Was this the 'attack' Rajen? You got me worried sick for nothing
:-).
I copied Sumanta in to make you squirm a little, because you
dragged him into these for no reason. But rest easy, it is highly
unlikely he will exercise his powers as the powerful editor of Dainik
Asom to sully your reputation. Actually time to time you to do a
pretty darn good job of it all by yourself :-).
I don't have a clue about what Sumanta's views are on these
issues that we debate, and go to war over. It was YOU who made
the charges about Sumanta's views and your disagreements over them,
and thus lumped them together with other views that you do not agree
with, like mine, mm's, Tarun Gogoi's, Mamoni Goswami's, Arabinda
Rajkhowa's etc. etc. I was surprised by your including Sumanta in this
bunch of people whom you obviously find so highly disagreeable.
>It is for the netters to judge if my assessment about the Mahantas is correct when I say the following. But this is the impression I get from your various postings in the net:
>That the
Mahantas voice for Communism in future Assam. They express hatred
against India. >They prophecy Doom and Gloom for
India.
*** What can I say? You have an unique way of looking at things.
But if it helps
your cause, whatever it might be, AMEN Brother! You hold on to
those perceptions ,opinions and conclusions. Far be it for me than to
deprive you of your birth-rights.
And I am sure Netters will exercise their own reasoning skills to
come to their own conclusions. But if they share theirs with you to
express solidarity with your assessments, do let us know, OK? Don't
hide that from us now.
But one thing you might want to know: It is not going to hurt my
feelings, or cause me any discomfiture. Because I say what I say quite
deliberately, usually with consideration for its ramifications.
>But before I try to show the short coming of your statement, I want you to note and confirm again that the following is your own statement which you believe, and not of Sumanta Chaliha or somebody else and that you are simply trying to tabulate to spice up the arguments for the sake of arguments.
"Assam IS for the Assamese
-- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their homeland. It includes many
different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc.
etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for
B'deshis. They can be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a
process of assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and
Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That
is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Jan 26,
2005)
*** I am NOT in the habit of blaming somebody else for what I
write Rajen. The Devil does NOT make me do it. Did I create an
impression otherwise? Unlike YOU, I did not drag someone into these
debates out of the blue. I asked what Sumanta';s sins were to lump him
with the rest of the despicable lot you listed. You tried to
back-pedal out of it, but I wouldn't let you ( the 'bihguti' I am
:-)). You asserted that Sumanta held 'narrow nationalistic views'. I
asked you what they were. You told us. So I asked you WHY you think of
those as outrageous - why it is so bad that Sumanta should think Assam
is for the Assamese? Instead of explaining, like you usually AVOID
doing, you levelled all the charges above against the Mahantas
of Assam Net.
End of story. You demonstrated, once again, your propensity for
indulging in 'bere-saale' kwbwa' exercises. But hey, I know it takes
all kinds :-).
>Because, this
line of thinking has serious problems and shortcoming for Assam. and I
totally donot agree with >the above view. If you really believe the
above, I see that there is a vast difference between the
future Assam as envisioned by the Mahantas and by me.
*** You sure could have fooled me :-). I would like to ask you to
explain WHY, but I know you won't. So I will let it go at that.
But if you want to surprise the heck out of me and others in the net,
you may want to explain WHY what I wrote seems so outrageous to
your concept of Assam. That might be enlightening.
Take care.
c
PS: I copied Sumanta in on this one last time, just so he knows
how the 'bhawna' ended :-).
At 2:51 PM -0600 12/27/05, Rajen Barua wrote:
First I think you are copying these to Sumanta Chaliha just to add some spice into our debate or just to expose Rajen Barua in front of a powerful Editor of Doinik Asom who will teach Rajen Barua a lesson.
Please go ahead.
However, I did not equate Sumanta with the Mahantas (in spite of your blood relation). I donot think Sumanta has the same views as yours. His views are different.
What I don't understand is why you are trying to act as Sumanta Chaliha's attorney or spokesperson if you don't share the same view with his? Again just to throw a monkey wrench into my arguments just for the sake of it?
It is for the netters to judge if my assessment about the Mahantas is correct when I say the following. But this is the impression I get from your various postings in the net:
That the Mahantas voice for Communism in future Assam. They express hatred against India. They prophecy Doom and Gloom for India.
(Now please don't try to drag Sumanta Chaliha into the scene here. He does not do any of these. His views are quite different, I intend to coolly discuss with him and continue our unfinished discussion that we had in Assam when I visited last. So I would appreciate if you don't try to misinterpret my comments and try to create confusion in our understanding. )
But before I try to show the short coming of your statement, I want you to note and confirm again that the following is your own statement which you believe, and not of Sumanta Chaliha or somebody else and that you are simply trying to tabulate to spice up the arguments for the sake of arguments.
"Assam IS for the Assamese -- those who BELONG to Assam. It is their homeland. It includes many different ethnic groups. Ahoms, Bodos, Dimasas, Misings, Karbis-- etc. etc.Assam is NOT the homeland for Biharis, not for Marwaris, not for B'deshis. They can be guests there. And become Assamese in time thru a process of assimilation. But they cannot REMAIN itinerant Marwaris and Biharis and B'deshis but claim to be Assamese at the same time. That is the difference" - Chandan Mahanta (Jan 26, 2005)
Because, this line of thinking has serious problems and shortcoming for Assam. and I totally donot agree with the above view.
If you really believe the above, I see that there is a vast difference between the future Assam as envisioned by the Mahantas and by me.
RB
----- Original Message -----From: Chan MahantaTo: Rajen Barua ; [email protected]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 12:16 PMSubject: Re: [Assam] Who is Assam For?It was Rajen Barua who brought Sumanta Chaliha into these discussions and equted them with :Communism, as proposed by the Mahantas, is definitely not the solution.Hatred of India, as proposed by the Mahnats, is not the solution.Doom for India, as proposed by the Mahantas, is not the solution.I don't have to be Sumanta Chaliha's spokesperson to ask what you had in mind. And you should be able to explain it, since you authored it.It does not take a genius to figure out why. But I wanted to have YOU say so. Obviously my challenge causes you a lot of discomfiture. But that is NOT MY doing. You brought it upon yourself.>It does not because what you tried to interperet your statement in the following, you are actaullay getting nto a >dead end.*** Yeah? That is because my comment was not designed to be left as an open ended one.>But before I show you the fallacy of your statement,*** I appreciate your magnanimity here. But go right ahead and 'attack' me. Isn't that what I am here for? The suspense is killing me though :-).
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
