Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Chan Mahanta
gt; > > >>From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: Saurav Pathak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>CC: Rajib Das <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis >>Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:47:55 -0500

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Alpana B. Sarangapani
>From: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Saurav Pathak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: Rajib Das <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis >Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:47:55 -0500 > > >some people just se

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Chan Mahanta
>some people just see red when they dont like something. :) *** How true :-)! At 6:33 PM -0400 9/17/02, Saurav Pathak wrote: >Chan Mahanta said on AssamNet: > >+ >+ >The others that complain as much as some in this group are the commies of >+ >Bengal - who haven't done anything worthwhile i

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Saurav Pathak
Chan Mahanta said on AssamNet: + + >The others that complain as much as some in this group are the commies of + >Bengal - who haven't done anything worthwhile in the last 20 years for their + >people. + + *** And its relevance to the discussion at hand? + some people just se

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Chan Mahanta
is group are the commies of >Bengal - who haven't done anything worthwhile in the last 20 years for their >people. > > > > >>From: D Deka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: Sankardeva

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Rajib Das
ECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis >Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 09:34:01 -0700 (PDT) > > >I feel the ingrate is really a retrograde in his belief. From your own >analysis you can see that intermixing and comingling is a dy

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Chan Mahanta
>--->also took part in the larger economic and political structures of the >>entity called India? ** I thought it was not that Assam did NOT want to take part. If I understand it correctly, Assam DID indeed want to take part as a co-equal at the time of independence. But it turned out that the

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Saurav Pathak
D Deka said on AssamNet: + + Looking at the other side of the coin, how much do the Assamese people know about +the likes of Xonkordev in Tamilnadu and the festivities in that state? Have the +Tamils ever complained about that? Spend a little time on this paragraph. Add to it +Assam's si

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread D Deka
I feel the ingrate is really a retrograde in his belief. From your own analysis you can see that intermixing and comingling is a dynamic process and you can't stop it by artificial border or by pretending to isolate yourself. An Assamese can be an Assamese and an Indian simultaneously, just like a

Re: Sankardeva responsible ? --An Ingrate's Analysis

2002-09-17 Thread Chan Mahanta
To add to Anjan's observations: There is hardly a national entity left anywhere in the world that is not a mixture of cultures/religions/political ideologies that were imported from across its geographical borders. Except for certain remote societies, such as one might find in the Amazon basin,