[Assam] From the AT

[Alpana B. Sarangapani]

http://www.assamtribune.com/scripts/details.asp?id=oct0507\City
 
City to join global campaign against poverty on Oct 17By A City Correspondent 
GUWAHATI, Oct 4 – Students of Guwahati will take part in a worldwide campaign 
against poverty to be jointly launched by The Art of Living and United Nations 
Millennium Campaign (UNMC) on October 17.The joint effort is aimed at 
eradicating poverty and inching towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 
set by the United Nations. The MDGs include achieving universal primary 
education, promotion of gender equality and empowering women, reducing child 
mortality, improving maternal health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other 
diseases, ensuring sustainability and developing a global partnership for 
development.Art of Living’s North East coordinator Pinki Hazarika said that 
along with the rest of the world, the students of the city will take the pledge 
to eradicate poverty by standing up for two minutes.The ‘Stand Up’ campaign 
would seek to mobilise public opinion to support the UNMC’s initiative to 
achieve a poverty-free world by 2015. The Art of Living has taken the lead to 
mobilise over four million people across the globe to support the vision to 
defeat poverty.The Art of Living is going to organize several public events in 
over 100 countries for people from all walks of life to take the pledge. The 
‘Stand Up’ events would be held all over the world, from the busiest square in 
the world, New York’s Times Square to the smallest school in the tsunami-struck 
Ache province in Indonesia. The events would be in different forms such as 
simple public gatherings, music concerts, group dances, rallies, carnivals, 
street theatres and satsangs. The idea behind the ‘Stand Up’ campaign is to 
remind the world leaders of their promise of achieving the MDGs and urge them 
to show the necessary political will. The rich countries would be enjoined to 
provide more aid, cancel debts and practice fair trade, whereas the poor 
countries would be requested to save the lives of the poorest citizens and 
achieve real transparency and accountability in utilization of resources.“In 
the North East we are mainly targeting the schools,” said Pinki. Schools with 
more than 500 students in the city are being approached for the forthcoming 
programme.The Art of Living, North East has requested the people of the region 
to come forward and make the world a more beautiful place to live.The ensuing 
event is a follow-up to an alliance finalised in May 2007 between the Art of 
Living and UNMC.











 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

“In order to make spiritual progress you must be patient like a tree and humble 
like a blade of grass”
- Lakshmana
 
 
_
Boo! Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare!
http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmailnews___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

[Assam] Rat Race

[umesh sharma]

http://www.flex888.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/strangeimage.gif

from an IIT students webpage on orkut

Umesh




 





Umesh Sharma

Washington D.C. 

1-202-215-4328 [Cell]

Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005

http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/index.html (Edu info)

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/ (Management Info)




www.gse.harvard.edu/iep  (where the above 2 are used )




http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/
   
-
 For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

[Assam] SOLIDARITY FAST IN SUPPORT OF IROM SHARMILA

[umesh sharma]

Parijat Academy www.parijatacademy.org
They went there to join in  Solidarity Fast with Irom Sharmila.
   
  Thanks and regards
   
  Uttam Teron
  Parijat Academy
  Pamohi, P.O. Garchuk, Guwahati-781035, Assam, India
   
  

  SOLIDARITY FAST IN SUPPORT OF IROM SHARMILA
 



Dear friends,
This solidarity fast is in support of Irom Sharmila, who is in her 7th year of 
fast with a demand to repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (for more 
information see below). This solidarity fast will be organized in Imphal, 
Manipur where Sharmila is presently confined to the Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital, 
from 13th September, 2007, and will go on for 3-5 days. We invite more people 
from all over India and even outside to come and join this solidarity fast for 
as many days as you can. This is the least we can do to support one of the 
longest solitary peaceful struggles of our times which saddens our hearts but 
doesn't move the authorities a bit. We are confident that the truth will emerge 
victorious one day.  

Looking forward to seeing you in Imphal on 13th September. If you cannot come 
to Imphal you may observe the fast at your own place. For more information 
please contact Sharmila's brother Singhjeet at 09863151540 or Sapamcha 
Kangleipal, President of Manipur Forward Youth Front at 09862096539. 
Love, 
Sandeep Pandey, Lucknow, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Faisal Khan, Delhi, 9313106745 
Biju Barboruah, Guwahati, 9435198562 


  News in Hindu 
Call for Action 
For more information   
Individuals sign up here for the solidarity fast:

Full  Name:
 [input]  *
  City of Residence: 
 [input]  *
  Country of Residence:
 [input]  *
  Country of Origin: 
 [input]  *
  Email Address: 
   [input]  *   Organizational Affiliation (if any): 
   [input]Number of days you can  fast?
  1 day 2 day 3 day 4 day 5 day *
  Comments: 
   [input]Keep me informed
   [input]   


 [input]  

* fields are mandatory. 
   
  Individuals and organizations endorsing this campaign sign up here:

Name of Organization/Individual:

 [input]  *

  Name of Contact Person: 

 [input]  *

  Email Address: 

   [input]  *   

  Address: 

   [input]  
  City: 

   [input]  
  Country:  

   [input]  
  Comments: 

   [input]  
  Keep me informed

   [input] 
  


 [input]  

* fields are mandatory. 

   
Privacy Policy  Email addresses are required to verify the authenticity of 
the petition. They are kept strictly confidential and will not be disclosed to 
anybody.   List of Supporters  Click here to view the list of individuals on 
fast.
Click here to view the list of Organizations and Individuals endorsing the 
campaign. 










  

Umesh Sharma

Washington D.C. 

1-202-215-4328 [Cell]

Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005

http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/index.html (Edu info)

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/ (Management Info)




www.gse.harvard.edu/iep  (where the above 2 are used )




http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/
   
-
 For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

[Assam] From Tehelka

[Chan Mahanta]

Look at the very last paragraph, with my highlighting.

While I like to hope for it to happen, having 
observed desi-citizenry, or more precisely its 
intelligentsia, one that holds the powers for 
change,  it would care less. So good luck and say 
a prayer  to your favorite god, for that has a 
far better chance ofd delivering than 
desi-intelligentsia or its 'rising middle-class' 
involvement or care.


cm









 Welfare's Willing Executioners

Cholera's not all that's killing people in 
India's hunger capital. Staggering corruption in 
the Orissa NREGS has done the poor enough harm 
too, says PARSHURAM RAI


OF THE 1.4 billion people who face chronic hunger 
world over, one in three is an Indian. Every 
third Indian goes to bed without food; more than 
10,000 of our compatriots die of hunger each day. 
So massive a scale of abject poverty is 
unconscionable in a fast-growing economy with a 
rising number of dollar millionaires. When 
confronted with such disparity, the traditional 
explanation of poverty in terms of low incomes 
and a poor economy becomes increasingly 
irrelevant. It is difficult to disagree with Lord 
Meghnad Desai when he says that economic poverty 
in India is inextricably linked to the poverty of 
politics - bad governance and corruption. It is 
not the poor state of the economy or the lack of 
funds that is killing about 40 lakh Indians every 
year, it is the cancer of corruption and the 
colonial character of the Indian bureaucracy.

Dregs of the NREGS
Rs 733 crore was spent
on the NREGS in Orissa
in 2006-07


Of this, the CEFS
report claims that
NREGS executing
officials siphoned
off over Rs 500 crore

The money would have
bought 10 lakh
families two meals a
day for six months

Rural Development
Minister Raghuvansh
Prasad Singh
recently denied the
report any veracity

However, on September
17, a day after his
previous statement,
Singh said the CAG
would probe the
'alleged irregularities'

India currently has four major schemes in 
operation that aim at fighting hunger and food 
insecurity: the Public Distribution System (PDS), 
the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), 
the Mid-day Meal Scheme (MDM) and, most 
importantly, the National Rural Employment 
Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). Very few Indians would 
ever have to go without food if we could just 
ensure that these schemes were corruption-free, 
in particular the PDS and the NREGS. But what is 
their actual performance on the ground? According 
to a recent report on the Ministry of Consumer 
Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, "Last year 
alone, Rs 11,336.98 crore worth of food grain 
that the government is supposed to distribute to 
the needy at subsidised prices found its way into 
the market illegally. Every year, India's poor 
are cheated out of 53.3 percent of wheat and 39 
percent of rice meant for themŠ There is 
largescale diversion of PDS grain across IndiaŠ 
Exceptions apart, the poor in India simply can't 
trust the government to deliver them food 
supplies." (The Times of India, September 17, 
2007)


One of the most horrifying examples of the 
governing class' brutal theft of money meant for 
the poor is to be found in Orissa, which is among 
the poorest states in the country. A survey I 
headed conducted by the Delhibased Centre for 
Environment and Food Security (CEFS) across 100 
Orissa villages has found that of the Rs 733 
crore spent under the NREGS during 2006-07, over 
Rs 500 crore, or around 70 percent, has been 
siphoned off and misappropriated by officials of 
the executing agencies. Moreover, as against the 
claims of the Orissa government that no needy 
household in the state's 19 NREGS districts had 
been denied wage employment and that each such 
household had been given an average of 57 days of 
wage employment under the NREGS, the CEFS study 
has revealed that a large number of impoverished 
households had been denied not only jobs but even 
job cards, and that not more than five days' wage 
employment on average had been given to any of 
these families in the 19 districts.


To put Rs 500 crore of siphoned NREGS funds in 
perspective, this amount of money would have 
given about 90 days of wage employment to about 
10 lakh severely impoverished families. Each of 
these families would have got Rs 5,000 as wages. 
This amount would have given each family two 
subsistence meals a day for four to six months; 
it would have supplied each family one meal a day 
for an entire year. The scale of this callousness 
takes it beyond the level of just another 
financial scam - the Orissa bureaucracy has 
robbed 10 lakh chronically hungry families of a 
meal a day for a whole year.


DURING THE last two months, hundreds of adivasis 
in Rayagada, Koraput and Kalahandi districts have 
died due to "consumption of contaminated water 
and rotten food" and "hunger and severe food 
insecurity". The CEFS study, however, leads one 
to believe that the cholera epidemic that is 
killing hundreds of adivasis in

Re: [Assam] What a response!!

[Chan Mahanta]

Dear Hazarika:


I am sorry that you , a well educated man,  a pillar of your society, 
is unable to deal with a very simple
issue:

***  Why can't Utpal or yourself, or anybody else, are able 
to tell us what objective they had?
Why can't you admit the truth with the COURAGE of your convictions?

Not that it is a secret. Anyone with half a working brain can 
see right thru it. And if it was not
so, and had a more honorable objective, you and a bunch of 
others here in this forum
would have come out baying for my blood, for having the 
temerity to doubt the
inquisitors'  integrity. They have NOT, only because they can't.


And if you all had a good explanation, you would have come 
out swinging, telling the world
how wrong I am in suggesting that a reasonable person could 
have concluded that Utpal's
AIM was not solely for  proving ULFA wrong and devalue their 
goals, and that they had
no intention  of engaging in a DIALOGUE, just an inquisition.


But I' will give you one more chance to redeem yourself.  We all make 
bad decisions every now and then. So, even though you have been 
evading the points I raised,  you can correct yourself, and tell us, 
that Utpal's ploy was not a constructive one. A far better one would 
have been to engage in a sincere DIALOGUE, of give and take; ask, 
answer and vice-versa.

The choice is yours.

Best regards.

m

PS: I take all your accusations, wild and sad as they are,  in good 
humor, and hold absolutely no  hard feelings.





