Connect with us

Features

THREATS OF VIOLENCE THE MAIN REPUBLICAN STRATEGY FOR ELECTORAL AND JUDICIAL SUCCESS

Published

on

TRUMP WARNS OF “CHAOS AND BEDLAM”, IN COURT FILING

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

The Iowa Republican caucus, representing the first votes cast in the current presidential election cycle, was held last Monday, in freezing air and wind-chill temperatures. Only 14% of the total Republican electorate cast their votes, 110,000 to a total electorate of 750,000. However, sub-zero temperatures do tend to shrink dimensions of caucuses.

Donald Trump clinched the Iowa presidential nomination by a large margin, winning 56% of the votes cast. DeSantis finished a distant second (21%) to Haley (19%) in a fight for second place. Trump remains the prohibitive favorite to win the Republican nomination in November.

Some relevant, even frightening facts were revealed by the Iowa caucus. One, over two-thirds of Republicans believe the Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. Two, 75% of Republicans believe that Trump will be a fit occupant of the White House, even as a convicted felon.

Three, and perhaps the most sinister, is that rank and file Republican politicians are frightened to speak against Trump. Even his rivals for the presidency, except for Chris Christie, who has since withdrawn his candidacy, hardly criticize him for his criminal behavior. Death threats against those who speak against Trump – political opponents, Republican congressmen and senators, judges, prosecutors, witnesses, journalists, – have, according to the FBI, broken all records in the past three years. Fear, violence, death threats – those are the deadly weapons Trump’s terrorist supporters use to maintain his dominance of the white supremacist cult that is the Republican Party of today.

In fact, last Thursday, in a court filing, Trump warned that “chaos and bedlam” would follow if he is disqualified to contest the 2024 presidency, as the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine Secretary of State have ruled. The grounds for such disqualification are impeccable, according to Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. There is no doubt that Trump was involved in inciting an insurrection against the legally elected government of the United States, which disqualifies him from holding public office in the future.

If, as seems likely, the Republican majority Supreme Court takes the case, it will permit Trump to remain on the ballot, against a strict interpretation of the Constitution. But this is the type of rhetoric Trump uses to incite his cult to violence when he feels things are going against him.

Where election strategies are concerned, Trump uses his tried and proven weapon, racism. With Nikki Haley threatening him in the New Hampshire primary next week, he has begun using her middle name “Nimrata”, as a dog-whistle to his Republican cult, implying that Haley, the daughter of first-generation Indians, is somehow less than “American”. Just as he used President Obama’s middle name “Hussein” to sow doubt about his “Americanness”.

Last Tuesday, Trump was in court, having donned his rapist hat, to find out how much more damages he will be legally required to pay in continuing to defame a woman he has already been convicted of sexually assaulting.

There are many other hats on his rack, representing treason, sedition, espionage, fraud and most of the crimes in the penal code, which he will be forced to don on numerous trial dates till November, dates which will play a major role in his election campaign.

I would like to explain why I keep on writing about the state of US politics with a most partisan, anti-Trump/Republican slant. The primary ethical function of a journalist reporting the news is to research and analyze every aspect of any person or situation, and arrive at an educated, equitable conclusion.

I report the news based on meticulous fact-checking, evidence of actual events with collaborative sources, and audio/video clips available to the public. Unlike Trump’s famous urging, “Believe me. Don’t believe your lying eyes”, my conclusions are based on provable facts.

My unbiased reasoning is that there is no second side to Trump, no redeeming feature whatsoever. He is pure, unadulterated, white trash evil.

I have always been of a liberal bent, which means that I espouse an ideology practiced in every advanced democracy in the world, in which the super-wealthy willingly pay their fair share of taxes, a thriving middle class form the vast majority of the population, and there is a social safety net to provide for the unfortunate and the vulnerable. A nation living the values enshrined in the Christian Bible, as well as in the tenets of every religion and philosophy in the world.

At what cost? The “cost” is an educated and cared-for society with no impairment in innovative productivity or creation of wealth.

