Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
:
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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 -0500To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Assam] What a response!! 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 BhuyanDilip/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 toqualify each question with the rationale behind each question. I thinkI would give your argument to the Students' Union so that they canagitate that in future, every question paper in examinations must havea page explaining what the question setter had in mind while settingthe question.Wah.When you have no answers to Uttam's questions, you firstinsist what is the purpose without which you are not willing toanswer. 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 redeemmyself before you. Our purpose was a DIALOGUE, and that too of thesincere variety and the best way we could have started was byseeking answers to questions that are plaguing the minds of mosteducated, middle class Assamese people. You took theresponsibility of holding the fort on their behalf while, as it seems,they have scooted, leaving you to hold the baby. Well, you deserve ourpity, which we extend in unbound lots.Its not that we did not get all the answers. One we got right from thehorse's mouth was the boundary of the Independent Assam, wherecuriously Bangladesh did not feature. Is it because the IndependentAssam you are extolling would be a part of Bangladesh, so how does itmatter?Second answer YOU gave was that the purpose behind all the mayhem,disturbance of peace, killing of innocent daily labourers, is toliberate Assam..obviously from the poor people who are beingregularly killed, or to liberate Assam from peace and tranquility inwhich case it may be difficult to sustain the comfort zones in whichthe leaders (and their cohorts) are dwelling?Lot of netters have patience, I being sixty, do not have it. Also, time.Shantikam hazarikaOn 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Chandan-da, I have been reading with great curiosity your mails arising out of Shantikam Hazarikas comments on my questions posted to ULFA on another online group of Assamese people. I dont wish to join you in a debate on the exchanges you have been having with Hazarika or others, but I would be grateful if you let me know: 1. How you deduced that my questions to ULFA were constructive (as you put it, 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). 2. I had asked ULFA some stratightforward questions, and HAD given the reasons why I was asking them. I am not sure if you saw / have seen the questions while questioning the motive behind them, because I have posted them on another group and on this group it just took off on the basis of Hazarikas comments. (I am also not sure if you are a member of the other group, since you have not participated in the debate on the other group, though you have said in this forum As I wrote earlier, Utpal's questions were virtually the same as those posed to this writer by Chittaranjan in May of this year.) 3. How did you arrive at the conclusion that the questions were an inquisition and an interrogator's talking points, and that it was not designed to have a SINCERE DIALOGUE? 4. If the ULFA dispatcher might have been farther handicapped by not being in on ULFA's policy making or communicating team (I would like to know how you arrived at that conclusion, or whether you are privy to some inside information on this, since Ruby Bhuyan is a member of ULFAs central publicity committee, as is mentioned in the ULFA press release emails), s/he should have told me that. My questions were not directed at him/her, but at the ULFA, so s/he could have taken some time maybe even collecting all the questions of all varieties (pro/anti/whatever) from more questioners and come up with an overall response from the leadership, the one which makes the policies. If the ULFA dispatcher is not part of ULFAs policy making or communication team, n that context, there is no use in sending any question to ULFA through Ruby Bhuyan 5. ULFA, for your kind information, did not even attempt to reply to a single question in a straightforward manner it just inserted some words in different colours, adding some caustic comments and remarks. I would have appreciated if it had replied to my questions even if it had been in the manner you had argued with Chittaranjan Pathak. I am not sure if you have seen the so-called reply before questioning my motive. 6. Since you say you do not speak for ULFA and am NOT PRIVY to its policy-making, would not it be better if ULFA talks directly to all of us? with regards, Utpal Borpujari Message: 2 Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 08:52:39 -0500 From: Chan Mahanta Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!! To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the world Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Is the debate worth the hurt feelings it is causing? Personally, I don't have any problem with anyone calling me names or personally attacking me. My feelings could not be hurt by people who make fun of me or my views. Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. But I do realize, that those whose feelings are founded on how others perceive them and if they end up being presented in an unflattering light for what they say or imply, that might cause humiliation, anger, lashing out with personal attacks, parodying and caricaturing, attributing manufactured quotes and such other less than honorable or mature reactions. But there is a good way to prevent it: It requires a bit i of careful thinking before shooting off one's mouth in anger or annoyance. Do we need to continue the discussions and debates? Absolutely. Just because a majority of the participants here sing the chorus of Assam's continued servitude, does not make it the last word. Silence merely helps shove the dirt, the issues, under the rug, and does not lead either to thinking critically, nor informing that vast majority of the audience who observe in a silence. While the term 'sovereignty' is an easy pill to reject for the nay-sayers, it has ingredients that everyone needs to look at and decide if they are NOT needed for their well-being. That is why it is of critical importance, for the able and the willing, to analyze and examine them and let the chips fall where they may. What amazes me is how the big group that is against is allowing the two to rile them up. *** I explained that a number of times, didn't I ? Hard to accept that however, isn't it :-)? Differences will always exist, and it is also a great quality to agree to disagree and move on. *** That will be a very simplistic
