that many Western countries still have blasphemy laws. I know Monty Python's Life of Brian was banned in Norway because it was blasphemous against Christianity!

Exactly my point, think about how ridiculous it is that blasphemous laws still even exist in secular nations even if they are not acted upon (I didn't even know that one you listed even existed) For all the progress that has been made in secular nations (I very strongly believe church and state should be separate) the last thing I want is secular nations taking a backwards step against people that speak out against a particular religion.

I know that it is fully possible to criticize Islam, and that, e.g., neither Sam Harris nor Richard Dawkins have ever had any trouble with the law because of their public and constant criticism of it.

Depending on who you are and what side of politics you bat for yes, I agree. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are fairly low key on Islamic criticism and are very careful on what they say and how they criticize it, they really really get into Christianity though, especially Dawkins, and so they should, every religion should be up for critique. Dawkins is sometimes challenged on why he appears to be softer on Islam, he never really gives a clear answer, or at least in the debates I've watched him in. I'll be honest I haven't seen a great deal of what Sam Harris has to say about Islam, I have heard him critique it somewhat but like I said it seems fairly low key.

I think your «questioning» is insincere, loaded, and «dog whistling», and I find it deeply problematic.

I don't have to like Islam or agree with it, but that doesn't mean I'm going to to be disrespectful to someone who follows the faith either, which I never do, but if I don't agree with something, I am going to criticize it, I think it's extremely important that Islam has a reformation, much like Christianity had, the problem is the discussion is being shut down before it can even begin with labels being thrown at people left right and center. To give you some insight into where the discussion on Islam is at the moment you only need to look to the Islamic reformers and the persecution they themselves face from other Muslims, that in-itself should give you a clear indication of where any kind of reformation is at.

Perhaps you yourself feel that if you speak out about Islam you might be labelled certain grossly misleading names?
What are your thoughts on Islam, do you have any issues with it?

I'm curious as to what glorious feats of self-sacrifice, risk-of-life-limb-and-freedom, globe-trotting, pure risk you engage in daily to show YOUR OWN virtue, if I may ask?

In recent times, not a great deal, in previous years World Vision, but I not longer donate to foreign charities anymore, I'm fairly disgusted in how the whole thing operates to be honest.
But that's not virtue signalling, I've never posted a single thing about it, this is the first time I think I have ever posted anything about it on the Interwebs. I also give away my tax return, but only to local charities now. I know it looks like I'm making a big deal about virtue signalling, I don't have a problem with it, I said in another thread about people who film themselves giving away food to homeless people and then post the video on social media, but who cares, someone homeless gets to eat and a message gets spread, it's the whole double standard type virtue signalling, especially the ones about climate change and C02 emissions I can't stand, the same people posting these statuses drive carbon emitting cars, travel the world and have appliances running in every room, there the ones who need to be called out.

What a bunch of PC snowflakery. Not even Trump used the word Christian in his tweet on the matter.

"138 people have been killed in Sri Lanka, with more that 600 badly injured, in a terrorist attack on churches and hotels. The United States offers heartfelt condolences to the great people of Sri Lanka. We stand ready to help!"

The snowflakes on the right have been triggered no doubt! But do you now see how ridiculous things like this are? Has it sunk in? Whenever "controversial" comments are made by a politician or commentator on the right it's always claimed that "words are important" or "It's just how Trump worded it that made it so wrong..."
Now suddenly when it's called out from the other side, words don't really matter, and these people are just "snowflakes" that have been triggered.

 

[Farm Boy]

What ethno-religious groups hasn't died in wars, other than, seemingly, the millennia-old Norte Chico civilization. Human dignity and respect demands equal, proper, and sober coverage and viewpoints whenever ANY such tragedy happens to ANYONE - even if the victims were, for instance, members of a highly-questionable and secreitve cult...

I don't know that empathy is necessarily sober. Doesn't seem like rationality is the game it plays.

