Features
THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND GENOCIDE

by Vijaya Chandrasoma
The first ten Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, the Bill of Rights, were ratified on December 15, 1791. The First Amendment to the Constitution stipulates that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
The Presidents of Harvard (Claudine Gay), MIT, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Sally Kornbluth) and the University of Pennsylvania (Liz Magill) were summoned, on December 5, before a Congressional hearing relating to anti-Semitism protests on college campuses. Mass protests and counter protests held since the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israelis and the Israelis’ subsequent airstrikes, bombings and ground invasions on Gaza in response.
First, anti-Muslim protests after the atrocities against an estimated 1,200Israeli civilians, men, women and children, tortured, beheaded and burnt by Hamas terrorists on October 7. The terrorists also kidnapped over 240 hostages, Israeli, American and civilians of other nationalities during the attack.
Second, anti-Israel protests, when the Hamas’ acts of terrorism were immediately followed by indiscriminate airstrikes and bombings in Northern Gaza by the Israeli Defense Force (IDF). In addition, IDF ground forces have begun flooding the tunnels of Gaza in an attempt to flush out the terrorists. These attacks have been continuing relentlessly for over two months, so far claiming the lives of nearly 20,000 Palestinian civilians, mostly women and children, and seriously wounding a further 35,000, while ravaging the infrastructure of Gaza City and its environs, including hospitals, schools and refugee camps.
The savage attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians on October 7 was a war crime which ended that day, though the terrorists are still holding about 135 of the originally kidnapped 240 hostages in inhumane conditions in the tunnels of Northern Gaza. But the inexorable airstrikes and bombings on Gaza by the IDF against Palestinian civilians, most of whom were not complicit in the October 7 atrocity by Hamas, constitute a never-ending series of war crimes, fast approaching levels of genocide.
Although members of the Security Council of the United Nations, bar the USA (and a non-committal UK) have been repeatedly calling for a ceasefire, Israel has not complied; but for a seven-day “humanitarian pause” to conduct an exchange of hostages. The truce fell through when the Israelis accused Hamas of not honoring their side of the bargain. The attacks resumed immediately thereafter.
Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, has since resisted all such calls for a ceasefire. He is determined to continue the war against Gaza until all Hamas terrorists are killed and all hostages returned, unharmed. How many more murders of Palestinian civilians will satisfy the blood thirst of Netanyahu and the members of his hardline Likud Party, as revenge for the atrocities of that one day in October?
Actually, Netanyahu has already answered this question, when he stated last month: “The war will continue until we have achieved complete victory”, by which he means the elimination, by displacement, genocide or any other means, of the entire race of Palestinians, and the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel.
The Congressional hearing on December 5 featured fourth ranking Republican in the House, Elise Stefanik. Her question to the Presidents of these prestigious universities demanded a Yes or No answer, with neither qualification nor prevarication. A question of the “Gotcha” variety, which ensured that the response of the interviewee will be detrimental and humiliating to herself, however she responds.
The loaded question to the lady Presidents of three of the most famous universities in the world was: “Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate – Upenn’s, Harvard’s, MIT’s – rules of bullying and harassment in its Code of Conduct? Yes or No?”
Loaded because the question would be impossible to answer with a simple Yes or No. The answer would have to be qualified on two counts.
First, the omission the words “of Jews”, if genocide of all stripes would have so violated the universities’ Codes of Conduct, may have tempered the political flavor of the original question. However, even the answer to that question would prove impossible to answer with a simple Yes or No, as it would have to be qualified as to whether “calling for genocide”, which in itself constitutes free speech within First Amendment rights, had led to violence or criminal activity.
Protests and the freedom of assembly are protected by the First Amendment. However, there is a grey area, subject to interpretation, when such protests, combined with hate speech, result in violence or the commission of criminal activity.
Hate speech, though, is not a First Amendment term, and there is no defined line at which free speech crosses onto hate speech. Indeed, there is doubt whether such a line exists at all. The general consensus of constitutional scholars is that the line would be crossed only if speech leads to, or is designed to incite, criminal activity.
All three Presidents of these universities refused to give the easy answer, to take the easy way out, as could be expected of ladies of high intelligence, education and integrity. They are above the need, unlike Ms. Stefanik, to seek sensational publicity, or to score cheap political points.