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Hi Utpal: I was afraid we won't hear from you at all :-). Nice of you to respond. Now we can talk. But before we do, will you be kind enough to post the full text of what you wrote to Ruby Bhuyan in Esom ? It is very difficult to follow the thread from what Hazarika and Nayan Medhi forwarded. I will get beck to you shortly. c-da At 12:35 PM +0100 10/7/07, utpal borpujari wrote: Chandan-da, I have been reading with great curiosity your mails arising out of Shantikam Hazarikas comments on my questions posted to ULFA on another online group of Assamese people. I dont wish to join you in a debate on the exchanges you have been having with Hazarika or others, but I would be grateful if you let me know: 1. How you deduced that my questions to ULFA were constructive (as you put it, 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). 2. I had asked ULFA some stratightforward questions, and HAD given the reasons why I was asking them. I am not sure if you saw / have seen the questions while questioning the motive behind them, because I have posted them on another group and on this group it just took off on the basis of Hazarikas comments. (I am also not sure if you are a member of the other group, since you have not participated in the debate on the other group, though you have said in this forum As I wrote earlier, Utpal's questions were virtually the same as those posed to this writer by Chittaranjan in May of this year.) 3. How did you arrive at the conclusion that the questions were an inquisition and an interrogator's talking points, and that it was not designed to have a SINCERE DIALOGUE? 4. If the ULFA dispatcher might have been farther handicapped by not being in on ULFA's policy making or communicating team (I would like to know how you arrived at that conclusion, or whether you are privy to some inside information on this, since Ruby Bhuyan is a member of ULFAs central publicity committee, as is mentioned in the ULFA press release emails), s/he should have told me that. My questions were not directed at him/her, but at the ULFA, so s/he could have taken some time maybe even collecting all the questions of all varieties (pro/anti/whatever) from more questioners and come up with an overall response from the leadership, the one which makes the policies. If the ULFA dispatcher is not part of ULFAs policy making or communication team, n that context, there is no use in sending any question to ULFA through Ruby Bhuyan 5. ULFA, for your kind information, did not even attempt to reply to a single question in a straightforward manner it just inserted some words in different colours, adding some caustic comments and remarks. I would have appreciated if it had replied to my questions even if it had been in the manner you had argued with Chittaranjan Pathak. I am not sure if you have seen the so-called reply before questioning my motive. 6. Since you say you do not speak for ULFA and am NOT PRIVY to its policy-making, would not it be better if ULFA talks directly to all of us? with regards, Utpal Borpujari Message: 2 Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 08:52:39 -0500 From: Chan Mahanta Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!! To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the world Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Is the debate worth the hurt feelings it is causing? Personally, I don't have any problem with anyone calling me names or personally attacking me. My feelings could not be hurt by people who make fun of me or my views. Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. But I do realize, that those whose feelings are founded on how others perceive them and if they end up being presented in an unflattering light for what they say or imply, that might cause humiliation, anger, lashing out with personal attacks, parodying and caricaturing, attributing manufactured quotes and such other less than honorable or mature reactions. But there is a good way to prevent it: It requires a bit i of careful thinking before shooting off one's mouth in anger or annoyance. Do we need to continue the discussions and debates? Absolutely. Just because a majority of the participants here sing the chorus of Assam's continued servitude, does not make it the last word. Silence merely helps shove the dirt, the issues, under the rug, and does not lead either to thinking critically, nor informing that vast majority of the audience who observe in a silence. While the term 'sovereignty' is an easy pill to reject for the nay-sayers, it has ingredients that everyone needs to look at and decide if they are NOT needed for their well-being. That is why it is of critical importance, for the able and the willing, to analyze
Re: [Assam] What a response?
What you are trying to say is that ULFA is not in a position to or
incapable of enter into a dialogue or answer questions posed to it.
I have fair ability to say EXACTLY what I want to say, and I do.
And the above is NOT it.
What I said that Ruby Bhuyan may NOT be able to do that.
