Ongoing Coup in Sri Lanka

[Moriarte]

Just posting a fact, which is often omitted in the press and which sparked, in part, latest government response. Whether that was just or not I wouldn't want to comment, just another link in the chain worth mentioning. I wouldn't want to derail your thread further with Myanmar crisis discussion.

 

[HoloDoc]

Just posting a fact, which is often omitted in the press and which sparked, in part, latest government response. Whether that was just or not I wouldn't want to comment, just another link in the chain worth mentioning. I wouldn't want to derail your thread further with Myanmar crisis discussion.

No, you were excusing genocide. If you were "just posting a fact," you would have posted; "Maybe if a Rohingya insurgency group called ARSA hadn't killed 12 policemen, the Burmese military wouldn't have launched its latest pogrom." That would still have been disputable, but it could have been the basis of a genuine discussion. Instead, you explicitly accused "the Rohingya" of launching "terrorist attacks," and claimed that if they hadn't "things might have gone differently for them."

That is an explicit statement that the Rohingya are at fault for the latest round of violence, which everyone - except the Burmese Govt. - agrees is an ethnic cleansing at best, a genocide at worst.

As for it being "omitted in the press;" that's the BBC you're quoting. Not exactly a fringe source. The existence of ARSA and the ongoing violence isn't exactly a secret.

For that matter, it is somewhat controversial to even refer to the LTTE as a "terrorist organisation," although I won't go there. They certainly committed war crimes, yet they also had an air force and conducted foreign trade. They were actually closer to being a legitimate Govt. in Northeast Sri Lanka than many recognised Govts are in their own territory. Their acts of terror could almost be classed as "state-sponsored terrorism."

I also appreciate your implicit admission that you're on the losing end of this discussion and your excuse about not derailing the discussion in order to avoid it continuing.

 

[Moriarte]

We can play the game of calling each other conspiracy nut at every turn or make an effort to be less insulting. Up to you.

No, you were excusing genocide.

Nope. I wasn't commenting on whether consequent actions of Myanmar government is excusable. Only pointing to the fact that the other side has done their share to provoke latest response, however asymmetrical it was. Normally, when people kill other people, there is a response. Was government response heavy handed or adequate? My answering That question definitively could enable one to put me in a demographic of people excusing or not excusing genocide/ethnic cleansing if one was determined to place me there. As of now, not so much. Living outside this sphere of events, I am not authorizing myself to judge with absolute certainty whether 12 equals 1 million "entirely". What I can do is partially observe cause and effect.

Absolutely, I meant ARSA insurgents performing acts of terror, not Rohingya nation as a whole, you're right, I should have been clearer in my initial post.

Continuing with the topic at hand, I see you are somewhat negative towards the Sri-Lankan strongman. Do you see solid indications that there will be Tamil cleansing if Rajapaksa holds on to power?

 

[HoloDoc]

We can play the game of calling each other conspiracy nut at every turn or make an effort to be less insulting. Up to you.



Nope. I wasn't commenting on whether consequent actions of Myanmar government is excusable. Only pointing to the fact that the other side has done their share to provoke latest response, however asymmetrical it was. Normally, when people kill other people, there is a response. Was government response heavy handed or adequate? My answering That question definitively could enable one to put me in a demographic of people excusing or not excusing genocide/ethnic cleansing if one was determined to place me there. As of now, not so much. Living outside this sphere of events, I am not authorizing myself to judge with absolute certainty whether 12 equals 1 million "entirely". What I can do is partially observe cause and effect.

Absolutely, I meant ARSA insurgents performing acts of terror, not Rohingya nation as a whole, you're right, I should have been clearer in my initial post.

Continuing with the topic at hand, I see you are somewhat negative towards the Sri-Lankan strongman. Do you see solid indications that there will be Tamil cleansing if Rajapaksa holds on to power?

I agree that playing the "who is worse because they killed more people" game is stupid, and get annoyed when people try to quantify whether Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao, etc. is most evil by comparing body counts. But we're talking about 12 people compared to 1 million. Anything other than a blanket denunciation of the Burmese regime is excusing, if not advocating, genocide. The fact that you are attempting to play little semantic games to avoid doing so is not a point in your favour; honestly, you'd earn more respect if you at least had the balls to openly state you were in favour of it. You'd be considered scum, but scum with a backbone.

