>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
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 8:00
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is
ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
O' 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-da
At 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
>
> [email protected]
>
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> > assam mailing
list
> > [email protected]
> > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
> >
>
>
|