At 6:30 AM +0530 10/5/07, Shantikam Hazarika wrote:
>I am not willing to get into an exercise of explaining the rainbow to
>the blind.
>If you do not have answers to the questions, just keep quiet, unless
>you have been appointed to deflect the main issues. It seems they have
>already run away from the filed, leaving their ilks of you to hold the
>illegitimate baby.
>Or, is it that you already know they do not have the answers or are
>not capable of answering legitimate questions which any normal human
>being would like to ask?
>
>BTW Mahanta, if you are thinking that I am trying to reach out to
>those whose apologist you are, forget about it, Frankly I have no time
>like you to split hairs and develop my mastery of deflection. You have
>time, go ahead, from your comfort zone, what else can you do?
>Shantikam Hazarika
>
>On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>  But levity aside, allow  me ask you and other wise folks once more, IF
>>  Utpal's aim was merely to  assert that ULFA 's aims have no validity, WHY on
>>  earth does he or his fan club need Ruby Bhuyan or whoever  to answer
>>  anything?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  They already know they are right and ULFA is wrong.  They can go right on
>>  with their monologs as some of our friends do right here in assamnet with
>>  the pomposity and certitude  of God himself.
>>
>>
>>  Am I spinning here?  Is it an irrelevant question?  An unreasonable one? One
>>  designed to obfuscate and muddy some higher truths?
>>  Tell us H.  Go right ahead and mince no words. Educate us.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  >AIM of GOALS , what a fantastically creative phrase. Frankly I have come
>>  across this phrase for the first >time in my life.
>>
>>
>>  *** Sorry H, but conveniently cut and pasted  words of mine to devalue what
>>  I wrote does not rescue your sinking effort  here. I wrote:
>>
>>
>>  "What  is missing from the exercises is a rudimentary  element of
>>  AIM of GOALS. "
>>
>>
>>  I did however miss the comma between the two.  That I remain guilty of.  But
>>  to attempt to use that bit of typo, or solecism if you prefer, is riskier
>>  than groping at straws, won't you think?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  > If one has beliefs, one must be ready to face INQUISITIONS.
>>
>>
>>  Is that your best argument here H?
>>
>>
>>  Good sermon, I am sure. But you need a flock to listen to it.  I may be off
>>  the wall here, but somehow I get this feeling that ULFA is not about to make
>>  a beeline to listen to or pay heed to your sermon. What do you think?
>  >
>>
>>  BTW, the meaning of the word INQUISITION, as you understand it and use it in
>>  "---that we did not subject the leaders to frequent inquisitions,"  is NOT
>>  what it is. If you look it up, you will know that  it means: A rigorous,
>>  harsh, interrogation, one that disregards the privacy rights, feelings etc.
>>  of the target. One that does not allow the target to ask questions, one
>>  sided inquiry.
>>
>>
>>  Therefore, had you attempted to subject them to your 'inquisition', the
>>  results might have been less than what you have hoped for.  Just like it
>>  won't work with ULFA today . To disregard it merely displays one's delusion,
>>  that's all.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>  >
>>  At 10:53 PM +0530 10/3/07, shantika

Re: [Assam] What a response!!

[Shantikam Hazarika]

I am not willing to get into an exercise of explaining the rainbow to
the blind.
If you do not have answers to the questions, just keep quiet, unless
you have been appointed to deflect the main issues. It seems they have
already run away from the filed, leaving their ilks of you to hold the
illegitimate baby.
Or, is it that you already know they do not have the answers or are
not capable of answering legitimate questions which any normal human
being would like to ask?

BTW Mahanta, if you are thinking that I am trying to reach out to
those whose apologist you are, forget about it, Frankly I have no time
like you to split hairs and develop my mastery of deflection. You have
time, go ahead, from your comfort zone, what else can you do?
Shantikam Hazarika

On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> But levity aside, allow  me ask you and other wise folks once more, IF
> Utpal's aim was merely to  assert that ULFA 's aims have no validity, WHY on
> earth does he or his fan club need Ruby Bhuyan or whoever  to answer
> anything?
>
>
>
>
> They already know they are right and ULFA is wrong.  They can go right on
> with their monologs as some of our friends do right here in assamnet with
> the pomposity and certitude  of God himself.
>
>
> Am I spinning here?  Is it an irrelevant question?  An unreasonable one? One
> designed to obfuscate and muddy some higher truths?
> Tell us H.  Go right ahead and mince no words. Educate us.
>
>
>
>
> >AIM of GOALS , what a fantastically creative phrase. Frankly I have come
> across this phrase for the first >time in my life.
>
>
> *** Sorry H, but conveniently cut and pasted  words of mine to devalue what
> I wrote does not rescue your sinking effort  here. I wrote:
>
>
> "What  is missing from the exercises is a rudimentary  element of
> AIM of GOALS. "
>
>
> I did however miss the comma between the two.  That I remain guilty of.  But
> to attempt to use that bit of typo, or solecism if you prefer, is riskier
> than groping at straws, won't you think?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > If one has beliefs, one must be ready to face INQUISITIONS.
>
>
> Is that your best argument here H?
>
>
> Good sermon, I am sure. But you need a flock to listen to it.  I may be off
> the wall here, but somehow I get this feeling that ULFA is not about to make
> a beeline to listen to or pay heed to your sermon. What do you think?
>
>
> BTW, the meaning of the word INQUISITION, as you understand it and use it in
> "---that we did not subject the leaders to frequent inquisitions,"  is NOT
> what it is. If you look it up, you will know that  it means: A rigorous,
> harsh, interrogation, one that disregards the privacy rights, feelings etc.
> of the target. One that does not allow the target to ask questions, one
> sided inquiry.
>
>
> Therefore, had you attempted to subject them to your 'inquisition', the
> results might have been less than what you have hoped for.  Just like it
> won't work with ULFA today . To disregard it merely displays one's delusion,
> that's all.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 10:53 PM +0530 10/3/07, shantikam hazarika wrote:
> What a wonderful deflection from the main issue. Chandan Mahanta, you are
> really a master at it. If there is a Nobel equivalent, I would strongly
> recommend you for the same.
> Poor Utpal. I am sure he, and many like him, have been itching to ask them
> some questions which are lurking in the minds of almost all Assamese people.
> He got a chance and asked them, in plain, straight forward English language,
> without any ambiguity. So, attack his "design" in asking these questions,
> since, frankly, they and their sympathisers have no answers.
>
> I remember, in one of the seminars organised by the students of the Assam
> Institute of Management on Assam's current critical problems, Sanjib
> Sabhapandit used a curious phrase: "Don't intellectualise Assam's problems."
> Well, here we are seeing an effort to intellectualise even simple and honest
> queries to those who seem to have solutions to Assam's problems.
>
> No one in Assam is quite clear as to what these people are fighting for. A
> large number of the people of Assam believe that there is a big nexus that
> sustains them, that they are anything but revolutionaries, and when
> opportunities are provided to them to justify their actions, they run away
> and leave it to people like Chandan mahanta, ensconced in the middle of the
> USA, to obfuscate the issues on their behalf. This is indeed a gem:
> Quote
> Where is the ORDINARY integrity expected of  the intelligentsia here, if one
> can misuse the English word under the circumstances? The sincerity of
> purpose?
> It is obvious that those who consider themselves the 'educated' and'wise',
> unlike ULFA, and  who parade around wearing the garbs of  pillars-of society
> do not think so and thus the eloquent outpo

Re: [Assam] slept like a baby?

[shantikam hazarika]

What about a background check? 
And what is the guarantee that the questioner is not a halfwit?
Shantikam 

> Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 08:23:19 -0700> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: 
> assam@assamnet.org> Subject: [Assam] slept like a baby?> > Good one dilip-da 
> > > allow me to add a few more ...> > I know the answer but why don't you 
> give a try?> I know the answer but I why shall tell you?> Is the baby Indian? 
> If so, he/she does not deserve an> answer?> > Best one can be - A baby 
> can never wake up every> two hours ... must be GOI is disturbing him.> > > 
> >>Why is it that people say they "slept like a baby"> when babies wake up 
> like every two hours?> > >>Now, let's dissect this.> >>1. Is the questioner 
> sincere in asking?> >>2. Is he a logical thinker?> >>3. Does he just want to 
> break with tradition?> >>4. Is he trying to rattle you?> >>5. Is he trying to 
> get your attention?> >>6. Would you call him a non-conformist?> >>7. Would 
> you call his question trash?> >>8. Is there a hidden AGENDA?> >>9. Could he 
> be an Assamese?> >>10. Does he fit your image of an ULFA leader? :-)> > Your 
> resonse will be highly appreciated. There is no> hidden agenda on my side.> 
> Dilip Deka> > > > 
> >
>  Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! 
> http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 > > > > 
> ___> assam mailing list> 
> assam@assamnet.org> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_
Get the new Windows Live Messenger!
http://get.live.com/messenger/overview___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Ram:

One of the MOST fundamental norms of a CIVILIZED, democratic society 
is  that you don't go shoot up your people who are demonstrating or 
are holding a civil protest, EVEN if it gets unruly.


You arrest them for breaking laws, if that is what it is, then give 
them a fair trial, punish if proven guilty or forever hold your peace.


Tell us, show us, HOW many 'insurgents', starting from the Naga 
rebellions, to the Mizois, to the ULFA and all the others, across 
India,  were give a fair trial, and imprisoned if warranted, or set 
free?


And compare that to all the hundreds and thousands that India shoots 
up every year in the name of keeping the peace, or kill in cold blood 
in FAKE encounters, or simply throw in prison year after year without 
trials.


Before insurgency took place, it started as mass civilian protests in 
Assam, but soon escalated when the

army was brought in to shoot protesters.


How many were given a trial in a court of law Ram? Then, or now ?

And THAT is your desi-demokrasy.















At 10:58 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
 >What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE, who are driven to 
armed uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which they 
are >deprived of


C'da,

And what you might be missing is that those killed by insurgents, 
are people too.
Where is the humanity that we seem to all wear on our sleeves and 
preach all the time? These people were also fathers,
mothers, brothers, sisters and children. Were the Biharis expendable 
or were the children of Dhemaji

cannon fodder?

The other day, you raised the question whether Sanjoy Ghosh's life 
was more valuable than the thousands of insurgents killed?
Well, all life is precious - but more precious ones are the innocent 
ones and innocent here means the countless, everyday common 
soft-target people milling around, going about their own business. 
Ghosh is a classic example of someone who was doing what very few 
people are willing to do - helping the poor and needy in Assam. And 
of course, who really cares about him? He is gone... good riddance. 
right?


 >That India has remained buried in its  effort to squelch these 
voices militarily for over half a century,

 >annihilating hundreds of thousands of what it >calls their very OWN people

C'da, how would you want the GOI to react when some of its people 
take to murder and

mayhem of innocent people? Treat them with kid gloves?

Yes, insurgents also need to be treated fairly and with decency. But 
that ought to be extended the other way too.


--Ram


.





On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE, who are driven to 
armed uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which they are 
deprived of.



In a real, functioning democracy, run by people who BELIEVE in it, 
not merely wave as a facade at those whose approval they so seek, 
there would have been ways to find a peaceful solution to such 
disaffections.



That India has remained buried in its  effort to squelch these 
voices militarily for over half a century, annihilating hundreds of 
thousands of what it calls their very OWN people , and now with 
connivance of a brutal military dictatorship in Burma,  points to 
its  fake commitments to real democratic values and its 
intelligentsia's cluelessness and absence from its governance.

































At 10:07 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

 > A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 
'insurgents' , as if



 >they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not >Shans, not Manipuris,

 >not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.



C'da,



I doubt if any sane government will just allow insurgents to do what 
they please - hole up in neighboring countries and blow up their 
citizens. To that end, India is frequently reminded of  the 
"humanity" that insurgents frequently dole out to Indian citizens in 
Assam, Manipur etc.




You tout the  'just cause' on behalf of insurgents, of their 
sacrifices, their aspirations etc.


Fair enough. Similarly, India and Indians also think that their 
cause is just, and that the Indian democracy (at least thats what 
they think - even if you disagree) is being hijacked, its citizens 
killed, and  insurgents are causing a reign of terror among common 
citizens in Assam




That is why, whatever the causes/aspirations are, in the end, peace 
is what both sides need to aspire for.


If "peace" is not on the table nothing else matters.



--Ram





10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 >He is upset that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the 
help of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.











 A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' 
, as if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not Manipuris, 
not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.