Let us assume for a moment, for discussion's sake , that ULFA is
indeed incapable of doing so. That they are little more than
low-class and uneducated people as you so implied and as others in
that sordid exchange did.
But, would that mean that there are NO good answers to the questions
asked? Would that be yours and others considered conclusion and thus
you can wave that as proof to anyone caring to watch that YOU the
wise, educated folks are RIGHT and ULFA is WRONG as was just played
out in Esomonline?
Is that what you concluded?
I am not interested in anything else.
That is very understandable. Because you seem only to seek
simple minded, black and white answers to complex issues with many
shades of grey, not just the blacks and the whites.
That, sir, is nothing less than tragic.
At 8:48 AM +0530 10/7/07, shantikam hazarika wrote:
You go on splitting hair, it does not bother me. What you are trying
to say is that ULFA is not in a position to or incapable of enter
into a dialogue or answer questions posed to it.
Unfortunately these questions are being asked by everyone in Assam
and we are perplexed why they cannot answer.
I am not interested in anything else.
Shantikam Hazarika
Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 09:31:49 -0500
To: assam@assamnet.org
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response? My Conclusions: PART 1
.ExternalClass blockquote, .ExternalClass dl, .ExternalClass ul,
.ExternalClass ol, .ExternalClass li
{padding-top:0;padding-bottom:0;}
I will stay to the main issue in this part, and avoid dealing with
the extraneous issues, which I will try to address in Part 2.
I thank Hazarika for changing his earlier position expressed in the comment
BTW Mahanta, if you are thinking that I am trying to reach out to
those whose apologist you are, forget about it,
with the following clarification:
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.
The only things we need to decide now are:
A: Whether the questions posed by Utpal were they designed to
generate a dialogue, of give and take, of understanding each other's
concerns and actions; or subject the ULFA dispatcher to an
inquisition to extract an admission from ULFA, that their goals and
objectives are all bad for Assam, while the inquisitors' ( Utpal's ,
Hazarika's and those I fondly call the 'righteous block's ) own
notions and beliefs are the right ones?
B: If the ULFA dispatcher did not or could not answer Utpal and
other's interrogations to their satisfaction, whether any
satisfactory or credible answers are at all possible, whether they
exist?
Why this arises is for the simple reason that not everyone amongst
us is capable of articulating a coherent response. It is hardly a
mystery that our communicative skills, by and large, are , shall we
say--a work in progress?
Utpal, a journalist, wrote his piece quite well as an
interrogator's talking points. But was it designed to understand
the whole issue, as a SINCERE DIALOGUE, as Hazarika wants us to
believe?
I will let netters decide that.
It was obvious that the ULFA dispatcher was not someone used to or
experienced in effective written communication. He/she might have
been farther handicapped by not being in on ULFA's policy making
or communicating team.
He is hardly an exception. Most of those of the 'righteous block'
that made fun of Ruby Bhuyan's English language skills would not
fare much higher on the communication skills scale either.
BUT, does that mean, that there can be no good answers to the questions?
I would submit there are. As I wrote earlier, Utpal's questions were
virtually the same as those posed to this writer by Chittaranjan in
May of this year. And I addressed those in considerable detail, in
mY PERSONAL CAPACITY, since I do not speak for ULFA and am NOT
PRIVY to its policy-making .
If anyone is curious enough about it, I will be pleased to revisit
them, as time permits.
Finally, I would ask 'the righteous block' and other netters this again:
Can they seriously expect ULFA to participate in a dialogue, if all
they are interested in is extracting an admission from it that what
they have fought for a quarter century and gave thousands of their
lives, is all WRONG?
At 5:52 AM +0530 10/6/07, Shantikam Hazarika wrote:
Next time whenever any one has a query, the questioner would have to
qualify each question with the rationale behind each question. I
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
.
*
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
Re: [Assam] What a response? My Conclusions: PART 1
.
