[Assam] Ulfa Wives

Ram Sarangapani assamrs at gmail.com
Fri May 11 09:09:16 PDT 2007


Hehe C'da,

>*** From WHOM ? From the same people who would not tell them what they did
to their husbands?
>Lets get real here Ram.

IF that is the case - why EVEN petition the GOI mai-baap - the PM/thePrez
etc?  If you have NO confidence in whatever the GOI does (doesn't) why even
bother?

 >*** I don't know they did not. Do you? And what if Bhutan told them that
it was Indian forces that >handled all that? Would that be hard to believe?

Well! I got that from the petition you fwded. Is it then possible that
Bhutan played the 'ol Bhutia rope trick?  Why would the ulfa & its cohorts
believe the Bhutan Govt. From what I read at that time, the ULFA leadership
was crying hoarse that the Bhutan Govt. and head honcho betrayed them - ie.
they had just met him and he had assured them a 'safe haven' and then had
the army attack at night..

Thats why it would be hard to believe.

*>But most importantly, WHAT does India gain by NOT telling these women and
their children >what they did to their husbands and fathers?* I mean other
that the slow torture?

My guess is - they (the GOI) just don't know, at least off-hand. Someone
would have to dig thru mounds of paperwork and bureaucracy to find out what
really happened. And very few 'people' in India identify themselves as
representing the the GOI.


 >***  What would be a more* selfless, un-exploitative way* to help them?
Would you like to suggest >some alternatives? I will be pleased to pass it
on , I promise . Better late than never. I won't mention the >' wide berth'
again that you gave earlier :-).

I would have a to-the-point, truthful petition out. When petitions like this
try to crafty, they lose focus. Also attach whatever judgement the Guwahati
High Court is supposed to have rendered.

I would only ask ONE question - what happened to the spouses. The background
would only narate (without bias) the circumstances. And Publish it in the
newspapers. The same petitioners should also assure everyone that they are
also demanding from the ULFA to release info regarding the missing and the
dead in their war against the common Assamese people.

Just imagine - these people are petitioning the GOI/PM/Minister babu etc -
but in the same petition, they put in stuff that goes straight to 'Indo-Asom
conflict'. Which minister or PM with even half a brain would get a second
thought to such a petition. They would more than likely thrash it as another
crack-pot taking potshots at the GOI.