 

[Patine]

the Turkish media coverage centers on two -Muslim- engineers working on the construction of (no doubt terror-proof and new) US Embassy building . Caught in breakfast at a hotel , parent of one is saddened by the thing that they texted him they had heard of terror attacks in Sri Lanka and he should be indoors . Additionally the richest family of Danemark losing 3 of their 4 kids .



am baffled by this thing that supposes am an American with bad grammar . Or an equivalent . The only thing one might accept about me is that am an Admiral of the Starfleet . Things not just go whooshing in the Dark , but also travel interstellar .

otherwise the thing should stay . Al Crusading -which is Al Jazeraa to those who can't tell- speaks of a hate preacher the Muslim Council of the country ratted to the Authorities . The first tip off is now officially taken to months before , because the initial 10 days idea would suggest the "foreign" orders were tracked , even from its source , which is most shameful . For whomever that might have passed the orders to those who ordered their lessers to blow themselves up . Even if Indians are not exactly slouches in espionage affairs . So , are you suggesting it's bad form on me to suggest this would indeed be used as justification ? Just like Saddam suddenly discovered he was #1 supporter of Bin Ladin ? Or there have been movies about some CIA agent that saw Iraq was not taking delivery Nigerian (?) Uranium and said so and was eaten alive by her comrades of years ?

Not what I meant at all. I explain it in in more coherent terms when I have more time later today.

are you refering to llluminati or one of the scooby doo episodes?

An extreme and generic example of how not to separate people from the human tragedy of these things based on their religious affiliation.

Depending on who you are and what side of politics you bat for yes, I agree. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are fairly low key on Islamic criticism and are very careful on what they say and how they criticize it, they really really get into Christianity though, especially Dawkins, and so they should, every religion should be up for critique. Dawkins is sometimes challenged on why he appears to be softer on Islam, he never really gives a clear answer, or at least in the debates I've watched him in. I'll be honest I haven't seen a great deal of what Sam Harris has to say about Islam, I have heard him critique it somewhat but like I said it seems fairly low key.



I don't have to like Islam or agree with it, but that doesn't mean I'm going to to be disrespectful to someone who follows the faith either, which I never do, but if I don't agree with something, I am going to criticize it, I think it's extremely important that Islam has a reformation, much like Christianity had, the problem is the discussion is being shut down before it can even begin with labels being thrown at people left right and center. To give you some insight into where the discussion on Islam is at the moment you only need to look to the Islamic reformers and the persecution they themselves face from other Muslims, that in-itself should give you a clear indication of where any kind of reformation is at.

My biggest problems with many of the largest and most vocal and prominent organizations claiming to represent Islam AND Christianity is frankly that they DON'T. Many of the big groups we often hear about for both are basically utterly and flagrantly in violation of their own scriptures and the tenets and doctrines set down by their founders, often even anathema and antithesis to these ideals in so many overt and egregious ways, just to serve ulterior ends of their leadership in the here and now.

In recent times, not a great deal, in previous years World Vision, but I not longer donate to foreign charities anymore, I'm fairly disgusted in how the whole thing operates to be honest.
But that's not virtue signalling, I've never posted a single thing about it, this is the first time I think I have ever posted anything about it on the Interwebs. I also give away my tax return, but only to local charities now. I know it looks like I'm making a big deal about virtue signalling, I don't have a problem with it, I said in another thread about people who film themselves giving away food to homeless people and then post the video on social media, but who cares, someone homeless gets to eat and a message gets spread, it's the whole double standard type virtue signalling, especially the ones about climate change and C02 emissions I can't stand, the same people posting these statuses drive carbon emitting cars, travel the world and have appliances running in every room, there the ones who need to be called out.

You'd probably never suspected that I worked as a social worker for a living, helping people who are homeless and unemployable gain stability, a home, and some sort of income. A job I do out of choice, not because anyone pressured me to. I don't think that counts as "virtue signalling" just because I may get a paycheck for it (and not even a stellar one).

