Two-tongued monsters in wonderland

"I haven’t seen a dog with two tongues but reptiles, lizards in particular. Lizard family is many and varied. Some are small, some are big, some can change colours and camouflage well, some are ferocious and all are predators, the dragons or the monsters being the largest. Taken the cunning, the might and the ferocity of the monsters it is appropriate to change the imagery from two-tongued dogs to two-tongued monsters. In the wonderland these monsters are plenty and the only wonder in the wonderland is the unabated, unpredictable and predatory movement of these monsters.'

by Helasingha Bandara

(October 06, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) In his neighbourhood, my father was famous for his straight-talk and his outrageous outbursts at dishonest people. He used to call them two-tongued dogs. Whenever my father realised that a villager has betrayed his trust he used to shout “you two-tongued dogs, never come to my house again” (Diva deke ballo, ai mage gedara pas paganna epa). Although he was liked by some for his principled life style and generosity, his misjudged straight-talk bred many enemies because the village was full of such two-tongued dogs. Now I realise that the village is the microcosm of a larger entity, the country, that is infested with the so called two-tongued dogs. I am ashamed to be part of such a country.

I haven’t seen a dog with two tongues but reptiles, lizards in particular. Lizard family is many and varied. Some are small, some are big, some can change colours and camouflage well, some are ferocious and all are predators, the dragons or the monsters being the largest. Taken the cunning, the might and the ferocity of the monsters it is appropriate to change the imagery from two-tongued dogs to two-tongued monsters. In the wonderland these monsters are plenty and the only wonder in the wonderland is the unabated, unpredictable and predatory movement of these monsters.

Two tongues enable them to say two diametrically opposing things with ease that others hardly notice it is the same animal talking. Take one big, perhaps the biggest monster in the wonderland. At one place he has said the law applies to everyone equally. The example cited for this good practice was the imprisonment of Sarath Fonseka. He has reiterated that justice should be delivered in equal quantities to everyone irrespective of a person’s educational, social, political, professional or economic status. When people question him why is this equal law absent for his own son who campaigned for the father while in uniform, he remains silent. When the same question is raised about many politicians and other close associates, who are accused of financial irregularities amounting to billions of rupees he maintains silence again. The other tongue may be quietly saying “yes equal enactment of law for everyone except for my family and the buddies, an amazing ability of a two-tongued monster!

Johnston Fernando and Lakshman Senevirathna must have conferred with SF while he was the commander of the army and they were in the opposition, undoubtedly something about the way how Rajapakshas were claiming credit for the war victory only for themselves. Can we not visualise how the pair talked with him with their backs bent and uttering ‘sir’ at every passing second? They must have praised him to heaven with one tongue to earn his trust. How quickly they used the other tongue to betray him when the opportune moment came about? What about the MPs who hurl insults at SF when he tries to address the parliament? With one tongue they and their bosses told us that SF was the best military commander in the world. With the other tongue they say that he was not the best and was unpatriotic. Only in the wonderland you can experience such double talk because it is full of such two-tongued monsters.

Someone wrote an article entitled SF and Rihana. Some parts of the article were written in the first person although the author remained anonymous. He says that he was prepared to run to India if SF came to power .No reason was given as to why Fonseka would have persecuted him. This could well be another assumption similar to that of the much hyped coup to kill the president and his family, the initial allegation before arresting SF. No one was ever charged for the fabricated coup. This means that there was no coup. However this monstrous author with one tongue claims that the threatening of SF during the election campaign to bring some to Bogambara and give evidence against some others in an international tribunal could have been the gravest danger to the nation. It was only a ‘could have been’ and remains dead so far. We hope this author monster would use his other tongue at an opportune moment, perhaps when the tide turns, and say despite the election campaign promise of MR and his cronies to abolish the executive presidency, the gravest danger to democracy and to the existence of a dignified nation they did quite the opposite and this gravest threat still remains intact indeed with more vigour.