They all went by a strict interpretation of the First Amendment, that the Universities’ Code of Conduct would be violated only depending on the context, whether such student protests had led to or incited violence or criminal behavior. As the President of Harvard, Ms. Claudine Gay said, the answer would be context-dependent on the interpretation of the aforementioned grey area of the First Amendment.
Congresswoman Stefanik expressed indignation at what she opined was an equivocal response, which sidestepped the question and did not condemn strongly enough the anti-Semitic furore at these universities. Though she did succeed in achieving the backlash she sought, protests from the general public, including the powerful Jewish lobby and threats of withdrawal of donations. And probably more importantly, earned herself brownie points with Trump, who had probably initiated the question with the political motive of earning the approval of the Jewish community.
After the initial reaction of horror by the Jewish community and the radical right subsided, many constitutional scholars have now recognized that Stefanik’s question was a political hit job, designed to elicit pro-Israel sentiments from the presidents of these prestigious universities. These learned lawyers agreed that the university presidents’ qualified response was perfectly in keeping with the US constitution and the Codes of Conduct of Harvard, MIT, UPenn and other universities.
However, under intense pressure as a result of the turmoil caused after the hearings, Liz Magill, President of UPenn, resigned her post; and the Presidents of Harvard and MIT tendered their apologies after condemnation of their response by the Jewish community, members of Congress and even the White House.
The statement by the White House spokesman, Andrew Bates, signifies the hitherto blind support of Israel by the USA. He said, “Any statements that advocate the systematic murder of Jews are dangerous and revolting – and we should all stand firmly against them, on the side of human dignity and the most basic values that unite us as Americans”. Completely ignoring the fact that the systematic, dangerous and revolting murder under current reference is being executed by the Jews against Palestinian civilians, and the human dignity under attack is that of defenseless Palestinian men, women and children.
The First Amendment is one of the main lines of defense exploited by the twice impeached, four times indicted former President of the United States, in many of the 91 felonies with which he has been charged, arrested and is on bail.
Trump’s speech at the Ellipse on January 6, 2021, inciting a mob of white supremacist terrorists he had assembled to attack the Capitol, was considered to be protected under the free speech clause of the First Amendment, by Ms. Stefanik and the Republican Party. In spite of the fact that Trump’s speech incited those insurrectionists to attack the Seat of Democracy of the nation, to kill and maim hundreds of police officers defending the Capitol, and to threaten the lives of lawmakers who had convened to perform their constitutional duty of certifying Joe Biden’s presidency. An insurrection that nearly brought America’s democracy to its knees.
So, according to the legal expertise of Elise Stefanik and the Republican Party, the First Amendment protects the free speech of a criminal president, although it directly resulted in the worst political violence in the nation since the Civil War.
This while protests by university students, expressing condemnation against the ongoing genocide of Palestinian civilians, violate the same free speech clause of the First Amendment, on grounds that they may result in the unlawful harassment of Jewish students.
No such congressional hearings were deemed necessary to question the constitutional validity of anti-Hamas protests after October 7, when innocent Muslim students were violently harassed. A double standard of hypocrisy, the classic hallmark of the Party of Trump.
We have been inured over the years against all kinds of lying and treachery of Trump and the radical, white supremacist cult that is the Republican Party. But to see President Biden recently approving a supply of $106 million worth of ammunition for tanks to enable Netanyahu continue the massacre at Gaza was deeply distressing. As was the lame response of Secretary of State Blinken when asked about the administration’s motive for the supply of this ammunition:
“Washington remains committed to supporting Israel’s right to self-defense, but has stepped up calls for Israel to comply with international law and protect civilians”. No explanation as to how this call for Israel’s compliance with international law is being monitored. Also, how Israel’s relentless onslaught on Gaza for over two months could possibly be construed as “Israel’s right to self-defense” is beyond comprehension.
However, at long last, American complicity in the current Israeli war crimes in Gaza seems to be cooling, in the face of global outrage. The Biden administration is openly criticizing Israel’s continuing genocide against Palestinians in North Gaza. In fact, just last Tuesday, Biden said that “Israel is losing international support over the indiscriminate bombing of Gaza”, expressing concern that the “most conservative government in Israeli’s history” is making progress in the resolution of the conflict “difficult”. Netanyahu responded that there was “disagreement with Biden over how a post-conflict Gaza would be governed”.
