[Assam] Re: For Those Who Are Lost in Riverlinking

Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:55:09 -0800

Title: Re: For Those Who Are Lost in Riverlinking
O'Deka:

>In my opinion the posted article was biased but it at least put some semblance >of chronology



*** Biased?

What did you expect?

Did you expect it to be some non-judgemental,insipid, clueless,  both-sides-are-guilty kharkhowa blather :-), a picture of the subject of riverlinking swathed in greys, without any blacks and whites, no rights and no wrongs and thus of no consequence to anybody?

If you did, your expectations here are the problem, not the discussions in the forum.


*** And "semblance of chronology" ? Again, what were you looking for? Date and time stamped, certified transcripts of who said what and when, so that you can look up the records on the web to verify their veracity?


>But I unsubscribed when the ranting and raving became too noisy

*** Tsk, tsk, these ravers and ranters! Where has collegiality gone to?
Where are the objective scientists and engineers delving into deep theories and deliberating on unchallengeable data?

*** Something tells me here that we are using words and phrases to devalue something that we cannot handle, even though we don't know how to do it with persuasive arguments. It is also called SPINNING .


*** There has been a wealth of knowledge in riverlinking the yahoo group, the most substantial that *I* have seen in any forum of this sort so far. But I guess that is visible only to those who are looking for them.


>Did you say recently there is no solution to assam's "flood problem"? I think >there is. It requires cooperation between China and India so that China could >divert the extra water for its use before it hits Assam.


*** Say what Bro :-)? Are you serious or are you pulling my leg? It is very hard to tell right now considering what I read in this post. You will need to explain.

> Happy debating in Riverlinking.

*** do I detect a tinge of sarcasm here :-)??


O' mahanta







At 12:20 PM -0800 1/10/05, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote:
O'Mahanta,
How can you join the club of "lost ones"? You know well where you are heading on the issue of Riverlinking. My post was meant for those who are bamboozled by this debate (that includes me) between a group called GOI who claims to have lots of information but will not share with the public and a group against Riverlinking who is willing to share but does not have any scientific data of its own to convince the public.
In my opinion the posted article was biased but it at least put some semblance of chronology for those who are lost in the sea of information.
I was a participant in the Riverlinking group for a while, right after it started. But I unsubscribed when the ranting and raving became too noisy. The group has every right to voice its opinion but I also have every right to ignore them. That does not make me any wiser or dumber than anyone else.
Did you say recently there is no solution to assam's "flood problem"? I think there is. It requires cooperation between China and India so that China could divert the extra water for its use before it hits Assam. Will you accept such a solution? How about GOI? Assam of course will change ecologically.
Happy debating in Riverlinking.
O'Deka
 
Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

What have the resourceful found in that link that is news that the lost ones are unaware of?

The link's info was put together by Gopal Krishna, the moderator of riverlink yahoo group, where this lost one has been a member for over a year.

Wouldn't it have been more useful to point out what might have been of importance to the discussion in question that  is irrelevant
or missing, instead of being dismissive with an air of authority that the truly wise and well informed are entitled to wear?



A lost one.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------


At 8:06 PM -0800 1/9/05, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote:
Please go to http://mumbai.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/209163.shtml if you want to get a composite picture of what is happening in this riverlinking project.

Dilip
============================================================

Barua25 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BLOCKQUOTE {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } DL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } UL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } OL {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px } LI {    PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px }
That is what I said. As a President he should inspire the people for pursuit of scientific research, implementation of democratic process and all kinds of avenues. But as a President he should be above taking any side either in politics or technology. In fact one does not have to be a scientist to inspire the people to become a scientist. Nehru was not a scientist or engineer, but he inspired the country tremendously and it is due to his vision that we now have the greatest technological institutes in India. Dr. Kalam should concentrate on leaving such an legacy instead of wasting his energy by taking side in a mega project which is yet to be approved to go the drawing board. And moreover, let us keep in mind, a rocket scientist may not necessarily be a good hydrologist. The fact that neither the public nor the press asked him any critical question in Guwahati may be that people and the press have so muc! h respec! t for him as a scientist that they thought how he could be wrong.   
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Chan Mahanta
To: Barua25 ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu
Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 6:40 PM
Subject: [Assam] Re: [riverlink] Presidents, Science and Democracy

Very well said Rajen.


I have only one point of dissent: The President is who he is today, the President, because of the enormous admiration and goodwill of the people that he garnered from his leadership of the Indian rocketry program. Although there is a difference between science and technology, the man on the street looks at him as a man of advanced science. No harm done.  In that, I see nothing wrong in his promoting science education or scientific pursuits or in attempting to inculcate a culture of looking at issues scientifically that is sorely missing in large segments of our society in spite of the well recognized contributions of Indians to the advancement of science. He is eminently poised to do that, and ought to do that from his pulpit as the head of state.