I don't know that empathy is necessarily sober. Doesn't seem like rationality is the game it plays.

I meant "sober" in tenor, as in "funerary sober."

 

[Farm Boy]

Right, more dry churches, less Catholics.

 

[Patine]

Right, more dry churches, less Catholics.

Ugh! Bad humour...

 

[Lexicus]

I think your «questioning» is insincere, loaded, and «dog whistling», and I find it deeply problematic.

My understanding is that you largely agree with Harris and Dawkins' "criticism" of Islam? If that is the case, do you not think that the arguments Modder_Mode is making follow logically to some degree from that "criticism"?

 

[AmazonQueen]

Depending on who you are and what side of politics you bat for yes, I agree. Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins are fairly low key on Islamic criticism and are very careful on what they say and how they criticize it, they really really get into Christianity though, especially Dawkins, and so they should, every religion should be up for critique. Dawkins is sometimes challenged on why he appears to be softer on Islam, he never really gives a clear answer, or at least in the debates I've watched him in. I'll be honest I haven't seen a great deal of what Sam Harris has to say about Islam, I have heard him critique it somewhat but like I said it seems fairly low key.

Considering that Dawkins has said "Islam is the greatest force for evil in the world today" and has been accused of Islamophobia by some I wouldn't say hes low key on criticism of Islam.
He has also said "It’s tempting to say all religions are bad, and I do say all religions are bad, but it’s a worse temptation to say all religions are equally bad because they’re not. If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam. It’s terribly important to modify that because of course that doesn’t mean all Muslims are evil, very far from it. Individual Muslims suffer more from Islam than anyone else. They suffer from the homophobia, the misogyny, the joylessness which is preached by extreme Islam, Isis and the Iranian regime. So it is a major evil in the world, we do have to combat it, but we don’t do what Trump did and say all Muslims should be shut out of the country. That’s draconian, that’s illiberal, inhumane and wicked. I am against Islam not least because of the unpleasant effects it has on the lives of Muslims."

 

[Farm Boy]

Ugh! Bad humour...

Hey, some of those wakes get pretty rowdy.

 

[Patine]

Considering that Dawkins has said "Islam is the greatest force for evil in the world today" and has been accused of Islamophobia by some I wouldn't say hes low key on criticism of Islam.
He has also said "It’s tempting to say all religions are bad, and I do say all religions are bad, but it’s a worse temptation to say all religions are equally bad because they’re not. If you look at the actual impact that different religions have on the world it’s quite apparent that at present the most evil religion in the world has to be Islam. It’s terribly important to modify that because of course that doesn’t mean all Muslims are evil, very far from it. Individual Muslims suffer more from Islam than anyone else. They suffer from the homophobia, the misogyny, the joylessness which is preached by extreme Islam, Isis and the Iranian regime. So it is a major evil in the world, we do have to combat it, but we don’t do what Trump did and say all Muslims should be shut out of the country. That’s draconian, that’s illiberal, inhumane and wicked. I am against Islam not least because of the unpleasant effects it has on the lives of Muslims."

But of course, ISIS (acronym, not word - this isn't the Egyptian Polytheist goddess here), al-Qaeda, Hamas, the Taliban, and the Iranian and Saudi regimes don't properly ascribe to Islam - much like the Evangelical ministries of people like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, Harold Camping, Ian Paisley, Fred Niles, and others, or the Roman Catholic Church, especially when Crusades, Inquisitions, and Colonial Era abuses are among it's great modus operandi, or the LDS Church, and many others - don't properly ascribe to Christianity. It's not Islam that's the greatest force of evil in the world today - nor is it Christianity. It's ulterior motives and horrid abuses, wars, and atrocities commit IN THE NAME of these religions, and under a false cover of faux righteousness by invoking their names, but not following their tenets at all.