This exchange seems to indicate a rift in Biden/Netanyahu relations, providing stark contrast to Biden’s literal and political embrace of the Israeli Prime Minister in Tel Aviv days after the October 7 attacks.
The Americans may have finally realized that Netanyahu and the majority of the Israelis have never had any interest in a two-state solution. They will not stop the war in Gaza until all Palestinians are eliminated, one way or another, so successfully completing the genocide that has been in progress over the past 75 years. The Final One State Solution. The Promised Land.
Features
Shame! Ragging raises its cowardly head again

Ragging at Sabaragamuwa university has resulted in the loss of another student’s life and there is another incident of barbaric attack on an anti-rag student of J’pura university by some students from the same university. Whether the bullies are backed by political parties or not, they show their undeveloped and conformist minds that need urgent refinement; if they are connected to political parties and student unions, the latter show only their vulgarity and duplicity when they wax eloquent about modern education, culture, decadent politics, human rights, corruption and all that jazz. That this barbarous practice continues in broad daylight and under the very nose of university and law enforcement authorities is deplorable and puzzling to say the least. It is ironic that the best minds, the superstars in academia, the leading lights in education and the guardians of all that is progressive have become helpless spectators of this bullying happening in their universities. The ignominious records of rag victims in our country are a crying shame as all those perpetrators have been from that somewhat musty and largely conservative ‘cream of intelligence’ as they are called at all inauguration ceremonies where their egos are pampered.
Ragging in our universities is a sure sign of the backwardness of our culture and education, in comparison with that of civilized societies. The brutal practice of ragging shows that education in our country, both in schools and universities, has a lot of room for improvement about making the undergraduate population sensitive and sensible, more than ‘educated’. Of course, we can understand torture if it is something which happens in the underworld or in any place where the new recruits must be brutaliesed before they are admitted to their circles, but how can one understand when it happens in the highest seats of academia? Professor O. A. Ileperuma has, in his article “Ragging and loss of life” published in The Island of 5 May 2025, stated that some academics turn a blind eye to ragging perhaps “because they themselves were raggers in the past and see nothing harmful in such sordid instances of ragging”. This is pathetic and may perhaps prove some of the accusations that have been made ad nauseum about the lack of a wholesome education in our university system, which is said to be obsessed with mass producing ‘employable graduates’.
As they say, desperate times call for desperate measures. As far as the ragging culture in our universities is concerned, desperate measures are long overdue. In the highest institutes of learning where knowledge is produced and all the progressive and advanced ideas are supposed to be generated, there has been unfathomable brutality, crudeness and conventionality in the name of an acquired beastliness which they call ‘ragging’ to give it a quasi-academic smell when all it amounts to is lack of refinement which can be linked to numerous reasons.
Most of the culprits are the victims of a system which esteems hierarchy where it is accepted that superiority is synonymous with repressive power and inferiority is another term for meekness and passive acceptance of all commands coming from above. It is a mentality which is based on the warped logic that superiority is absurd if the seniors have no right to snub the juniors. Those who have tasted humiliation in one form or another for long due to reasons inherent in society can grow up to be vengeful. Most of these diehard raggers often show signs of this mentality in the way they behave the minute they have been automatically lifted to their pathetic superiority after one year in the university where they enjoy a mistaken sense of immunity from the law. The widely publicised idea of ‘freedom’ associated with universities and their relative aloofness from the rest of society and the aura they have acquired have made them safe havens for the raggers if the unmitigated brutality in ragging over the long years is any indication. The question is why (oh why?) these learned bullies despise civilised behaviour so much in their enclaves of power merely on the strength of one year’s seniority. If it is their one year’s accumulated knowledge which makes them feel superior to the newcomers in an aggressive way, surely, such knowledge is questionable, which must intrigue educationists, psychologists, sociologists and all academics interested in the role of education in character building.
Raggers have been saying ad nauseam that ragging is given to make the new entrants tough enough for academic work. As we know their methods include using foul language, humiliation, intimidation, physical and psychological abuse, torture, beating and forcing rigorous exercises even leading to death. The resultant trauma has led some to commit suicide. All this is done to help the new students with a proven capacity for hard work in the academic field!