It's also quite well known that ARSA's campaign was in response to the violence already being perpetrated against Rohingya, not the inciting incident. We'd have to go back to at least WWII for that. Maybe a millennium. And calling a resistance group's attacks on an occupying police force "acts of terror" is also a sign of your preference for the Burmese regime. Why you seem to like them so much, I don't know, but it's becoming apparent. Or maybe you just don't like Muslims; I'm unsure of your motives.

I can tell you that R was the President of Sri Lanka during the most brutal and violent period of the civil war, when an estimated 40,000 Tamil civilians were killed. This is only counting deaths, not associated crimes like mass rape and forced relocation, which definitely occurred. Some would call that an ethnic cleansing; I would. R's brother was the Defence Minister at the time, and will almost certainly assume that position again. He has openly and repeatedly called for the removal of Tamils from certain regions, which means he has openly advocated forced relocation at best, outright murder at worst. R and his supporters are also escalating their propaganda attacks on the Tamils, who are being blamed for economic difficulties caused by a combination of simple bad luck - not all investments work out - and R's own economic mismanagement as President.

It is blindingly obvious that the incoming regime is staking out their claims to authority; protecting Sri Lankan sovereignty from India; fixing the economy; removing Tamils from public life. They are whistling up a pogrom. At best, they simply turn Tamils into second-class citizens in their own country; this is already practically the case, but legally Tamils have the same rights as Sinhalese. At worst, this is preparation for genocide. I tend to believe in a middle ground, where certain regions are forcibly cleared of Tamils through massacres and forced relocation, but we don't end up with a new Rwanda. I suspect tens of thousands Tamils will flee to India, Australia, and elsewhere however, which will make a mockery of my homeland's claims that their "tough policy on immigration" is what stopped refugees arriving, rather than the simple fact that the end of the Sri Lankan civil war meant few people were fleeing the country anymore.

As for why I'm negative towards R; I tend to look unfavourably upon wannabe dictators who use racist rhetoric, commit crimes against humanity, and launch coups in long-term successful democratic societies. I guess that's just my cross to bear.

 

[Hrothbern]

China wants its own Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, and needs a stable regime because Sri Lanka has too many inhabitants (23 mio) to simply remove as was done by the UK and the US (to "deliver" Diego Garcia as a naval base to the US).
A stable pro-China regime in Sri Lanka, no matter what
Any negative sentiments of the (remaining) population in the direction of India ofc more than welcome.

R wants ofc the money, just like his family, and the pursuing of his own flavor of a future Sri Lanka.
Getting all ethnic groups one way or another out of Sri Lanka giving a "solid base for the future", and enough sentiments support from the turmoil to transform Sri Lanka to his liking.

The Belt & Road trade hub effect securing some additional economy and prosperity to keep a population happy. The population of 23 mio, as collateral for legitimacy for the status of sovereign nation, disguising the future vassal status to China, the future military marine base, to improve control on the Indian Ocean, to protect the Maritime Belt & Road.
China in the position to prop up Sri Lanka until it can really use Sri Lanka for its marine (now at official level denied).

 

[Moriarte]

It's also quite well known that ARSA's campaign was in response to the violence already being perpetrated against Rohingya, not the inciting incident. We'd have to go back to at least WWII for that. Maybe a millennium. And calling a resistance group's attacks on an occupying police force "acts of terror" is also a sign of your preference for the Burmese regime.

Acts of terror are used since the dawn of man by all sides in all wars, it's a way to send a message to the opposing side. Warring armies and groups of people used it throughout history, sometimes covertly, other times not. It's an objective term used to describe a tactic of violence and intimidation during a war, a conflict, it is not a reliable marker-word found in viewpoints, which helps establish allegiance to one side, or another. Attitude towards "the act of terror" term is far from the best way to distinguish between allegiances, and as we both can see, your guess about my allegiance was built on a shaky foundation and thus is, unfortunately, incorrect. Again, terror is integral part to war, irregardless of allegiances. Killing policemen is an act designed to spread terror more than anything else. Therefore, I have no problem calling red color what it is - red color. Who did it this time, the Jedi of the Order of Blinding Light or Hordes of Mordor is secondary to the definition. Now, why You would prefer any term other than the objective one interests me less and less with every reply I get.

