[Assam] Fwd: letters to the Editor

Ram Sarangapani assamrs at gmail.com
Fri May 25 19:17:45 PDT 2007


C'da

 >But then why do unarmed innocents get killed? Being dragged out of their
homes and executed in fake encounters?  >Indian army guys couldn't be THAT
un-professional, could they, heh-heh?

Lets look at this scenario: Some ulfa cadres (usually on
motorbikes) shoot/kill some army personnel, then immediately in the darkness
run into some poor innocent villager's home to take shelter. The villager
could do one of two things:
Give shelter or face being killed by the ulfa (as the abnoxious school
teacher was) later. If the villager gives shelter, he could face the wrath
of the army. The army men would probably go house to house to find anyone,
anything (remember some of their colleagues have just been killed)

These low level army guys are not West Point/Sandhurst/Doon School graduates
that you are looking for.
As for 'fake encounters' - the whole thing stinks to high heaven. These
grunts are only taught to become killing machines and really not to think as
much.

The army and the ULFA do it regularly. As far as the army is concerned -
they start off with a genuine chase of ulfa cadres - only to find out they
are NOT ulfa, and possibly plant or taint the evidence to show otherwise.

Plus, I am not sure why ulfa supporters are so worried. Situations like this
are Good publicitu for them to showcase - they can tell the world "look how
the army has killed innocent villagers, these people weren't even ulfa"

The ulfa cadres kill at random, or even targeted (like this schoolteacher).
Depending on the political mood after the killing, they come up with enough
excuses or reasons. These could range from "It wasn't us" to "too bad, the
guy was an agent for the GOI". The case of the killings of the Dhemaji
children and was it Sanjoy Ghosh (the NGO), the ulfa leadership claimed
"victory" too fast. They did not realize that public opinion would go
against them.

In that case of this schoolteacher the ulfa is vacillating - misjudging
public/village reaction from one moment to the next.

The whole thing is a darn shame.