However, there are some pertinent questions to be asked. Is this method of building resilience of potential academics backed by research? Should this ‘programme’ be conducted by senior students (who are apparently mentally unsound)? Aren’t there better qualified people to conduct a civilised programme which would help make the newcomers ready to face the trials of academic life? Do they believe that no refined programme can be as ‘effective’ as their ragging? Why should they spend their valuable time doing it when it can be done by experts in a more organised and civilised manner? Have they ever been cultured enough to discuss this so-called ‘personality development’ programme with the relevant authorities and academics, with any reliable evidence to prove its effectiveness?
As we know, these raggers who are self-appointed ‘experts’ in character building of sorts expect total submission from the juniors they try to brutalise, and those who dare resist this bullying are viciously suppressed. To what extent does this compulsory compliance expected from the new students at the beginning of their academic career help them to be better undergrads?
How much more brutality in ragging is to be endured by the new university entrants for “desperate measures” to be called for?
by Susantha Hewa
Features
80th Anniversary of Second World War

One of the most important dates in World War II, is May 9, 1945, when the Soviet red flag with the hammer and sickle emblem was raised over the Reichstag building, the German parliament. This confirmed Germany’s unconditional surrender to the Soviet Union. Since then, 80 years have passed upto May 9, 2025. It is very timely to look back on the past 80 years of history, and to briefly discuss some of the current issues and the future.
Beginning and End of the 2nd World War
World War II began on September 1, 1939, when Nazi Germany attacked Poland. Within a year of the war, the world’s imperialist powers had divided into two camps. Germany was on one side, targeting Europe, Italy Africa, and Japan Asia, while Great Britain, the United States, and France were on the other side of the war.
Within a short time from the start of the war, Germany had conquered many countries in Europe, and on June 22, 1941, Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union joined the anti- Nazi Allies and launched the “Great Patriotic War” to defend the world’s first socialist state, and progressive forces around the world acted in a way that supported the Soviet Union.
Three major battles known as the Battles of Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kursk turned the tide of World War II, shattering Hitler’s dream of capturing Moscow in a few months (4 months) through Operation “Barbarossa” and celebrating the victory from Red Square. By the beginning of 1945, the entire Soviet Union had been liberated from Nazi Germany, and by March 1945, the Soviet Red Army had surrounded Berlin from the east, south, and north, and then surrounded the entire city, surrendering the German forces, ending the European War of World War II on May 9.
World War II was a major war in which 61 countries, representing 89% of the world’s population participated, and the total number of deaths in this war was 50 million, of which 25-30 million were Soviet citizens. The Soviet Red Army, which ended the Great War for the Liberation of Europe on May 9, 1945, entered the Battle of Manchuria three months later on August 9, 1945, and defeated imperialist Japan. By then, the United States had dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (on August 6 and 9). Thus, the Soviet Union played the major role in defeating the fascist military coalition, including Nazi Germany, during World War II.
Post-World War order
Negotiations, to shape the post-war world order, began while World War II was still ongoing. In talks held in Washington in January-February 1942, in Canada in 1943, later in Moscow, and in Tehran, Iran in November-December 1943, the Soviet Union, the United States, Great Britain, and China agreed to establish an international organisation with the aim of preserving world peace. Later, the Soviet, American and British leaders who met in Yalta in Crimea agreed on the structure of the United Nations, the Security Council, and the veto power, and the United Nations Charter, signed by 50 countries in San Francisco in 1945, came into force on October 24, 1945.
Rise of Socialist world and collapse of colonialism
With the Soviet victory in World War II, the world underwent unprecedented changes. Although Mongolia was the only socialist state other than the Soviet Union at the start of World War II, after that war, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Albania in Eastern Europe also became socialist countries. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam was established in 1945, and in 1947 a socialist state was established in East Germany under the name of the German Democratic Republic. The Chinese Revolution triumphed in 1949, and the Cuban Revolution triumphed in 1959. Thus, the socialist system established in a single country by the October Revolution in 1917 developed into a world system against the backdrop of the unique victory of the Soviet Union in World War II.
Another direct result of the victory in World War II was the collapse of the colonial system. National liberation struggles intensified in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and new independent countries emerged one after another on these continents. In the 25-30 years that followed the end of World War II, the colonial system almost completely collapsed. The United Nations, which began with 50 member states, now has 193 members.