Values completely rejected by the current phony Christian Nation Under God, the richest and most hypocritical, holier than thou country in the world where I would be contemptuously dismissed as a Commie.

During my two decades in the US, I have always been a Democrat. I worked at Party offices in Pasadena, CA and Phoenix, AZ, even when I was not qualified to vote. The invaluable functions I carried out in Phoenix in 2008, licking stamps, registering voters and answering telephones in my thick Sri Lankan accent, no doubt played a role in President Obama’s historic presidential victory.

I have been following American politics closely since the Reagan years, when that mediocre movie star and worse president dismantled a thriving middle class by halving the taxes on the super-rich with his famous “Reagonomics”, the much vaunted “trickle-down theory”, which has proved to be successful only for the super-wealthy and the big corporations.

Reagan was succeeded by the one-term older Bush, who waged “Operation Desert Storm” against Iraq, a military operation aimed at expelling Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait.

Both President Saddam Hussein and the Palestinians had accused western colonialists of arbitrarily carving artificial states of Kuwait and Israel after World War II.

Saddam claimed that Kuwait was the 19th province of Iraq. Palestinians had made the equally ridiculous claim to ownership of Palestine, just because they owned 97% of the land and comprised over 90% of its population (Jews numbered less than 10%) in 1947.

Still, the American and European rulers of the world after World War II, had two irrefutable reasons for the creation of both the states of Kuwait and Israel. Kuwait had nearly 10% of the world’s oil reserves, and the Holy Land of Palestine had been promised to the Jews 4,000 years ago by Yahweh, God of the Israelites Himself. What more authentic reasons and title deeds do you need as proof of ownership?

Then we had the younger Bush who was presented the 2000 presidency by the Republican majority Supreme Court, which ordered the termination of the counting of votes in Florida when Bush was ahead. Democrat Al Gore won the national popular vote by over 500,000 votes, but conceded the election to Bush “for the good of the country!” An extraordinarily stupid reason only a Democrat would conceive. Trump has yet to concede an election the Republican Supreme Court ruled he lost over three years ago!

The younger Bush waged an illegal war against Iraq, lying to Congress and the United Nations that Saddam was about to use Weapons of Mass Destruction on his own people, a claim since proved to be entirely false. A war that cost hundreds of thousands of innocent lives and trillions of dollars of taxpayer money. Bush’s reign of error left the nation with a housing crisis and a near recession in 2008, only to be rescued by the brilliance of the administrations of President Obama.

I have deliberately left out Nixon and Watergate, which forced the resignation of a crooked president. Trump’s crimes make Watergate seem like a Jaywalking misdemeanor.

The above digression is intended to illustrate how difficult it has been to recall any acts beneficial to regular, middle-class Americans by Republicans in 50 years of four pre-Trump Republican administrations. Though it must be conceded that all these pre-Trump presidents, possibly bar Nixon, were men who may have been stupid and/or consumed with greed, but they were not entirely evil.

Not so with Trump. The task of searching for two sides in Trump’s moral compass is similar to looking for a non-existent needle in a filthy Republican haystack, an exercise in futility.

Trump’s lie that the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol was a peaceful protest, rather like a tourist visit, a “beautiful day”, provides the greatest danger faced by American democracy. A lie against the evidence of our own eyes, as we saw the violence unfolding of the storming of the Capitol by domestic terrorists brandishing TRUMP and Confederate flags and Nazi Swastikas. An insurrection that left five dead, hundreds seriously wounded, and millions of dollars damage to the Capitol, the seat of American government and one of the most iconic and beautiful buildings in the nation.

This is a lie that has denigrated the integrity of future elections, the cornerstone of American democracy. The peaceful transfer of power may be a thing of the past, with every future election subject to dispute, even a repeat of the violence of January 6, 2021.

President Biden made a most inspiring speech at the historic African Methodist Episcopal Church, in Charleston, South Carolina, on the eve of the third anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection. He concluded his speech with the most important question Americans will face in November:

“Today, we are here to answer the most urgent question of our time. Is Democracy still America’s sacred cause?”