My preference is for legitimate government voted for by the people; on the other hand, as history proven time and time again, the majority of people may decide (and certainly have the right to decide) otherwise. In the latter case all I can hope for is painless transition, but, ultimately, I understand and respect the will of the majority in a nation (or people, if you will). I get it - it is difficult to comprehend neutral opinions and viewpoints, while you clearly found your place in the spectrum, picked your side. My disposition is less extreme. With Myanmar being half a globe away from me, all I can do is analyze a chain of events, what led where, I will never have full understanding, because I don't possess information on the matter in it's entirety, like relevant intelligence agencies and leaders do. I have not come here to wave hands in despair, engage in state propaganda (or anti-state propaganda) of opinions or sway others into thinking exactly like I do. This is a line, which separates us, and I insist on me staying on the side I describe. You are not conversing here with Rohingya resistance fighter nor Myanmar colonel, but with an outside spectator.

As for why I'm negative towards R; I tend to look unfavorably upon wannabe dictators who use racist rhetoric, commit crimes against humanity, and launch coups in long-term successful democratic societies. I guess that's just my cross to bear.

Quite a picture. Let's see how this unfolds. Thanks for taking time to share this.

It seems from an economic standpoint Sri Lanka has much to gain from integration with Belt & Road, it will be a hard one to avoid unless India sets itself on a collision course and offers Sri Lanka a brighter alternative, which I doubt, given India's inferior financial disposition.

 

[HoloDoc]

"Oops, I got caught condoning genocide, better hit the Wall of Text button and spout vaguely metaphysical bulldust to distract people."

No real updates today.

 

[Moriarte]

Not that big of a wall, yet too high to climb for ya. Much easier to make a distressed face and run for the bomb shelter.

 

[HoloDoc]

Update.

Sri Lanka’s president, Maithripala Sirisena, has dissolved the country’s parliament in a gamble that a new election will secure backing for his preferred candidate as prime minister over an ousted premier who has refused to leave.

Sirisena signed a decree dismissing the island’s 225-member assembly just hours after his party admitted it did not have enough votes to support former president Mahinda Rajapakse against rival claimant Ranil Wickremesinghe.

The two have been battling for the prime minister’s post for two weeks as international concern grows over the mounting turmoil.

A minister, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the official notification would take effect at midnight on Friday. Before signing the order, Sirisena inducted more ministers into the cabinet headed by Rajapakse.

“The election is likely to be held in early January,” the minister said. Normally an election would not be held until 2020.

Sirisena sparked the crisis on 26 October by sacking Wickremesinghe and replacing him as prime minister with Rajapakse, the country’s authoritarian president from 2005 until 2015.

Wickremesinghe has since refused to leave the premier’s official residence after the president suspended parliament to head off any revolt against his action.

In the latest twist in the crisis, Sirisena’s United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) said ahead of the president’s stunning announcement they were at least eight legislators short of getting a majority for Rajapakse in the assembly.

“At the moment we have 104 or 105 MPs,” UPFA’s spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella told reporters, adding that the Sirisena-Rajapakse group hoped to secure support from “crossover" legislators.

Sirisena had claimed on Monday he had the support of 113 legislators when he sacked Wickremesinghe. But the admission of a lack of a majority had fuelled speculation that he might sack the legislature and go for a snap election.
The leftist People’s Liberation Front (JVP), which regards the sacking of Wickremesinghe as unconstitutional, accused Sirisena of trying to consolidate his power grab.

“Dissolving parliament at this time is illegal and goes against the constitution,” JVP’s general secretary, Tilvin Silva, told reporters.

Sirisena suspended parliament to give himself more time to engineer defections, according to the opposition. Several legislators have said they were offered millions of dollars to switch allegiance and at least eight have already jumped to the president’s side.

Wickremesinghe, who has not left the Temple Trees residence since his sacking, maintains that the action against him was unconstitutional and illegal, and insists his group can muster a majority.

According to an AFP count, he and his allies have the support of 120 MPs while Rajapakse and Sirisena have 104. The speaker, the 225th member, is neutral.

Under pressure from the UN, the US and the EU to allow a parliamentary vote, Sirisena agreed three times to lift the suspension but changed his mind each time.

The EU said on Friday, before the dissolution, that the crisis had scarred the Indian Ocean island’s international reputation.

The EU, in a joint statement with Norway and Switzerland, called for parliament to reconvene and hold an immediate vote.

“Any further delay could damage Sri Lanka’s international reputation and deter investors,” the statement said.

On Thursday Wickremesinghe thanked his supporters and urged them not to give up in the showdown.

“In extraordinary numbers and with extraordinary courage you came out on to the streets, you spoke out,” Wickremesinghe said in a Facebook video.