With the end of World War II, working class struggles intensified. Communist parties were formed all over the world. Although the Sri Lankan working people’s movement was in a state of truce during World War II, the war ended in May 1945 and by August it had gone on a general strike. The 8-hour workday, wage boards, holiday systems and monthly salary systems were won through that struggle. The working class movement in this country was able to win many rights, including pension rights, overtime pay, and other rights, through the general strike held in 1946. Although the general strike of 1947 was suppressed, there is no doubt that the British government was shocked by this great struggle. In the elections held in 1947, leftist and progressive groups were elected to parliament in large numbers, and independence with Dominion status was achieved in 1948.
World is in turmoil
Until this era, which is 80 years after the end of World War II, the world has so far managed to prevent another world war. Although there have been no world wars, there have been several major conflicts around the world. The ongoing Middle East conflict over the forced displacement of the Palestinian people, the conflict created by Western powers around Iran, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and the recently escalating Indo-Pakistan conflict are among them. The limited military operation launched by Russia to prevent the NATO organization reaching its borders, has transformed into a battle between Russia and the collective West. But the conflict now seems to have entered a certain path of resolution.
Several parties have launched trade wars that are destabilising the world, perhaps even escalating into a state of war. Thousands of trade sanctions have been imposed against Russia, and the US President has declared a trade war by imposing tariffs on dozens of countries around the world.
Meanwhile, the world has not yet been able to provide a satisfactory solution to the problem of global warming, which has threatened the existence of the entire human race.
The Bretton Woods Organizations (International Monetary Fund and World Bank), which were economic operating institutions established after World War II, have not only failed to lead the world’s economic development, but there is a strong allegation that the guidance of those institutions has exacerbated the economic problems of newly independent countries.
At this time of commemoration of the 80th anniversary of World War II, it is our responsibility to resolve the above problems facing the people of the world and to dedicate ourselves to the future of humanity.
Way forward
Accordingly, a futuristic, new economic order is emerging, and a multipolar world has been formed. The most important point to emphasise here is that the world order that was established after World War II, which encompasses various fields, is a system jointly developed by the great powers that won that war, and the reforms that need to be made in accordance with the demands to change this world order to suit the current reality must be identified collectively. No single country can change these world structures.
People are rallying all over the world for issues related to the survival of the entire human race, such as controlling global warming. New programmes that contribute to the economic development of most countries in the world have been or are being developed. The New Silk Road projects, the BRICS organisation, the New Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization are such programs/new institutions. A global process has been launched to prevent a nuclear war and maintain world peace.
Many of the above-mentioned issues and problems have arisen through imperialist military and economic planning and operations, and therefore, the contradiction between imperialism and the people has become the main contradiction of this era. Therefore, it must be emphasized on the 80th anniversary of the Second World War that the way forward in the world will be through the people’s struggle against imperialism.
by Dr. G. Weerasinghe
General Secretary, Communist
Party of Sri Lanka
Features
New Mayors; 80th Anniversary of VE Day; Prince Harry missteps yet again

This week’s Cry is put together as the voting goes on for mayors of Municipal Councils. Cass is rather confused about this second tier of government, so she googled and here is what she got: “There are currently 29 municipal councils in Sri Lanka. These councils govern the largest cities and first tier municipalities in the country. The local government system also includes 36 urban councils and 276 Pradeshiya Sabhas.” Not that this has made matters clearer to Cass.
She believes that for a small country of 22 m people, we are too heavily governed from above, with a central government and then all these councils and sabhas below. Consider the number employed in them; most underworked and underworking. Another matter is that if you want a matter seen to, regarding property rates, etc., you are most often sent from this Sabha to that council.
This came about with the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lanka Constitution introduced on November 14, 1987, following the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord, which aimed to address the ethnic conflict by granting some autonomy to provincial councils. As Cass believes it was imposed on us by India after the threat expressed by India, instigated by Tamil Nadu, when Prabhakaran in his military childhood, was cornered and almost captured in Vadamarachchi.
India rained parippu on the northern peninsular, demanded no arrests of LTTE; and it was rumoured Indian forces were poised on the southern and south eastern coasts of the subcontinent ready to sail to war to the island below them. PM Rajiv Gandhi came instead; Prez JRJ was constrained to meet, greet and honour him. One rating in a guard of honour which handsome Rajiv inspected, expressed the majority people’s opinion; “We don’t want you here!” After which guards of honour worldwide are kept strictly at a safe distance from the VVIP honoured.
