C'da, > For a St. Edmunds educated person, you don't read English all that > well, do you :-)?
I have already pled guilty to the lack of comprehension of the language some months ago, so you can't really hold me on that ground :-). And this darn language gets to be more challenging as the days go by. Its gooten so bad, that I am not even embarrassed any more. For this group, ecology/human rights/etc etc seem to be their first concern (not that its a bad idea). I didn't hit on a raw nerve somewhere, did I? Not intentional, I assure you. I was sincerely wanting to know the differences between this group's and your view points on the subject. There does seem to be a difference. --Ram On 6/17/05, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ram: > > > For a St. Edmunds educated person, you don't read English all that > well, do you :-)? > > c-da > > > > > > > > > > At 9:09 PM -0500 6/17/05, Ram Sarangapani wrote: > >****They said in their concensus that large dams 'can only built > >inthe absence of better, ecologically sustainable and > >non-destructiveviable alternatives'. But for that too, they said, > >construction ofsuch dams should be done in full compliance with the > >criteria andguidelines of the World Commission on Dams and other > >national andinternational legal, human rights and environmental > >framework andobligations. They also demanded decommissioning of > >those dams, whichproved damaging.*** > >--AssamTribune > >C'da, > >It looks like these people oppose RL on ecological grounds, and > >wouldbe agreeable to building dams if it meets the World Comm. on > >Damsguidelines. That does not seem to be a bit different from > >yourconcerns, ie. RL would deplete water resources from Assam? > >Anyway just thought this may be of interest to you. > >--Ram_____________________________________Call to shelve project on > >interlinking of riversFrom Ajit Patowary NIRJULI (Arunachal > >Pradesh), June 16 - The four-day Third South AsianForum on Rivers > >and Peoples of the South Asian Solidarity for Riversand Peoples > >(SARP) which connected here today demanded 'immediate andtotal > >cancellation' of Indian project for interlinking of rivers. > >Thedemand has been raised in the light of the revelation in the > >IndianParliament that the report of the National Commission for > >Waterresource Development deemed the paninsular component > >unnecessary andHimalayan component as not feasible because of > >adverse environmentalimpact, said the SARP delegates in their > >consensus. > >About 150 delegates from India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, > >Myanmar,Thailand, Sri Lanka, the Netherlands and Argentina, who took > >part inthe deliberations of the meeting for the past four days, were > >alsounanimous in their opposition to mega dams and described > >suchstructures as 'vicious large dams'. > >They said in their concensus that large dams 'can only built in > >theabsence of better, ecologically sustainable and non-destructive > >viablealternatives'. But for that too, they said, construction of > >such damsshould be done in full compliance with the criteria and > >guidelines ofthe World Commission on Dams and other national and > >internationallegal, human rights and environmental framework and > >obligations. Theyalso demanded decommissioning of those dams, which > >proved damaging. > >While calling for a change in the development paradigm that is > >beingpursued in South Asia for its intensifying flood and > >relatedcatastrophies, the delegates of the forum also laid stress on > >in apositive change in the attitude towards the fresh water bodies. > >Theyalso called for collective participation of the indigenous and > >localpeoples in the nourishment and long-term protection of wetlands. > >The SARP delegates also opposed all moves to privatise water > >andrivers, saying - 'Water is a basic human right'. > >They also demanded urgent formulation of a Himalayan policy by > >thecountries concerned to save the mountain and its environment from > >anyfurther damage caused to them by industrial developments. > >The delegates also extended their whole-hearted support to > >theindigenous peoples' and local communities of the NE region of > >India intheir fight against 'exploitation, human rights violations > >andsubjugation of their dignity, pride and honour to live in > >theirage-old native habitat and to safeguard their rich > >heritage,bio-diversity and natural resources from devastation being > >caused inthe name of economic development'. > >They demanded that the projects involving commercial exploitation > >ofnatural resources in the indigenous peoples' territories and > >localcommunities' vicinities follow a free, prior and informed > >consentpractice making it a mandatory provision to provide free > >space tothese peoples and communities to make their decisions freely. > >Besides, the demand for a South Asia regional Framework Treaty > >ontrans-boundary rivers and their management for regional peace > >andprosperity has also been raised by the forum. The forum in > >twoseparate resolutions demanded measures to install democratic > >policy inBhutan and Nepal. > >_______________________________________________ > >Assam mailing list > >[email protected] > >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 [email protected] 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
