There are many, who are real disappointed finding their apple cart, drawn by
golden horses being upset by ULFA. They believe that they are better off in the
golden era under GoI with the lavish life bestowed upon them, which is they
think is due to them for their sheer intelligence. While serving the people in
their heydays (in influencial posts), they never gave a damn about Assam or
Assamese people but after retirement, those same people are standing tall as
sole protector of Assam and Assamese people. Hope I am not hurting many.
Regards
Mridul Bhuyan
Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That I must leave to the imagination of Netters, A .
I am not certain who or how many listen to us, around the world. And even
if I did, I certainly won't be the one to gloat about the numbers . It is not
the numbers that count in a forum like ours, it is the quality of the
discourse. It ain't no desi-demokrasy here A, you know that, don't you :-)?
At 3:04 PM -0500 10/8/07, Alpana B. Sarangapani wrote:
>> I am sure that there are more than two who are for 'Sovereignity of
Assam', but may not think it to be >fruitful enough to engage in this debate
>**** That is one of the most incisive perceptions I have seen in this net in
a very long time, Mridul.
Yes, there must be!
Pise` xonkhya-tu aangulir murot lekhib pora jaabo ne` baaru?
"In order to make spiritual progress you must be patient like a tree and
humble like a blade of grass"
- Lakshmana
---------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 08:23:58 -0500
To: assam@assamnet.org
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!!
.ExternalClass blockquote, .ExternalClass dl, .ExternalClass ul, .ExternalClass
ol, .ExternalClass li {padding-top:0;padding-bottom:0;} > I am sure that there
are more than two who are for 'Sovereignity of Assam', but may not think it to
be >fruitful enough to engage in this debate
**** That is one of the most incisive perceptions I have seen in this net in
a very long time, Mridul.
At 2:40 AM -0700 10/8/07, Mridul Bhuyan wrote:
Yes, it's a sad thing indeed. There's nothing personal involved in this
debate. Everybody is free to express their opinion in good spirit. When things
started to become personal it's no longer a debate. Contrary to what you said,
I am sure that there are more than two who are for 'Sovereignity of Assam', but
may not think it to be fruitful enough to engage in this debate, which very
well starts roaming here and there instead of sticking to the subject.
Regards
Mridul Bhuyan
Dilip/Dil Deka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gentlemen,
I am sorry to say that it is degenerating into personal attack. Is there a
need to continue it?
let's stop and count how many are arguing for Assam's sovereignty in this net
and how many are against. I count two for (not counting Rubi Bhuyan), and many
against. What amazes me is how the big group that is against is allowing the
two to rile them up. Is the big group trying to reach unanimity? Differences
will always exist, and it is also a great quality to agree to disagree and move
on.
As for debating on facts, It does not seem to stick, on this subject. It
looks like a cat and mouse game.
Is the debate worth the hurt feelings it is causing? I have my doubts. How
about you?
Dilip Deka
=======================================================
Shantikam Hazarika <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Next time whenever any one has a query, the questioner would have to
qualify each question with the rationale behind each question. I think
I would give your argument to the Students' Union so that they can
agitate that in future, every question paper in examinations must have
a page explaining what the question setter had in mind while setting
the question.
Wah.....When you have no answers to Uttam's questions, you first
insist what is the purpose without which you are not willing to
answer.
> But I' will give you one more chance to redeem yourself. We all make
> bad decisions every now and then. So, even though you have been
> evading the points I raised, you can correct yourself, and tell us,
> that Utpal's ploy was not a constructive one. A far better one would
> have been to engage in a sincere DIALOGUE, of give and take; ask,
> answer and vice-versa.
I have much more important and better things to do than to redeem
myself before you. Our purpose was a DIALOGUE, and that too of the
"sincere" variety and the best way we could have started was by seeking
answers to questions that are plaguing the minds of most
"educated", "middle class" Assamese people. You took the
responsibility of holding the fort on their behalf while, as it seems,
they have scooted, leaving you to hold the baby. Well, you deserve our
pity, which we extend in unbound lots.
Its not that we did not get all the answers. One we got right from the
horse's mouth was the boundary of the "Independent Assam", where
curiously Bangladesh did not feature. Is it because the "Independent
Assam" you are extolling would be a part of Bangladesh, so how does it
matter?