There is no confusion about who Trump is and what he intends to do.

He has shown the world that, in his perverted mind, democracy in the United States has run its course, the US Constitution is outdated and should be terminated. He has laid down publicly his plans, if re-elected, of weaponizing the Department of Justice, exacting retribution on his political opponents, and employing only Trump loyalists in key federal positions.

And, of course, rounding up all illegal immigrants, separating children from their parents, interning them in concentration camps and implementing the greatest deportation program in history.

The real questions facing America today are:

Who are the American people of today? Who are these people who keep pretending to believe that a criminal convicted on multiple felonies and facing trial on many others, including sedition and espionage, would be a suitable occupant of the White House?

Who are these Americans who believe that a criminal who consorts with the dictators of the world, the nation’s adversaries, would be the ideal Leader of the Free World?

Have Americans crossed the thin line to white supremacy, anti-immigrant and anti-Semitic hatred and fascism, as the Germans did in the 1930s?

If Donald Trump wins in November, the Cradle of Democracy would be transformed by a criminal wannabe dictator into an authoritarian kleptocracy, a satellite of Russia. Russia’s Putin will use Trump to achieve his ultimate goals – the illegal annexation of Ukraine and other neighboring European nations.

And the United States will abdicate from the longest lasting military alliance the world has ever seen, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

It will be America First. And America the Most Despised.

When former New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie recently decided to withdraw his candidacy for the 2024 Republican nomination, he said he was disgusted by what had happened at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and the part he had played in that insurrection.

He was reminded of a statement made by Benjamin Franklin, when he was walking the streets of Philadelphia after the Constitution Convention in 1787, a woman asked him, “Mr. Franklin, what kind of government have you given us?”

Franklin replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it”.

November 2024 will provide the answer.



Features

Rethinking post-disaster urban planning: Lessons from Peradeniya

Published

on

University of Peradeniya

A recent discussion by former Environment Minister, Eng. Patali Champika Ranawaka on the Derana 360 programme has reignited an important national conversation on how Sri Lanka plans, builds and rebuilds in the face of recurring disasters.

His observations, delivered with characteristic clarity and logic, went beyond the immediate causes of recent calamities and focused sharply on long-term solutions—particularly the urgent need for smarter land use and vertical housing development.

Ranawaka’s proposal to introduce multistoried housing schemes in the Gannoruwa area, as a way of reducing pressure on environmentally sensitive and disaster-prone zones, resonated strongly with urban planners and environmentalists alike.

It also echoed ideas that have been quietly discussed within academic and conservation circles for years but rarely translated into policy.

One such voice is that of Professor Siril Wijesundara, Research Professor at the National Institute of Fundamental Studies (NIFS) and former Director General of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya, who believes that disasters are often “less acts of nature and more outcomes of poor planning.”

Professor Siril Wijesundara

“What we repeatedly see in Sri Lanka is not merely natural disasters, but planning failures,” Professor Wijesundara told The Island.

“Floods, landslides and environmental degradation are intensified because we continue to build horizontally, encroaching on wetlands, forest margins and river reservations, instead of thinking vertically and strategically.”

The former Director General notes that the University of Peradeniya itself offers a compelling case study of both the problem and the solution. The main campus, already densely built and ecologically sensitive, continues to absorb new faculties, hostels and administrative buildings, placing immense pressure on green spaces and drainage systems.

“The Peradeniya campus was designed with landscape harmony in mind,” he said. “But over time, ad-hoc construction has compromised that vision. If development continues in the same manner, the campus will lose not only its aesthetic value but also its ecological resilience.”

Professor Wijesundara supports the idea of reorganising the Rajawatte area—located away from the congested core of the university—as a future development zone. Rather than expanding inward and fragmenting remaining open spaces, he argues that Rajawatte can be planned as a well-designed extension, integrating academic, residential and service infrastructure in a controlled manner.