--Ram



On 5/25/07, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>  At 3:36 PM -0500 5/25/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> C'da,
>
>
>
> >But HOW is one to know who is an ULFA
>
>
>
> One big give away may be that as Shivaji Singh is walking by, someone is
> taking pot shots at his group. Using fireamrs in the direction of the army
> may actually do the trick.
>
>
>
>
> But then why do unarmed innocents get killed? Being dragged out of their
> homes and executed in fake encounters?  Indian army guys couldn't be THAT
> un-professional, could they, heh-heh?
>
>
> >While I will agree to this part - that the rule of law has deteriorated.
> But are you now telling us that the ULFA spawned off because of the
> break-down in the rule of law?
>
>
> *** The ULFA is a creation of desi-demokrasy's dysfunction. It was the
> inability of the people to get any attention to their grievances, and when
> they took to the streets, for getting brutalized and shot down like street
> dogs, by the Indian army/CRPF  goons with the connivance of Assam govt.
> stooges. When it came to a breaking point, they said enough is enough. And
> the rest is history Ram.
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In the meantime ULFA has denied their involvement in the killing, stating
> that the two cadres did not belong >to their group and that the outfit had
> nothing against the teacher.
>
>
>
> And soon after that, the ulfa gave a press statement that the teacher was
> an 'army informant'. (Sentinel)
>
>
>
> But really, it was only a school teacher, why should anyone really care. I
> don't think the PCPIA or the PCG have the time nor the inclination to bother
> about such trivial thing.
>
>
>
> >*** Such Ram, is the rule of law  of desi-demokrasy , that spawned ULFA
> to begin with. >Let us not forget that.
>
>
>
> While I will agree to this part - that the rule of law has deteriorated.
>
> But are you now telling us that the ULFA spawned off because of the
> break-down in the rule of law? and not because of some lofty principle? And
> if these people were so hell-bent upon upholding the law, why are they so
> lawless? :)
>
>
>
> Will let Kamal answer for himself to some of your other questions.
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 5/25/07,* Chan Mahanta* <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Ram:
>
>
>
>
> >That is interesting. It could well be that. But no insurgent would want
> their own family become targets >of unruly armymen, would they.
>
>
>
>
> *** I might think not. But HOW is one to know who is an ULFA, who is
> merely a relative, or who has nothing to do with them?  Should the 'common
> people' know that it does not really matter? That as long as Havildar Daulat
> Ram says so, or as long as an NRA accepts so, it is enough to be shot?
>
>
>
>
> And if it does not matter, what difference does it make if one is an ULFA
> or not having anything to do with ULFA? As long as the ARMY says so, that is
> enough, isn't it? Isn't exactly that what AFSPA allows them to?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >--- Irate public lynched a suspected ULFA cadre
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In the meantime ULFA has denied their involvement in the killing, stating
> that the two cadres did not belong >to their group and that the outfit had
> nothing against the teacher.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** But what does that have to do with Army killing someone if he/she had
> nothing to do with ULFA?  I won't even go to the issue of HOW  the Army
> might know how to decide who is ULFA and who is not.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Accept the scenario laid out so lucidly by Kamal ? Like you do :-)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** Such Ram, is the rule of law  of desi-demokrasy , that spawned ULFA to
> begin with. Let us not forget that. And in thirty years or so, nothing has
> changed. Not even for NRA devotees of democracy  and believers in the rule
> of law :-).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 1:43 PM -0500 5/25/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
> Hi C'da,
>
>
>
> *>I am glad you corrected that slip of Kamal's Ram, by clarifying >that
> the 'common people' harbor them out of sheer terror, and >NOT because them'terrorist' just might be their own--sons, >nephews, friends, in-laws,
> lovers, what have you :-).*
>
>
>
> That is interesting. It could well be that. But no insurgent would want
> their own family become targets of unruly armymen, would they.
>
>
>
> It is more than likely, unsurgents would make sure the "action" is not
> close to their immediate families. So, when they do need to make a run for
> it, they make probably do so in some other village (not their own).
>
>
>
> This news from the AT should perk you right up (as to how close the ULFA
> insurgents are to the common people - specially when the common folks are
> free to express themselves and not looking down the barrel of a gun) .
>
>
>
> Here the brave ULFA men shot (point blank) this most dangerous school
> teacher - who probably was a bigwig in this big "Indo-Assam Conflict". Now,
> that is done, perhaps the ULFA can put down its arms and join the
> mainstream! :)
>
>
>
> --Ram
>
> ___________________________________
>
> Villagers lynch ULFA cadre
> From Our Correspondent
>
>  DIBRUGARH, May 24 - Irate public lynched a suspected ULFA cadre at
> Pengeri and detained his comrade at Hulunggutti village under Kakopathar PS
> in Tinsukia district after the militants killed the schoolteacher of
> Kailashpur LP school this morning. Local villagers gave a chase to the
> militants following the hue and cry of the school students and managed to
> get hold of Budhe Dhadumia who was later beaten to death by the villagers.
> The other cadre whose identity has not been confirmed is said to be handed
> over to the police by the villagers in Hulunggutti.
>
> The two militants who reportedly came over to the school on foot called
