Title: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
Is ULFA not even accountable to the
people of Assam whom they claim to represent in their demand of independence for
Assam?
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 6:12
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is
ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
>Or the rule does not apply
there?
*** That depends upon whether one can apply some ordinary analytical
skills.
Accountability of a government exists to the people that put it in
place.
ULFA is NOT accountable to those who would have it submit to their
inquisition. Nor is it accountable to those who would deny it its
existence.
Or was that much too complicated to figure out?
At 12:34 PM -0600 1/20/06, Rajen Barua wrote:
Can
we say the same for GOI accountability?
Or
the rule does not apply there?
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Chan
Mahanta
To: Rajen
Barua ; Ram
Sarangapani
Cc: ASSAMNET
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP (SB)
Sentinel
>Parallel govts
must have its own accountability.
*** Only problem here is that " Xogunor xawt burha goru
nomore"
At 11:14 AM -0600 1/20/06, Rajen Barua wrote:
I think if ULFA would come up with a solid plan how to spend
that 5 billion dollar for Assam and agree to put that money in a common
World Bank account to be spent only for the cause of Assam, I would
support the ULFA move and would demand the money from GOI instead
and not from ONGC. But I will not support ULFA if they want to collect
the money and spend in Bangladesh Movie industry or any other personal
investment depriving the people of Assam and making the people of Assam
even poorer.
Parallel govts must
have its own accountability.
Assamese people are
saying NO to Hobo Diok.
They are saying :
Amar Upai Nai.
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Ram
Sarangapani
To: Barua25
Cc: ASSAMNET ; Chan Mahanta
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:25
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is ULFA's: IGP
(SB) Sentinel
Heh! heh! Barua, that is yet another explanation for the
faux pas.
The idea seems to put the onus on the GOI. But who
knows?
On 1/18/06, Barua25 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
"Be that
as it may, the demand note to the ONGC will
not
hamper the peace process since extortion by militants is not
unusual."
Thinking again,
I think the above statement by MRG may be a 'wish' statement.
Note the adverb 'will not'. Normally only a spekeperson
from GOI wiould use the phrase 'will not'. MRG should have
used 'should not', but by using the 'word 'will not', she is
in fact wishing to tell the GOI, " Of course, you are not going to
stop the negotiations simply because of this demand note, are you?
You know these milliants do this kind of thing al the time.
You better hurry to do the negotiations so that they will not do
such things." In fact she is wishing that the demand note issue may
be used as a some kind of trump card and force GOI to do some
realpolitics. Otherwise, I could not see why she used 'will
not' without any authority and did not use 'should
not'.
RB
|
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org