Crucially, he stresses that such reorganisation must go hand in hand with social responsibility, particularly towards minor staff currently living in the Rajawatte area.

“These workers are the backbone of the university. Any development plan must ensure their dignity and wellbeing,” he said. “Providing them with modern, safe and affordable multistoried housing—especially near the railway line close to the old USO premises—would be both humane and practical.”

According to Professor Wijesundara, housing complexes built near existing transport corridors would reduce daily commuting stress, minimise traffic within the campus, and free up valuable land for planned academic use.

More importantly, vertical housing would significantly reduce the university’s physical footprint.

Drawing parallels with Ranawaka’s Gannoruwa proposal, he emphasised that vertical development is no longer optional for Sri Lanka.

“We are a small island with a growing population and shrinking safe land,” he warned.

“If we continue to spread out instead of building up, disasters will become more frequent and more deadly. Vertical housing, when done properly, is environmentally sound, economically efficient and socially just.”

Peradeniya University flooded

The veteran botanist also highlighted the often-ignored link between disaster vulnerability and the destruction of green buffers.

“Every time we clear a lowland, a wetland or a forest patch for construction, we remove nature’s shock absorbers,” he said.

“The Royal Botanic Gardens has survived floods for over a century precisely because surrounding landscapes once absorbed excess water. Urban planning must learn from such ecological wisdom.”

Professor Wijesundara believes that universities, as centres of knowledge, should lead by example.

“If an institution like Peradeniya cannot demonstrate sustainable planning, how can we expect cities to do so?” he asked. “This is an opportunity to show that development and conservation are not enemies, but partners.”

As climate-induced disasters intensify across the country, voices like his—and proposals such as those articulated by Patali Champika Ranawaka—underscore a simple but urgent truth: Sri Lanka’s future safety depends not only on disaster response, but on how and where we build today.

The challenge now lies with policymakers and planners to move beyond television studio discussions and academic warnings, and translate these ideas into concrete, people-centred action.

By Ifham Nizam ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Superstition – Major barrier to learning and social advancement

Published

on

At the initial stage of my six-year involvement in uplifting society through skill-based initiatives, particularly by promoting handicraft work and teaching students to think creatively and independently, my efforts were partially jeopardized by deep-rooted superstition and resistance to rational learning.

Superstitions exerted a deeply adverse impact by encouraging unquestioned belief, fear, and blind conformity instead of reasoning and evidence-based understanding. In society, superstition often sustains harmful practices, social discrimination, exploitation by self-styled godmen, and resistance to scientific or social reforms, thereby weakening rational decision-making and slowing progress. When such beliefs penetrate the educational environment, students gradually lose the habit of asking “why” and “how,” accepting explanations based on fate, omens, or divine intervention rather than observation and logic.

Initially, learners became hesitant to challenge me despite my wrong interpretation of any law, less capable of evaluating information critically, and more vulnerable to misinformation and pseudoscience. As a result, genuine efforts towards social upliftment were obstructed, and the transformative power of education, which could empower individuals economically and intellectually, was weakened by fear-driven beliefs that stood in direct opposition to progress and rational thought. In many communities, illnesses are still attributed to evil spirits or curses rather than treated as medical conditions. I have witnessed educated people postponing important decisions, marriages, journeys, even hospital admissions, because an astrologer predicted an “inauspicious” time, showing how fear governs rational minds.

While teaching students science and mathematics, I have clearly observed how superstition acts as a hidden barrier to learning, critical thinking, and intellectual confidence. Many students come to the classroom already conditioned to believe that success or failure depends on luck, planetary positions, or divine favour rather than effort, practice, and understanding, which directly contradicts the scientific spirit. I have seen students hesitate to perform experiments or solve numerical problems on certain “inauspicious” days.

In mathematics, some students label themselves as “weak by birth”, which creates fear and anxiety even before attempting a problem, turning a subject of logic into a source of emotional stress. In science classes, explanations based on natural laws sometimes clash with supernatural beliefs, and students struggle to accept evidence because it challenges what they were taught at home or in society. This conflict confuses young minds and prevents them from fully trusting experimentation, data, and proof.