*
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. And what about the recipients inability to READ a coherent response? Rgds, SD - Original Message From: Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the world assam@assamnet.org Sent: Saturday, October 6, 2007 11:52:39 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!! Is the debate worth the hurt feelings it is causing? Personally, I don't have any problem with anyone calling me names or personally attacking me. My feelings could not be hurt by people who make fun of me or my views. Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. But I do realize, that those whose feelings are founded on how others perceive them and if they end up being presented in an unflattering light for what they say or imply, that might cause humiliation, anger, lashing out with personal attacks, parodying and caricaturing, attributing manufactured quotes and such other less than honorable or mature reactions. But there is a good way to prevent it: It requires a bit i of careful thinking before shooting off one's mouth in anger or annoyance. Do we need to continue the discussions and debates? Absolutely. Just because a majority of the participants here sing the chorus of Assam's continued servitude, does not make it the last word. Silence merely helps shove the dirt, the issues, under the rug, and does not lead either to thinking critically, nor informing that vast majority of the audience who observe in a silence. While the term 'sovereignty' is an easy pill to reject for the nay-sayers, it has ingredients that everyone needs to look at and decide if they are NOT needed for their well-being. That is why it is of critical importance, for the able and the willing, to analyze and examine them and let the chips fall where they may. What amazes me is how the big group that is against is allowing the two to rile them up. *** I explained that a number of times, didn't I ? Hard to accept that however, isn't it :-)? Differences will always exist, and it is also a great quality to agree to disagree and move on. *** That will be a very simplistic conclusion, to agree to disagree and move on, particularly on THIS issue of enormous importance to Assam's present and its future. We all have a stake in its many ramifications. As for debating on facts, It does not seem to stick, on this subject. *** I don't get it. But if I agree we cannot depend upon FACTS, since there is no telling how trustworthy the facts presented might be. That is why I always resort to looking at the basic principles. At 7:42 PM -0700 10/5/07, Dilip/Dil Deka 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
And what about the recipients inability to READ a coherent response? What about them? At 7:47 AM -0700 10/6/07, SANDIP DUTTA wrote: Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. And what about the recipients inability to READ a coherent response? Rgds, SD - Original Message From: Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the world assam@assamnet.org Sent: Saturday, October 6, 2007 11:52:39 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] What a response!! Is the debate worth the hurt feelings it is causing? Personally, I don't have any problem with anyone calling me names or personally attacking me. My feelings could not be hurt by people who make fun of me or my views. Those who indulge in it, really expose their own inability to articulate a coherent response, much less a credible one. But I do realize, that those whose feelings are founded on how others perceive them and if they end up being presented in an unflattering light for what they say or imply, that might cause humiliation, anger, lashing out with personal attacks, parodying and caricaturing, attributing manufactured quotes and such other less than honorable or mature reactions. But there is a good way to prevent it: It requires a bit i of careful thinking before shooting off one's mouth in anger or annoyance. Do we need to continue the discussions and debates? Absolutely. Just because a majority of the participants here sing the chorus of Assam's continued servitude, does not make it the last word. Silence merely helps shove the dirt, the issues, under the rug, and does not lead either to thinking critically, nor informing that vast majority of the audience who observe in a silence. While the term 'sovereignty' is an easy pill to reject for the nay-sayers, it has ingredients that everyone needs to look at and decide if they are NOT needed for their well-being. That is why it is of critical importance, for the able and the willing, to analyze and examine them and let the chips fall where they may. What amazes me is how the big group that is against is allowing the two to rile them up. *** I explained that a number of times, didn't I ? Hard to accept that however, isn't it :-)? Differences will always exist, and it is also a great quality to agree to disagree and move on. *** That will be a very simplistic conclusion, to agree to disagree and move on, particularly on THIS issue of enormous importance to Assam's present and its future. We all have a stake in its many ramifications. As for debating on facts, It does not seem to stick, on this subject. *** I don't get it. But if I agree we cannot depend upon FACTS, since there is no telling how trustworthy the facts presented might be. That is why I always resort to looking at the basic principles. At 7:42 PM -0700 10/5/07, Dilip/Dil Deka 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
Re: [Assam] What a response? My Conclusions: PART 1
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
.
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
I have come to believe that 'terrorism' subsists because it serves 'vested
interest' all around.
It serves the arm supplying nations.
It serves the nations having an axe to grind.
It serves the gun runners.
It serves the drug dealers.
It serves the corrupt army as it can do anything with the funds made
available, fund found and confiscated and also materials made available
including medicines. I have been told that the Indian army destroy cancer
drugs each year that could have catered to the needs of the patient in entire
north east region. Not only that, such 'destroyed' medicines find their way
back into the market:-).
It serves the police making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the bureaucrats making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the politicians... they use part of the loot for funding elections
and then take share of the loot out of counter insurgency fund as well and can
misappropriate developmental fund too for personal gains.
It serves a part of the journalists who claim special privilege . from
both sides. (Some body described them to me as Giant Storks pinning the
vultures (politicians) down to vomit the semi-digested carcass and then gulping
that vomit).