But as you argue very well, he should not be putting his heavy weight on one side or the other on the evaluation and feasibility of the highly controversial riverlinking scheme.

cm












At 5:36 PM -0600 1/9/05, Barua25 wrote:
I fully support Jayanta Bandyopadhyay's views on this issue. The role of the Indian President in our Parliamentary system is that of the head of the nation but without any executive power.  The position is just like that of the Queen in British Parliament. It is an honor and prestige for all of us that an eminent scientist like Dr. Kalam has been elected to this highest positon. But once in that position, he should not act like a technocrat but do his proper job. The President's job is to guide and inspire the country to prosper and progress in the right direction, make sure the executive branch is following the proper democratic process and to assure that the country's image outside is properly received. By the very nature of his position, he should be above party politics and it follows that he should be above science and technology.  If he has any idea for advancement o! ! f the country, he should delegate, delegate and delegate. Otherwise he would not be doing justice to his position. >From the current happening, it is apparent that Dr Kalam, by getting himself involved in technological issue like River Linking Project is doing several things which is not due to the Presidency.

1) First I think he is degrading the very position of the Presidency to which he has been elected to that of a technocrat by taking side in a highly controversial technical mega project the magnitude of which the country has not seen yet and which has not yet been finalised. 

2) He is hampering the very democratic process which he is supposed to uphold. Unless such issues are freely and properly debated in public, we cannot say the merits of such project.  The very question that nobody asked him a single question on his stand on this controversial issue in Guwahati shows that Indian public and the media are either too timid or too embarrassed to to ask such questions to the highest position of the country.  Either way it is the Indian democracy which is at stake.
3) He is also breaking the basic rules of Indian Parliamentary system. It is the role of the Prime Minister, the Head of the Executive branch to try to advance any major project. It is not the President's role.

 
I think Dr Kalam should try to upgrade himself to the President's proper role to which the Indian public have elected him. This he can do by doing the following:
1) He should immediately dis-associate himself from taking any side on this highly controversial mega project of India but rather  should help in the initiation of an open scientific debate on the ILR by inviting Indian and International experts. He should not be too excited as a scientist on the issue but should act as a President and wait for the outcome of the debate. 
2) In his position he can also do such an initiation for future Tsunami warning forecast for the country.
3) It has been reported that in some areas some Dalits are exploited even during Tsunami disaster. It is a shame for the country, and no amount of technological advancement of the country would remove such shame. The Presidents role is to address such issues and bring the country to shame.
4) He should visit the Tsunami devastated countries if he has not done yet. This would project the correct image for the country.

 
The above actions I think will bring back the prestige of the Presidency, a job he was elected to do.
R Barua 

----- Original Message -----
From: Jayanta Bandyopadhyay
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 7:03 AM
Subject: [riverlink] Presidents, Science and Democracy


***********************
No virus was detected in the attachment no filename

Your mail has been scanned by InterScan.
***********-***********


The debate that has emerged on President Kalam's views regarding the
Interlinking of Rivers (ILR), expressed frequently in his speeches, is of
extreme value to the strengthening of democratic polity in India, as much
anywhere else in the world. I admire those who have come forward to uphold
the dignity of the highest office in India. This is to be upheld at any cost
under any circumstances. We have seen unfortunate instances in recent
history of Presidents in other countries themselves being responsible for
causing indignity to their office through their actions. The Watergate
episode is fresh in our memory. As the ultimate custodian of the dignity of
the highest office in their country, the people of the USA came forward to
rehabilitate the dignity of that office.

Our President is a scientist of very high level of competence. However,
while hierarchy has a big respect in governance,  hierarchy has less
significance in science. Otherwise humanity would have remained in the
pre-Copernicun age for ever. Criticism is the tool for the growth of
scientific knowledge. Hierarchy and criticism sometimes do not go together.
I am sure that the scientist in our President is aware of the scientific
criticisms of the ILR being published all over the country. If the President
gets the time to consider them, it may be that the scientist in him would
start questioning either these criticisms or question the received view on
ILR that he has expressed so far.

Many in India have been eagerly asking for more scientific and technical
information on such a mammoth project that needs a gigantic investment.
Promises of sharing scientific and technical details of the ILR have been
made. But they h! ave hardly been kept. I am sure that even the richest
countries in the world, before taking decisions on  projects for which the
investment needed is of the order of their annual GDP, would undertake open
and repeated professional examination of their feasibility.

India is the largest democracy in the world. It's standing in the world of
science is high. So, it will go a long way to strengthen both science and
democracy in India, if our scientist President can respond to the plea of
the millions of the country people that an open scientific debate be
organised to convincingly establish the feasibility or otherwise of the ILR
before any action is taken on this concept/project.  It will be a tremendous
achievement for science and good governance in In! dia, if our President, also
a scientist of internationl repute, could help in the initiation of such an
open scientific debate on the ILR.

Jayanta Bandyopadhyay
Yahoo! Groups Links


_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

Mailing list FAQ:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam

_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

Mailing list FAQ:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

Mailing list FAQ:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam

_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
Assam@pikespeak.uccs.edu
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

Mailing list FAQ:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html
To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam

Reply via email to