At 10:14 PM -0600 1/18/06, Barua25 wrote:
>1: ULFA did not ask MRG , nor does MRG pretend, to speak or negotiate
on behalf of ULFA.
Is not MRG in the PCG Group which was formed by ULFA of 'like minded' people?
Does it not imply that MRG is not only close to ULFA but a spokesperson of ULFA?
In fact if she is really in the PCG group she already lost her neutrality and her creditability to negotiate between ULFA and GOI.
RB
*** I am sorry to say it in such harsh words Rajen, but all of
the above comments are either ignorant or dumb or both.
Take care.
c
----- Original Message -----From: Chan MahantaTo: Ram Sarangapani ; Roy, SantanuCc: Rajen Barua ; ASSAMNET ; Chan MahantaSent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 8:00 PMSubject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) SentinelO' Ram:I just want to put a few things in perspective here:1: ULFA did not ask MRG , nor does MRG pretend, to speak or negotiate on behalf of ULFA. 2: MRG used her influence and goodwill ( which is fairly substantial at Dilli if you didn't know) to call GoI's bluff about its willingness to arrive at a negotiated political settlement with ULFA, and by proxy Assam. MRG put MMSingh, no doubt a decent individual, and others on the defensive. 3: MRG would not have gotten involved had she NOT cared about what ULFA has been attempting to achieve for Assam or had she not cared about those who constitute ULFA, her brethren and mine, even though that might not be yours or Rajen's or HT's or BB's or who knows who elses's. There are umpteen individuals at Dilli with influence and goodwill, who DID NOT CARE TO or DID NOT HAVE the GUTS to stand up and be counted on behalf of Assam before. Just look at all the silence in Assam Net. 4: I have it from reliable sources that she does not involve herself with ULFA's policies, practices or tactics. How do I know that? It is not for me to tell, and for you to guess :-). 5: She does not need India-partisans' approval, be it at at Dilli, or Kolkata or in Assam Net, to do what she believes to be the right thing to do. I am sure there are plenty of those who hates her guts. But it is THEIR problem. She is quite able to stand up to that. I hope one of these days she will slap that ghee-belly around :-). 6: The Sentinel( ?) interviewer, attempted to bait her ( not the first time), but she put her/him in her/his place. End of story.Tough? You be the judge.c-daAt 6:01 PM -0600 1/18/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
OK,
Let me try and explain (btw - the portion you took out was actually besides the whole point, but nevertheless).
The question of ULFA/GOI meeting for peace talks is a highly charged atmosphere. Here you have everybody from the Home Ministry, to the Governor, the CM, the PM, Ulfa making comments to suit their own situations.
Contary to your assumption, I do recognize MRG as a prolific writer, but as a 'negotiator'she has (by virtue of being one) put her credibility on the line. Not her credibility as a writer, but as a negotiator.
>Making a comment like
>"Since the ULFA has neither admitted nor denied the issuance of the demand note to the ONGC,
>it is too early to draw a conclusion on the authenticity of the letter"
This statement is fine and it would have been construed as someone telling us 'not to jump to conclusions' No one should have a problem with that - I certainly don't.
But you seemed to deftly leave out statement we were discussing:
ie: Be that as it may, the demand note to the ONGC will not hamper the peace process since extortion by militants is not unusual."
So, what on earth does this statement mean? Extortion is OK? Or they existed before, why bring it now? Its not a big deal - let the negotiations begin? Is she making excuses for the ULFA in a bad situation? The GOI should keep the negotiation process on, inspite of what the ULFA does? What?
>If I am wrong, show me why
The above is where you went wrong. The above statement by her is the problem, not the one you quoted.
>She is not an arbitrator. She does not have to be neutral
If thats the case, we should not be calling her a 'negotiator' or a facilitator. What would you call her?
She obviously is not facilitating any chats, if she is in the habit of making politically charged comments.
>She is simply trying to ennsure that there are talks
Good, but is she doing that? What is the difference between her comments and the Governor's (who also is in the habit of making irresponsible comments).
>It is not her role to soft pedal and maintain a delicate balance
Then let her declare as such - that she is speaking on behalf of ULFA's interests. Then she needn't soft pedal at all. But she can't have it both ways - on the one hand a negotiator of sorts and on the someone with a biased mindset in this regard.