It serves criminals.
It serves the terrorists maintaining a life style that they could not have
afforded in the normal circumstances.
ONLY THAT IT DOES NOT SERVE THE COMMON MAN WITHOUT RICHES AND CLOUTS.
shantikam hazarika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma }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
Uttam Kumar Borthakur
-
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online. Click here.___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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: http://www.aimguwahati.edu.in/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 http://get.live.com/messenger/overviewTry it now! ___ 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. Dilip Deka uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
When a dialog was being sought, one would have hope it had an aim, a goal. In this instance, what was Utpal's aim? Would it be reasonable to assume that for the kind of people involved here it was to help find a solution for the impasse of a quarter century? And what did it turn out to be? Did the questions posed have a sincerity of purpose, of discussing the merits of each side's positions, hopefully to find common ground and a solution? Can an observer not reasonably conclude that it was in its entirety , without exceptions, an inquisition; of a dispatcher, by a band of obviously immature and self-righteous and self-impressed intellectual goons intent only on devaluing and insulting the hapless, messenger ill equipped to dish out in kind? The start of the response cycle obviously could very well have been an honorable one, to have a honest and sincere dialog, with some of Assam's most privileged and purportedly 'educated'. Some education that must have been! It could in no way, shape or form have been interpreted by the inquisitors or well meaning observers to have been a signal to submit to being insulted and to surrender the goals that thousands of their fellow men had given their lives for or to concede that they have all been wrong while their inquisitors alone are right. Was it? Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. *** If the aim was merely to assert one's own righteousness, it played out just as expected. But who needs it? What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. *** That is profound. At 4:52 PM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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. Example, C'da, example! What if one considers Sanjoy Ghosh as one of those ten thousand plus Oxomiyas? It reminds of this line from one of Bhupen Hazarika's songs: Mur Aaik bhaal pao bulile aanor Aaik jaanu ghin koratu Bujaabo? (When I say 'l love my mother', would it mean that 'I hate somebody else's mother?) “In order to make spiritual progress you must be patient like a tree and humble like a blade of grass” - Lakshmana Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:33:27 -0500To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Assam] What a response!! 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 +0100From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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 -0500To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Assam] What a response!! 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
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: mailto:assam@assamnet.orgassam@assamnet.org
From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
, 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: http://www.aimguwahati.edu.in/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
http://get.live.com/messenger/overviewTry it now!
___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Isn't that an exhaustive litany of Kharkhowa woes?
But tell us something we DON'T KNOW :-).
The big mystery remains untouched: What is a body to do about it? How
could they be resolved ?
That is the issue, isn't it?
At 8:35 AM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
I have come to believe that 'terrorism' subsists because it serves
'vested interest' all around.
It serves the arm supplying nations.
It serves the nations having an axe to grind.
It serves the gun runners.
It serves the drug dealers.
It serves the corrupt army as it can do anything with the funds made
available, fund found and confiscated and also materials made
available including medicines. I have been told that the Indian army
destroy cancer drugs each year that could have catered to the needs
of the patient in entire north east region. Not only that,
such 'destroyed' medicines find their way back into the market:-).
It serves the police making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the bureaucrats making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the politicians... they use part of the loot for funding
elections and then take share of the loot out of counter insurgency
fund as well and can misappropriate developmental fund too for
personal gains.
It serves a part of the journalists who claim special privilege
. from both sides. (Some body described them to me as Giant
Storks pinning the vultures (politicians) down to vomit the
semi-digested carcass and then gulping that vomit).
It serves criminals.
It serves the terrorists maintaining a life style that they could
not have afforded in the normal circumstances.
ONLY THAT IT DOES NOT SERVE THE COMMON MAN WITHOUT RICHES AND CLOUTS.
shantikam hazarika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } 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: http://www.aimguwahati.edu.in/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
http://get.live.com/messenger/overviewTry it now!
___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Uttam Kumar Borthakur
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online.
http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_webmessenger_4/*http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.phpClick
here.
___
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. If I had access to such insightful advice, I would SELL them, for a big fat fee, by the word. What a shame you give it away, for FREE. :-) PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. At 9:09 AM -0700 10/3/07, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. Dilip Deka uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
At 11:03 PM +0530 10/3/07, shantikam hazarika wrote:
It does not require any intellectual prattle to find out what has
been the AIM of those who have raised the queries. They want to know
what is the purpose of all the mayhem, that has disturbed the peace,
have projected Assam in unfavourable light to the whole world and
does not seem to end.