> for the schoolteacher when the school assembly was on. As the schoolteacher
> Rohini Gogoi approached them, he was shot at from point blank range in full
> view of the students, according to reliable sources. The teacher died on the
> spot.
>
> Senior police officials from Tinsukia have rushed to the spot and
> investigation is on. In the meantime ULFA has denied their involvement in
> the killing, stating that the two cadres did not belong to their group and
> that the outfit had nothing against the teacher.
>
>
>
>
> On 5/25/07,* Chan Mahanta* <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Ram:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for sharing Kamal's letter to the Sentinel and your thoughts on the
> subject.
>
>
>
>
> I know Kamal  does believe in the rule of law, and am sure he too wants
> the security forces to be accountable.
>
>
>
>
> But he goes to great lengths in trying to explain that 'terrorism' cannot
> be dealt with gingerly, as if that is what Wasbir wants to do, deal with it
> 'gingerly'. If one has to draw conclusions from Kamal's note, it would be
> that Kamal wants to give the 'security' forces free-reign -- as if AFSPA is
> not enough. In that his
>
> opening statement sounds  like a mere perfunctory homage to the rule of
> law, a 'xaliki-snan' .
>
>
>
>
> I was also quite curious about :
>
>
>
>
> >It is a killing field where
> >the Army has to fight an invisible enemy, who hides amongst the
>
>  >common masses and does not wear uniform.
>
>
>
>
> *** So perhaps it is OK to go shoot first and ask questions later. After
> all there are 'terrorists' out there, and soldiers are only human, unlike
> them 'masses'  harboring them 'terrorists'. So , let us not make too big a
> deal of a few of the 'masses'  getting rubbed out, no doubt only
> accidentally!  Right ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In order to overcome this disadvantage, a soldier must be
> >swift-reacting for which lightening reactions are summoned into
> >actions, whenever and wherever there is an iota of doubt. By being
> >fast and unpredictable, a soldier garners the ability to alarm the
>
>  >terrorist before the latter unnerves him.
>
>
>
>
> *** I didn't realize that Kamal, besides being the good daktor he is, is
> also a military tactician. Perhaps a specialist in 'terrorist' fighting ?
> In GW Bush country he has a lot to contribute.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Under this
>
>  >circumstance, human errors are bound to occur occasionally.
>
>
>
>
> *** Of course!  Only people like Wasbir tend to make mountains of such
> molehills. You never can trust these bleeding heart liberal journalists, can
> you?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>The Army, in essence, is a well-oiled killing machine, who are
> >taught to annihilate the enemy. Its mathematics is simple:
>
>
>  >''anti-national'' means ''you have to eliminate''.
>
>
>
>
> *** The immense power of superior logic exuding thru these observations
> would be lost on the clueless like myself, had it not been for Kamal's
> pointing it out !  Well-oiled killing machine! So, occasionally it could
> veer out of course. Only natural--what do you expect?  Are you going to make
> a federal case out of it? Once the 'anti-national' label is placed on the
> target, it is OPEN SEASON!
>
>
>
>
> My only question will be about WHO places that target, the anti-national
> label? And their QUALIFICATION for that? Authority for that?
>
>
>
>
> Ooops! Forgive me. I almost forgot. They have AFSPA.  Don't need any.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Ideally, the Army
>
>  >is not a force to be unleashed in civilian space.
>
>
>
>
> *** Oh the idealist Kamal! He is all heart, isn't he? Tell you what? If it
> were for me, I would say ideals schmideals! It is for them bleeding hearts.
> Real patriots , not to mention real men, don't need that sappy garbage.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>Since the terrorist almost always hides amongst the common people,
> >the security forces must treat everyone with suspicion and that
>
>  >keeps the soldiers on their toes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** Now he is talking. The gloves finally came off, didn't they? I knew we
> could count on Kamal to say it like it is.
>
>
>
>
> *"--- terrorist almost always hides amongst the common people,"*
>
>
>
>
> Wait a minute here! Is Kamal suggesting that the 'common people' AID and
> ABET them 'terrorists" ?  Very interesting indeed.  But if that is true, how
> are they 'terrorists', if the common people are not even terrified of them?
>
>
>
>
> *I am glad you corrected that slip of Kamal's Ram, by clarifying that the
> 'common people' harbor them out of sheer terror, and NOT because them
> 'terrorist' just might be their own--sons, nephews, friends, in-laws,
> lovers, what have you :-).*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >the security forces must treat everyone with suspicion and that
>
>   >keeps the soldiers on their toes. This may cause harassment to the
>
> >public, but it is the price one has to pay when the security forces
>
> >are fighting an invisible enemy.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** Glad someone put things in perspective.  These common masses  need to
> be told in uncertain terms that they are SUSPECT! After all they are the
> ones causing trouble for the uncommon ELITEs like Kamal and his kind,
> keeping soldiers in their service on their toes.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >This is precisely why we get to
> >read the news of innocent civilians being killed mistakenly by the
>
>  >Army.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** Now we know!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >But then, these cases are exceptions rather than rule.
> >It would be worthwhile to keep in mind that the terrorists are
> >certainly not normal human beings who harbour sentiments such as
>
>  >compassion and love.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *** Didn't know that. Honest! Call me a fool, but I was under the mistaken