>I think you don't have a justification. I think you guys are simply using an opportunity to bad->.
Is it bad-mouthing if you tell the truth. I did not put those words into her mouth - she said it. But if you want us to give her a pass, sure we can.
>someone who you otherwise dislike - probably because you feel she is close to the ULFA
Heh! heh! is that all you could come up? Dislike her? What on earth for? There are many, many people I know who are either close to ULFA or are big supporters. In fact, they are some whom I consider as good friends. Their proximity to ULFA has nothing to do with like or dislike.
If she is close to ULFA, then thats fine, but even she has to draw a line when making excuses for them. If she doesn't she would lose credibility as a facilitator, its as simple as that.
>She is not the American president at Camp David
I wouldn't have known.
On 1/18/06, Roy, Santanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A littany of sarcasm does not add up to an explanation.
You have not provided ANY information on why your allegation that she is in indulging in "POLITICS of bla-bla-blah" is justified. I think you don't have a justification. I think you guys are simply using an opportunity to bad-mouth someone who you otherwise dislike - probably because you feel she is close to the ULFA.
Making a comment like
"Since the ULFA has neither admitted nor denied the issuance of the demand note to the ONGC,
it is too early to draw a conclusion on the authenticity of the letter"
is not equivalent to indulging in politics. As far as I am concerned, it is a statement of fact as she perceived it at the time she made a comment to the media.
If I am wrong, show me why.
She is not an arbitrator. She does not have to be neutral. She is NOT a part of the negotiations, she is simply a public facilitator that the GOI or the ULFA can use if they mutually wish to chat or find out if the other side wishes to chat. She is not trying to create a meeting of minds and an agreement. She is simply trying to ennsure that there are talks. It is not her role to soft pedal and maintain a delicate balance. She is not the American president at Camp David.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Sarangapani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thu 1/19/2006 7:40 AM
To: Roy, Santanu
Cc: Rajen Barua; ASSAMNET; Chan Mahanta
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
>What is this politics of "ONGC-GOI-ULFA" that she is indulging in? Can you
explain?
Well the ONGC is that 'oil-sucking' company that you referred to. Obviously,
they are after their own interests and little else. The GOI is the inept
govt. entity which is after everything in Assam. And the ULFA obviously is
looking after the interests of Assam and the Assamese by extorting huge sums
from the petty trader to giant blood-sucking entities like the ONGC.
So, I was wondering why a nice lady like Dr. G would even bother to make it
her business to make comments where none were warranted (at least from her,
and her position).
On 1/18/06, Roy, Santanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What is this politics of "ONGC-GOI-ULFA" that she is indulging in? Can you
> explain?
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ram Sarangapani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thu 1/19/2006 6:46 AM
> To: Roy, Santanu
> Cc: Rajen Barua; ASSAMNET; Chan Mahanta
> Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
>
> >I don't see the point of hitting out at Mamoni-baideu just because she
> did
> not condemn the ULFA >for the note received by some bloody oil sucking
> organization She is not the ULFA, nor their point->man. She is not a cop.
> It
> is not her job to make balanced political statements,
>
> Is it her job to make unbalanced political statements, for which you claim
> she has no expertise?
> This job as a 'negotiator' is a tough job and personal biases have to be
> kept at bay. If as you say she is NOT the front man or the point person,
> then why would she indulge in the politics of ONGC-GOI-ULFA if she has NO
> understanding, and show her bias (toward ULFA).
>
> >By doing that she performs a far greater service to the people of Assam,
> then all of the great living >writers of Assam (I guess this is what
> irritates quite a few people - the attention she has received
>
> In THIS particular case, she is making it more difficult for the job she
> or
> others have entrusted upon her as a 'negotiator'. Thats a disservice to
> the
> people of Assam by putting hurdles on the way for peace talks.
>
> As for writers - I am sure there are some who are jealous of her
> 'limelight'. Fortunately, you won't find them in these shores.