That is what d

[Assam] Burmese cause

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

Ram-da

That is an excellent write-up.   We must remember that
te world is not black and white.
Unfortunately,  some people always try to paint India
in Black ignoring the grey or white sides of it.

While US is defininitely a well formed democracy,  to
say that democracy does not exist in India or to make
a mockery of it,  is naivity at best

Same goes true with Education and other points.

Apart from the points you cited,  US has not gone
through a fracture causing a permanent and lingering
enemy neighbour.  

If you notice,  just one 9/11 caused US to come up
with a number of new laws and restrictive practices
... compare this to numerous terrorist attacks India
has and is going through.

There are good and bad   and there are lot for India
to do.  But to say that India is dying or tottering
does not help in anyway





>>KC,

>>Just want to clear a few things (IMHO).

>>A democracy does NOT mean that the country should
not protect itself against
anti-social elements, specially those accompanied by
violence.

>>The BPP and say, the KKK are both extreme examples
of US society. But US
Federal law is very clear:

>>The US does allow free speech and all that, but that
privelege is taken away
once some thresholds are crossed: for example
violence. That is why the KKK
is tolerated, but if they violent, the Govt. would not
allow that.

>>The other thing is that, the practice of democracy
in the US is much more
developed than in India. India has had only 60 years
compared to that of the
US. India's experiment and its experience is still in
its infancy, and there
will be errors, and sputterings, but overall it seems
to done a much better
job than expected. All this inspite of constant
gnawing at this young
democracy by insurgents and their supporters in the NE
and Kasmir, and by
its ever-so-friendly neighbors.

>>So, in essence, comparisons with the US an either
side is not really
conducive. When I say either side, I mean either to
hold it up as a model or
to poke holes at. Comparisons as model is lousy
because the US has had many,
many more years of experience. And the comparisons are
apples to
oranges. And seeking to poke holes in  the US
experience is also not
correct, because even the US is still perfecting the
art of democracy, and
there will be problems along the way.

>>But, this much is true, no democracy will stand by
idle when its citizens
are wontonly killed and harassed, and its territorial
integrity is
threatened by violence - even if they happen to come
from its own citizens.

>>You might remember, the US took 'military action' on
a number of cases. To
cite a couple, there is the Ruby Ridge and David
Koresh. In both cases, the
Federal Govt. thought life & liberty were at risk, and
so it decided to end
them by force (if necessary).

--Ram da

On 10/4/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty  wrote:
>
> Ramda
>
> Check this ... how "functioning democracy, run by
> people who BELIEVE in it"  treats separatists.
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
>
> This is just one example  just google and you
will
> get many more examples.
>
> But then again  " Moi g* khaale toi-w khaabi
> neki?"  :-)
>
> >
> > >What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE,
> > who are driven to armed
> > uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS,
which
> > they are >deprived of
> >
> > C'da,
> >
> > And what you might be missing is that those killed
> > by insurgents, are people
> > too.
> > Where is the humanity that we seem to all wear on
> > our sleeves and preach all
> > the time? These people were also fathers,
> > mothers, brothers, sisters and children. Were the
> > Biharis expendable or were
> > the children of Dhemaji
> > cannon fodder?
> >
> > The other day, you raised the question whether
> > Sanjoy Ghosh's life was more
> > valuable than the thousands of insurgents killed?
> > Well, all life is precious - but more precious
ones
> > are the innocent ones
> > and innocent here means the countless, everyday
> > common soft-target people
> > milling around, going about their own business.
> > Ghosh is a classic example
> > of someone who was doing what very few people are
> > willing to do - helping
> > the poor and needy in Assam. And of course, who
> > really cares about him? He
> > is gone... good riddance. right?
> >
> > >That India has remained buried in its  effort to
> > squelch these voices
> > militarily for over half a century,
> > >annihilating hundreds of thousands of what it
> > >calls their very OWN people
> >
> > C'da, how would you want the GOI to react when
some
> > of its people take to
> > murder and
> > mayhem of innocent people? Treat them with kid
> > gloves?
> >
> > Yes, insurgents also need to be treated fairly and
> > with decency. But that
> > ought to be extended the other way too.
> >
> > --Ram
> >
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >  What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are
PEOPLE,
> > who are driven to armed
> > > uprising, in t

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

KC,

Just want to clear a few things (IMHO).

A democracy does NOT mean that the country should not protect itself against
anti-social elements, specially those accompanied by violence.

The BPP and say, the KKK are both extreme examples of US society. But US
Federal law is very clear:

The US does allow free speech and all that, but that privelege is taken away
once some thresholds are crossed: for example violence. That is why the KKK
is tolerated, but if they violent, the Govt. would not allow that.

The other thing is that, the practice of democracy in the US is much more
developed than in India. India has had only 60 years compared to that of the
US. India's experiment and its experience is still in its infancy, and there
will be errors, and sputterings, but overall it seems to done a much better
job than expected. All this inspite of constant gnawing at this young
democracy by insurgents and their supporters in the NE and Kasmir, and by
its ever-so-friendly neighbors.

So, in essence, comparisons with the US an either side is not really
conducive. When I say either side, I mean either to hold it up as a model or
to poke holes at. Comparisons as model is lousy because the US has had many,
many more years of experience. And the comparisons are apples to
oranges. And seeking to poke holes in  the US experience is also not
correct, because even the US is still perfecting the art of democracy, and
there will be problems along the way.

But, this much is true, no democracy will stand by idle when its citizens
are wontonly killed and harassed, and its territorial integrity is
threatened by violence - even if they happen to come from its own citizens.

You might remember, the US took 'military action' on a number of cases. To
cite a couple, there is the Ruby Ridge and David Koresh. In both cases, the
Federal Govt. thought life & liberty were at risk, and so it decided to end
them by force (if necessary).

--Ram da

On 10/4/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ramda
>
> Check this ... how "functioning democracy, run by
> people who BELIEVE in it"  treats separatists.
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
>
> This is just one example  just google and you will
> get many more examples.
>
> But then again  " Moi g* khaale toi-w khaabi
> neki?"  :-)
>
> >
> > >What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE,
> > who are driven to armed
> > uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which
> > they are >deprived of
> >
> > C'da,
> >
> > And what you might be missing is that those killed
> > by insurgents, are people
> > too.
> > Where is the humanity that we seem to all wear on
> > our sleeves and preach all
> > the time? These people were also fathers,
> > mothers, brothers, sisters and children. Were the
> > Biharis expendable or were
> > the children of Dhemaji
> > cannon fodder?
> >
> > The other day, you raised the question whether
> > Sanjoy Ghosh's life was more
> > valuable than the thousands of insurgents killed?
> > Well, all life is precious - but more precious ones
> > are the innocent ones
> > and innocent here means the countless, everyday
> > common soft-target people
> > milling around, going about their own business.
> > Ghosh is a classic example
> > of someone who was doing what very few people are
> > willing to do - helping
> > the poor and needy in Assam. And of course, who
> > really cares about him? He
> > is gone... good riddance. right?
> >
> > >That India has remained buried in its  effort to
> > squelch these voices
> > militarily for over half a century,
> > >annihilating hundreds of thousands of what it
> > >calls their very OWN people
> >
> > C'da, how would you want the GOI to react when some
> > of its people take to
> > murder and
> > mayhem of innocent people? Treat them with kid
> > gloves?
> >
> > Yes, insurgents also need to be treated fairly and
> > with decency. But that
> > ought to be extended the other way too.
> >
> > --Ram
> >
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >  What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE,
> > who are driven to armed
> > > uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS,
> > which they are deprived of.
> > >
> > >
> > > In a real, functioning democracy, run by people
> > who BELIEVE in it, not
> > > merely wave as a facade at those whose approval
> > they so seek, there would
> > > have been ways to find a peaceful solution to such
> > disaffections.
> > >
> > >
> > > That India has remained buried in its  effort to
> > squelch these voices
> > > militarily for over half a century, annihilating
> > hundreds of thousands of
> > > what it calls their very OWN people , and now with
> > connivance of a brutal
> > > military dictatorship in Burma,  points to its
> > fake commitments to real
> > > democratic values and its intelligentsia's
> > cluelessness and absence from its
> > > governance.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >

[Assam] Burmese cause

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

Ramda 

Check this ... how "functioning democracy, run by
people who BELIEVE in it"  treats separatists.  


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party

This is just one example  just google and you will
get many more examples.

But then again  " Moi g* khaale toi-w khaabi
neki?"  :-)

> 
> >What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE,
> who are driven to armed
> uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which
> they are >deprived of
> 
> C'da,
> 
> And what you might be missing is that those killed
> by insurgents, are people
> too.
> Where is the humanity that we seem to all wear on
> our sleeves and preach all
> the time? These people were also fathers,
> mothers, brothers, sisters and children. Were the
> Biharis expendable or were
> the children of Dhemaji
> cannon fodder?
> 
> The other day, you raised the question whether
> Sanjoy Ghosh's life was more
> valuable than the thousands of insurgents killed?
> Well, all life is precious - but more precious ones
> are the innocent ones
> and innocent here means the countless, everyday
> common soft-target people
> milling around, going about their own business.
> Ghosh is a classic example
> of someone who was doing what very few people are
> willing to do - helping
> the poor and needy in Assam. And of course, who
> really cares about him? He
> is gone... good riddance. right?
> 
> >That India has remained buried in its  effort to
> squelch these voices
> militarily for over half a century,
> >annihilating hundreds of thousands of what it
> >calls their very OWN people
> 
> C'da, how would you want the GOI to react when some
> of its people take to
> murder and
> mayhem of innocent people? Treat them with kid
> gloves?
> 
> Yes, insurgents also need to be treated fairly and
> with decency. But that
> ought to be extended the other way too.
> 
> --Ram
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >  What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE,
> who are driven to armed
> > uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS,
> which they are deprived of.
> >
> >
> > In a real, functioning democracy, run by people
> who BELIEVE in it, not
> > merely wave as a facade at those whose approval
> they so seek, there would
> > have been ways to find a peaceful solution to such
> disaffections.
> >
> >
> > That India has remained buried in its  effort to
> squelch these voices
> > militarily for over half a century, annihilating
> hundreds of thousands of
> > what it calls their very OWN people , and now with
> connivance of a brutal
> > military dictatorship in Burma,  points to its 
> fake commitments to real
> > democratic values and its intelligentsia's
> cluelessness and absence from its
> > governance.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 10:07 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
> >
> > > A! The use of language to deny the
> humanity of 'insurgents' , as
> > if
> >
> > >they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not >Shans, not
> Manipuris,
> >
> > >not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so
> fair game.
> >
> >
> >
> > C'da,
> >
> >
> >
> > I doubt if any sane government will just allow
> insurgents to do what they
> > please - hole up in neighboring countries and blow
> up their citizens. To
> > that end, India is frequently reminded of  the
> "humanity" that insurgents
> > frequently dole out to Indian citizens in Assam,
> Manipur etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > You tout the  'just cause' on behalf of
> insurgents, of their sacrifices,
> > their aspirations etc.
> >
> > Fair enough. Similarly, India and Indians also
> think that their cause is
> > just, and that the Indian democracy (at least
> thats what they think - even
> > if you disagree) is being hijacked, its citizens
> killed, and  insurgents are
> > causing a reign of terror among common citizens in
> Assam
> >
> >
> >
> > That is why, whatever the causes/aspirations are,
> in the end, peace is
> > what both sides need to aspire for.
> >
> > If "peace" is not on the table nothing else
> matters.
> >
> >
> >
> > --Ram
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 10/4/07,* Chan Mahanta* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > >He is upset that the GOI would reach across the
> border to seek the help
> > of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  A! The use of language to deny the
> humanity of 'insurgents' , as
> > if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not
> Manipuris, not
> > Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair
> game.
> >
> >
> 
=== message truncated ===>
___
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
>
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
> 



  

Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html

_

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

>What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE, who are driven to armed
uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which they are >deprived of

C'da,

And what you might be missing is that those killed by insurgents, are people
too.
Where is the humanity that we seem to all wear on our sleeves and preach all
the time? These people were also fathers,
mothers, brothers, sisters and children. Were the Biharis expendable or were
the children of Dhemaji
cannon fodder?

