Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

At 7:55 AM -0600 10/5/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:


No, C'da, I see only effects.




*** But having willfully discarded the curiosity to learn about the 
causes, you have lost the most important tool you need to be a part 
of the solution.












After all, to those affected it would seem 'damn the causes, I have 
a dead son/daughter/wife/husband. here'


and to others it might be 'damn the dead, lets find out who can blame here?'

--Ram


On 10/5/07, Chan Mahanta 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Your confusions Ram, is a result of a self induced inability to 
separate effects from causes. That simple.











At 6:50 AM -0600 10/5/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:

The basic question (as I understood it from C'da's posting) was the 
accordance (lack of it) of humanity by the Govt. No one really says 
that insurgents should NOT be given due process of the law and NOT 
be treated humanely.


But shouldn't there also be a quid quo pro? Shouldn't the so many 
innocent people and children killed also be be given some of that? 
Do common people deserve some humanity, be left alone to go about 
their business? I just don't know any more!



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




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



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

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

No, C'da, I see only effects.

After all, to those affected it would seem *'damn the causes, I have a dead
son/daughter/wife/husband. here'*

and to others it might be *'damn the dead, lets find out who can blame
here?'*

--Ram


On 10/5/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Your confusions Ram, is a result of a self induced inability to 
> separate*effects
> * from* cause*s. That simple.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 6:50 AM -0600 10/5/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> The basic question (as I understood it from C'da's posting) was the
> accordance (lack of it) of humanity by the Govt. No one really says that
> insurgents should NOT be given due process of the law and NOT be treated
> humanely.
>
> But shouldn't there also be a quid quo pro? Shouldn't the so many innocent
> people and children killed also be be given some of that? Do common people
> deserve some humanity, be left alone to go about their business? I just
> don't know any more!
>
>
> ___
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>
>
> ___
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Very well said Mridul.












At 12:11 AM -0700 10/5/07, Mridul Bhuyan 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."


I wholeheartedly support the underlined statement. We all should 
understand that they are our brothers and sisters. Even if they have 
committed some mistakes, the onus is on us to advise them to amend 
their ways and try to find a suitable solution agrreable to all 
(even if it is a arduous task). Admit it or not, GoI did never give 
a damn about what happens to the people of Assam and will never do 
that in future too.


Mridul Bhuyan


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 
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 t

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

Your confusions Ram, is a result of a self induced inability to 
separate effects from causes. That simple.






At 6:50 AM -0600 10/5/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
The basic question (as I understood it from C'da's posting) was the 
accordance (lack of it) of humanity by the Govt. No one really says 
that insurgents should NOT be given due process of the law and NOT 
be treated humanely.
But shouldn't there also be a quid quo pro? Shouldn't the so many 
innocent people and children killed also be be given some of that? 
Do common people deserve some humanity, be left alone to go about 
their business? I just don't know any more!


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

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Chan Mahanta]

*** First off, WHAT does that have to do with HOW  ordinary, meek 
Oxomiyas turned into

  INSURGENTS ?  Where was India's democracy then?  Or even now?

 Or for that matter of other Indians turning into NAXALITES? Were 
they born that way? Spoilt

 brats of rich people turning into violence as a hobby perhaps?

 Where were the courts with habeas corpus or what have you to 
listen to their grievances or

 giving them a hand in their struggles to survive?



*** Secondly, is it not patently disingenuous to expect  a band of 
rag-tag guerillas, being hounded
by the world's second largest standing army, to provide uniform 
justice ; while the same folks bear mute witness  to their supposedly 
legitimate GOVT's  wanton disregard for its own laws, tacitly, if not 
overtly accept such abominations as AFSPA as something inevitable or 
even desirable; while never missing  a chance to wave to the world 
how civilized their 'democracy' is?


*** Thirdly, these insurgents do no go seeking JUSTICE from India. If 
they had ANY faith in it, they would not go take up arms against it, 
knowing full well that they are courting death, as the hundreds of 
thousands of Nagas, Mizos, Bodos, Oxomiyas, and Manipuris' killings 
would amply illustrate.


But what about those who spout 'democratic values', do THEY care? Do 
they seek it?  Have they ever lifted a finger demanding reforms, 
demanding changes to what  have spawned the numerous insurgencies and 
Maoist rebellions? What do THEY have to show for?