>
> >And yes, it would be a great boon to Assam (despite the "jobs lost") if
> the
> oil suckers left and >allowed the state to conserve its deposit of an
> exhaustible natural resource instead of feeding it at >sub-market prices
> to
> the ever hungry Indian economy.
>
> And of course the stupid people at the GOI will also leave all the
> infrastructure and whatever technical know-how just as easily. No, they
> would just STILL keep drilling, and ONLY make sure it is located in Bihar
> or
> West Bengal.
> No, the bottom-line is, if that were to happen, Assam & the Assamese would
> still lose.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1/18/06, Roy, Santanu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't see the point of hitting out at Mamoni-baideu just because she
> did
> > not condemn the ULFA for the note received by some bloody oil sucking
> > organization. Who do you think she is? She is not the ULFA, nor their
> > point-man. She is not a cop. It is not her job to make balanced
> political
> > statements, investigate truths and morally chastise errant parties. She
> has
> > been trying to get the negotiations going and that's exactly her role.
> By
> > doing that she performs a far greater service to the people of Assam,
> then
> > all of the great living writers of Assam (I guess this is what irritates
> > quite a few people - the attention she has received). This, despite my
> > belief, that these negotiations are not going to work.
> >
> > And yes, it would be a great boon to Assam (despite the "jobs lost") if> > the oil suckers left and allowed the state to conserve its deposit of an
> > exhaustible natural resource instead of feeding it at sub-market prices
> to
> > the ever hungry Indian economy.
> >
> > Santanu.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Rajen Barua
> > Sent: Thu 1/19/2006 6:11 AM
> > To: Ram Sarangapani; ASSAMNET; Chan Mahanta
> > Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
> >
> > Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel>"Since the ULFA has
> > neither admitted nor denied the issuance of the demand note to the ONGC,
> it
> > is too early to draw a conclusion on the >authenticity of the letter.
> >
> > It may be because MMG is a writer, who by nature of her tribe normally
> > likes to think rather on the right hand side of the brain, but she
> > definitely has problems with basic logic which is controlled as we know
> by
> > the left hand side of the brain.
> >
> > Normally, an unbiased logical mind (just normal garden variety type)
> would
> > like to draw the following conclusion instead,
> > "Since the ULFA has neither admitted nor denied the issuance of the
> demand
> > note to the ONGC, it is too early to say that the letter was not from
> ULFA."
> >
> > "Be that as it may, the demand note to the ONGC will not hamper the
> peace
> > process since extortion by militants is not unusual."
> >
> > It is like saying,
> > "thik ase, hobo diok baru, tewlwok baru bea manuh, apwna lwke ki korise.
> > Apwna lwke negotiate nai kora karonehe tewlwke bhoi dekhuaise."
> >
> > No MMG, it HAMPERS the PEACE PROCESS BIG TIME.
> >
> > And Chandan already said, GOI will not be THE looser.
> >
> > Upai Nai!!
> >
> > RB
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Chan Mahanta
> > To: Ram Sarangapani ; ASSAMNET
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
> >
> >
> > Heh-heh-heh!
> >
> >
> > So MRG too is one of the bad-guys now?
> >
> >
> > GoI can mouth off peace mantras, frothing in the mouth about how there
> is
> > no problem that could not be resolved with 'democracy', while hunting
> down
> > ULFA, without nary a whimper from the now-outraged.
> >
> >
> > What is surreal here is for the same FAIR and NEUTRAL folks to be
> outraged
> > when ULFA plays its cards.
> >
> >
> > Come on Ram. Give us a break! Who are you kidding?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 2:11 PM -0600 1/18/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
> > Noted writer Mamoni Raisom Goswami, talking to The Sentinel today,
> > said: "Since the ULFA has neither admitted nor denied the issuance of
> the
> > demand note to the ONGC, it is too early to draw a conclusion on the
> > authenticity of the letter.
> >
> > Be that as it may, the demand note to the ONGC will not hamper the
> > peace process since extortion by militants is not unusual."
> >
> > Highlights are mine.
> >
> > I can't believe this. "Be that as it may .......". So, is it Kay
> Sara,
> > Sara,.... Dr. Goswami? or is hope against hope that the ULFA can do what
> it
> > pleases, but the GOI must hold parleys under any circumstances.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
