[Assam] Any comment?

Chan Mahanta cmahanta at gmail.com
Wed May 5 10:01:02 PDT 2010 

One has the right to express one's opinion here.
But it does not , auton matically, mean anything, unless one can
EXPLAIN the basis for such opinions.






On May 5, 2010, at 11:55 AM, kamal deka wrote:

> I see.Yes,there is absolutely no point in discussing on an issue which
> is beyond the realm of realisation.This is an issue that can never be
> viewed as a tempest in a tea-pot ( or is it tea-cup?).And that is the
> bottom line.
> KJD
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>>> .What is your stand
>>>
>>> now?
>>
>>
>>
>> **** The pre-condition of NOT discussing the issue of contention is  
>> an
>> absurd one.
>>
>>
>> ****  I did not wish to get into it late last night when I saw DD's  
>> query
>> and posted the reply.
>>
>>
>>> IF they do not represent the broad section of Assamese people
>>
>> **** I was alluding to KJD's views as expressed in Assamnet, as not
>> representing a broad
>> cross section of the people of Assam who want to see a negotiated  
>> end to the
>> conflict.
>>
>> But that cannot happen IF the point of contention is a taboo  
>> subject at such
>> TALKS.
>>
>> Those who support such a position either do not want the TALKS to  
>> take place
>> or see a political settlement of the conflict. There can be no other
>> explanation of such a
>> position or stance.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 5, 2010, at 11:20 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>
>>>>>> That is Kamal Deka's view. Unfortunately, he is not a party to  
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> conflict.
>>>
>>> And as far as I can imagine, his musings, however wise, are unlikely
>>> to sway ULFA. For that matter a broad section of the people
>>> of Assam. So, the question remains:<<<
>>>
>>> IF they do not represent the broad section of Assamese people,who do
>>> they represent?some Martian creatures? And which fraction of ULFA?  
>>> The
>>> one,who are languishing in jail and have mellowed down or the  
>>> one,who
>>> has been roaming in jungles?
>>> You said in one of your earlier post that you don't wish to  
>>> comment on
>>> the preamble to the proposition, but it is a wise and thoughtful
>>> view.As I understand,the proposal goes like this- “There should be
>>> talks between the ULFA and the Centre without any preconditions so  
>>> as
>>> to reach a political solution to the ULFA problem".What is your  
>>> stand
>>> now?
>>> KJD
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>  
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That is Kamal Deka's view. Unfortunately, he is not a party to the
>>>> conflict.
>>>> And as far as I can imagine, his musings, however wise, are  
>>>> unlikely
>>>> to sway ULFA. For that matter a broad section of the people
>>>> of Assam. So, the question remains:
>>>>
>>>> WHY talks?
>>>>
>>>> IF it is to resolve the conflict , then would it not defy common  
>>>> sense
>>>> to NOT  discuss the primary cause of the conflict?
>>>>
>>>> However, if the claims of GoI and its servants at Dispur always  
>>>> declaring
>>>> to TALK (instead of continuing to wage an armed conflict with no  
>>>> end
>>>> in sight) are merely a charade to deceive the population  what an  
>>>> end
>>>> to the conflict, then, YES, it makes eminent sense to put an absurd
>>>> pre-condition ( that it won't discuss the issue of the conflict)  
>>>> on the
>>>> fake
>>>> 'sanctity of the constitution' - that every regime at Delhi has  
>>>> amended
>>>> since independence, merely on the basis  of a simple majority of
>>>> votes at the Lok Sabha, would make sense.
>>>>
>>>> But people with any degree of sincerity and an ordinary ability  
>>>> to reason
>>>> ought to see the fakery involved and point it out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 5, 2010, at 10:36 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The ULFA has been battling for a loosing proposition by sticking  
>>>>> to
>>>>> the old gun of Assam's independence.It is as good as asking for  
>>>>> the
>>>>> moon.Common sense, again, dictates that the proposition must be
>>>>> grounded in solid reason. There must be justifiable cause to  
>>>>> advocate
>>>>> separation. Does ULFA aspirations qualify for legitimate  
>>>>> independence?
>>>>> Even a half-wit will understand that the thrust of the discussion
>>>>> should be how to make Assam economically viable.Independence is  
>>>>> a pipe
>>>>> dream.
>>>>> KJD
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is quite immaterial about Hiren Gohain or anybody else's
>>>>>> understandings
>>>>>> about effectiveness or futility of the pursuit of sovereignty.  
>>>>>> He or
>>>>>> others
>>>>>> in his shoes are
>>>>>> not the parties to the conflict. They, as affected members of the
>>>>>> population
>>>>>> are seeking and end to the conflict thru a process of "TALKS", a
>>>>>> reasonable
>>>>>> and thoughtful move.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the talks would be meaningless if they don't discuss the   
>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would they?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is so difficult to understand in this proposition ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 5, 2010, at 10:13 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's why Hiren Gohain understands the futility of sovereignty
>>>>>>> hype.Please read the following.
>>>>>>> KJD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gohain clarifies stand on sovereignty
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GUWAHATI, May 4: Chief convenor of the Sanmilita Jatiya  
>>>>>>> Abhivartan
>>>>>>> (SJA), Dr Hiren Gohain, today said: “I don’t support the  
>>>>>>> demand for
>>>>>>> sovereignty of Assam personally. The ULFA should reconsider  
>>>>>>> the way of
>>>>>>> solution to the problems for which the demand for sovereignty  
>>>>>>> has been
>>>>>>> raised.” Dr Gohain said this close on the heels of Chief  
>>>>>>> Minister
>>>>>>> Tarun Gogoi asking the intellectuals to clear their stand on the
>>>>>>> ULFA’s demand for sovereignty of Assam.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Addressing a press conference here today, Dr Gohain said that  
>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>> independence the people of Assam felt that they were a  
>>>>>>> deprived lot,
>>>>>>> and when they failed to get their demands met through democratic
>>>>>>> agitation, a section of them rebelled and raised the demand for
