[Assam] Sentinel Letter-3

Mon Sep 4 11:00:34 EDT 2006

Good Morning C'da,

Just opened up the mails - wow so many salvos. I will get to them one by
one.

 >**** The Sentinel printing letters/opinions supporting ULFA?  That would
be a collector's item Ram. Will you >please tell me when. I have got see
that.

Maybe not from your 'Worldview'. But they do print letters than at least
border on it.

 >And *I* posted them too? Wow! I know my family claims I get absent minded.
But this is sleep-walking on >my part or worse ! Hope Alzheimers has not
claimed me already :-).

Same problem here too:-).
But I do remember, (several weeks ago), you were going ga-ga over something
published in the Sentinel and you posted that in the Assamnet. And  there
have been other times when (obviously those were times when the Sentinel was
a 'good 'ole boy') when you have posted stuff from the Sentinel.

--Ram

On 9/4/06, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>  > You, yourself have posted several letters/editorial that support views
> that somewhat >support Ulfa's position  (from the Sentinel).
>
>
>
>
> **** The Sentinel printing letters/opinions supporting ULFA?  That would
> be a collector's item Ram. Will you please tell me when. I have got see
> that.
>
>
> And *I* posted them too? Wow! I know my family claims I get absent minded.
> But this is sleep-walking on my part or worse ! Hope Alzheimers has not
> claimed me already :-).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 12:31 PM -0500 9/3/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> I don't C'da,
>
>
>
> I look at the letter from a different point of view.
>
>
>
> The writer obviously has no trust in Ulfa's promises.
>
> Look at what he writes:
>
>
>
> What has happened that the ULFA is desperately pressurizing the Centre for
> the release of its five comrades? It cannot be for reasons of peace, because
> till today extortions in upper Asom are in full swing. If the outfit is
> actually so keen to set the stage for peace talks, let it sit for the first
> round of talks without the jailed leaders participating in the talks. This
> will clearly show that their emphasis is on peace rather than the release of
> jailed terrorists.
>
> So, how can you categorically say he is NOT for peace but his agenda is to
> disrupt the process. Whats that going to do for him. Regarding the release
> for its leaders, ULFA doesn't seem to have a good track record. The last
> time Chetia was released, then he took off - so why would the GOI buy into
> this again?
>
>
>
> >Now why would a mature, responsible, supposedly 'respected' newspaper
> >publish a piece like that? For the public good? For bringing about peace to
> >Assam?
>
>
>
> Would you want the Sentinel only publish letters/editorials that only
> support the ULFA? Are you advocating some kind of censorship? You, yourself
> have posted several letters/editorial that support views that somewhat
> support Ulfa's position  (from the Sentinel). I think they are balanced in
> their approach. Your frustration should be with the author of the letter as
> opposed to the newspaper itself. And the author of the letter is not
> important, but he does make some good points.
>
>
>
> Everyone wants peace in Assam. The thing that many doubt is whether the
> ULFA is serious about it and are willing to get to the negotiating table
> directly with the GOI.
>
> The question you and others should answer is whether the release of some
> ULFA is more important than peace in Assam? I think once the ULFA and GOI
> sit face to face, the 5 jailed ULFA will be released. It is ultimately in
> GOI's interest to solve the Assam insurgency problem, once and for all - it
> costs men and treasure, and stalls economic development for a state which
> was in need for one yesterday.
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9/2/06,* Chan Mahanta* <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Ram:
>
>
>
>
> Let us examine the 'essence' of this gem of a 'letter' :
>
>
>
>
> To that we need to determine what the PURPOSE of the letter is.
>
> Without a doubt it is to PREVENT from GoI giving in to ULFA demands for
> release of their senior cadres. And since ULFA has made it a cornerstone of
> their conditions for entering negotiations, the motive of the letter could
> be clearly established as to torpedo any such  peace negotiation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The  piece questions the "need" for ULFA's demands for release of their
> top cadres. And the writer no doubt knows best, what ULFA's needs are. Why
> should anyone NEED their comrades' release from prison? They can go to 'o
> peace-talks' anytime they want to? What prevents them from surrendering?
>
>
>
>
> Powerful logic no doubt!  No wonder it touched a chord :-).
>
>
>
>
> The piece is full of taunts. Why does one resort to taunting? Could it be
> to
>
> ENCOURAGE ULFA to come to the negotiating table? Or could be because the
> writer
>
> is frustrated by ULFA, and not having a clue to doing anything about it
> constructively, resorts to taunting?Is it the sign of a mature, thinking
> man, looking out for Assam's welfare, or is it the ranting of someone whose
> real interests is in asserting his own righteousness, his own ability to
> read the tea-leaves better than all those 'fools' who are attempting to have
> a negotiated settlement of the conflict and a return to peace in Assam?
>
>
>
>
> You tell us.
>
>
>
>
> Now why would a mature, responsible, supposedly 'respected' newspaper
> publish a piece like that? For the public good? For bringing about peace to
> Assam?
>
>
>
>
> If ULFA/GOI peace negotiations are good for Assam, and if I remember
> correctly the Sentinel professed that is is indeed good, then should it be
> participating in  promoting the agenda of those, such as this letter writer,