Worse still, superstition nurtures dependency; students wait for miracles instead of practising problem-solving, revision, and conceptual clarity. Over time, this mindset damages curiosity, reduces confidence, and limits innovation, making science and mathematics appear difficult, frightening, or irrelevant. Many science teachers themselves do not sufficiently emphasise the need to question or ignore such irrational beliefs and often remain limited to textbook facts and exam-oriented learning, leaving little space to challenge superstition directly. When teachers avoid discussing superstition, they unintentionally reinforce the idea that scientific reasoning and superstitious beliefs can coexist.

To overcome superstition and effectively impose critical thinking among students, I have inculcated the process to create a classroom culture where questioning was encouraged and fear of being “wrong” was removed. Students were taught how to think, not what to think, by consistently using the scientific method—observation, hypothesis, experimentation, evidence, and conclusion—in both science and mathematics lessons. I have deliberately challenged superstitious beliefs through simple demonstrations and hands-on experiments that allow students to see cause-and-effect relationships for themselves, helping them replace belief with proof.

Many so-called “tantrik shows” that appear supernatural can be clearly explained and exposed through basic scientific principles, making them powerful tools to fight superstition among students. For example, acts where a tantrik places a hand or tongue briefly in fire without injury rely on short contact time, moisture on the skin, or low heat transfer from alcohol-based flames rather than divine power.

“Miracles” like ash or oil repeatedly appearing from hands or idols involve concealment or simple physical and chemical tricks. When these tricks are demonstrated openly in classrooms or science programmes and followed by clear scientific explanations, students quickly realise how easily perception can be deceived and why evidence, experimentation, and critical questioning are far more reliable than blind belief.

Linking concepts to daily life, such as explaining probability to counter ideas of luck, or biology to explain illness instead of supernatural causes, makes rational explanations relatable and convincing.

Another unique example that I faced in my life is presented here. About 10 years ago, when I entered my new house but did not organise traditional rituals that many consider essential for peace and prosperity as my relatives believed that without them prosperity would be blocked.  Later on, I could not utilise the entire space of my newly purchased house for earning money, largely because I chose not to perform certain rituals.

While this decision may have limited my financial gains to some extent, I do not consider it a failure in the true sense. I feel deeply satisfied that my son and daughter have received proper education and are now well settled in their employment, which, to me, is a far greater achievement than any ritual-driven expectation of wealth. My belief has always been that a house should not merely be a source of income or superstition-bound anxiety, but a space with social purpose.

Instead of rituals, I strongly feel that the unused portion of my house should be devoted to running tutorials for poor and underprivileged students, where knowledge, critical thinking, and self-reliance can be nurtured. This conviction gives me inner peace and reinforces my faith that education and service to society are more meaningful measures of success than material profit alone.

Though I have succeeded to some extent, this success has not been complete due to the persistent influence of superstition.

by Dr Debapriya Mukherjee
Former Senior Scientist
Central Pollution Control Board, India ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Race hate and the need to re-visit the ‘Clash of Civilizations’

Published

on

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: ‘No to race hate’

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has done very well to speak-up against and outlaw race hate in the immediate aftermath of the recent cold-blooded gunning down of several civilians on Australia’s Bondi Beach. The perpetrators of the violence are believed to be ardent practitioners of religious and race hate and it is commendable that the Australian authorities have lost no time in clearly and unambiguously stating their opposition to the dastardly crimes in question.

The Australian Prime Minister is on record as stating in this connection: ‘ New laws will target those who spread hate, division and radicalization. The Home Affairs Minister will also be given new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate and a new taskforce will be set up to ensure the education system prevents, tackles and properly responds to antisemitism.’

