I admire Mohan Palleti's interest in Assam and Assam's problems.
Somehow I have a feeling that Mohan R. Palleti is another avatar of a netter who went through three or four other avatars before. May I request Mr. Palleti to introduce himself to the netter community?
Dilip Deka
"Mohan R. Palleti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Mohan R. Palleti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:20:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mohan R. Palleti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Bartta Bistar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Assam] Duplicity is the Trade Mark of which country and her
people the world knows very well!
I do read your emails which you circulate around. But sometimes it is very
confusing as to what you are trying to put across. Pardon me for saying
that. Are you with the ULFA, or against it or are you trying to instigate
some real mythical ULFA to surface up.
In whatever form it may be, any sort of insurgency should be smoted down.
If ULFA is very popular, the public would have supported it financially.
Extortion from people only means they are desperately trying to fund
themselves for their survival. No government should give in to any such
pressures. USA never paid of any ransoms to US citizens who have been
kidnapped in foreign countries. If you succumb to these pressures, you lay
a precedence.
I do not understand a precondition for peaceful talks. When there is a
precondition then it implies that there is no real intention to sort out
anything peacefully. It means "release my friends, and I will join you for
a cup of tea"
> *Inbred duplicity*
>
> * *
>
> http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=3&theme=&usrsess=1&id=122998
>
> Will the real Ulfa stand up?
>
> Assam Police confirmation that the Ulfa's Rs 25-lakh extortion notice on
> the
> Guwahati RBI regional director is "genuine" once again exposes the
> outfit's
> inbred duplicity vis-a-vis the on-going peace process. Such ugly deeds
> violate the understanding reached at last month's meeting between the
> Centre
> and the Ulfa-appointed People's Consultative Group, that both sides would
> endeavour to create a conducive atmosphere to pave the way for "direct
> talks".
> Surprisingly, despite Delhi's last offer of "direct talks", Ulfa leaders
> continue to remain elusive ~ and what is more the outfit wants the Centre
> to
> honour its promise and says talks are "almost certain" but only after
> Delhi
> concedes its "key" demands that entail the release of five central
> executive
> members and information on seven colleagues missing since the December
> 2003
> Royal Bhutan Army crackdown. It even took an Assam tribal minister's son
> hostage for some days in 2004 in exchange for their release. Ulfa's
> concern
> is understandable; it has the moral obligation to let their families know
> what happened to them. Delhi should clear this confusion. To facilitate
> talks it has agreed to free five leaders but if the fresh precondition is
> to
> determine the future course of talks the charade will spin on even more
> endlessly. For all the talk about there being a way if there is a will,
> Ulfa
> leaders must first free themselves from the clutches of their foreign
> principles if any progress is to accrue. And where is the real Ulfa,
> anyway?
>
Mohan Rao Palleti
_______________________________________________
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
