C'da, There are certain realities in the world today :)
*** Really? But I doubt they do. After all they are 'Terrorists', aren't
they? And that is why there is a conflict - each thinks the other is the terrorist. Unfortunately, the world opinion usually goes against killings of innocent people - this is specially *TRUE of stateless groups.* Countries usually have an advantage - like the US engagement in Iraq. While there may be many innocent citicents killed, a country like the US can usually deflect at least some of this (bad publicity). Moreover, the US is not seeking territory from Iraq. So,if labeled terrorists do NOT see it, they usually pay a heavy price for the myopia. And if they are willing, I guess, it is fine. >>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? I am glad you are, C'da :). Hence, I used the key words "for the most part, most". But both Gujarat and the Sikhs killings, though unfortunate, they were controlled by political/religious movitations - both of which raise national sentiments. Now, if thousands of say Biharis or Muslims or Hindus were killed in Assam, yes that would definitely cause problems for Assamese elsewhere.
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 :-). Hehehe! - what can I say? --Ram On 7/1/07, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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* <[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 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 [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org _______________________________________________ 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