“You have not let this country be plunged into the darkness of dictatorship. For this inspiring effort, I want to thank everyone who has risen to fight for democracy and justice.”

The power struggle on the island of 21 million people has paralysed much of the administration, according to legislators on both sides of the dispute.

TLDR: The coup has stalled, the parliament won't support the coup, the President has dissolved Parliament and is almost certain to call new elections. The elected PM hasn't left his residence in two weeks, and this refusal to back down has screwed up the attempted takeover; the coup plotters have also been forced to publicly admit they never had Parliament's backing.

 

[HoloDoc]

Just confirming that at least eight MPs have confirmed they were offered bribes of several million dollars to switch their support to the coup plotters. Which probably means a lot of the people who did switch sides took the money.

And the most alarming development yet: There are reports that the military has started to remove journalists from the Northeast of the country. That's where the majority of the Tamil ethnic minority lives. That's not yet confirmed though.

 

[innonimatu]

TLDR: The coup has stalled, the parliament won't support the coup, the President has dissolved Parliament and is almost certain to call new elections. The elected PM hasn't left his residence in two weeks, and this refusal to back down has screwed up the attempted takeover; the coup plotters have also been forced to publicly admit they never had Parliament's backing.

It's interesting how much politics depends on intimidating adversaries to concede without putting up a fight. And how unpredictable things become when they do.

 

[HoloDoc]

It's interesting how much politics depends on intimidating adversaries to concede without putting up a fight. And how unpredictable things become when they do.

Yes, S and R were focusing very much on showing they were in charge two weeks ago when they seized power, and W's refusal to concede appears to have caught them very flat-footed. S has already announced he's recalling Parliament, only to change his mind, three times. I don't think the military is working towards a single purpose at the moment either. Very fluid situation; hopefully the coup fails completely.

 

[Hrothbern]

This article of Reuters gives a good overview of the struggle the recent years behind the scenes of China, India and to some degree Japan in outbidding each other in soft loans and infra projects (and vanity projects).
R having established the first big push of Chineses money. S when in charge trying to get more balance, independence back with more of India and Japan in the equation and ofc to the benefit of the total foreign investments in infra in Sri Lanka.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-for-investments-and-influence-idUSKCN1ND0D1

 

[HoloDoc]

Update.

Sri Lanka president dissolves parliament and calls for election in bid to solve political crisis
Posted about 8 hours ago

Photo: Critics have accused President Maithripala Sirisena of drawing Sri Lanka into a political crisis. (AP: Eranga Jayawardena)
Sri Lanka could hold an early election on January 5 after the President dissolved parliament in a bid to stave off a deepening political crisis, sparked by his dismissal of the prime minister that opponents say is unconstitutional.

The country has been in a crisis since October 26, when President Maithripala Sirisena fired his prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, and replaced him with former strongman Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Mr Wickremesinghe has insisted his firing is unconstitutional, with both men claiming the prime ministership.

He has refused to vacate his official residence and demanded that Parliament — which had been suspended for almost three weeks — be summoned immediately to prove he had support among its members.

Mr Sirisena's supporters had been irked by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya's announcement that he was going to call for a vote in the 225-member house on Wednesday for either party to prove their support.

"The dissolution clearly indicates that Mr Sirisena has grossly misjudged and miscalculated the support that he might or could secure to demonstrate support in the Parliament," Bharath Gopalaswamy, director at US-based analyst group Atlantic Council's South Asia Centre, said.

"At the end of the day, he is a victim of his own homegrown crisis."

Thousands of Sri Lankans earlier marched through the streets of Colombo to demand the President take action.

Foreign Minister Sarath Amunugama said the President dissolved parliament due to the need to go to the people to find a resolution to the crisis.

Mr Amunugama said that on Wednesday "there was to be a lot of commotion and unparliamentary activities sponsored by the speaker".

"The speaker was not planning to act according to the constitution and standing orders of parliament," he said.

Photo: Sri Lanka's sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickeremesinghe is expected to challenge the constitutionality of the move. (AP: Eranga Jayawardena)
Mr Wickremesinghe's camp is likely to contest Mr Sirisena's move because of constitutional provisions stating a parliament can't be dissolved until four and a half years after it is elected. The current parliament was elected in August 2015.

"It's totally unconstitutional," Harsha de Silva, a member of Wickremesinghe's United National Party and a former government minister, said.