--Ram


On 5/11/07, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>  Ram:
>
>
>
>
> >Huh! I must have been sleeping - Wasn't that the excercise 'get info'
> regarding their husbands. The >other steps would come later - once they know
> what happened.
>
>
>
>
> *** From WHOM ? From the same people who would not tell them what they did
> to their husbands?
> Lets get real here Ram.
>
>
> >Curious - why haven't they asked the Bhutanese Govt. too.
>
>
> *** I don't know they did not. Do you? And what if Bhutan told them that
> it was Indian forces that handled all that? Would that be hard to believe?
>
>
> *But most importantly, WHAT does India gain by NOT telling these women and
> their children what they did to their husbands and fathers?* I mean other
> that the slow torture?
>
>
> Some strategic advantage perhaps? Or it is just another play of
> Indian-humanity towards whom they never cease to call their own, just
> misguided?
>
>
>
>
> > Is that WHY, their sad situation was taken advantage of?
>
>
> ***  What would be a more* selfless, un-exploitative way* to help them?
> Would you like to suggest some alternatives? I will be pleased to pass it on
> , I promise . Better late than never. I won't mention the ' wide berth'
> again that you gave earlier :-).
>
>
> All the rest of the arguments are of little use other than for NRAs
> sitting pretty in their comfortable perches shedding crocodile tears about
> the plight of these women.  It is merely trying to look humane, while making
> arguments that support GoI ploys.
>
>
>
>
> >I think they were. I understand, C'da, that when you fwded it, you
> probably did not look at it closely ( I >could easily do things like that:))
>
>
>
>
> *** You are right about that. But it does change the fact that I was
> responding to 'asom' posts in response to the assamwatch  post. And I
> explained the EXPLOITATION  to Dilip that you read.
>
>
> I will eagerly await that UN-EXPLOITATIVE  plea that I hope you will draft
> up for us :-).
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 9:00 AM -0600 5/11/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> C'da,
>
>
>
> That the wives were being "used" by certain quarters was abundantly clear.
>
>
>
> The question in my mind was 'Did they really want some resolution for
> these unfortunate women or were they played like pawns?'
>
>
>
> I think they were. I understand, C'da, that when you fwded it, you
> probably did not look at it closely ( I could easily do things like that:))
>
>
>
> But look at it -
>
> *(a)     the custodial disappearances of their husbands and others
> following the infamous 'Operation All-Clear' in December 2003 be addressed
> by the highest authorities of the land;*
>
> Was it "infamous" from India's or Bhutan's view point?
>
>
> *(b)      peaceful resolution to the Indo-Assam conflict; and*
>
> *If  someone has signed on - it would automatically mean that they
> consider Assam as a different country from India for starters.*
>
> *(c)     the unconditional release of the ULFA leaders in jail, which
> remains a key to ensuring a just resolution to the impasse in the
> possibility of talks between the government of India and the armed
> opposition group. *
>
> And how does this help these women in any way? If there was unconditional
> release and there was no news still of their husbands? would that help?
>
> And that is why people in the Net gave it a wide berth. In fact, there
> were very few signatures even otherwise. Which tells me, that the crafty
> crafters of the petition were really not bothered about the plight of these
> ladies or the other. They just used this as a 'platform' to get their views
> out.
>
>  In fact, if you had followed up their plight, the newspapers also
> reported that the women gave up their hunger strike upon the urging of the
> CM, and THEN these women made statements that in effect  took umbrage with
> the PCPIA, PCG (I think they were the groups that took up "their" cause) and
> the Govt. for playing with their emotions and naviety. When they were on
> hunger strike, everybody and his uncle were there - I am guessing get some
> mileage out of it.
>
> That unfortunately is their story.
>
>
> To answer your question, you are right, these women would NOT have been
> able to articulate their demands and write. Is that WHY, their sad situation
> was taken advantage of? Is there no one in Assam who could that simple thing
> for them?
>
> >*** Secondly, getting the information on the missing husbands >DOES NOT
> solve the problem for their families. Or does it?
>
> Huh! I must have been sleeping - Wasn't that the excercise 'get info'
> regarding their husbands. The other steps would come later - once they know
> what happened.
>
> Curious - why haven't they asked the Bhutanese Govt. too. The Bhutanese
> said, 'they handed the cadres to India" and they are off the hook?
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
> On 5/11/07,* Chan Mahanta* <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
> >So, go figure who is using these poor victims as a front.
>
>
>
>
> *** First off, one should ask if these women are able to articulate their
> demands  and write a piece, as was done?
>
>
>
>
> One might think they are not. So , they needed help.  Somebody DID put
> that help forward, put the write-up together and forwarded it to various
> people. I received it from someone who shares my views on such matters.
>
>
>
>
> *** Secondly, getting the information on the missing husbands DOES NOT
> solve the problem for their families. Or does it? What would Dilip Deka do
> if he were in the position of the ULFA wives? Once he got that info, he
> would heave a sigh of relief and move on?
>
>
>
>
> So a dose of ordinary REALITY is useful therefore in determining WHAT
> NEXT.
>
>
>
>
> One might think , therefore, that UNLESS the entire PROBLEM is resolved,
> the ULFA wives' /families' plight would NOT END.
>
>
>
>
> Therefore a reasonable person might wonder  HOW to bring the conflict to
> an end.
