[Assam] Demands for Separate states in India

[Chan Mahanta]

>  >No, they did not seize power - they did contest elections, you have to
>give them that. After that, it was all about themselves as individuals
>and promises remained promises.


*** And that being different from WHOM again? Like WHO, and where, 
has it been any different Ram? Do tell us, please! It would be a 
great bit of education, for which I shall forever remain indebted to 
you :-).


Point therefore is, that UNLESS the governmental system could be 
re-tooled, reformed, you will continue to see 'jeyei lonkaloi jai, 
xeyei ravon hoy' phenomenon.

>  >All I am saying is that these leaders you uphold so much are no
>different than any other desi politician.


*** That would not  matter, if there are functioning institutions of 
government that would hold these folks to account for their 
performance or absence there-of. That is the big difference.

>  >You can have all the operators, checks and balances, a barnd-spanking
>new 'shistem' but if the powers that be will NOT let you implement
>them, how is an independent Assam going to practice them?


*** It is as simple as holding a few responsible high-ups 
accountable. If a corrupt big-babu goes to prison, all the minions 
would fall into place instantly. That IS deterrence!

>  >The good people most of know wouldn't touch Assam politics
>with a barge pole

*** And that is EXACTLY why governance needs to be reformed, 
re-engineered, so that good , able people could be brought in to 
serve their country's needs.









At 1:10 PM -0500 8/26/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>C'da,
>
>>Are you suggesting that these folks, unable to
>>seize power through 'legitimate', desi means, decided to grab it
>>through the agitation, forcibly removing the legitimate powers who
>>were occupying the 'gaddi' while Assam smoldered
>
>No, they did not seize power - they did contest elections, you have to
>give them that. After that, it was all about themselves as individuals
>and promises remained promises.
>
>All I am saying is that these leaders you uphold so much are no
>different than any other desi politician. If the ULFA leadership
>assumes power tomorrow, we can expect nothing more (probably worse -
>judging from their fantastic track record of extortion, killing
>innocents, aligning with groups like ISI and B'Desh.)
>
>The problem (for Assam) has nothing to do with 'saffron'. The hatred
>of ISI/B'desh cannot and should not be translated into
>'Assamese-B'deshi-ISI bhai-bhai'. They are no friends of India, but by
>no means should anyone (including those wanting independence) for that
>to mean the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend'.
>
>>*** But the point  I was making, and you digress from, is that the
>>people of Assam, ( excepting the Bengali speakers and the
>>Hindiwallas), by and large did close ranks behind the agitators,
>>didn't they? And it included Bodos, Misings,Karbis, Ahoms and 
>>even > Bamuns. Am I incorrect about that?
>
>You are right.But didn't we all got taken for a long ride on that
>gravy train? What makes you think the 'new leaders' will be different.
>
>You can have all the operators, checks and balances, a barnd-spanking
>new 'shistem' but if the powers that be will NOT let you implement
>them, how is an independent Assam going to practice them?
>
>>The good news is that Assam  has plenty of those. The question is
>>HOW to bring them on board? And how to get the right apparatus >for
>them to work with.
>
>Yeah right. The good people most of know wouldn't touch Assam politics
>with a barge pole. C'da, in the end, Assam, independent or not will at
>the best case scenario be old wine in a new bottle. One dreads to
>think of other possibilities in an independent Assam.
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On 8/26/06, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>>  >  >Divisive agenda? Actually it was power grabbing and a whole lot of
>>>corruption amongst the leaders.
>>
>>*** I am trying to understand what you present, trying to read the
>>underlying message. Are you suggesting that these folks, unable to
>>seize power through 'legitimate', desi means, decided to grab it
>>through the agitation, forcibly removing the legitimate powers who
>>were occupying the 'gaddi' while Assam smoldered?
>>
>>It is hard for me to comprehend this. Would you care to explain the
>>legitimacy and effectiveness of those who got thrown out by the
>>agitators ?
>>
>>*** But the point  I was making, and you digress from, is that the
>>people of Assam, ( excepting the Bengali speakers and the
>>Hindiwallas), by and large did close ranks behind the agitators,
>>didn't they? And it included Bodos, Misings,Karbis, Ahoms and even
>>Bamuns. Am I incorrect about that?
>>
>>
>>>and a whole lot of corruption amongst the leaders.
>>
>>*** Corruption is NOT an innate condition ( you ought to have learned
>>that by now Ram--tsk, tsk :-)), it was an effect, of falling prey to
>>the dysfunctional desi-governmental system and its vested machinery.
>>They did not realize that merely a turn-over of the people at the
>>wheels of this system was not going to be enough to make a difference
>>for Assam. It required radical overhauling, if not entirely replacing
>>the defective, antiquated,hand-me-down machinery of a colonial past.
>>
>>>   >Aren't the new 'andwlon' leaders now
>>>fighting for 'independence' cut from a similar cloth? Are they any different
>>
>>*** You keep making the same mistake over and over again Ram :-). It
>>is NOT the people ALONE that matters. It is the machinery that
>>requires major overhauling. Of course better trained, able and
>>passionate operators are required too. The good news is that Assam
>>has plenty of those. The question is HOW to bring them on board? And
>>how to get the right apparatus for them to work with.
>>
>>>   >No, no, I could be wrong here, there may actually be an
>>>infusion of new ideas here - you know from B'Desh and the ISI.
>>
>>*** Ram, Ram, Ram! You are letting your guard down --- your saffron
>>is showing :-)!
>>
>>
>>c-da
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>At 10:41 AM -0500 8/26/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>>C'da,
>>>
>>>>Unfortunately the 'andwlon' leadership had a divisive agenda, was
>>>>uneducated about how to form a government and reform it to move
>>>>forward. They young folks thought that changing of the guard was
>>>>enough to take them to the promised land. It was a profoundly
>>>>faulty perception as it proved to be in very short order.
>>>
>>>Divisive agenda? Actually it was power grabbing and a whole lot of
>>>corruption amongst the leaders. Aren't the new 'andwlon' leaders now
>>>fighting for 'independence' cut from a similar cloth? Are they any
>>>different? No, no, I could be wrong here, there may actually be an
>>>infusion of new ideas here - you know from B'Desh and the ISI. :-)
>>>
>>>--Ram