It is this promptness and single-mindedness to defeat race hate and other forms of identity-based animosities that are expected of democratic governments in particular world wide. For example, is Sri Lanka’s NPP government willing to follow the Australian example? To put the record straight, no past governments of Sri Lanka initiated concrete measures to stamp out the evil of race hate as well but the present Sri Lankan government which has pledged to end ethnic animosities needs to think and act vastly differently. Democratic and progressive opinion in Sri Lanka is waiting expectantly for the NPP government’ s positive response; ideally based on the Australian precedent to end race hate.

Meanwhile, it is apt to remember that inasmuch as those forces of terrorism that target white communities world wide need to be put down their counterpart forces among extremist whites need to be defeated as well. There could be no double standards on this divisive question of quashing race and religious hate, among democratic governments.

The question is invariably bound up with the matter of expeditiously and swiftly advancing democratic development in divided societies. To the extent to which a body politic is genuinely democratized, to the same degree would identity based animosities be effectively managed and even resolved once and for all. To the extent to which a society is deprived of democratic governance, correctly understood, to the same extent would it experience unmanageable identity-bred violence.

This has been Sri Lanka’s situation and generally it could be stated that it is to the degree to which Sri Lankan citizens are genuinely constitutionally empowered that the issue of race hate in their midst would prove manageable. Accordingly, democratic development is the pressing need.

While the dramatic blood-letting on Bondi Beach ought to have driven home to observers and commentators of world politics that the international community is yet to make any concrete progress in the direction of laying the basis for an end to identity-based extremism, the event should also impress on all concerned quarters that continued failure to address the matters at hand could prove fatal. The fact of the matter is that identity-based extremism is very much alive and well and that it could strike devastatingly at a time and place of its choosing.

It is yet premature for the commentator to agree with US political scientist Samuel P. Huntingdon that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world but events such as the Bondi Beach terror and the continuing abduction of scores of school girls by IS-related outfits, for instance, in Northern Africa are concrete evidence of the continuing pervasive presence of identity-based extremism in the global South.

As a matter of great interest it needs mentioning that the crumbling of the Cold War in the West in the early nineties of the last century and the explosive emergence of identity-based violence world wide around that time essentially impelled Huntingdon to propound the hypothesis that the world was seeing the emergence of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Basically, the latter phrase implied that the Cold War was replaced by a West versus militant religious fundamentalism division or polarity world wide. Instead of the USSR and its satellites, the West, led by the US, had to now do battle with religion and race-based militant extremism, particularly ‘Islamic fundamentalist violence’ .

Things, of course, came to a head in this regard when the 9/11 calamity centred in New York occurred. The event seemed to be startling proof that the world was indeed faced with a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that was not easily resolvable. It was a case of ‘Islamic militant fundamentalism’ facing the great bulwark, so to speak, of ‘ Western Civilization’ epitomized by the US and leaving it almost helpless.

However, it was too early to write off the US’ capability to respond, although it did not do so by the best means. Instead, it replied with military interventions, for example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which moves have only earned for the religious fundamentalists more and more recruits.

Yet, it is too early to speak in terms of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Such a phenomenon could be spoken of if only the entirety of the Islamic world took up arms against the West. Clearly, this is not so because the majority of the adherents of Islam are peaceably inclined and want to coexist harmoniously with the rest of the world.

However, it is not too late for the US to stop religious fundamentalism in its tracks. It, for instance, could implement concrete measures to end the blood-letting in the Middle East. Of the first importance is to end the suffering of the Palestinians by keeping a tight leash on the Israeli Right and by making good its boast of rebuilding the Gaza swiftly.

Besides, the US needs to make it a priority aim to foster democratic development worldwide in collaboration with the rest of the West. Military expenditure and the arms race should be considered of secondary importance and the process of distributing development assistance in the South brought to the forefront of its global development agenda, if there is one.

If the fire-breathing religious demagogue’s influence is to be blunted worldwide, then, it is development, understood to mean equitable growth, that needs to be fostered and consolidated by the democratic world. In other words, the priority ought to be the empowerment of individuals and communities. Nothing short of the latter measures would help in ushering a more peaceful world.

Continue Reading

Trending