|
You seem to be very much worried at
my statement.
But you did not answer my
question.
Is MRG a member of
PCG?
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:48
AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Demand note is
ULFA's: IGP (SB) Sentinel
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.
* MRG
challenged GoI to put up or shut up on its claims about a
desire for a
negotiated settlement with the ULFA long before
the PCG was a
glimmer in someone's eyes.
* MRG does not
HAVE to be NEUTRAL. Only the brain dead or
otherwise
mentally disabled Oxomiya could be expected to be NEUTRAL
on this matter,
NOT having an opinion or bias towards either position.
* MRG lost her
credibility with WHO? GoI and its lackeys? That is
tough isn't it?
And if GoI's lackeys in Assam Net are disturbed
over MRG's
perceived biases towards ULFA, would they have the
intestinal
fortitude to fire off letters of protest / complaint /
whine to MRG
and Assam newsapapers? Or would they dare to write
to the the PMO
and the MHA to BAN her like the ULFA as an enemy
of the state ?
If they could,
that would show some courage of conviction!
Take care.
c
----- Original Message -----
From: Chan
Mahanta
To: Ram
Sarangapani ; Roy,
Santanu
Cc: Rajen
Barua ; ASSAMNET ; Chan Mahanta
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
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
