Continuing from what C’da posted (who are we to dictate what the Nagas want or
what the Kashmiris want or what Bodos want.) … who are Mahantas to dictate
what Dekas want OR who are Barpetias to dictate what Nalbarias want … drill
down further --- who are Ulubarians to dictate what Uzanbazarians want etc.
On his other comment (Only the incurably pretentious would want to tell them
what they should be happy with), we do know some Naga groups will be happy
with a greater Nagalim including parts of Assam and some Bodo groups , a
Bodoland carved out of Assam. There are other groups which will be happy with
parts of Assam. Are you going to make all these groups happy ?
***********************************************************************
Let's take the ' bottom line to the logical conclusion.
We will have
Dekaland,Kalitaland,Bodoland,Rabhaland,Tiwaland,Dimasaland,Misingland,Islamistan---ad
infinitum.
Now,we have created another 'bottom line'---WHERE WILL 'ULFALAND' FIT
IN THEIR MIDST.
CONFUSION WORSE CONFOUNDED!!!
KJD
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com> wrote:
> The bottom line is:
>
>
>>DO WE REALLY NEED ANY OTHER DEFINITION OF AUTONOMY? A PERFECT EXAMPLE
>>OF A COUNTRY WITHIN A COUNTRY!!!!
>
>
> *** The 'country' does not exist. It is a figment of idle imaginations. If
> it did, it wouldn't be in the shambles it is.
> So the question of a country within a country does not arise.
>
>
> *** The second thing is that who are we to dictate what the Nagas want or
> what the Kashmiris want or what Bodos want.
> Only the incurably pretentious would want to tell them what they should be
> happy with.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2010, at 7:24 PM, kamal deka wrote:
>
>> Take a look at the' Naga- Indian' imbroglio.Article 371A ( the
>> Constitution was amended to accommodate that) provides various
>> safeguards for Nagaland.These include a provision whereby no Act of
>> Parliament in respect of the religious or social practices of
>> Nagas,Naga customary law and procedure,administration of civil and
>> criminal justice involving decisions according to Naga customary law
>> and ownership and transfer of land shall apply to the state.IS THERE
>> ANY REASON,AFTER PROCURING ALL OF THE ABOVE( READ AUTONOMY),WHY NAGA
>> IDENTITY OR CULTURE OR OTHER NAGA INTERESTS SHOULD BE INJURED OR
>> ERODED ?
>> And yet,NSCN proclaimed its motto to be "NAGALAND FOR CHRIST".The NSCN
>> manifesto exclaims that Nagas are " DIFFERENT FROM OTHER INDIANS
>> BECAUSE THEY ARE CHRISTIANS and they could lose their identity " in an
>> ocean of Hindus and other non-christians in India,completely
>> sidestepping the fact that India is a secular state in which freedom
>> of worship is guaranteed by the Constitution.An valid arguement can be
>> made by citing the fact that for every Christian in Nagaland,there are
>> almost 20 elsewhere in the country.The MAR THOMAS CHURCH OF KERALA IS
>> ONE OF THE VERY OLDEST ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD AND IT HAS FLOURISHED FOR
>> 1940 YEARS BECAUSE OF THE TOLERANCE AND RESPECT SHOWN BY THE PEOPLE
>> BELONGING TO OTHER FAITHS.AND IF ASSURANCE WERE NEEDED,THIS IS TO BE
>> FOUND IN THE INCREASE IN NAGALAND'S OWN CHRISTIAN POPULATION SINCE
>> 1947.
>>
>> Now take a look at the custom-made Article 370 which mandates that
>> the applicability of every law of the Indian Parliament to J&K
>> requires i. consultation with the J&K government if the subject matter
>> of the law pertains to defence or external affairs or communications,
>> and ii. concurrence of the J&K government if the law pertains to
>> subjects other than defence or external affairs or communications. No
>> other state in India has such privilege. That is why the Indian Penal
>> Code, the Prevention of Corruption Act and rules framed for the
>> Central Bureau of Investigation are among the several Parliamentary
>> enactments which are simply not in vogue in J&K.
>>
>> As bad as that, if not worse, is the fact that many provisions of the
>> Constitution of India are either i. simply not applicable to J&K state
>> or ii. are applicable to J&K only in a modified form or iii. subsumed
>> by the provisions of the J&K constitution.
>>
>> Further, as in the case a Parliamentary law, application to J&K of a
>> provision of the Indian Constitution requires consultation/consent of
>> the J&K government depending upon the subject of the constitutional
>> provision. Again, no other state in India has such a privilege of
>> saying 'Yes' or 'No' to a constitutional measure.
>>
>> J&K is the only state in India --
>> Where a distinction has been permitted to be made between state
>> citizens (designated as 'permanent residents') and other Indian
>> citizens (who are not 'permanent residents') and where -- contrary to
>> the principles of equality before the law (Article 14), prohibition of
>> discrimination on the ground of place of birth (Article 15) and
>> equality of opportunity in public employment (Article 16), -- laws are
>> permissible to confer special rights and privileges on 'permanent
>> residents' with respect to employment under the state government,
>> acquisition of immovable property in the state, settlement in the
>> state and right to scholarships as well as other state government aid
>>
>> Ø whose area, boundaries and name cannot be altered without the
>> consent of the state government
>>
>> Ø whose legislative assembly has a tenure of six years
>>
>> Ø where no amendment of the Indian constitution shall have effect
>> without consulting/securing concurrence of the state government even
>> in regard to disposition of the state through a treaty with another
>> country
>>
>> Ø whose government's request or concurrence is needed for Delhi
>> to declare emergency for reasons only of internal disturbance in the
>> state (Article 352)
>>
>> Ø where emergency declared under Article 356 can become
>> applicable without suspending the machinery of the state constitution
>>
>> Ø where fiscal emergency cannot be declared (Article 360)
>>
>> Ø where provisions for the Anglo-Indian community and minorities
>> do not apply.
>>
>> DO WE REALLY NEED ANY OTHER DEFINITION OF AUTONOMY? A PERFECT EXAMPLE
>> OF A COUNTRY WITHIN A COUNTRY!!!!
>>
>> KJD
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Ram Sarangapani <assamrs at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> The PM recently made a remark about being open to discussing the issue of
>>> autonomy for Jammu & Kashmir (within the ambit of the Constitution).
>>>
>>> Maybe someone knows, but what exactly is the meaning of 'autonomy' as held
>>> by the PM? By the time politicos & spin masters get through with it,
>>> the meaning of autonomy will look nothing like what the dictionary says.
>>>
>>>
>>> This from the TOI
>>>
>>> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/PM-Manmohans-autonomy-remark-wont-help-solve-Kashmir-problem-Pak/articleshow/6299668.cms
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> assam mailing list
>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> assam mailing list
>> assam at assamnet.org
>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