To Cass the most important fact of the election progressing now and its outcome is that she hopes newly elected mayors will insist on the Municipal Councils’ employees doing the work allotted to them: mostly garbage collectors; sprayers against mosquitoes; PHIs inspecting kitchens of eating houses and those in charge of general cleanliness of cities keeping s clean.
Complaints are numerous that roads are dirty, garbage piled up and drains and small waterways clogged so water remains stagnant and thus the rapid spread of most debilitating chikungunya.
May 8 1945 – VE Day
This date marked Victory in Europe. “… after Britain and its allies formally accepted Nazi Germany’s surrender after almost six years of war. At 15.00, the then Prime Minister Winston Churchill announced World War Two in Europe had come to an end.” Allied Forces marched into Germany from west and South and the Russians entered from the north. Hitler committed suicide and the Nazi so far invincible forces were shattered, battered and splintered. It was Emperor Hirohito who surrendered Japan and himself on August 15, 1945, after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings (Aug 6,9).
Thus, this year is the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and Britain brought out its Palace Guards, forces and cheering crowds to celebrate the event, and more to pay homage to veterans still living and extend gratitude to those soldiers, sailors and airmen and women who laid down their lives to save their country. King Charles III was present in a special seating area which had other members of the royal family; politicians and veterans and their families, while some of those who had served in the war rode in open cars to the cheers of the spectators.
The Netherlands and Canada too mounted celebrations. Canada made it a point to pay allegiance to the British Monarch as their head, and Cass feels sure King Charles III reciprocated with acknowledgement. Commented on were video statements Cass heard that this reiteration was for the benefit of Prez Trump with his plans to annex Canada as the 51st State of the US.
Prince of groans and complaints
In the midst of this pageantry and show of British royal family’s unity was Prince Harry cutting a very poor figure of himself, most in an interview given to the BBC after he lost his British Court of Appeal challenge over his security arrangements. “The Duke of Essex, who attended both days of the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice last month, was appealing a ruling dismissing his challenge to the level of police protection he receives in the UK” He was demanding armed security for himself and his family if and when they visit England. This was refused because of his own withdrawal from royal duties, opting not to be a working member of the British Royal Family; and moving to the US to live. Videos Cass watched tore him to pieces on several counts. He said he could not bring his wife and children to Britain. He said he wanted reconciliation but his father would not speak with him. Then the blunder of adding the sentiment that King Charles’ days on earth were numbered. “We don’t know how long he has to live.”
He was very annoyed with a compere of a British late-night show for referring to him as Harry with no Prince or Duke salutation. He and his wife are not allowed to use HRH by King Charles’ orders, but it was said Meghan loves using the title. Here is a straightforward case of wanting and not wanting something, of utter selfishness and gross grasping.
Local news in English
Cass bemoans the fact she is no longer able to watch MTV News First at 6.30 of a morning. MTV late news in English is at 9.00 pm but it was repeated the next morning. Served lots, I am sure. In Cass’ case the TV set is monopolised by the two helpers she has with her. They watch teledramas on various channels all through the late evening almost to midnight. Can she butt in? Never! They need entertainment. So, no local news for her these days until she goes to another TV channel for news in English – few available. She hopes TV One will resume its news relay in English at 6.30 am after the welcome chanting of pirith.
Cassandra wishes everyone and our much-loved country a continuation of the peace of Vesak. Oneness of the people as good persons was demonstrated in the crowds in Kandy recently. Mosques opened their doors wide to let in anyone and everyone come in and sleep. All races supplied food and water. Such unity was not seen before. A propitious sign for the future.
-
Opinion6 days ago
Remembering Dr. Samuel Mathew: A Heart that Healed Countless Lives
-
Business4 days ago
Aitken Spence Travels continues its leadership as the only Travelife-Certified DMC in Sri Lanka
-
Latest News3 days ago
NPP win Maharagama Urban Council
-
Business4 days ago
LinearSix and InsureMO® expand partnership
-
Business2 days ago
John Keells Properties and MullenLowe unveil “Minutes Away”
-
Features6 days ago
Trump’s economic missiles are boomeranging
-
Latest News6 days ago
The Heat index is likely to increase up to ‘Caution level’ at some places in Eastern, Northern, North-central and North-western provinces and in Monaragala and Hambantota districts.
-
Business3 days ago
NDB Bank partners with Bishop’s College to launch NDB Pixel awareness