>
>
>
>
> *** To end the conflict, there is ONLY ONE credible means, as has been
> abundantly clear for decades.
>
> That is thru a political settlement.
>
>
>
>
> Oh I know there are those who would WISH ULFA away.
>
>
>
>
> And those who would settle for nothing less than an Indian military
> victory.
>
>
>
>
> But the thinking person can ignore those alternatives.
>
>
>
>
> *** How to achieve such a settlement?  Can that happen WITHOUT a ULFA/GoI
> dialogue?
>
>
>
>
> Take a wild guess.
>
>
>
>
> *** How could that be brought about?
>
>
>
>
> Again take a wild guess. Failing which,  consider the suggestion laid out
> in that petition, obviously crafted by the EXPLOITATIVE entities that riles
> our friends so.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 6:20 AM -0700 5/11/07, Dilip/Dil Deka wrote:
>
> From the email below - "Incidentally, the April 6 forwarded appeal was
> neither from MASS nor from Assamwatch UK, as far as  I can tell. It was an
> appeal from/or* on behalf of* the fasting ladies."
>
>
>
> "On behalf of" is what bothers me. Who made the appeal on behalf of the
> ladies? Looks to me either ULFA or an ULFA affiliated group inserted the
> "release of the leaders" in the appeal.
>
> If the wives of the missing ULFA men are only in search of the whereabouts
> of their men, and if they prepared the appeal themselves, there would be no
> reason to include other demands in their appeal.
>
> So, go figure who is using these poor victims as a front.
>
> Dilip Deka
>
> =============================================================
>
>
>
> *Chan Mahanta <**cmahanta at charter.net* <cmahanta at charter.net>*>* wrote:
>
> Ram:
>
>
> It was my bad . You are right about what I forwarded on April 6.
>
>
> But THAT was not what I have been responding to during the last three days
> or so. It was about the post from assamwatch UK, which was taken issue with
> by 'asom' list members. I don't recall seeing either MASS( brought into the
> equation by Dilip with his acronym)  or assamwatch uk, both HR orgs., mixing
> up the two issues.
>
>
> And on the April 6 post, I made the following, specific introduction:
>
>
> "I would like to think, assamnetters would support the struggle of these
> ladies who are seeking information on their husbands' whereabouts, if they
> are dead or alive; regardless of whether they support or sympathize with
> ULFA ?
>
>
> It will also be interesting to hear how netters feel about the GoI's
> refusal to submit to the High Court's orders on the matter."
>
>
> If I remember correctly netters gave the request a WIDE BERTH :-).
>
>
>
> Incidentally, the April 6 forwarded appeal was neither from MASS nor from
> Assamwatch UK, as far as  I can tell. It was an appeal from/or on behalf of
> the fasting ladies.
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 3:14 PM -0600 5/10/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> C'da
>
>
>
>
> I will take this one portion of your response right now. For the rest, I
> will have to respond later.
>
>
>
>
> *Me:* >>The best thing to do (for those who are really interested in
> helping these ulfa wives) is NOT to bring in
>
> >>unrelated demands like bring ulfa to the table for tals, or release so &
> so >from jail etc.
>
>
>
>
>
> *You:*
>
> *** That is an entirely different issue. Neither Assamwatch nor MASS have
> attempted to mix the two.
>
> At least I don't recall seeing any such thing.* It is of your making*. And
> of those who were railing against
>
> assamwatch's efforts to shame India in front of the civilized world by
> publicizing GoIs despicable stonewalling on the matter.
>
> It was the making of those who were questioning why these women should be
> given that info. or questioning
>
> their judgement and/or motives in marrying ULFA cadres in the most
> infantile manner one can imagine.
>
> I have seen some pretty despicable things from our fellow men.
>
>
>
>
> *But speculating on these women's motives as to WHY they married the men
> they did was about*
>
> *one of the lowest I have seen thus far.*
>
> *_______________________________________________________*
>
> *Below is a relevant portion of what you forwarded on April 6th*
>
>
>
>
> *They demanded that:*
>
>
> *(a)     the custodial disappearances of their husbands and others
> following the infamous 'Operation All-Clear' in December 2003 be addressed
> by the highest authorities of the land;*
>
>
> *(b)      peaceful resolution to the Indo-Assam conflict; and*
>
>
> *(c)     the unconditional release of the ULFA leaders in jail, which
> remains a key to ensuring a just resolution to the impasse in the
> possibility of talks between the government of India and the armed
> opposition group. *
>
> *These three demands simply reiterate the basic tenets of democracy and
> justice in the quest for a peaceful resolution to armed conflict. The
> protesting women are demanding answers from India's political classes who
> tend to forget that their celebrated democracy does not extend to the people
> of Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura and other states of the so-called
> Northeast.
>
> *_____________________________________________
>
>
>
> *So, all signatories (that you appealed to) would be effectively signing
> for (b) & (c) above EVEN if they may have agreed to some portions of (a)
> above.*
>
> *IMHO, (b) & (c) and portions of (a) have nothing to do with any
> resolutions that these women seek regarding their husbands' whereabouts.*
>
>
>
> *So, it is no figment of my imagination and nor did I make it up as you
> indicate.*
>
>
>
>
> *>But speculating on these women's motives as to WHY they married the men
> they did was about*
>
> *>one of the lowest I have seen thus far.*
>
>
> I DID NOT make any such statement. Don't know who did.
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> assam mailing list
> assam at assamnet.org
> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20070511/048a7854/attachment.htm>


More information about the Assam mailing list