When trouble began,  had Indian intelligentsia demanded action of 
their govts., put the offenders on trial, let the issues come into 
full public view about who did what and why, that would have gone a 
long way towards stemming the proliferation of violence. Does Indian 
intelligentsia even KNOW of what has been going on in our nook of the 
world for this past half century and more, much less raise their 
voices in support of ordinary justice?



Knowing we cannot dwell on the past, is it reasonable to expect at 
least NOW some action?


Does  the intelligentsia , the pillars of society, have the 
wherewithal to put their money where their mouths are? Will they ask 
the hard questions they need to, of those who are in power?  And 
demand the changes that are direly needed?



Do they have the courage to do that?


Can those, who are quick to join the "hola gosot baagi kuthar moraa 
mohabeers" and chase the ULFA dispatcher like a bunch of barking 
mongrels or go applauding from the sidelines  ask hard questions of a 
minister who controls the purse strings of where they feed from?



Think about that?











At 10:52 AM +0100 10/5/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
What about Naxalite movements in various parts of India? It has been 
said that those groups hold sway over a big chunk of India. 
Moreover, I fail to understand one thing. The INSURGENTS calling for 
secession and being at WAR with India can avail of procedures like 
habeas corpus through Indian Courts. Unfortunately, the same cannot 
be said of their courts where we come to know about death penalty 
etc. after those are carried out. Why do they seek justice under 
Indian constitution when they do not conform to it? I do not say 
they should not, but I find a dichotomy:-).


Mridul Bhuyan <[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."


I wholeheartedly support the underlined statement. We all should 
understand that they are our brothers and sisters. Even if they have 
committed some mistakes, the onus is on us to advise them to amend 
their ways and try to find a suitable solution agrreable to all 
(even if it is a arduous task). Admit it or not, GoI did never give 
a damn about what happens to the people of Assam and will never do 
that in future too.


Mridul Bhuyan


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 squelc

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Mohan R. Palleti]

C'da:
I regret to say that Assamnet has become a brickbatting ground.
You on one side with complete animosity for India and the Government where
you grew up and became a somebody in your own rights. And the others who
automatically become half witts for putting forward their best foot and
their best voice.

You claim that you have left India way back in the 60's and yet you seem
to know more about the intentions of GOI, the GOA, the intentions of the
ULFA. I must say that this is pretty impressive.

I really do not see in what way India would be committing a wrongful act
in supporting the Burmese people.

Mohan R. Palleti



> 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 e

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Ram Sarangapani]

The basic question (as I understood it from C'da's posting) was the
accordance (lack of it) of humanity by the Govt. No one really says that
insurgents should NOT be given due process of the law and NOT be treated
humanely.
But shouldn't there also be a quid quo pro? Shouldn't the so many innocent
people and children killed also be be given some of that? Do common people
deserve some humanity, be left alone to go about their business? I just
don't know any more!
___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[uttam borthakur]

What about Naxalite movements in various parts of India? It has been said that 
those groups hold sway over a big chunk of India. Moreover, I fail to 
understand one thing. The INSURGENTS calling for secession and being at WAR 
with India can avail of procedures like habeas corpus through Indian Courts. 
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of their courts where we come to know 
about death penalty etc. after those are carried out. Why do they seek justice 
under Indian constitution when they do not conform to it? I do not say they 
should not, but I find a dichotomy:-).

Mridul Bhuyan <[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."
   
  I wholeheartedly support the underlined statement. We all should understand 
that they are our brothers and sisters. Even if they have committed some 
mistakes, the onus is on us to advise them to amend their ways and try to find 
a suitable solution agrreable to all (even if it is a arduous task). Admit it 
or not, GoI did never give a damn about what happens to the people of Assam and 
will never do that in future too.
   
  Mridul Bhuyan 


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 I

Re: [Assam] Burmese cause

[Mridul Bhuyan]

"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."
   
  I wholeheartedly support the underlined statement. We all should understand 
that they are our brothers and sisters. Even if they have committed some 
mistakes, the onus is on us to advise them to amend their ways and try to find 
a suitable solution agrreable to all (even if it is a arduous task). Admit it 
or not, GoI did never give a damn about what happens to the people of Assam and 
will never do that in future too.
   
  Mridul Bhuyan 


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 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

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

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.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >

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] 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 
<

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

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