The other day, you raised the question whether Sanjoy Ghosh's life was more
valuable than the thousands of insurgents killed?
Well, all life is precious - but more precious ones are the innocent ones
and innocent here means the countless, everyday common soft-target people
milling around, going about their own business. Ghosh is a classic example
of someone who was doing what very few people are willing to do - helping
the poor and needy in Assam. And of course, who really cares about him? He
is gone... good riddance. right?

>That India has remained buried in its  effort to squelch these voices
militarily for over half a century,
>annihilating hundreds of thousands of what it >calls their very OWN people

C'da, how would you want the GOI to react when some of its people take to
murder and
mayhem of innocent people? Treat them with kid gloves?

Yes, insurgents also need to be treated fairly and with decency. But that
ought to be extended the other way too.

--Ram


.





On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE, who are driven to armed
> uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which they are deprived of.
>
>
> In a real, functioning democracy, run by people who BELIEVE in it, not
> merely wave as a facade at those whose approval they so seek, there would
> have been ways to find a peaceful solution to such disaffections.
>
>
> That India has remained buried in its  effort to squelch these voices
> militarily for over half a century, annihilating hundreds of thousands of
> what it calls their very OWN people , and now with connivance of a brutal
> military dictatorship in Burma,  points to its  fake commitments to real
> democratic values and its intelligentsia's cluelessness and absence from its
> governance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 10:07 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> > A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' , as
> if
>
> >they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not >Shans, not Manipuris,
>
> >not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.
>
>
>
> C'da,
>
>
>
> I doubt if any sane government will just allow insurgents to do what they
> please - hole up in neighboring countries and blow up their citizens. To
> that end, India is frequently reminded of  the "humanity" that insurgents
> frequently dole out to Indian citizens in Assam, Manipur etc.
>
>
>
> You tout the  'just cause' on behalf of insurgents, of their sacrifices,
> their aspirations etc.
>
> Fair enough. Similarly, India and Indians also think that their cause is
> just, and that the Indian democracy (at least thats what they think - even
> if you disagree) is being hijacked, its citizens killed, and  insurgents are
> causing a reign of terror among common citizens in Assam
>
>
>
> That is why, whatever the causes/aspirations are, in the end, peace is
> what both sides need to aspire for.
>
> If "peace" is not on the table nothing else matters.
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
> 10/4/07,* Chan Mahanta* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >He is upset that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the help
> of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' , as
> if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not Manipuris, not
> Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That is what desi-demokray obviously stands for and is defended so
> staunchly, uncritically by its devotees.  And my pointing it out causes the
> discomfiture it does.
>
>
>
>
> Again, small wonder why desi-demokrasy's quality remains in the dismal
> condition it does, and gets worse by the day.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 8:50 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> >This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand
> the dig if any.
>
>
>
> Oh!. I understood the dig alright (I've known C'da for many years now:)).
>
>
>
> But what he fails to undersatand is that the GOI may on the one hand seek
> help from the military Junta with a couple of goals in mind ( (a) to flush
> insurgents and (b) to curtail drug trafficking into India from Burma ) and
> on the other hand condemn the Burmese Govt. for its attrocities on the
> monks.
>
>
>
> Is this hypocritical on the part of the GOI? Obviously, the GOI does not
> think the peaceful protesting monks are the same as militant insur

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

What you miss Ram is that INSURGENTS are PEOPLE, who are driven to 
armed uprising, in the pursuit of POLITICAL RIGHTS, which they are 
deprived of.


In a real, functioning democracy, run by people who BELIEVE in it, 
not merely wave as a facade at those whose approval they so seek, 
there would have been ways to find a peaceful solution to such 
disaffections.


That India has remained buried in its  effort to squelch these voices 
militarily for over half a century, annihilating hundreds of 
thousands of what it calls their very OWN people , and now with 
connivance of a brutal military dictatorship in Burma,  points to its 
fake commitments to real democratic values and its intelligentsia's 
cluelessness and absence from its governance.

















At 10:07 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

 > A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' , as if
 >they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not >Shans, not Manipuris,
 >not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.

C'da,

I doubt if any sane government will just allow insurgents to do what 
they please - hole up in neighboring countries and blow up their 
citizens. To that end, India is frequently reminded of  the 
"humanity" that insurgents frequently dole out to Indian citizens in 
Assam, Manipur etc.


You tout the  'just cause' on behalf of insurgents, of their 
sacrifices, their aspirations etc.
Fair enough. Similarly, India and Indians also think that their 
cause is just, and that the Indian democracy (at least thats what 
they think - even if you disagree) is being hijacked, its citizens 
killed, and  insurgents are causing a reign of terror among common 
citizens in Assam


That is why, whatever the causes/aspirations are, in the end, peace 
is what both sides need to aspire for.

If "peace" is not on the table nothing else matters.

--Ram


10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 >He is upset that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the 
help of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.







 A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' 
, as if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not Manipuris, 
not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.







That is what desi-demokray obviously stands for and is defended so 
staunchly, uncritically by its devotees.  And my pointing it out 
causes the discomfiture it does.



Again, small wonder why desi-demokrasy's quality remains in the 
dismal condition it does, and gets worse by the day.























At 8:50 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

 >This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not 
understand the dig if any.





Oh!. I understood the dig alright (I've known C'da for many years now:)).



But what he fails to undersatand is that the GOI may on the one hand 
seek help from the military Junta with a couple of goals in mind 
( (a) to flush insurgents and (b) to curtail drug trafficking into 
India from Burma ) and on the other hand condemn the Burmese Govt. 
for its attrocities on the monks.




Is this hypocritical on the part of the GOI? Obviously, the GOI does 
not think the peaceful protesting monks are the same as militant 
insurgents.




And I understand this has struck a 'raw nerve' in C'da. He is upset 
that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the help of 
Burma/Bhutan with the insurgency problem.




--Ram



On 10/4/07, uttam borthakur 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:


People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence 
over the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are 
the people of India and its government the same thing? I am amazed 
at the naivete. This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani 
did not understand the dig if any.




Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Heh-heh!




 That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.




Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off 
diplomatic relations?








What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:




Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to 
Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help 
India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last 
month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for 
weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.









 But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).







 >Yes, India is a democracy,




 Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of 
these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.








 > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also 
known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of 
Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most 
would >love India wiped out. And what about Ba

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

 > A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' , as
if
>they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not >Shans, not Manipuris,
>not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.

C'da,

I doubt if any sane government will just allow insurgents to do what they
please - hole up in neighboring countries and blow up their citizens. To
that end, India is frequently reminded of  the "humanity" that insurgents
frequently dole out to Indian citizens in Assam, Manipur etc.

You tout the  'just cause' on behalf of insurgents, of their sacrifices,
their aspirations etc.
Fair enough. Similarly, India and Indians also think that their cause is
just, and that the Indian democracy (at least thats what they think - even
if you disagree) is being hijacked, its citizens killed, and  insurgents are
causing a reign of terror among common citizens in Assam

That is why, whatever the causes/aspirations are, in the end, peace is what
both sides need to aspire for.
If "peace" is not on the table nothing else matters.

--Ram


10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  >He is upset that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the help
> of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' , as
> if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not Manipuris, not
> Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That is what desi-demokray obviously stands for and is defended so
> staunchly, uncritically by its devotees.  And my pointing it out causes the
> discomfiture it does.
>
>
> Again, small wonder why desi-demokrasy's quality remains in the dismal
> condition it does, and gets worse by the day.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 8:50 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> >This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand
> the dig if any.
>
>
>
> Oh!. I understood the dig alright (I've known C'da for many years now:)).
>
>
>
> But what he fails to undersatand is that the GOI may on the one hand seek
> help from the military Junta with a couple of goals in mind ( (a) to flush
> insurgents and (b) to curtail drug trafficking into India from Burma ) and
> on the other hand condemn the Burmese Govt. for its attrocities on the
> monks.
>
>
>
> Is this hypocritical on the part of the GOI? Obviously, the GOI does not
> think the peaceful protesting monks are the same as militant insurgents.
>
>
>
> And I understand this has struck a 'raw nerve' in C'da. He is upset that
> the GOI would reach across the border to seek the help of Burma/Bhutan with
> the insurgency problem.
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
> On 10/4/07,* uttam borthakur* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence over
> the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are the people
> of India and its government the same thing? I am amazed at the naivete. This
> is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand the dig if
> any.
>
>
>
> *Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*>* wrote:
>
> Heh-heh!
>
>
>
>
>  That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.
>
>
>
>
> Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off diplomatic
> relations?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:
>
>
>
>
> *Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar
> Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
> Significantly,Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet 
> visit to Myanmar
> to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the
> outcome of his visit.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Yes, India is a democracy,
>
>
>
>
>  Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of these
> terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known
> of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba.
> What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would >love India wiped
> out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, lies
> with:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar
> Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
> Significantly,Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet 
> visit to Myanmar
> to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the
> outcome of his visit.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"
>
>
>
>
> *** Nice try!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> >What leaves me curious a

Re: [Assam] World roars on Burma - ads tomorrow

[Ram Sarangapani]

>India has been forging close military ties , conducting >joint >exercises
and the like, with the hope of squelching >the sovereignty >aspirations of
the Nagas , the >Manipuris, the Assamese and so forth >militarily, >together
with that of the Shan people of Northwestern >Myanmar who have been fighting
for independence from >Myanmar >rule.

C'da,

Is this a surprise? India has always held that there are some insurgents
among Indians in Assam, Manipur etc, etc. It considers the actions by them
as anti-India.

If that is its position, why would GOI change just because you or others may
want it. Why would India NOT seek the help of Burma?

Also it helps little when you try to compare the Burmese Junta with the
Indian Govt.

--Ram




On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:34:16 -0500
> To: "Ricken Patel - Avaaz.org " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: World roars on Burma - ads tomorrow
>
> Cc:
>
> X-Attachments:
>
> Hello:
>
>
> We signed the petition and moved it on.
>
>
> But I see a glaring omission here on WHO matter in the scheme of things,
> in influencing the Myanmar's military bosses: INDIA.
>
>
> India has been forging close military ties , conducting joint exercises
> and the like, with the hope of squelching the sovereignty aspirations of the
> Nagas , the Manipuris, the Assamese and so forth militarily, together with
> that of the Shan people of Northwestern Myanmar who have been fighting for
> independence from Myanmar rule.
>
>
> I hope you all acknowledge it and make an issue. and not give India a free
> pass, while fingering China.
>
>
>
> Chandan Mahanta
>
>
> An Ethnic Assamese American
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 7:02 PM -0700 10/2/07, Ricken Patel - Avaaz.org wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  Dear friends,
>
> Our emergency petition to stop the crackdown on peaceful protesters in
> Burma is exploding, with* nearly 500,000 signers from every nation of the
> world*. But the situation in Burma remains desperate, with reports 
> of*hundreds of monks being massacred
> * and tortured. Burma's rulers have also killed and expelled international
> journalists, cutting off global media coverage of their cruelty.
>
> China is still the key - the country with the most power to halt the
> Burmese generals' reign of terror. We're delivering our message this week
> with a massive ad campaign in major newspapers, beginning Thursday with 
> a*full page ad in the Financial Times worldwide
> *, and in the* South China Morning Post*. The strength of the ad comes
> from the number of petition signers listed - can we reach our goal of 1
> million signatures this week? The link to sign the petition and view the ad
> is below, forward this email to all your friends and family!
>
> http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_burma/u.php
>
> China continues to provide key economic and military support to Burma's
> dictatorship, but it has been openly critical of the crackdown. Now we need
> the government to match words with actions.* Our ad paints a powerful
> moment of choice for China in its relationship with the world* - will it
> be a responsible and respected member of the global community, or will it be
> associated with tyranny and oppression?
>
> *People power, on the streets of Burma, and around the world, can triumph
> over tyranny. Our strength is in our numbers, spread the word!*
>
> With hope and determination,
>
> Ricken, Paul, Ben, Graziela, Pascal, Galit and the whole Avaaz team.
>
> For the best local reporting on the situation in Burma, try these links:
>
> http://www.irrawaddy.org
>
> http://www.mizzima.com
>
> _
>
> [-525.374034-]
> You are getting this message because you signed "Stand with the Burmese
> Protesters " on 2007-10-2 using
> the email address [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your email address,
> language settings, or other personal information, go 
> here
>
> Please add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your address book to make sure you keep
> receiving emails from Avaaz, or go here to 
> unsubscribe PROTECTED]&b=297&v=927%E2%8C%A9=en>
> .
>
> Avaaz.org  is staffed by a global team of campaigners
> operating on 3 continents. We have administrative offices in London, New
> York, and Rio de Janeiro. Please direct mail to our NY office at 260 Fifth
> Avenue, 9th floor, New York, NY 10001 U.S.A.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
___
assam mailing list

[Assam] World roars on Burma - ads tomorrow

[Chan Mahanta]

Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:34:16 -0500
To: "Ricken Patel - Avaaz.org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: World roars on Burma - ads tomorrow
Cc:
X-Attachments:

Hello:

We signed the petition and moved it on.