Second answer YOU gave was that the purpose behind all the mayhem,
disturbance of peace, killing of innocent daily labourers, is to
liberate Assam......obviously from the poor people who are being
regularly killed, or to liberate Assam from peace and tranquility in
which case it may be difficult to sustain the comfort zones in which
the leaders (and their cohorts) are dwelling?
Lot of netters have patience, I being sixty, do not have it. Also, time.
Shantikam hazarika
On 10/5/07, Chan Mahanta wrote:
> Dear Hazarika:
>
>
> I am sorry that you , a well educated man, a pillar of your society,
> is unable to deal with a very simple
> issue:
>
> *** Why can't Utpal or yourself, or anybody else, are able
> to tell us what objective they had?
> Why can't you admit the truth with the COURAGE of your convictions?
>
> Not that it is a secret. Anyone with half a working brain can
> see right thru it. And if it was not
> so, and had a more honorable objective, you and a bunch of
> others here in this forum
> would have come out baying for my blood, for having the
> temerity to doubt the
> inquisitors' integrity. They have NOT, only because they can't.
>
>
> And if you all had a good explanation, you would have come
> out swinging, telling the world
> how wrong I am in suggesting that a reasonable person could
> have concluded that Utpal's
> AIM was not solely for proving ULFA wrong and devalue their
> goals, and that they had
> no intention of engaging in a DIALOGUE, just an inquisition.
>
>
> But I' will give you one more chance to redeem yourself. We all make
> bad decisions every now and then. So, even though you have been
> evading the points I raised, you can correct yourself, and tell us,
> that Utpal's ploy was not a constructive one. A far better one would
> have been to engage in a sincere DIALOGUE, of give and take; ask,
> answer and vice-versa.
>
> The choice is yours.
>
> Best regards.
>
> m
>
> PS: I take all your accusations, wild and sad as they are, in good
> humor, and hold absolutely no hard feelings.
>
>
>
>
>
> At 6:30 AM +0530 10/5/07, Shantikam Hazarika wrote:
> >I am not willing to get into an exercise of explaining the rainbow to
> >the blind.
> >If you do not have answers to the questions, just keep quiet, unless
> >you have been appointed to deflect the main issues. It seems they have
> >already run away from the filed, leaving their ilks of you to hold the
> >illegitimate baby.
> >Or, is it that you already know they do not have the answers or are
> >not capable of answering legitimate questions which any normal human
> >being would like to ask?
> >
> >BTW Mahanta, if you are thinking that I am trying to reach out to
> >those whose apologist you are, forget about it, Frankly I have no time
> >like you to split hairs and develop my mastery of deflection. You have
> >time, go ahead, from your comfort zone, what else can you do?
> >Shantikam Hazarika
> >
> >On 10/4/07, Chan Mahanta wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> But levity aside, allow me ask you and other wise folks once more, IF
> >> Utpal's aim was merely to assert that ULFA 's aims have no validity, WHY on
> >> earth does he or his fan club need Ruby Bhuyan or whoever to answer
> >> anything?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> They already know they are right and ULFA is wrong. They can go right on
> >> with their monologs as some of our friends do right here in assamnet with
> >> the pomposity and certitude of God himself.
> >>
> >>
> >> Am I spinning here? Is it an irrelevant question? An unreasonable one? One
> >> > >> designed to obfuscate and muddy some higher truths?
> >> Tell us H. Go right ahead and mince no words. Educate us.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >AIM of GOALS , what a fantastically creative phrase. Frankly I have come
> >> across this phrase for the first >time in my life.
> >>
> >>
> >> *** Sorry H, but conveniently cut and pasted words of mine to devalue what
> >> I wrote does not rescue your sinking effort here. I wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> "What is missing from the exercises is a rudimentary element of
> >> AIM of GOALS. "
> >>
> >>
> >> I did however miss the comma between the two. That I remain guilty of. But
> >> to attempt to use that bit of typo, or solecism if you prefer, is riskier
> >> than groping at straws, won't you think?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > If one has beliefs, one must be ready to face INQUISITIONS.
> >>
> >>
> >> ****Is that your best argument here H?
> >>
> >>
> >> Good sermon, I am sure. But you need a flock to listen to it. I may be off
> >> the wall here, but somehow I get this feeling that ULFA is not about to
> >> make
> >> a beeline to listen to or pay heed to your sermon. What do you think?