That , if I might say so in so many words, is a no-brainer . I
don't recall ULFA has ever made a secret of their GOAL, that is to
make Assam a sovereign nation. Did some folks here miss that?
I hope I did not make it difficult to comprehend with intellectual prattle :-).
If you have answers, provide them. If you do not have the answers, say so.
Well? Does the above help? Please don't hesitate to ask if I
need to translate it or anything :-).
cm
Shantikam Hazarika
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 11:30:02 -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;}
When a dialog was being sought, one would have hope it had an aim, a goal.
In this instance, what was Utpal's aim?
Would it be reasonable to assume that for the kind of people
involved here it was to help find a solution for the impasse of a
quarter century?
And what did it turn out to be?
Did the questions posed have a sincerity of purpose, of discussing
the merits of each side's positions, hopefully to find common ground
and a solution?
Can an observer not reasonably conclude that it was in its
entirety , without exceptions, an inquisition; of a dispatcher, by
a band of obviously immature and self-righteous and self-impressed
intellectual goons intent only on devaluing and insulting the
hapless, messenger ill equipped to dish out in kind?
The start of the response cycle obviously could very well have been
an honorable one, to have a honest and sincere dialog, with some of
Assam's most privileged and purportedly 'educated'. Some education
that must have been! It could in no way, shape or form have been
interpreted by the inquisitors or well meaning observers to have
been a signal to submit to being insulted and to surrender the goals
that thousands of their fellow men had given their lives for or to
concede that they have all been wrong while their inquisitors alone
are right.
Was it?
Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating
through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him
and what is not.
*** If the aim was merely to assert one's own righteousness, it
played out just as expected. But who needs it?
What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another.
*** That is profound.
At 4:52 PM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is
inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any
pre-condition for proselytisation?
Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in
beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response
cycle at all?
Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a
dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have
his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is
not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any
comment thereon.
Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating
through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him
and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be
blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith.
What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another.
Is there any scope for normative preachings here?
Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. --- That is half the fun. Ene usotwa budhi xorute uzanbozarot xika. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. If I had access to such insightful advice, I would SELL them, for a big fat fee, by the word. What a shame you give it away, for FREE. :-) PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. At 9:09 AM -0700 10/3/07, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. Dilip Deka uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Have you got all answers to riddles of life, except this, sir!
Not a litany of Kharkhowa woes, I presume some of us are not aware of these;
else they would stopped doing things that they do to prolong the list of woes
from safe distance.
Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't that an exhaustive litany of Kharkhowa woes?
But tell us something we DON'T KNOW :-).
The big mystery remains untouched: What is a body to do about it? How could
they be resolved ?
That is the issue, isn't it?
At 8:35 AM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
I have come to believe that 'terrorism' subsists because it serves 'vested
interest' all around. It serves the arm supplying nations. It serves
the nations having an axe to grind. It serves the gun runners. It
serves the drug dealers. It serves the corrupt army as it can do anything
with the funds made available, fund found and confiscated and also materials
made available including medicines. I have been told that the Indian army
destroy cancer drugs each year that could have catered to the needs of the
patient in entire north east region. Not only that, such 'destroyed' medicines
find their way back into the market:-). It serves the police making hay in
disturbed situation. It serves the bureaucrats making hay in disturbed
situation. It serves the politicians... they use part of the loot for
funding elections and then take share of the loot out of counter insurgency
fund as well and can misappropriate developmental fund too for personal
gains.
It serves a part of the journalists who claim special privilege . from
both sides. (Some body described them to me as Giant Storks pinning the
vultures (politicians) down to vomit the semi-digested carcass and then gulping
that vomit). It serves criminals. It serves the terrorists maintaining
a life style that they could not have afforded in the normal circumstances.