"Sirisena has relegated the constitution to toilet paper. We will fight this dictator to the end."

The party said in a Twitter message that it will meet the elections commissioner to discuss the constitutionality of Sirisena's move.

Tensions had been building between Mr Sirisena and Mr Wickremesinghe for some time, as the president did not approve of economic reforms introduced by the prime minister.

Mr Sirisena has also accused Mr Wickremesinghe and another Cabinet member of plotting to assassinate him, a charge Mr Wickremesinghe repeatedly denied.

TLDR: The coup plotters don't have the numbers in Parliament to legitimise their coup, so the President is calling an early election for January 5 for a new Parliament. This is unconstitutional; under Sri Lankan law new elections can't be called until 4 1/2 years after the previous election, and that was August 2015. So the next election can't legally take place until 2020.

This move is a response to the Speaker of the House, who is a member of the elected PM's party (the United National Party) but politically neutral according to the Constitution. The Speaker, Karu Jayasuriya (henceforth known as "J" in keeping with the shorthand I've developed) was calling for a Parliamentary vote on Wednesday (S has already dissolved Parliament, but his ability to legally do that is questionable at best, and J has the right to call it as well) which would have exposed R and S's inability to govern; they don't have the numbers to form Govt, whereas W does.

There is marching in the streets of Colombo, and basic Govt services are beginning to grind to a halt. S is appointing coup plotters to Cabinet positions, but the previous occupants are refusing to vacate those ministries. The public service doesn't know whose orders to follow, and many of them are simply staying home.

 

[HoloDoc]

The coup is stalling!

Source.

Sri Lanka thrown into more turmoil as parliament rejects new Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa
Posted about 2 hours ago

Photo: Sri Lanka's MPs wore shawls saying 'for democracy' as they opposed the no-confidence motion. (AP: Rukmal Gamage)
Sri Lanka's parliament has passed a no-confidence motion against newly appointed Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa amid raucous opposition, throwing the country deeper into crisis.

Sri Lanka has been in turmoil since President Maithripala Sirisena fired Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe last month, replaced him with Mr Rajapaksa, a pro-China strongman, and dissolved parliament.

Mr Rajapaksa's allies said they could not accept the vote, shouting "this is illegal", with many wearing shawls emblazoned with the words "for democracy".

The Supreme Court rejected a presidential decree to dissolve parliament and hold fresh elections on Tuesday and the house sat again on Wednesday.

"The (no-confidence) motion was taken to vote by voices on the floor and it had a majority support. Now we are going to sign the papers," said R Sambanthan, leader of an opposition group bitterly opposed to Mr Rajapaska.

Five other opposition MPs also confirmed the move.

Political instability shakes rupee
Photo: Newly appointed PM Mahinda Rajapaksa's allies have rejected the vote. (AP: Eranga Jayawardena)
The instability in the island nation of 21 million people has raised concerns for its economy, already expanding at its slowest pace in more than a decade.

The central bank unexpectedly raised its key policy rates, a move aimed at defending a faltering rupee as foreign capital outflows picked up in Sri Lanka, where both India and China are locked in a tussle for influence.

The parliamentary speaker has called the president's sacking of the prime minister to bring a former leader back to power a non-violent coup d'etat.

Mr Rajapaksa, under whose rule Sri Lanka achieved its 2009 victory in a decades-long conflict against rebels from the Tamil minority, is seen as a hero by many among Sri Lanka's Buddhist majority.

He has been accused by diplomats of human rights abuses during the war, which he denies.

Opposition parties to soldier on
Photo: Supporters hope that ousted prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe will be able to return to the job. (AP: Lahiru Harshana)
Part of the Sri Lankan Supreme Court's rejection of President Sirisena's decree has meant that the parliament will sit for another month.

For a deadlocked legislature, this gives opposition more time to exert more pressure on the fledgling administration of Mr Rajapaksa.

Namal Rajapaksa, an MP in his father's United People Freedom Alliance party, told The Associated Press that they "don't accept this verdict" and will continue as the Government.

Another politician, Ajith Perera, a supporter of Mr Wickremesinghe, said the results of the vote meant Mr Wickremesinghe and his government would be reinstated.

However, at this stage it is unclear if the ousted prime minister will return to the top job.