But I see a glaring omission here on WHO matter in the scheme of 
things, in influencing the Myanmar's military bosses: INDIA.


India has been forging close military ties , conducting joint 
exercises and the like, with the hope of squelching the sovereignty 
aspirations of the Nagas , the Manipuris, the Assamese and so forth 
militarily, together with that of the Shan people of Northwestern 
Myanmar who have been fighting for independence from Myanmar rule.


I hope you all acknowledge it and make an issue. and not give India 
a free pass, while fingering China.



Chandan Mahanta

An Ethnic Assamese American














At 7:02 PM -0700 10/2/07, Ricken Patel - Avaaz.org wrote:





 Dear friends,

Our emergency petition to stop the crackdown on peaceful protesters 
in Burma is exploding, with nearly 500,000 signers from every 
nation of the world. But the situation in Burma remains desperate, 
with reports of hundreds of monks being massacred and tortured. 
Burma's rulers have also killed and expelled international 
journalists, cutting off global media coverage of their cruelty.


China is still the key - the country with the most power to halt 
the Burmese generals' reign of terror. We're delivering our message 
this week with a massive ad campaign in major newspapers, beginning 
Thursday with a full page ad in the Financial Times worldwide, and 
in the South China Morning Post. The strength of the ad comes from 
the number of petition signers listed - can we reach our goal of 1 
million signatures this week? The link to sign the petition and 
view the ad is below, forward this email to all your friends and 
family!


http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_burma/u.php

China continues to provide key economic and military support to 
Burma's dictatorship, but it has been openly critical of the 
crackdown. Now we need the government to match words with actions. 
Our ad paints a powerful moment of choice for China in its 
relationship with the world - will it be a responsible and 
respected member of the global community, or will it be associated 
with tyranny and oppression?


People power, on the streets of Burma, and around the world, can 
triumph over tyranny. Our strength is in our numbers, spread the 
word!


With hope and determination,

Ricken, Paul, Ben, Graziela, Pascal, Galit and the whole Avaaz team.

For the best local reporting on the situation in Burma, try these links:

http://www.irrawaddy.org

http://www.mizzima.com

_

 [-525.374034-]
You are getting this message because you signed 
"Stand with the Burmese 
Protesters" on 2007-10-2 using the email address 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your email address, language 
settings, or other personal information, 
go 
here


Please add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your address book to make sure you 
keep receiving emails from Avaaz, or 
go 
here to unsubscribe.


Avaaz.org is staffed by a global team of campaigners operating on 3 
continents. We have administrative offices in London, New York, and 
Rio de Janeiro. Please direct mail to our NY office at 260 Fifth 
Avenue, 9th floor, New York, NY 10001 U.S.A.


___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Re: [Assam] Rediff: Mahatma Gandhi's audio autobiography

[umesh sharma]

seems like a good effort but billing system is very strange. Instead of 
allowing download and charging a price ($1.25) like for most audio things now 
on internet --  they charge for shipping ($15) shipping is 12 times the cost of 
the audio autobiography. Ofcours, I have read the book many times, had it on my 
self since college days. Louis Fisher's biography was also interesting and a 
different perspective.

Umesh

umesh sharma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
http://www.karaditales.com/gandhi/rediff.htm



Umesh Sharma

Washington D.C. 

1-202-215-4328 [Cell]

Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005

http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/index.html (Edu info)

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/ (Management Info)




www.gse.harvard.edu/iep  (where the above 2 are used )




http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/

-
  Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Try it now.


Umesh Sharma

Washington D.C. 

1-202-215-4328 [Cell]

Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005

http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/index.html (Edu info)

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/ (Management Info)




www.gse.harvard.edu/iep  (where the above 2 are used )




http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/
   
-
 For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

He is upset that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the 
help of Burma/Bhutan with the >insurgency problem.




 A! The use of language to deny the humanity of 'insurgents' 
, as if they are NOT people.  Not Nagas, not Shans, not Manipuris, 
not Oxomiyas---they are just INSURGENTS and so fair game.




That is what desi-demokray obviously stands for and is defended so 
staunchly, uncritically by its devotees.  And my pointing it out 
causes the discomfiture it does.


Again, small wonder why desi-demokrasy's quality remains in the 
dismal condition it does, and gets worse by the day.












At 8:50 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
 >This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not 
understand the dig if any.


Oh!. I understood the dig alright (I've known C'da for many years now:)).

But what he fails to undersatand is that the GOI may on the one hand 
seek help from the military Junta with a couple of goals in mind 
( (a) to flush insurgents and (b) to curtail drug trafficking into 
India from Burma ) and on the other hand condemn the Burmese Govt. 
for its attrocities on the monks.


Is this hypocritical on the part of the GOI? Obviously, the GOI does 
not think the peaceful protesting monks are the same as militant 
insurgents.


And I understand this has struck a 'raw nerve' in C'da. He is upset 
that the GOI would reach across the border to seek the help of 
Burma/Bhutan with the insurgency problem.


--Ram


On 10/4/07, uttam borthakur 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:


People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence 
over the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are 
the people of India and its government the same thing? I am amazed 
at the naivete. This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani 
did not understand the dig if any.



Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Heh-heh!


 That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.


Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off 
diplomatic relations?





What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:



Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to 
Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help 
India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last 
month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for 
weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.







 But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).




 >Yes, India is a democracy,


 Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of 
these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.





 > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also 
known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of 
Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most 
would >love India wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not 
very India friendly?





 The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, 
lies with:






Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to 
Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help 
India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last 
month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for 
weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.









 > "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"


*** Nice try!






c-da










At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

 >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's 
military >dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to 
its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's 
own dedication to democracy?





C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has 
known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of 
the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. 
What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would love India 
wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not very India 
friendly?




Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After 
all, there are people in all these countries seeking democratic 
aspirations .




The US and every other democratic country have always had 
relationships (at least tolerated) with countries that really do not 
hold the same values. What about the US and Venezuela? Should the US 
severe that relationship, because there too millions seek democratic 
aspirations.?




Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, 
and should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the 
not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.


I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then 
you must be against us" :)




--Ram















On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<

[Assam] slept like a baby?

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

Good one dilip-da  

allow me to add a few more ...

I know the answer but why don't you give a try?
I know the answer but I why shall tell you?
Is the baby Indian? If so, he/she does not deserve an
answer?

Best one can be - A baby can never wake up every
two hours ... must be GOI is disturbing him.


>>Why is it that people say they "slept like a baby"
when babies wake up like every two hours?
   
  >>Now, let's dissect this.
  >>1. Is the questioner sincere in asking?
  >>2. Is he a logical thinker?
  >>3. Does he just want to break with tradition?
  >>4. Is he trying to rattle you?
  >>5. Is he trying to get your attention?
  >>6. Would you call him a non-conformist?
  >>7. Would you call his question trash?
  >>8. Is there a hidden AGENDA?
  >>9. Could  he be an Assamese?
  >>10. Does he fit your image of  an ULFA leader? :-)
   
  Your resonse will be highly appreciated. There is no
hidden agenda on my side.
  Dilip Deka



  

Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!   
http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 



___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

[Assam] Burmese cause

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

So you admit that ALL Citizens of US support US
Governments attack on Iraq ?

But I thought you said something different earlier :-)




>Are the people of India and its government the same
thing?


>>  Perceptive question.  And it would absolve
>>those who are NOT 
>>blind / unquestioning supporters of Indian
>>governmental hypocrisies.

>>But then I would not have posted the response I
>>did, to those who do 
>>not deserve to be fingered either.














At 3:32 PM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
>People of India may demand that its Govt should exert
its influence 
>over the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to
repression. Are 
>the people of India and its government the same
thing? I am amazed 
>at the naivete. This is probably the reason why Sri
Ram Sarangapani 
>did not understand the dig if any.



>
>Chan Mahanta  wrote:
>
>Heh-heh!
>
> That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS
you undertook Ram.
>
>Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to
have cut-off 
>diplomatic relations?
>
>
>What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL
stance:
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
assistance to 
>>Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was
willing to help 
>>India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar
Dutta had last 
>>month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the
demand for 
>>weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of
his visit.
>>
>
>
> But I understand why my post struck that raw
nerve again :-).
>
>
>  >Yes, India is a democracy,
>
> Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where
ordinary meanings of 
>these terms like democracy, secularism and the like
do not apply.
>
>
>  > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for
decades. It has also 
>known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in
China, and of 
>Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would
think, most 
>would >love India wiped out. And what about
Bangladesh, which is not 
>very India friendly?
>
>
> The difference you avoided acknowledging and
addressing, again, 
>lies with:
>
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
assistance to 
>>Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was
willing to help 
>>India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar
Dutta had last 
>>month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the
demand for 
>>weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of
his visit.
>>
>
>
>
>  > "if you are not with us, then you must be against
us"
>
>*** Nice try!
>
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>>  >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was
aware of Burma's 
>>military >dictatorship's activities spanning
decades, as relates to 
>>its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit
with India's 
>>own dedication to democracy?
>>
>
>
>C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a
democracy, and it has 
>known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has
also known of 
>the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of
Fidel in Cuba. 
>What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most
would love India 
>wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not
very India 
>friendly?
>
>
>
>Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such
countries? After 
>all, there are people in all these countries seeking
democratic 
>aspirations.
>
>
>
>The US and every other democratic country have always
had 
>relationships (at least tolerated) with countries
that really do not 
>hold the same values. What about the US and
Venezuela? Should the US 
>severe that relationship, because there too millions
seek democratic 
>aspirations.?
>
>
>
>Like, every other democratic country, India is no
different. It can, 
>and should, maintain relationships with other
countries (even the 
>not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at
different levels.
>
>I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not
with us, then 
>you must be against us" :)
>
>
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
><cmahanta at
charter.net> wrote:
>
>Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see
Kharkhowa xangbadik 
>xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns)
about the 
>Burmese people's struggles for democratic rights.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the 
powerful stance 
>you all took in  support of democratic values by
urging 
>
>
>
>
>"> the Government of India to create diplomatic
pressure on the 
>Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures
against those 
>carrying on the democracy movement in the country."
>
>
>
>
>That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all
are to 
>democratic values.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>More so in view of the following that appeared in
your paper, the 
>AT, obviously with a sense of relish
>
>( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
><http://www.assamtribune.com/>

>http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 200

[Assam] Burmese cause

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

Good that you admitted that you are eating g**  . 
Never thought that the flag bearer of DEMOKRASY will
admit so easily of eating g**

>>India's pretensions to 
>>democracy not only does not improve but continues
>>to spiral downwards 
>>over time.


Heh-Heh  ... coming from the flag bearer of DEMOKRASY
who admits eating 



>>One would have thought that this crowd of the
desi-knowledge-brigade 
would be a cut above that.

>>But I understand why they can't. All they can
imagine is to emulate 
>>what they decry in others.