ONLY THAT IT DOES NOT SERVE THE COMMON MAN WITHOUT RICHES AND CLOUTS.
shantikam hazarika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
When the unfortunate killing of Sanjoy Ghosh keeps appearing as the sole argument against ULFA's struggles, it is legitimate and appropriate to weigh it against those who willingly gave their lives in pursuit of their cause. And to attempt to compare the cause of FREEDOM with that of genocide by Nazis or 9/11 or what have you harks of either an absence of ordinary reasoning ability or an intentional abuse of it. That simple. At 3:11 AM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote: Should the number of people laying down their lives be a bulwark of any argument? So, did Nazis, so did 9/11 hijackers, . should I try to prolong the list where people might have laid down their lives for a retrgrade cause. I am not commenting on the legitimacy of the claim of ULFA here. I'm just saying, please do not bring number of death as index of the genuineness of any cause. Such arguments are placed in a political meeting. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a dialog was being sought, one would have hope it had an aim, a goal. In this instance, what was Utpal's aim? Would it be reasonable to assume that for the kind of people involved here it was to help find a solution for the impasse of a quarter century? And what did it turn out to be? Did the questions posed have a sincerity of purpose, of discussing the merits of each side's positions, hopefully to find common ground and a solution? Can an observer not reasonably conclude that it was in its entirety , without exceptions, an inquisition; of a dispatcher, by a band of obviously immature and self-righteous and self-impressed intellectual goons intent only on devaluing and insulting the hapless, messenger ill equipped to dish out in kind? The start of the response cycle obviously could very well have been an honorable one, to have a honest and sincere dialog, with some of Assam's most privileged and purportedly 'educated'. Some education that must have been! It could in no way, shape or form have been interpreted by the inquisitors or well meaning observers to have been a signal to submit to being insulted and to surrender the goals that thousands of their fellow men had given their lives for or to concede that they have all been wrong while their inquisitors alone are right. Was it? Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. *** If the aim was merely to assert one's own righteousness, it played out just as expected. But who needs it? What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. *** That is profound. At 4:52 PM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Sorry to interrupt. By proximity, I should have taken the cue from the otherside. Quirk of fate made me fall prey to the guiles of Uzanbazar. Dilip/Dil Deka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. --- That is half the fun. Ene usotwa budhi xorute uzanbozarot xika. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. If I had access to such insightful advice, I would SELL them, for a big fat fee, by the word. What a shame you give it away, for FREE. :-) PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. At 9:09 AM -0700 10/3/07, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. Dilip Deka uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
Dear Uttam, That was too cryptic. Please explain proximity, other side and guiles of Uzanbazar. Would you? Dilip uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry to interrupt. By proximity, I should have taken the cue from the otherside. Quirk of fate made me fall prey to the guiles of Uzanbazar. Dilip/Dil Deka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. --- That is half the fun. Ene usotwa budhi xorute uzanbozarot xika. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. If I had access to such insightful advice, I would SELL them, for a big fat fee, by the word. What a shame you give it away, for FREE. :-) PS: O' Pai, Kelei baaru eneke mwk eneke 'chance' di thako, koswn. At 9:09 AM -0700 10/3/07, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote: Don't be afraid of the screamers and the preachers in the net. Say your piece when you want to. Dilip Deka uttam borthakur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
At 3:22 AM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
Have you got all answers to riddles of life, except this, sir!
*** Do I HAVE to? I would submit I don't owe anyone any answer to
anything, much less the answers to all of life's riddles. And I do
not demand that of others either.
Not a litany of Kharkhowa woes, I presume some of us are not aware
of these; else they would stopped doing things that they do to
prolong the list of woes from safe distance.
*** Huh? That was too complex for my little mind to grasp.
*** But the mystery persists: WHAT is a body to do about the litany
of the Kharkhowa woes laid bare here ? How could they be resolved?
I have no problem with the aim to educate those in as deep a torpor
as to be unaware of these, even though one could argue that those
who are comatose are not worth the attempt to revive :-) . But to
enlighten us on how solutions could be found would mean something.
Repetitions of what we all know, does not. It is little more than
an abject display of bewilderment.
Same for those who go ga-ga over it :-).
Having said that, I would argue that there is nothing mysterious
about the problems cited. They are not new to the human condition.
Others have encountered them, conquered them and are on the paths to
progress. Therefore it does not even require INVENTING or
DISCOVERING hitherto unknown ways to deal with the issues cited. All
it takes is a DESIRE to keep our eyes and ears opened and a
willingness to learn from others and a determination to get it done.
***
Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't that an exhaustive litany of Kharkhowa woes?
But tell us something we DON'T KNOW :-).
The big mystery remains untouched: What is a body to do about it?
How could they be resolved ?
That is the issue, isn't it?
At 8:35 AM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote:
I have come to believe that 'terrorism' subsists because it serves
'vested interest' all around.
It serves the arm supplying nations.
It serves the nations having an axe to grind.
It serves the gun runners.
It serves the drug dealers.
