Ram:
You have been fooling us all these years--now we know! You must have
been a political science major. How else would you know all the
answers to those impossibly hard questions I posed, hoping to
deliver the coup-de-grace to you guys' arguments :-).
I know, C'da... these look like grand flip-flops. But terrorists
ought to know by now that countries do >that.
*** Really? But I doubt they do. After all they are 'Terrorists',
aren't they?
Question I have however is whether WE do? I mean, on the face of it,
wee have to assume YOU do, because you spelled it out right here.
Seeing is believing, right?
But I wonder. Correct me if I am wrong here Ram, if we do know then
how come we make these arguments based on labels assigned by people
who are known to flip-flop: One day a terrorist, the next a long lost
brother.
Does it seem like something an informed and analytically able person
will do? I can see how those who are good at collecting the
information ( desis being masters at it, like I say walking
encyclopedias) but are unsure about how to use them might. Or those
whose primary function is to indulge in propaganda might.
But should we?
>
>Most of all, if India is a civilized nation with a rule of laws,
why should the >Assamese living in Hindi speaking states be afraid?
For the most part, most Indians (as I stated earlier) will not go
about hunting other Indians (read >Assamese here) because of this
killing or another.
*** I am relieved. But what about those like Muslims ( Gujarat,
Mumbai) or Sikhs ( post-IG killing), dalits ( since eternity) ?
Perhaps they are 'terrorists'', not Indian enough?
c-da
At 9:40 AM -0600 7/1/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
C'da
>But WHO determines who should be given that label of 'terrorist'
or '>criminal'?
Unfortunately, it is the country that the terrorists are dealing with.
>Is it an ABSOLUTE standard, or is it something that varies,
depending on >the convenience of those who apply that label?
It is entirely up to the country, and of course it is a matter of
convenience. If terrorists can choose their sweet time when to act
as terrorists or when to act as regular citizens, why can't country
do so?
>Ronald Reagan declared the former Soviet Union the Evil Empire.....
I know, C'da... these look like grand flip-flops. But terrorists
ought to know by now that countries do that. One way may be to get
off that list is to play ball.
>I think you fail to understand what serious repercussion such
incidents can invite to Assamese people living in other Hindi
speaking states of India.
Imagine an Assamese student/family being assaulted, killed in
Gaziabad. Who do you think will come to protect them?
>*** First of all, let us assume for a moment that the news that
you posted >is accurate.
First of all, I did NOT write the above. JS did - so I will let him
answer you .
But, I would like weigh in a bit here.
Is the "NEWS" true or false? The AT also had a report. But then that
too is a rag (at least by your standards).
Should one wait for the ULFA to decide whether they should say "yes" or "no"?
I guess we should - get the truth from the horses mouth, so to speak. :)
Now, on the other part - about Assamese being in danger in other
parts of the country.
IMHO, they are NOT and will NOT be. But then I will have to leave it
people who actually live in these other parts of India.
I think, one will find, that in other cities - usually the big
cities or the metros, no one has time nor the inclination to form a
posse to hunt down Assamese here and there. But have heard Biharis
attacking people from the NE in trains.
>Most of all, if India is a civilized nation with a rule of laws,
why should the >Assamese living in Hindi speaking states be afraid?
For the most part, most Indians (as I stated earlier) will not go
about hunting other Indians (read Assamese here) because of this
killing or another.
But you, on the other hand, are free to condemn all Indians, their
democracy, their history and even their civilization if one army man
goes haywire.
>Why I ask is that this particular rag has a track record of
publishing rumors >as facts. I will await further info. on it before
*I* make my judgement.
Hehe! I knew that - That is WHY, I took care only to mention
Terrorists and NOT any particular group. I am waiting for the
"official" word.
I am not sure why you are so sensitive...... "baator kosu
..............." :) :)
My discussion was entirely on whether countries should keep an
option open for talks with those who they label as "terrorists".
IMHO, as long as the label sticks (and it is convenient for them
:)), countries ought to take a stand and not negotiate. That
actually may be a good solution for many countries, including India.
BTW: both China/Russia are ruthless when dealing with their
terrorists, and there is NOT a Peep from any one!
--Ram
On 7/1/07, Chan Mahanta
<<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>One does not negotiate with terrorists and criminals.
'
*** Really? Maybe so. But WHO determines who should be given that
label of 'terrorist' or 'criminal'? Can another terrorist or
criminal apply it on somebody else ? Is it an ABSOLUTE standard, or
is it something that varies, depending on the convenience of those
who apply that label?
Take for example the case of Fatah. For decades Israel, the USA etc
have called them TERRORISTS and treated them as such, killing them,
imprisoning them. But right now both Israel and the US are embracing
Fatah as the good folks. What gives? Convenience? A good ploy to
cement the rift between Fatah and Hamas, both politically as well
as geographically?