 

[AmazonQueen]

But of course, ISIS (acronym, not word - this isn't the Egyptian Polytheist goddess here), al-Qaeda, Hamas, the Taliban, and the Iranian and Saudi regimes don't properly ascribe to Islam - much like the Evangelical ministries of people like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, Harold Camping, Ian Paisley, Fred Niles, and others, or the Roman Catholic Church, especially when Crusades, Inquisitions, and Colonial Era abuses are among it's great modus operandi, or the LDS Church, and many others - don't properly ascribe to Christianity. It's not Islam that's the greatest force of evil in the world today - nor is it Christianity. It's ulterior motives and horrid abuses, wars, and atrocities commit IN THE NAME of these religions, and under a false cover of faux righteousness by invoking their names, but not following their tenets at all.

Well as an atheist I'd agree. Its not the religions that are at fault, its the uses people make of them that are. In this I'd disagree with Dawkins, religion isn't the problem, its people.

 

[Hrothbern]

As update on the status in Sri Lanka

What I find noteworthy is that the Muslim community in Sri Lanka has taken to active positions to make clear that they distance themselves from the attacks that jeopardize the fragile multi-religion, multi-tribe society in Sri Lanka still recovering from the Tamil civil war period.

Sri Lanka’s Muslim Council said on Thursday night that Islamic community leaders had agreed that bodies of the terrorists would not be buried in an mosque burial ground.
“The Muslim community is so angry about this that they want to disown [the bombers],” said Hilmy Ahmed, a top official at the council, an umbrella organisation of Muslim civil society groups. “Their bodies will eventually be released — whatever is left of their bodies. [We] will not entertain the burial of them in the mosque.”
He said the community’s council of theologians, a body of religious scholars, had initially resisted the idea but relented and given its approval on Thursday.

The All Ceylon Jamiyyathul Ulama, a top body of Muslim scholars, issued an advisory on Thursday evening calling on women not to wear the face-covering niqab. “In the prevailing situation our sisters should not hinder the security forces in their efforts to maintain national security by wearing the face cover (niqab),” the group said in a statement.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-in-sri-lanka-as-tensions-rise-after-bombings

I am still worried that the infighting between the President and the PM, the societal and geopolitical struggle in the background, is a risk on the process to neutralise the dividing effects of this attack on the Sri Lankan society.
I hope that PM's, Presidents from other countries have done more than a bit of public statements and tweeting and retweeting to express their horror at the casualties.
More something directed through confidentional cannels at that President, in diplomatic wording ofc, of the type: "hey friend... we don't like what you are doing... take note"

Not that much in the newsmedia on that struggle, but surprisingly the Daily Mail wrote an article listing up much more than other western newsmedia:

The warnings were clear: On April 11, Sri Lanka's police chief issued an alert saying that National Thowheeth Jama'ath (NTJ) planned suicide bombings of 'prominent churches', citing alerts from a foreign intelligence agency.
The document was addressed to several top officials, but neither the prime minister nor the deputy defence minister were among the recipients. That comes as little surprise to experts familiar with Sri Lanka's messy political scene, which has been dominated by wrangling between Prime Minister Wickremesinghe and President Sirisena - who also serves as defence and law and order minister.
Alan Keenan, Sri Lanka specialist at the International Crisis Group think tank, said: 'As part of his ongoing war with the prime minister, the president has tried to weaken him in many ways, including taking the police under his control.
'So it's entirely possible that the police wouldn't share information with ministers not aligned with the president', Keenan said.
The attempt to shut out Prime Minster Wickremesinghe follows efforts by Sirisena to sack the premier last year. Although the prime minister was eventually reinstated after a court ruling, the bad blood between the two men persists.

Hours after the Easter Sunday bombings that killed 359 people, Wickremesinghe called an urgent meeting of the armed forces chiefs.
But Sirisena was still out of the country on holiday and the military leadership initially refused to attend, saying they answered solely to the president, official sources told AFP.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...med-intelligence-blunder-allowed-attacks.html