It serves the corrupt army as it can do anything with the funds made
available, fund found and confiscated and also materials made
available including medicines. I have been told that the Indian army
destroy cancer drugs each year that could have catered to the needs
of the patient in entire north east region. Not only that,
such 'destroyed' medicines find their way back into the market:-).
It serves the police making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the bureaucrats making hay in disturbed situation.
It serves the politicians... they use part of the loot for funding
elections and then take share of the loot out of counter insurgency
fund as well and can misappropriate developmental fund too for
personal gains.
It serves a part of the journalists who claim special privilege
. from both sides. (Some body described them to me as Giant
Storks pinning the vultures (politicians) down to vomit the
semi-digested carcass and then gulping that vomit).
It serves criminals.
It serves the terrorists maintaining a life style that they could
not have afforded in the normal circumstances.
ONLY THAT IT DOES NOT SERVE THE COMMON MAN WITHOUT RICHES AND CLOUTS.
shantikam hazarika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE:
10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } 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...
Re: [Assam] What a response!!
I'm just saying, please do not bring number of death as index of the genuineness of any cause. Such arguments are placed in a political meeting. *** NOT ALL such examples are EQUAL. Those of us who are awake and are endowed with an ability to reason, cannot paint them all with the same brush. To do so will be abdicating our responsibilities as productive and involved members of society. At 3:39 AM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote: I simply add the example of Kamala Saikia for your consideration, despite my unwillingness. He did not such macabre death for any reason. Nazis too considered their cause 'holy' and now you are commenting on it as genocide. I have stated unequivocally that I am not questioning the legitimacy of ULFA's claim. Kindly re-read what I have said: - I'm just saying, please do not bring number of death as index of the genuineness of any cause. Such arguments are placed in a political meeting. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When the unfortunate killing of Sanjoy Ghosh keeps appearing as the sole argument against ULFA's struggles, it is legitimate and appropriate to weigh it against those who willingly gave their lives in pursuit of their cause. And to attempt to compare the cause of FREEDOM with that of genocide by Nazis or 9/11 or what have you harks of either an absence of ordinary reasoning ability or an intentional abuse of it. That simple. At 3:11 AM +0100 10/4/07, uttam borthakur wrote: Should the number of people laying down their lives be a bulwark of any argument? So, did Nazis, so did 9/11 hijackers, . should I try to prolong the list where people might have laid down their lives for a retrgrade cause. I am not commenting on the legitimacy of the claim of ULFA here. I'm just saying, please do not bring number of death as index of the genuineness of any cause. Such arguments are placed in a political meeting. Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When a dialog was being sought, one would have hope it had an aim, a goal. In this instance, what was Utpal's aim? Would it be reasonable to assume that for the kind of people involved here it was to help find a solution for the impasse of a quarter century? And what did it turn out to be? Did the questions posed have a sincerity of purpose, of discussing the merits of each side's positions, hopefully to find common ground and a solution? Can an observer not reasonably conclude that it was in its entirety , without exceptions, an inquisition; of a dispatcher, by a band of obviously immature and self-righteous and self-impressed intellectual goons intent only on devaluing and insulting the hapless, messenger ill equipped to dish out in kind? The start of the response cycle obviously could very well have been an honorable one, to have a honest and sincere dialog, with some of Assam's most privileged and purportedly 'educated'. Some education that must have been! It could in no way, shape or form have been interpreted by the inquisitors or well meaning observers to have been a signal to submit to being insulted and to surrender the goals that thousands of their fellow men had given their lives for or to concede that they have all been wrong while their inquisitors alone are right. Was it? Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. *** If the aim was merely to assert one's own righteousness, it played out just as expected. But who needs it? What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. *** That is profound. At 4:52 PM +0100 10/3/07, uttam borthakur wrote: When two parties talk, be it in catechism mode or a dialogue, it is inevitable that they would represent divers interests. Is there any pre-condition for proselytisation? Now, if the interests are so antgonistic that there is no point in beginning the discourse, then why should someone start a response cycle at all? Does Pakistan have to run a check on India while entering a dialogue or impose a pre-condition for conversion? Let everyone have his say. Each would find for himself, what is acceptable and what is not? I do not find any substance in the search for sincerity or any comment thereon. Intelligentsia or not, every human being capable of communicating through the net is intelligent enough to find what is good for him and what is not. What is saintly sermon for Mr. Laden may be blasphemy for Mr. Bush. Intelligentsia is not a defined monolith. What is intelligentsia for one may not be so for another. Is there any scope for normative preachings here? Chan Mahanta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