The difference is ... Indian knowledge brigaed does
not go advising others ... unlike US knowledge brigade
who go advising others while they themself eat ..



>  >So what,  if US hob-nobs with Military Ruled
Pakistan,
>  So what, if US promoted Talibans to counter Soviet
>(and now fighting the same Talibans !),  so what if
US
>turned a blind eye to Tienman Square . all while
>waving a flag of DEMOKRASY ..



>> That is a terrific defense!

>>Only problem is, it smacks of the ancient Oxomiya
scatological 
>>proverb that asks " Moi g* khaale toi-w khaabi
neki?" ( If I eat 
s**t, would you too?)

>>One would have thought that this crowd of the
desi-knowledge-brigade 
would be a cut above that.

>>But I understand why they can't. All they can
imagine is to emulate 
>>what they decry in others. Little wonder why
>>India's pretensions to 
>>democracy not only does not improve but continues
>>to spiral downwards 
>>over time.












At 7:29 AM -0700 10/4/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty
wrote:
>  Ram-da,
>
>Bottomline is your view does not count
>
>So what,  if US hob-nobs with Military Ruled
Pakistan,
>  So what, if US promoted Talibans to counter Soviet
>(and now fighting the same Talibans !),  so what if
US
>turned a blind eye to Tienman Square . all while
>waving a flag of DEMOKRASY ..
>
>
>
>
>>>Heh-heh!
>
>>> That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS
>you undertook Ram.
>
>>>Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to
>have cut-off
>diplomatic relations?
>
>
>>>What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL
>stance:
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
>assistance to Myanmar
>>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to
help
>India.
>>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
>last month paid a
>>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
>weapons. He briefed
>>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.
>
>
> But I understand why my post struck that raw
>nerve again :-).
>
>
>>Yes, India is a democracy,
>
> Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where
>ordinary meanings of
>these terms like democracy, secularism and the like
do
>not apply.
>
>
>>   and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for
>decades. It has also
>>known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in
>China, and of
>>Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would
>think, most
>>would >love India wiped out. And what about
>Bangladesh, which is not
>>very India friendly?
>
>
> The difference you avoided acknowledging and
>addressing, again, lies with:
>
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
>assistance to Myanmar
>>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to
help
>India.
>>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
>last month paid a
>>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
>weapons. He briefed
>>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.
>
>
>
>>   "if you are not with us, then you must be against
>us"
>
>*** Nice try!
>
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>   >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was
>aware of Burma's
>>military >dictatorship's activities spanning
decades,
>as relates to
>>its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit
>with India's
>>own dedication to democracy?
>>
>>C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a
>democracy, and it has
>>known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has
>also known of
>>the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and
of
>Fidel in Cuba.
>>What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most
>would love India
>>wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not
>very India
>>friendly?
>>
>>Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such
>countries? After
>>all, there are people in all these countries seeking
>democratic
>>aspirations.
>>
>>The US and every other democratic country have
always
>had
>>relationships (at least tolerated) with countries
>that really do not
>>hold the same values. What about the US and
>Venezuela? Should the US
>>severe that relationship, because there too millions
>seek democratic
>>aspirations.?
>>
>>Like, every other democratic country, India is no
>different. It can,
>>and should, maintain relationships with other
>countries (even the
>>not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at
>different levels.
>>I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are
not
>with us, then
>>you must be against us" :)
>>
>>--Ram
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta
>

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

>This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand the
dig if any.

Oh!. I understood the dig alright (I've known C'da for many years now:)).

But what he fails to undersatand is that the GOI may on the one hand seek
help from the military Junta with a couple of goals in mind ( (a) to flush
insurgents and (b) to curtail drug trafficking into India from Burma ) and
on the other hand condemn the Burmese Govt. for its attrocities on the
monks.

Is this hypocritical on the part of the GOI? Obviously, the GOI does not
think the peaceful protesting monks are the same as militant insurgents.

And I understand this has struck a 'raw nerve' in C'da. He is upset that the
GOI would reach across the border to seek the help of Burma/Bhutan with the
insurgency problem.

--Ram


On 10/4/07, uttam borthakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence over
> the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are the people
> of India and its government the same thing? I am amazed at the naivete. This
> is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand the dig if
> any.
>
> *Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote:
>
> Heh-heh!
>
>
>  That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.
>
>
> Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off diplomatic
> relations?
>
>
>
>
> What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:
>
>
>
> *Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar
> Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
> Significantly,Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet 
> visit to Myanmar
> to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the
> outcome of his visit.*
>
>
>
>
>
>  But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).
>
>
>
>
> >Yes, India is a democracy,
>
>
>  Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of these
> terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.
>
>
>
>
> > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known
> of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba.
> What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would >love India wiped
> out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly?
>
>
>
>
>  The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, lies
> with:
>
>
>
>
>
> *Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar
> Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
> Significantly,Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet 
> visit to Myanmar
> to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the
> outcome of his visit.*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"
>
>
> *** Nice try!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's military
> >dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to its people's
> democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's own dedication to
> democracy?
>
>
>
> C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has known of
> Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of the Ayotollas in
> Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan,
> where, one would think, most would love India wiped out. And what about
> Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly?
>
>
>
> Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After all,
> there are people in all these countries seeking democratic aspirations.
>
>
>
> The US and every other democratic country have always had relationships
> (at least tolerated) with countries that really do not hold the same values.
> What about the US and Venezuela? Should the US severe that relationship,
> because there too millions seek democratic aspirations.?
>
>
>
> Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, and
> should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the not friendly
> ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.
>
> I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then you
> must be against us" :)
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/4/07,* Chan Mahanta* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik xokolor
> utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns) about the Burmese people's
> struggles for democratic rights.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance you all
> took in  support of democratic values by urging 
>
>
>
>
> "> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the
> Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those carrying on
> the democracy movement in the country."
>
>
>
>
> That ought to leave no doubt 

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Are the people of India and its government the same thing?



  Perceptive question.  And it would absolve those who are NOT 
blind / unquestioning supporters of Indian governmental hypocrisies.


But then I would not have posted the response I did, to those who do 
not deserve to be fingered either.















At 3:32 PM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence 
over the Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are 
the people of India and its government the same thing? I am amazed 
at the naivete. This is probably the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani 
did not understand the dig if any.






Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Heh-heh!

 That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.

Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off 
diplomatic relations?



What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:

Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to 
Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help 
India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last 
month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for 
weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.





 But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).


 >Yes, India is a democracy,

 Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of 
these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.



 > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also 
known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of 
Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most 
would >love India wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not 
very India friendly?



 The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, 
lies with:



Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to 
Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help 
India. Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last 
month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for 
weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.






 > "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"

*** Nice try!



c-da





At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

 >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's 
military >dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to 
its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's 
own dedication to democracy?





C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has 
known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of 
the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. 
What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would love India 
wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not very India 
friendly?




Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After 
all, there are people in all these countries seeking democratic 
aspirations.




The US and every other democratic country have always had 
relationships (at least tolerated) with countries that really do not 
hold the same values. What about the US and Venezuela? Should the US 
severe that relationship, because there too millions seek democratic 
aspirations.?




Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, 
and should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the 
not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.


I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then 
you must be against us" :)




--Ram















On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik 
xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns) about the 
Burmese people's struggles for democratic rights.








And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance 
you all took in  support of democratic values by urging 





"> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the 
Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those 
carrying on the democracy movement in the country."





That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to 
democratic values.








More so in view of the following that appeared in your paper, the 
AT, obviously with a sense of relish


( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:








<http://www.assamtribune.com/> 
http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006


From Our Spl Correspondent
 NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in the ULFA peace 
process, the Centre is unwilling to write off the peace process and 
has held out fresh hope by indicating that it was still willing to 
stop Army operations, if the outfit responded positively. The 
Centre' latest

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

>  >So what,  if US hob-nobs with Military Ruled Pakistan,
>  So what, if US promoted Talibans to counter Soviet
>(and now fighting the same Talibans !),  so what if US
>turned a blind eye to Tienman Square . all while
>waving a flag of DEMOKRASY ..



 That is a terrific defense!

Only problem is, it smacks of the ancient Oxomiya scatological 
proverb that asks " Moi g* khaale toi-w khaabi neki?" ( If I eat 
s**t, would you too?)

One would have thought that this crowd of the desi-knowledge-brigade 
would be a cut above that.

But I understand why they can't. All they can imagine is to emulate 
what they decry in others. Little wonder why India's pretensions to 
democracy not only does not improve but continues to spiral downwards 
over time.












At 7:29 AM -0700 10/4/07, Krishnendu Chakraborty wrote:
>  Ram-da,
>
>Bottomline is your view does not count
>
>So what,  if US hob-nobs with Military Ruled Pakistan,
>  So what, if US promoted Talibans to counter Soviet
>(and now fighting the same Talibans !),  so what if US
>turned a blind eye to Tienman Square . all while
>waving a flag of DEMOKRASY ..
>
>
>
>
>>>Heh-heh!
>
>>> That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS
>you undertook Ram.
>
>>>Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to
>have cut-off
>diplomatic relations?
>
>
>>>What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL
>stance:
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
>assistance to Myanmar
>>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help
>India.
>>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
>last month paid a
>>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
>weapons. He briefed
>>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.
>
>
> But I understand why my post struck that raw
>nerve again :-).
>
>
>>Yes, India is a democracy,
>
> Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where
>ordinary meanings of
>these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do
>not apply.
>
>
>>   and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for
>decades. It has also
>>known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in
>China, and of
>>Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would
>think, most
>>would >love India wiped out. And what about
>Bangladesh, which is not
>>very India friendly?
>
>
> The difference you avoided acknowledging and
>addressing, again, lies with:
>
>
>>Government of India has decided to provide all
>assistance to Myanmar
>>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help
>India.
>>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
>last month paid a
>>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
>weapons. He briefed
>>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.
>
>
>
>>   "if you are not with us, then you must be against
>us"
>
>*** Nice try!
>
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>   >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was
>aware of Burma's
>>military >dictatorship's activities spanning decades,
>as relates to
>>its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit
>with India's
>>own dedication to democracy?
>>
>>C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a
>democracy, and it has
>>known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has
>also known of
>>the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of
>Fidel in Cuba.
>>What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most
>would love India
>>wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not
>very India
>>friendly?
>>
>>Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such
>countries? After
>>all, there are people in all these countries seeking
>democratic
>>aspirations.
>>
>>The US and every other democratic country have always
>had
>>relationships (at least tolerated) with countries
>that really do not
>>hold the same values. What about the US and
>Venezuela? Should the US
>>severe that relationship, because there too millions
>seek democratic
>>aspirations.?
>>
>>Like, every other democratic country, India is no
>different. It can,
>>and should, maintain relationships with other
>countries (even the
>>not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at
>different levels.
>>I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not
>with us, then
>>you must be against us" :)
>>
>>--Ram
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta
>><cmahanta at
>charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see
>Kharkhowa xangbadik
>>xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns)
>about the
>>Burmese people's struggles for democratic rights.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the
>powerful stance
>>you all took in  support of democratic values by
>urging 
>>
>>
>>"> the Government of India to create diplomatic
>pressure on the
>>Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures
>against those
>>carrying on the democracy movement in the country."
>>
>>
>>That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all
>are to
>>democratic values.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>More so in

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[uttam borthakur]

People of India may demand that its Govt should exert its influence over the 
Myanmar Junta so that it does not resort to repression. Are the people of India 
and its government the same thing? I am amazed at the naivete. This is probably 
the reason why Sri Ram Sarangapani did not understand the dig if any.

Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Heh-heh!
  

   That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.
  

  Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off diplomatic 
relations?
  

  

  What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:
  

Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar Army, 
as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. Significantly, Defence 
Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss 
the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.  

  

   But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).
  

  

  >Yes, India is a democracy,
  

   Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of these 
terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.
  

  

  > and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of 
the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. What 
about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would >love India wiped out. And 
what about Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly?
  