> idea that 'terrorist' is just a CONVENIENT label to place on other* humans
> * who are causing trouble for the good folks, like placing a bulls-eye
> target on their backs for the well-oiled killing machine to zero in on the
> kills. Didn't know they are not humans at all.  Must be another bunch of
> 'killing machines' but without the grease and short on fuel.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>The fact remains that brutes only understand brute force.
>
>
>
>
> *** Of course! And if the common masses harbor them, they too ought to be
> treated brutally. And since it is so hard to tell one from the other, what
> do you expect?
>
>
>
>
> *It's all clear now .* Thanks to Kamal.
>
>
>
>
> c-da :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> PS:
>
>
>
>
> >I hope you are not trying to show that insurgents are  innocent and
>
>  have played no part.
>
>
>
>
> *** How did you guess that Ram? I was trying to slide that in sideways.
> But you catch me every time .
>
> Let me 'fess up here: I was not only trying to shield them 'terrorists', I
> even had a soft spot for them common masses who harbor them as well.  I am
> another one of those who didn't realize that once they hob-nob with
> 'terrorists' their innocence go up in smoke and they become fair game.
>
>
>
>
> That, after all is the essence of desi-demokrasy!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 9:06 PM -0500 5/24/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>
> C'da
> Iam at a slight disadvt.-out of town and on a small keybrd. But will try.
> I think kjd does make salient pts.Assigning blame to the army is very
> easy.If one has to it has to be the policy makers, maybe the
> commanders etc. The usual jawan is probably shipped out of Andhra or
> Bihar with a very limited knowledge of the local populace. When they
> get imbroiled in a fracas, innocents get killed or hurt.
> Yesterday, I wrote how insurgents go hide among the villagers. The
> poor people, often have little or no option but to give shelter to
> insurgents, thus inviting the army.
>
>   The insurgents don't wear uniforms, look and dress like the locals
>
> (Assam or Kashmir)and they take full advantage of such situations and
>
> their sympathizers are ready to pounce on the army if things go awry.
> When civilians pay the price, it might be prudent to look into the
> role also of the insurgents.
>
> I hope you are not trying to show that insurgents are  innocent and
>
> have played no part.
> And thats about as much I can type on this tiny keybrd. More tomorrow:)
> BTW KJD just asked I fwd it-he is not a subscriber I think.
>
> --Ram
>
>
> On 5/24/07, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Any comments on it on your part ,Ram :-)?
>
> c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 6:15 PM -0500 5/24/07, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
> >Of Army 'Excess'
> >One of the remarks made by Mr Wasbir Hussain in his column entitled
> >"Men with weapons must have accountability" (The Sentinel, May 19,
> >2007) could not help but catch my eye. A direct quote, perhaps,
> >would carry the right flavour: "The action of the Army, police or
> >the paramilitary in eliminating any innocent civilian... is
> >unacceptable." True, checks and balances are necessary, and
> >accountability on the part of the security forces must be
> >established and responsibility fixed. However, one must understand
> >that the problem of terrorism cannot be tackled gingerly, nor can it
> >be equated with the delicate act of delivering babies.
> >The counter-insurgency operations are a lethal game that entails
>
>   >quickness and keenness of perception. It is a killing field where
> >the Army has to fight an invisible enemy, who hides amongst the
>
> >common masses and does not wear uniform. It is the terrorist who
> >decides when, where and how, while the soldier is at the receiving
>
> >end. In order to overcome this disadvantage, a soldier must be
> >swift-reacting for which lightening reactions are summoned into
>
> >actions, whenever and wherever there is an iota of doubt. By being
> >fast and unpredictable, a soldier garners the ability to alarm the
>
> >terrorist before the latter unnerves him. Time is not on the side of
>
> >the soldier, and he lives only if he reacts swiftly. Under this
>
> >circumstance, human errors are bound to occur occasionally.
>
> >The Army, in essence, is a well-oiled killing machine, who are
> >taught to annihilate the enemy. Its mathematics is simple:
>
> >''anti-national'' means ''you have to eliminate''. Ideally, the Army
>
> >is not a force to be unleashed in civilian space. When they are
> >marshalled into a troubled spot to help civil administration to curb
> >violence, a soldier does not differentiate between a foreign enemy
> >and a home-grown separatist. His only objective is to erase the foe.
>
> >Since the terrorist almost always hides amongst the common people,
>
> >the security forces must treat everyone with suspicion and that
>
> >keeps the soldiers on their toes. This may cause harassment to the
> >public, but it is the price one has to pay when the security forces
>
> >are fighting an invisible enemy. This is precisely why we get to
> >read the news of innocent civilians being killed mistakenly by the
>
> >Army. But then, these cases are exceptions rather than rule.
> >It would be worthwhile to keep in mind that the terrorists are
> >certainly not normal human beings who harbour sentiments such as
>
> >compassion and love. Had they been so, they would not have been able
> >to stand to shoot at another human being's head point-blank - that
> >too, that of a non-combatant civilian. And this speaks volumes of
> >their mental make-up.
>
> >The fact remains that brutes only understand brute force.
>
> >Kamaljit Deka,
> >Sugarland, Texas.
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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/20070525/ec30649d/attachment.htm>


More information about the Assam mailing list