> > >
> >>
> >> BTW, the meaning of the word INQUISITION, as you understand it and use it
> >> in
> >> "---that we did not subject the leaders to frequent inquisitions," is NOT
> >> what it is. If you look it up, you will know that it means: A rigorous,
> >> harsh, interrogation, one that disregards the privacy rights, feelings etc.
> >> of the target. One that does not allow the target to ask questions, one
> >> sided inquiry.
> >>
> >>
> >> Therefore, had you attempted to subject them to your 'inquisition', the
> >> results might have been less than what you have hoped for. Just like it
> >> won't work with ULFA today . To disregard it merely displays one's
> >> delusion,
> >> that's all.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>*************************************************************************************************************
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > >
> >> At 10:53 PM +0530 10/3/07, shantikam hazarika wrote:
> >> What a wonderful deflection from the main issue. Chandan Mahanta, you are
> >> really a master at it. If there is a Nobel equivalent, I would strongly
> >> recommend you for the same.
> >> Poor Utpal. I am sure he, and many like him, have been itching to ask them
> >> some questions which are lurking in the minds of almost all Assamese
> >> people.
> >> He got a chance and asked them, in plain, straight forward English
> >> language,
> >> without any ambiguity. So, attack his "design" in asking these questions,
> >> since, frankly, they and their sympathisers have no answers.
> >>
> >> I remember, in one of the seminars organised by the students of the Assam
> >> Institute of Management on Assam's current critical problems, Sanjib
> >> Sabhapandit used a curious phrase: "Don't intellectualise Assam's
> >> problems."
> >> Well, here we are seeing an effort to intellectualise even simple and
> >> honest
> >> queries to those who seem to have solutions to Assam's problems.
> >>
> >> No one in Assam is quite clear as to what these people are fighting for. A
> >> large number of the people of Assam believe that there is a big nexus that
> >> sustains them, that they are anything but revolutionaries, and when
> >> opportunities are provided to them to justify their actions, they run away
> >> and leave it to people like Chandan mahanta, ensconced in the middle of the
> >> USA, to obfuscate the issues on their behalf. This is indeed a gem:
> >> Quote
> >> Where is the ORDINARY integrity expected of the intelligentsia here, if one
> >> can misuse the English word under the circumstances? The sincerity of
> >> purpose?
> >> It is obvious that those who consider themselves the 'educated' and'wise',
> >> unlike ULFA, and who parade around wearing the garbs of pillars-of society
> >> do not think so and thus the eloquent outpourings of disappointment, not to
> >> mention the offenses to their genteel sensitivities . Not just that, the
> >> self-fulfilling prophecies too of the band of braves indulging in the
> >> "hola > >> gosot baagi kuthar mora" enterprise, justification why their
> >> masters don't
> >> talk to them, or should not.
> >> unquote
> >> AIM of GOALS, what a fantastically creative phrase. Frankly I have come
> >> across this phrase for the first time in my life. May I add, AIM of GOALS
> >> of
> >> OBJECTIVES?
> >>
> >> If one has beliefs, one must be ready to face INQUISITIONS. In fact, the
> >> mistakes we made during the Assam Movement was that we did not subject the
> >> leaders to frequent inquisitions, which resulted in the movement being led
> >> astray.
> >>
> >> Apologists, awake, arise and continue to give proxies for those who have
> >> lost the way long ago. After all you have nothing to lose.
> >>
> >> Shantikam Hazarika
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:33:27 -0500
> >> To: assam@assamnet.org
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!!
> >>
> >> .ExternalClass blockquote, .ExternalClass dl, .ExternalClass ul,
> >> .ExternalClass ol, .ExternalClass li
> >> {padding-top:0;padding-bottom:0;}
> >>
> >> Before we pass judgement on the response, we also ought to be able to judge
> >> the QUESTION.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What were the questions posed by Utpal designed to ?
> >>
> >>
> >> To help him and others decide, if what ULFA has been fighting for, Assam's
> >> sovereignty, is a sound and beneficial move for Assam? And if they are
> > > persuaded by ULFA's response that they are sound, Utpal and others would
> >> SUPPORT it?
> >>
> >>
> >> Or were they designed to extract an admission from ULFA, that their own
> >> notions and beliefs, that it is
> >> patently bad for Assam, never mind HOW or WHY they have concluded that
> >> their notions and beliefs are the truly wise and considered opinions?
> >>
> >>
> >> Is it therefore REASONABLE to evaluate INTENT for ULFA before submitting
> >> itself to the INQUISITION?