> who obviously do not want that to happen, for whatever reason he harbors?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Or could it be that the newspaper's own journalistic credentials or its
> maturity are questionable ?
>
>
>
>
> You tell us.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 3:14 PM -0500 9/1/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>
>
>  Last updated : SATUR DAY 2 SEPTEMBER 2006
>
> *Of Five Jailed ULFA Leaders*
> Why is the ULFA showing such desperation for the release of its five
> jailed comrades? Is it to enable it to have full-house discussion on the
> peace process? In other words, do they want us to believe that having
> terrorized the masses for 27 long years, they are suddenly in such a tearing
> hurry to give it up? Or have they suddenly developed love for their homeland
> Asom and hatred for Bangladesh? Has the ULFA suddenly become tired of
> raising millions of rupees by extortions and kidnappings, or has it suddenly
> realized the futility of money? Have Paresh Baruah and Arabinda Rajkhowa
> become saints overnight, realizing that all their guns and gold will be of
> no use in their last morbid journey on four shoulders and a yard of white
> cloth?
> What has happened that the ULFA is desperately pressurizing the Centre for
> the release of its five comrades? It cannot be for reasons of peace, because
> till today extortions in upper Asom are in full swing. If the outfit is
> actually so keen to set the stage for peace talks, let it sit for the first
> round of talks without the jailed leaders participating in the talks. This
> will clearly show that their emphasis is on peace rather than the release of
> jailed terrorists.
> Secondly, in this age of hi-tech gadgets, Paresh Baruah and Arabinda
> Rajkhowa can talk, see and discuss with all their jailed comrades through
> video-conferencing. For such discussions, it is not at all necessary to
> escort their friends from jails to Bangladesh in a chartered flight.
> Thirdly, the ULFA team can land at New Delhi for peace talks and the
> jailed comrades can be flown there to join their leaders. After the talks,
> the jailed comrades can be flown back to Guwahati.
>
> But the ULFA will never agree to any of the above modalities. It will
> insist on the jailed leaders' flight to Bangladesh. But why? This is so
> because their release is more important than peace in Asom. To understand
> this simple logic, one does not have to be a security analyst or a
> counterinsurgency expert.
>
> Today, the ULFA is a dying organization without any leadership. They
> desperately need to have their top leaders back. Their demoralized cadres
> can achieve nothing except throwing a few grenades here and there, or
> deliver extortion notes to innocent, unarmed civilians. Moreover, the
> lower-rung cadres are now much wiser, refusing to risk their lives for
> nothing except ensuring luxurious lifestyle for their top leaders. They can
> see through the false revolutionary ideology as the ULFA's, and the theory
> of ''xonar Asom" holds no attraction or conviction.
> The ULFA desperately needs its top leaders not only to motivate their
> grassroots-level cadres, but also to check their fading mutiny - the
> lower-rung cadres are impatient and ready to revolt against their top
> leaders. Naturally then, it is only the release of those five jailed ULFA
> leaders that can control the mutiny and revive the sagging morale of the
> lower-rung cadres.
> What answer do the peace committees have to the jailed ULFA leaders
> jumping out of parole if released? Are the peace committee members ready to
> undergo imprisonment and serve the remaining jail term on behalf of the
> released leaders?
> One must never forget that there is also an ISI angle to the whole
> picture. Both Paresh Baruah and Arabinda Rajkhowa are fully under the grip
> of ISI bosses in Bangladesh. The entire business empire of luxury hotels
> owned by them in Bangladesh are under the control of the ISI. Even their
> families and their children residing in Bangladesh are under constant ISI
> vigil. Do the ULFA leaders have the permission of the ISI to sit for direct
> peace talks with India? Or do the peace committees - whether the PCPI or the
> PCG or whatever - want us to believe that they have a bigger hold on Paresh
> Baruah and Arabinda Rajkhowa than the ISI of Pakistan? Will Paresh Baruah
> and Arabinda Rajkhowa follow the diktats of Rebati Phukan & Co at the risk
> of losing their own lives, properties and families?
>
> The unconditional release of those five jailed terrorists at this time
> will conclusively prove that either some top Indian bureaucrats are lured by
> the ULFA's money power, or that some top Indian politicians deliberately
> want to keep the ULFA issue alive for ever.
> MP Talukdar,
> Khaliamari Road,
> Dibrugarh.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>
>
> A taunt is a sarcastic remark, challenge, or insult intended to provoke a
> response of some kind from the one it is directed at. It can be compared to
> fighting words and trash-talk.
>
>  The act of taunting can be learned by observation and improvisation. It
> usually follows linear thought, correlating or building in some manner to
> the target of taunting. Things such as the victim's appearance,
> intelligence, mannerisms, education, background, past offenses, etc. can
> otherwise be insulted. When used in this manner, the effectiveness of a
> taunt at provoking a response varies depending on how the specific insult
> relates to its victim (or their sense of self), to what level of offense
> they regard the taunt, and how well the victim can control their emotions
> when responding.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20060904/41f6a849/attachment.htm 