  

   The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, lies 
with:
  

  

Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar Army, 
as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. Significantly, Defence 
Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss 
the demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about the outcome of his visit.  

  

  

  > "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"
  

  *** Nice try!
  

  

  

  c-da
  

  

  

  

  

  At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
  >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's military 
>dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to its people's 
democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's own dedication to 
democracy? C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it 
has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of the 
Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. What about 
Pakistan, where, one would think, most would love India wiped out. And what 
about Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly? Do you suggest that 
India severe all ties with such countries? After all, there are people in all 
these countries seeking democratic aspirations. The US and every other 
democratic country have always had relationships (at least tolerated) with 
countries that really do not hold the same values. What about the US and 
Venezuela? Should the US severe that relationship, because there too millions 
seek
 democratic aspirations.? Like, every other democratic country, India is no 
different. It can, and should, maintain relationships with other countries 
(even the not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.  I 
am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then you must be 
against us" :) --Ram
   
   

   On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik xokolor 
utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns) about the Burmese people's 
struggles for democratic rights.  
   
   And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance you all 
took in  support of democratic values by urging   
   "> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the Burmese 
junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those carrying on the 
democracy movement in the country."  
   That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to democratic 
values.  
   
   More so in view of the following that appeared in your paper, the AT, 
obviously with a sense of relish  ( note the highlighted parts)  some months 
back:  
   
   
 http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006  
From Our Spl Correspondent
 NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in the ULFA peace process, the 
Centre is unwilling to write off the peace process and has held out fresh hope 
by indicating that it was still willing to stop Army operations, if the outfit 
responded positively. The Centre' latest gambit came from National Security 
Adviser, MK Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he was willing to call 
off the Army operations, if ULFA comes for talks.

The NSA was responding to news reports, which quoted ULFA's mouthpiece Freedom 
as having said that the outfit was still open to finding a 'political solution' 
to the insurgency in Asom

[Assam] Burmese cause

[Krishnendu Chakraborty]

 Ram-da,

Bottomline is your view does not count

So what,  if US hob-nobs with Military Ruled Pakistan,
 So what, if US promoted Talibans to counter Soviet
(and now fighting the same Talibans !),  so what if US
turned a blind eye to Tienman Square . all while
waving a flag of DEMOKRASY ..  




>>Heh-heh!

>> That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS
you undertook Ram.

>>Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to
have cut-off 
diplomatic relations?


>>What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL
stance:

>Government of India has decided to provide all
assistance to Myanmar 
>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help
India. 
>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
last month paid a 
>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
weapons. He briefed 
>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.


 But I understand why my post struck that raw
nerve again :-).


>Yes, India is a democracy,

 Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where
ordinary meanings of 
these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do
not apply.


>  and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for
decades. It has also 
>known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in
China, and of 
>Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would
think, most 
>would >love India wiped out. And what about
Bangladesh, which is not 
>very India friendly?


 The difference you avoided acknowledging and
addressing, again, lies with:


>Government of India has decided to provide all
assistance to Myanmar 
>Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help
India. 
>Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had
last month paid a 
>quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for
weapons. He briefed 
>the meeting about the outcome of his visit.



>  "if you are not with us, then you must be against
us"

*** Nice try!



c-da





At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>  >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was
aware of Burma's 
>military >dictatorship's activities spanning decades,
as relates to 
>its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit
with India's 
>own dedication to democracy?
>
>C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a
democracy, and it has 
>known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has
also known of 
>the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of
Fidel in Cuba. 
>What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most
would love India 
>wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not
very India 
>friendly?
>
>Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such
countries? After 
>all, there are people in all these countries seeking
democratic 
>aspirations.
>
>The US and every other democratic country have always
had 
>relationships (at least tolerated) with countries
that really do not 
>hold the same values. What about the US and
Venezuela? Should the US 
>severe that relationship, because there too millions
seek democratic 
>aspirations.?
>
>Like, every other democratic country, India is no
different. It can, 
>and should, maintain relationships with other
countries (even the 
>not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at
different levels.
>I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not
with us, then 
>you must be against us" :)
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
><cmahanta at
charter.net> wrote:
>
>Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see
Kharkhowa xangbadik 
>xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns)
about the 
>Burmese people's struggles for democratic rights.
>
>
>
>
>And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the 
powerful stance 
>you all took in  support of democratic values by
urging 
>
>
>"> the Government of India to create diplomatic
pressure on the 
>Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures
against those 
>carrying on the democracy movement in the country."
>
>
>That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all
are to 
>democratic values.
>
>
>
>
>More so in view of the following that appeared in
your paper, the 
>AT, obviously with a sense of relish
>( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:
>
>
>
>
>
><http://www.assamtribune.com/>

>http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006
>From Our Spl Correspondent
>  NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in
the ULFA peace 
>process, the Centre is unwilling to write off the
peace process and 
>has held out fresh hope by indicating that it was
still willing to 
>stop Army operations, if the outfit responded
positively. The 
>Centre' latest gambit came from National Security
Adviser, MK 
>Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he was
willing to call 
>off the Army operations, if ULFA comes for talks.
>
>The NSA was responding to news reports, which quoted
ULFA's 
>mouthpiece Freedom as having said that the outfit was
still open to 
>finding a 'political solution' to the insurgency in
Asom.
>
>Rep

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Heh-heh!

 That was one heck of a JUMPING to CONCLUSIONS you undertook Ram.

Did *I* suggest or even IMPLY that India ought to have cut-off 
diplomatic relations?



What I was pointing to was a far more HYPOCRITICAL stance:

Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar 
Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a 
quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed 
the meeting about the outcome of his visit.



 But I understand why my post struck that raw nerve again :-).



Yes, India is a democracy,


 Yes indeed, desi-demokratic that is, where ordinary meanings of 
these terms like democracy, secularism and the like do not apply.



 and it has known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also 
known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, the >commies in China, and of 
Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most 
would >love India wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not 
very India friendly?



 The difference you avoided acknowledging and addressing, again, lies with:


Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar 
Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
Significantly, Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a 
quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the demand for weapons. He briefed 
the meeting about the outcome of his visit.





 "if you are not with us, then you must be against us"


*** Nice try!



c-da





At 7:48 AM -0600 10/4/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
 >What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's 
military >dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to 
its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's 
own dedication to democracy?


C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has 
known of Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of 
the Ayotollas in Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. 
What about Pakistan, where, one would think, most would love India 
wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which is not very India 
friendly?


Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After 
all, there are people in all these countries seeking democratic 
aspirations.


The US and every other democratic country have always had 
relationships (at least tolerated) with countries that really do not 
hold the same values. What about the US and Venezuela? Should the US 
severe that relationship, because there too millions seek democratic 
aspirations.?


Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, 
and should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the 
not friendly ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.
I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then 
you must be against us" :)


--Ram









On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik 
xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns) about the 
Burmese people's struggles for democratic rights.





And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance 
you all took in  support of democratic values by urging 



"> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the 
Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those 
carrying on the democracy movement in the country."



That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to 
democratic values.





More so in view of the following that appeared in your paper, the 
AT, obviously with a sense of relish

( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:





<http://www.assamtribune.com/> 
http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006

From Our Spl Correspondent
 NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in the ULFA peace 
process, the Centre is unwilling to write off the peace process and 
has held out fresh hope by indicating that it was still willing to 
stop Army operations, if the outfit responded positively. The 
Centre' latest gambit came from National Security Adviser, MK 
Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he was willing to call 
off the Army operations, if ULFA comes for talks.


The NSA was responding to news reports, which quoted ULFA's 
mouthpiece Freedom as having said that the outfit was still open to 
finding a 'political solution' to the insurgency in Asom.


Replying to a query, he said that he was unaware about ULFA's 
statement. "But, if it is true then it is most welcome. I will stop 
operation if they come," he added.


The NSA had come to the Ministry of Home Affairs to take a meeting 
on the internal security.


In the latest issue of its mouthpiece, the ULFA said it was, "still 
hopeful of a political solution and it would respond to any such 
efforts init

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[uttam borthakur]

Diplomacy is a different ball game altogether. Even in the time of war, two 
antipodal forces maintain such ties till the last possible moment. Even after 
that the bridge is not always burnt. There are no permanent enemies or friends 
in that sphere.

Ram Sarangapani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>What leaves me curious about 
is if GoI was aware of Burma's military >dictatorship's activities spanning 
decades, as relates to its people's democratic >aspirations, and how it fit 
with India's own dedication to democracy? 
   
  C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has known of 
Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of the Ayotollas in Tehran, 
the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan, where, one 
would think, most would love India wiped out. And what about Bangladesh, which 
is not very India friendly? 
   
  Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After all, 
there are people in all these countries seeking democratic aspirations.
   
  The US and every other democratic country have always had relationships (at 
least tolerated) with countries that really do not hold the same values. What 
about the US and Venezuela? Should the US severe that relationship, because 
there too millions seek democratic aspirations.?
   
  Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, and 
should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the not friendly ones 
or those run by dictators) at different levels. 
  I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then you must 
be against us" :)
   
  --Ram
   
   
   
   
  

 
  On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:   Greetings Goswami.  
It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese 
journalist's concerns) about the Burmese people's struggles for democratic 
rights.
  
 
  
 
  And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance you all 
took in  support of democratic values by urging 
  
 
  "> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the Burmese 
junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those carrying on the 
democracy movement in the country."
  
 
  That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to democratic 
values.
  
 
  
 
  More so in view of the following that appeared in your paper, the AT, 
obviously with a sense of relish
  ( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:
  
 
  
 
  
 http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006
>From Our Spl Correspondent
 NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in the ULFA peace process, the 
Centre is unwilling to write off the peace process and has held out fresh hope 
by indicating that it was still willing to stop Army operations, if the outfit 
responded positively. The Centre' latest gambit came from National Security 
Adviser, MK Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he was willing to call 
off the Army operations, if ULFA comes for talks. 

The NSA was responding to news reports, which quoted ULFA's mouthpiece Freedom 
as having said that the outfit was still open to finding a 'political solution' 
to the insurgency in Asom.

Replying to a query, he said that he was unaware about ULFA's statement. "But, 
if it is true then it is most welcome. I will stop operation if they come," he 
added. 

The NSA had come to the Ministry of Home Affairs to take a meeting on the 
internal security.

In the latest issue of its mouthpiece, the ULFA said it was, "still hopeful of 
a political solution and it would respond to any such efforts initiated by the 
Centre through the PCG". The mouthpiece said it was confident that the PCG 
would work for bringing about a "political solution". 

ULFA's latest threat to target Congressmen in the State, as well as the sudden 
end to the peace process has the Centre thinking. The UPA Government at the 
Centre, which was hoping for a breakthrough, is upset at the breakdown of the 
peace process. Politically, the UPA may not find much support among its allies, 
with the CPI-M already stating it wanted the peace process to continue. 

The reluctance on part of ULFA to commit in writing, unabated extortions and 
growing belligerence of the outfit coupled with stern warning from Army and 
intelligence agencies forced the Centre to call off the suspension of operation 
on September 24. Subsequently, the PCG also pulled out of the peace process. 

  The development may be significant, because it comes at a time when the 
Centre is bracing up to intensify operations against ULFA and by all 
indications, a coordinated operation with Myanmar Army may be in the offing. 

Last evening, as reported today, a high level meeting chaired by Cabinet 
Secretary, BK Chaturvedi and attended by top brass of the three services, 
intelligence officials, was held at South Block to take stock of the internal 
security situation including Army 

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

>What leaves me curious about is if GoI was aware of Burma's military
>dictatorship's activities spanning decades, as relates to its people's
democratic >aspirations, and how it fit with India's own dedication to
democracy?

C'da, just couldn't resist. Yes, India is a democracy, and it has known of
Burma's dictatorship for decades. It has also known of the Ayotollas in
Tehran, the commies in China, and of Fidel in Cuba. What about Pakistan,
where, one would think, most would love India wiped out. And what about
Bangladesh, which is not very India friendly?

Do you suggest that India severe all ties with such countries? After all,
there are people in all these countries seeking democratic aspirations.