AP/Reuters

Topics: government-and-politics, world-politics, leadership, sri-lanka

TLDR: The Supreme Court ruled President Sirisena's attempt to dissolve Parliament unconstitutional on Tuesday. On Wednesday Parliament sat, and returned a vote of no-confidence in the coup plotters, led by Rajapaksa. The rupee is in trouble, the no-confidence papers are being signed, and Parliament has to sit for another month. It is getting less and less likely that R can hold on without the military becoming involved. Wickremasinghe may not be able to officially claim the position of PM due to S's intractability, but for all intents and purposes his Govt remains the legal Govt of Sri Lanka.

Incidentally, I was unable to post this on Monday and forgot later, but R and S are now fighting with one another. S originally became President by abandoning R's party and forming a coalition with W. The deal was that S would be President and W PM. R retired from politics after defeat in the 2015 election, but his son stayed in Parliament and formed a new political party, alongside R's brothers. S and W fell out over economic differences, and S went back to R's old party, becoming its leader in R's absence. He then proclaimed R the new PM last month, with R rejoining the party. But on Monday, R took about two-third's of his former party with him, defecting to his son's party. Nice and confusing, and given the two parties have almost identical abbreviations, I'm actually making it simpler for you all than if I used their names here.

So the coup plotters are falling out with each other, probably over the miserable failure this coup has become, although I think it likely R and his family always intended to betray S.

The only real danger now is military involvement in the side of the coup plotters. I am finding that less and less likely; the mobs are dispersing, the plotters are fighting each other, India is now openly backing W while the Chinese are backing away from R, and the army and police showed a distinct disinclination to fire on protestors in Colombo last week. The media also seems to have repelled R's takeover attempts, apparently with help from pro-democracy protestors that kicked out R's thugs. R's brother has a lot of contacts in the military from his time as Defence Minister, but since the army hasn't already moved against W, I think the moment has passed.

Fingers crossed democracy has been saved in Sri Lanka.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I agree that playing the "who is worse because they killed more people" game is stupid, and get annoyed when people try to quantify whether Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao, etc. is most evil by comparing body counts. But we're talking about 12 people compared to 1 million. Anything other than a blanket denunciation of the Burmese regime is excusing

Actually, no. Words have meaning, and that's not what "excusing" means. Claiming that requires you to demonstrate that someone is defending or justifying the action in question outright. There are plenty of things in the possibility space between "defending/excusing" and "blanket denunciation".

So far, you have not demonstrated that he has excused genocide.

My preference is for legitimate government voted for by the people; on the other hand, as history proven time and time again, the majority of people may decide (and certainly have the right to decide) otherwise. In the latter case all I can hope for is painless transition, but, ultimately, I understand and respect the will of the majority in a nation (or people, if you will).

I'm not convinced the "will of the majority" is sacred. It is possible to have factually wrong information be widely believed, or have a majority will something unfair/unethical.

To paint an extreme example, let's say the Sinhalese were okay with treating the Tamil inhumanely, to the point of human rights violations. That's not okay, even if 60% of the population thinks it's okay. It's the kind of thinking that has led to war crimes in the past.

Facts and evidence should be held even above majority opinion. It's what keeps policy consistent with reality. I know often politics isn't actually about policy, but I don't have to respect that.

Fingers crossed democracy has been saved in Sri Lanka.

Fortunately it's looking that way based on what you're saying. Coups that aren't decisive don't have a tendency to succeed.

 

[Traitorfish]

So far, you have not demonstrated that he has excused genocide.

If a fascist dog whistles in the woods, and only a centrist is around to hear, did he make a sound?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

If a fascist dog whistles in the woods, and only a centrist is around to hear, did he make a sound?

Words still have meaning, and the classic example of people using different definitions doesn't change that. There is no commonly accepted usage for "excusing" that fits what happened in this thread.

 

[HoloDoc]

Words still have meaning, and the classic example of people using different definitions doesn't change that. There is no commonly accepted usage for "excusing" that fits what happened in this thread.

In the words of Adam Hills; "You talk horsehockye!"

He explicitly stated that the pogroms in Burma were the fault of the Rohingya for "committing acts of terror." That is excusing the genocide. If you want a signed handwritten statement before you'll agree he was excusing genocide, I guess the Wannsee Conference had nothing to do with Hitler either.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

He explicitly stated that the pogroms in Burma were the fault of the Rohingya for "committing acts of terror." That is excusing the genocide.

Perhaps, if Rohingya didn’t carry out terrorist attacks and not kill 12 local policemen things might have went differently for them.

Conjecture on what might have happened had events gone differently is not defending or justifying what happened. Words have meaning.