>>>>>>> sovereignty for the State. “If the main loopholes in the system
>>>>>>> responsible for such a situation are not identified and plugged
>>>>>>> through discussion between the Centre and the rebel groups, the
>>>>>>> situation in Assam may worsen. It is for this reason that the
>>>>>>> Sanmilita Jatiya Abhivartan was held in Guwahati,” he said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dr Gohain also released the resolutions that were taken at the
>>>>>>> conclave today. The draft resolutions were published by the  
>>>>>>> media
>>>>>>> earlier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of the important resolutions are: “There should be talks  
>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>> the ULFA and the Centre without any preconditions so as to  
>>>>>>> reach a
>>>>>>> political solution to the ULFA problem, top jailed leaders of  
>>>>>>> the ULFA
>>>>>>> should be given free movement so that the outfit can reach a  
>>>>>>> consensus
>>>>>>> on talks with the government, all cases against the ULFA leaders
>>>>>>> should be put on hold till talks with the rebel group is over  
>>>>>>> etc.”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com 
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That would be uncommon sense. Common sense dictates that a  
>>>>>>>> problem
>>>>>>>> cannot
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> resolved thru negotiations, if THE problem is not discussed  
>>>>>>>> at all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On May 5, 2010, at 10:04 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Common sense.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com 
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The core issue itself is a known
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> disqualifier .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *** According to whom, would be the question.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On May 5, 2010, at 9:53 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We are back to the square one.The core issue itself is a  
>>>>>>>>>>> known
>>>>>>>>>>> disqualifier .Any amounts of talks,therefore.will take them
>>>>>>>>>>> nowhere
>>>>>>>>>>> but reach a stalemate.Is there a point?
>>>>>>>>>>> KJD
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at gmail.com 
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my view,talks must be held without any pre-conditions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in order to end the impasse that exists between ULFA and  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> *** What are the talks about?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> One might think it is to bring the conflict to an end.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, what is the conflict about?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Unless we are developmentally challenged, we know that it  
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> demand of 'sovereignty'.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Now then, if a party to the conflict , namely GoI and its
>>>>>>>>>>>> puppets/servants
>>>>>>>>>>>> at Dispur refuses to acknowledge and discuss the main  
>>>>>>>>>>>> issue of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> conflict,
>>>>>>>>>>>> is this not a
>>>>>>>>>>>> profoundly absurd proposition? Is GoI's stance not  
>>>>>>>>>>>> entirely a
>>>>>>>>>>>> gimmick
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> fool the
>>>>>>>>>>>> people into thinking that they are the reasonable people,  
>>>>>>>>>>>> willing
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> sit
>>>>>>>>>>>> down
>>>>>>>>>>>> for a political solution, while refusing to acknowledge  
>>>>>>>>>>>> or deal
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> MAIN
>>>>>>>>>>>> issue?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who are fooling?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 5, 2010, at 9:25 AM, kamal deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of what measure will a parley be ,when the core issue  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> basket case? In my view,talks must be held without any
>>>>>>>>>>>>> pre-conditions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in order to end the impasse that exists between ULFA and  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> KJD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Chan Mahanta
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <cmahanta at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't wish to comment on the preamble to the  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposition, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and thoughtful view.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 4, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Dilip and Dil Deka wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Netters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any comment on the letter to the editor (in the AT) by  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> title,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Clear
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stand"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wrote the letter and it was published in its  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entirety. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> editors
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> added
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the title.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> May 4 issue of the Assam Tribune piublished it though  
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> letter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written and sent before the so called "Intellectuals
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Convention".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dilip Deka
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Houston
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Page06 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .pdf>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> assam mailing list
>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> assam mailing list
>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> assam mailing list
>> assam at assamnet.org
>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

More information about the Assam mailing list