The US and every other democratic country have always had relationships (at
least tolerated) with countries that really do not hold the same values.
What about the US and Venezuela? Should the US severe that relationship,
because there too millions seek democratic aspirations.?

Like, every other democratic country, India is no different. It can, and
should, maintain relationships with other countries (even the not friendly
ones or those run by dictators) at different levels.
I am surprised, you seem to be saying "if you are not with us, then you must
be against us" :)

--Ram








On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see Kharkhowa xangbadik xokolor
> utkontha  ( Assamese journalist's concerns) about the Burmese people's
> struggles for democratic rights.
>
>
>
>
> And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the  powerful stance you all
> took in  support of democratic values by urging 
>
>
> "> the Government of India to create diplomatic pressure on the
> Burmese junta to refrain from >repressive measures against those carrying on
> the democracy movement in the country."
>
>
> That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to democratic
> values.
>
>
>
>
> More so in view of the following that appeared in your paper, the AT,
> obviously with a sense of relish
> ( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:
>
>
>
>
>
> ***http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October
> 2006
> From Our Spl Correspondent
>  NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback in the ULFA peace process,
> the Centre is unwilling to write off the peace process and has held out
> fresh hope by indicating that it was still willing to stop Army operations,
> if the outfit responded positively. The Centre' latest gambit came from
> National Security Adviser, MK Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he
> was willing to call off the Army operations, if ULFA comes for talks.
>
> The NSA was responding to news reports, which quoted ULFA's mouthpiece
> Freedom as having said that the outfit was still open to finding a
> 'political solution' to the insurgency in Asom.
>
> Replying to a query, he said that he was unaware about ULFA's statement.
> "But, if it is true then it is most welcome. I will stop operation if they
> come," he added.
>
> The NSA had come to the Ministry of Home Affairs to take a meeting on the
> internal security.
>
> In the latest issue of its mouthpiece, the ULFA said it was, "still
> hopeful of a political solution and it would respond to any such efforts
> initiated by the Centre through the PCG". The mouthpiece said it was
> confident that the PCG would work for bringing about a "political solution".
>
> ULFA's latest threat to target Congressmen in the State, as well as the
> sudden end to the peace process has the Centre thinking. The UPA Government
> at the Centre, which was hoping for a breakthrough, is upset at the
> breakdown of the peace process. Politically, the UPA may not find much
> support among its allies, with the CPI-M already stating it wanted the peace
> process to continue.
>
> The reluctance on part of ULFA to commit in writing, unabated extortions
> and growing belligerence of the outfit coupled with stern warning from Army
> and intelligence agencies forced the Centre to call off the suspension of
> operation on September 24. Subsequently, the PCG also pulled out of the
> peace process.*
> **
> *The development may be significant, because it comes at a time when the
> Centre is bracing up to intensify operations against ULFA and by all
> indications, a coordinated operation with Myanmar Army may be in the
> offing.
>
> Last evening, as reported today, a high level meeting chaired by Cabinet
> Secretary, BK Chaturvedi and attended by top brass of the three services,
> intelligence officials, was held at South Block to take stock of the
> internal security situation including Army operations in Asom.*
> **
> *Government of India has decided to provide all assistance to Myanmar
> Army, as the neighbouring country was willing to help India. 
> Significantly,Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month paid a quiet 
> visit to Myanmar
> to discuss the demand for weapons. He brie

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Greetings Goswami.  It is heartwarming to see 
Kharkhowa xangbadik xokolor utkontha  ( Assamese 
journalist's concerns) about the Burmese people's 
struggles for democratic rights.



And my Kharkhowa heart glows with pride  with the 
powerful stance you all took in  support of 
democratic values by urging 


"> the Government of India to create 
diplomatic pressure on the Burmese junta to 
refrain from >repressive measures against those 
carrying on the democracy movement in the 
country."


That ought to leave no doubt on how committed you all are to democratic values.


More so in view of the following that appeared in 
your paper, the AT, obviously with a sense of 
relish

( note the highlighted parts)  some months back:



http://www.assamtribune.com/6 October 2006
From Our Spl Correspondent
 NEW DELHI, Oct 5 - Notwithstanding the setback 
in the ULFA peace process, the Centre is 
unwilling to write off the peace process and has 
held out fresh hope by indicating that it was 
still willing to stop Army operations, if the 
outfit responded positively. The Centre' latest 
gambit came from National Security Adviser, MK 
Narayanan, who told newsmen here today that he 
was willing to call off the Army operations, if 
ULFA comes for talks.


The NSA was responding to news reports, which 
quoted ULFA's mouthpiece Freedom as having said 
that the outfit was still open to finding a 
'political solution' to the insurgency in Asom.


Replying to a query, he said that he was unaware 
about ULFA's statement. "But, if it is true then 
it is most welcome. I will stop operation if they 
come," he added.


The NSA had come to the Ministry of Home Affairs 
to take a meeting on the internal security.


In the latest issue of its mouthpiece, the ULFA 
said it was, "still hopeful of a political 
solution and it would respond to any such efforts 
initiated by the Centre through the PCG". The 
mouthpiece said it was confident that the PCG 
would work for bringing about a "political 
solution".


ULFA's latest threat to target Congressmen in the 
State, as well as the sudden end to the peace 
process has the Centre thinking. The UPA 
Government at the Centre, which was hoping for a 
breakthrough, is upset at the breakdown of the 
peace process. Politically, the UPA may not find 
much support among its allies, with the CPI-M 
already stating it wanted the peace process to 
continue.


The reluctance on part of ULFA to commit in 
writing, unabated extortions and growing 
belligerence of the outfit coupled with stern 
warning from Army and intelligence agencies 
forced the Centre to call off the suspension of 
operation on September 24. Subsequently, the PCG 
also pulled out of the peace process.


The development may be significant, because it 
comes at a time when the Centre is bracing up to 
intensify operations against ULFA and by all 
indications, a coordinated operation with Myanmar 
Army may be in the offing.


Last evening, as reported today, a high level 
meeting chaired by Cabinet Secretary, BK 
Chaturvedi and attended by top brass of the three 
services, intelligence officials, was held at 
South Block to take stock of the internal 
security situation including Army operations in 
Asom.


Government of India has decided to provide all 
assistance to Myanmar Army, as the neighbouring 
country was willing to help India. Significantly, 
Defence Secretary Shekhar Dutta had last month 
paid a quiet visit to Myanmar to discuss the 
demand for weapons. He briefed the meeting about 
the outcome of his visit.





What leaves me curious about is if GoI was 
aware of Burma's military dictatorship's 
activities spanning decades, as relates to its 
people's democratic aspirations, and how it fit 
with India's own dedication to democracy?  And 
the ATs too?


Any ideas?

Best.

cm






At 1:29 PM +0100 10/4/07, ranenkumar goswami wrote:

Newsmen’s support to Burmese cause
Guwahati, October 4: The Journalists’ Forum, Assam on
Thursday urged the Government of India to create
diplomatic pressure on the Burmese junta to refrain
from repressive measures against those carrying on the
democracy movement in the country.
   In a meeting at the Guwahati Press Club with JFA
president Rupam Baruah in chair, the newsmen’s body
asked the Union Government not to remain silent on the
happenings in the neighbouring country and do the
needful within its powers to facilitate a peaceful
transition to democracy.
   Extending its whole-hearted support to the
movement, the Forum demanded that Aung San Suu Kyi,
the globally recognized pro-democracy leader, be
immediately released from the prolonged detention she
is being made to undergo. It deplored the brutal
killing of protesting citizens including one foreign
journalist.
   The meeting expressed its solidarity with the
proposed Global Action Day for Free Burma to be
observed on October 6.
  The meeting was addressed among others by Dr
Amalendu Guha, Hema

[Assam] Yet Another Promise (EDITORIAL,The Sentinel,04.10.2007)

[Buljit Buragohain]

Yet Another Promise
The Gauhati University Vice-Chancellor’s decision to withdraw his letter of 
resignation has been hailed by one and all with the appropriate sighs of 
relief. There can be no doubt that the withdrawal of resignation has come about 
as the result of a lot of pressure from student organizations as well the 
faculty of the university with the Chancellor himself playing a pivotal role in 
making the government honour its earlier commitments. In any case, the 
Education Minister too must have had time to realize that he had gratuitously 
burnt his fingers by calling the Vice-Chancellor an “escapist”. We now have a 
situation where a government that has a rather poor track record of keeping 
promises has managed to persuade the Vice-Chancellor to withdraw his 
resignation by dangling yet another promise before him. There is a very strong 
element of deja vu in such familiar shenanigans. The government makes a 
commitment to a college or university or a professional fraternity (like the
 teachers) and does not honour it. This leads to a threat of resignation or a 
collective hunger strike. The government first denounces the reactions and then 
makes yet another promise with a shorter deadline, but when the time comes to 
honour this new promise, the leopard cannot get rid of its spots. For the 
government, most promises are a means of buying time, unless a promise has been 
made to a group of its blue-eyed boys or when honouring a financial commitment 
yields some financial benefit also to the political executive or the 
bureaucrats. For instance, the contractors who did the shoddiest job of 
widening the GNB/MRD Road of Guwahati (with its two-foot high pavements) did 
not have to wait for their money even though they left walls of sandbags in the 
drains and even though their bills involved hundreds of crores of rupees. And 
yet the same government cannot meet its legitimate financial obligations to its 
creditors even when there are court orders and even when the
 amounts involved are very much smaller. When it comes to honouring its 
financial commitments, the government is not terribly worried by who or what is 
going to be affected by its failure to keep its promises. It has arbitrary 
norms about who needs to be paid at once and who can be kept dangling for 
months on end. And in its whimsical scheme of things, vice-chancellors and 
teachers belong to the second category.
The Vice-Chancellor of Gauhati University should keep this rather familiar 
style of functioning of the government in mind and not be very sanguine about 
yet another promise emanating from the same deplorable source of commitments. 
He should get his staff to work on a war footing to submit the detailed project 
report on how the Rs 25 crore that the government has promised him by December 
31, 2007 will be spent. And this time, if the government fails Gauhati 
University once again, he must resign as Vice-Chancellor and not withdraw his 
resignation again regardless of who pleads with him to capitulate once again. 
This will ensure two things: (a) that unlike the government, he does not 
believe in empty threats solely for effect; and (b) that the government is made 
to take full responsibility for the dismal future of the university after that. 
There is no denying that the people of Asom cannot afford to get into such a 
situation, but if their elected government pushes Gauhati
 University to such a situation, that government must also face the inevitable 
consequences.
   
  (EDITORIAL,The Sentinel,04.10.2007)



   
-
 Travelling to a new city? Search for ATMs in that city. Click here.___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

[Assam] Burmese cause

[ranenkumar goswami]

Newsmen’s support to Burmese cause
Guwahati, October 4: The Journalists’ Forum, Assam on
Thursday urged the Government of India to create
diplomatic pressure on the Burmese junta to refrain
from repressive measures against those carrying on the
democracy movement in the country.
   In a meeting at the Guwahati Press Club with JFA
president Rupam Baruah in chair, the newsmen’s body
asked the Union Government not to remain silent on the
happenings in the neighbouring country and do the
needful within its powers to facilitate a peaceful
transition to democracy.  
   Extending its whole-hearted support to the
movement, the Forum demanded that Aung San Suu Kyi,
the globally recognized pro-democracy leader, be
immediately released from the prolonged detention she
is being made to undergo. It deplored the brutal
killing of protesting citizens including one foreign
journalist. 
   The meeting expressed its solidarity with the
proposed Global Action Day for Free Burma to be
observed on October 6.
  The meeting was addressed among others by Dr
Amalendu Guha, Hemanta Barman, Dr Abdul Mannan,
Nilamoni Sen Deka, Hiten Mahanta, Nava Thakuria,
Jayanta  Gogoi, Jawaharlal Saha and Satish Tahbildar. 




  Download prohibited? No problem. CHAT from any browser, without download. 
Go to http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php/

___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org