> >>
> >>
> >> Where is the ORDINARY integrity expected of the intelligentsia here, if one
> >> can misuse the English word under the circumstances? The sincerity of
> >> purpose?
> >> It is obvious that those who consider themselves the 'educated' and'wise',
> >> unlike ULFA, and who parade around wearing the garbs of pillars-of society
> > > do not think so and thus the eloquent outpourings of
> >disappointment, not to
> >> mention the offenses to their genteel sensitivities . Not just that, the
> >> self-fulfilling prophecies too of the band of braves indulging in the "hola
> >> gosot baagi kuthar mora" enterprise, justification why their masters don't
> >> talk to them, or should not.
> >>
> >>
> >> What is missing from the exercises is a rudimentary element of AIM of
> >> GOALS. Never mind the need to explore the reasons WHY ten thousand plus
> >> Oxomiyas have given their lives. No doubt their lives were nearly not as
> >> valuable as one Sanjoy Ghosh's.
> >>
> >>
> >> Aimless exercises unfortunately lead to nowhere. With such pillars of
> >> society looking after its well-being, one hardly needs enemies to tear it
> >> down.
> >>
> >>
> >> cm
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> At 11:19 AM +0530 10/3/07, shantikam hazarika wrote:
> >>
> >> It seems that some of us are being branded as part of an "unhappy gang with
> >> their so-called education". And they would be 'selective' in answering
> >> their
> >> questions; which means they would only reply to 'sincere' questions, from
> >> 'real questioners' after their 'background check done'.
> >>
> >> Well, in case they have to do a background check in my case, let me tell
> >> you that my life has been an open book and if a background check is requird
> >> in my case, it simly shows how much these people are in touch with reality
> >> or the ground situations.
> >>
> >> Incidentally, let me also tell, that there has been enough background
> >> checks done about these people, their cohorts, sympathisers, beneficiaries,
> >> supporters, hangers one and what not. Lot of people already know who
> >> benefits from their actions, who are actually propping them up. For
> >> example > >> when they killed Sanjay Ghosh, it did not require much
> >> background check to
> >> find out why they did so, what was the nexus behind that sordid deal and
> >> who
> >> would be the real losers if Majuli is genuinely saved in a very cost
> >> effective manner. Obviously, they are buying time to prepare some
> >> obfuscating response, what we may call "saale bere kobowa" reply in the
> >> name of background checks and what not.
> >>
> >> Also they have already said that they would ignore "halfwit questions and
> >> questioners". How more selective can your comfort zone be...
> >>
> >> Interestingly, I was reading something today and I came across the
> >> follwoing phrase: The truth is that many terrorists are doing very well out
> >> of violence. Extortion rackets give them a lifestyle they cannot aspire in
> >> times of peace. They have money, excitement and status: what more you seek
> >> in life?
> >>
> >> Mantabya nisproyojan.
> >>
> >>
> >> Shantikam Hazarika
> >>
> >> Director,
> >>
> >> Assam Institute of Management
> >>
> >> PO Box 30, GUWAHATI 781001, India
> >>
> >> HOME PAGE: www.aimguwahati.edu.in
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 17:17:14 +0100
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> To: assam@assamnet.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Assam] assam Digest, Vol 26, Issue 66
> >>
> >> To: assamonline
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ULFA invites genuine sincere questions from persons(not gangs) not
> >> happy with their so-called education ,wanting to KNOW how to fight and win
> >> their great future in sovereign Assam .
> >>
> >>
> >> Firstly we will have background checks done on real (?) questioners.
> >> Please tolerate delays.
> >>
> >> ULFA will ignore halfwit questions and questioners who think they already
> > > know and are already bonded mentally or monetarily.
> >>
> >> With Best Regards to respectable Assamonliners,
> >>
> >> Rubi
> >> --------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> Call friends with PC-to-PC calling -- FREE Try it now!
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> assam mailing list
> >> assam@assamnet.org
> >> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> Windows Live Spaces is here! It's easy to create your own personal Web
> >> site.
> >> Check it out!
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> assam mailing list
> >> assam@assamnet.org
> >> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> > > assam mailing list
> >> assam@assamnet.org
> >> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >assam mailing list
> >assam@assamnet.org
> >http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam@assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Images by Graphics Factory.com
---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
---------------------------------
Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Images by Graphics Factory.com
---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. _______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