Ronald Reagan declared the former Soviet Union the Evil Empire. But
as as soon as the Communist regime fell, Russia became a friend.
George Bush went to meet Putin, the former spook, looked into his
eyes and saw his heart and declared it was in the right place.
Mandela was declared a terrorist both by South Africa as well as by
Dick Cheney and his cronies, was imprisoned for decades. But now he
is considered a great statesman.
Menachem Begin, the past Israeli PM, was declared a TERRORIST by the
British. Later he was re-labeled a freedom- fighter and was accorded
the veneration of a head of state.
So, one needs to look at the source from where these labels come
and judge them accordingly.
Should we accept Jyoti Sharma's or Ram Sarangapani's labels as the
ultimate truths?
Take a wild guess.
>I think you fail to understand what serious repercussion such
incidents can invite to Assamese people living in other Hindi
speaking states of India.
Imagine an Assamese student/family being assaulted, killed in
Gaziabad. Who do you think will come to protect them?
*** First of all, let us assume for a moment that the news that you
posted is accurate. We will get to that later. EVEN if it is true
that PC Ram was killed by ULFA or whoever, does that make ALL
Assamese GUILTY of the crime? Is that how Indian Civilization
works? And IF that is the SOURCE of applying such labels to ULFA
or whoever, what is the VALUE of such labels?
Furthermore, if ALL Assamese are to be considered criminals by all
these fine Indians, WHY only the Hindi speaking ones? Why not
Tamils, Telegus, Kannadas, Bengalis, Malayalis? Don't they have
empathy for the Hindi speaking victims?
Most of all, if India is a civilized nation with a rule of laws, why
should the Assamese living in Hindi speaking states be afraid? Will
you be afraid in Autralia, because Indian Hindu terrorists burnt the
Aurstralian missionary , his wife and children alive? Can't the
Assamese in Hindi speaking states depend upon equal protection of
the great Indian democracy?
Or is that great Indian democracy is a myth? That it is really
ruled by terrorists of various kinds, as is amply demonstrated by
recent events all across India?
>Well now that Army operations will be on a full scale let's see
how long it takes PCG to come out of >hibernation. Or has the PCG
been dismissed and another one formed by Mamoni?
*** That is certainly NEWS. I had no idea that the army has not
been operating in 'full scale'. What triggers full-scale operations
rumored killing of high Indian officials only?
Also I had no idea that the PCG or Mamoni had been hiding. Even
if they were, if the army goes on a rampage killing innocents,
should they remain silent as a penance for PC Ram's rumored
killing?
Is this some kind of a higher civilizational rung that only Indians
have reached , and if the PCG is not there yet, they can be fair
objects of ridicule and taunts from such intellectual titans as
Jyoti Sharma?
*** Finally the veracity of PC Ram's death from ULFA: Is this a
Telegraph scoop or is it a verified fact?
Why I ask is that this particular rag has a track record of
publishing rumors as facts. I will await further info. on it before
*I* make my judgement.
At 11:12 AM +0800 7/1/07, Jyotirmoy Sharma wrote:
**** Why don't you tell us? Educate us?
One does not negotiate with terrorists and criminals.
I think you fail to understand what serious repercussion such
incidents can invite to Assamese people living in other Hindi
speaking states of India.
Imagine an Assamese student/family being assaulted, killed in
Gaziabad. Who do you think will come to protect them?
Well now that Army operations will be on a full scale let's see how
long it takes PCG to come out of hibernation. Or has the PCG been
dismissed and another one formed by Mamoni?
JS
On 01/07/2007, at 10:42 AM, Chan Mahanta wrote:
Does the govt still need to talk with such groups? If yes, then
about what? I don't see Mr Bush sitting down with the Al-Qaeda
leaders to discuss Iraq or Mr Putin discussing Russia's future
with Cechen rebels. Why should India/Assam be any different?
**** Why don't you tell us? Educate us?
At 9:25 AM +0800 7/1/07, Jyotirmoy Sharma wrote:
<http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070701/asp/frontpage/story_7999536.asp>http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070701/asp/frontpage/story_7999536.asp
This incident and several others like these make me ashamed to say
that I am an Assamese. The ULFA and their cahoots have done
irreparable damage to Assam and Assamese. How does the ULFA
sympathizers spin this story now? Did they gain anything out of
this? Yes - scared the hell out of potential domestic and foreign
investors, tourists. Our boys and their intellectual colleagues
have done their very best to make Assam a Taliban country.
Does the govt still need to talk with such groups? If yes, then
about what? I don't see Mr Bush sitting down with the Al-Qaeda
leaders to discuss Iraq or Mr Putin discussing Russia's future with
Cechen rebels. Why should India/Assam be any different?
JS
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
<http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
<http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
