KATHMANDU, NEPAL, 15-SEP-2002: An army soldier warns photographers not to take pictures as he and other security personnel were on patrol along a busy street in Kathmandu, Sept. 15, 2002. At least four bombs went off today in the capital, a day before a nationwide strike called by Maoist rebels, but no one was injured, police said. [Photo by Devendra M. Singh, copyright 2002 by AFP and ClariNet]

Dear Ashu,

>Biswo,

>RNA:

>Well, if people feel that way about the RNA, then, let's face it, then RNA has a
>serious public relations problem, a problem it has done very little to address. Rather
>than blaming others for disparaging the Army, why not ask the RNA to take its PR
>exercise seriously and start winning people's trust by delivering CREDIBLE results?

Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

>I mean, to give an example, while jawaans with last names such as Gurung, Rai, Pun,
>Tamang and others were being killed in the field by the Maoists, the last Sena Pati
>was busy publicly releasing an album with songs about "pirati". Earlier, he was busy
>in a seven-day long pooja, when, agan, jawans were being killed in the field. Hardly
>the sort of behavour that, you know, inspires trust and confidence in the Army
>leadership, much less in their war strategy.

I agree with you, and to remind you, Biswo condemned the Prajwal shamsher in
sajha at that time too.

Yes, army has problem, but our intellectuals too have problem, and often that
problem is so glaring, gaping that it doesn't behoove them to stand in the
pedestal of virtue and smirk piously and selfrighteously at the army.

>You call that an exercise in winning people's trust?

I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?


>You know, incidents like the above -- ond and off the field -- have added up to the
>point now where the RNA needs to think serously about how it wants to start winning
>what's left of peopl's trust. Thankfully, there are still many of us who, despite our
>occasionally raised eye-brows, are still on the RNA's side.

I agree with you on this.

>Maoism:

>The simple fact that there now exists something called Prachanda Path must
>tell you how the Maoists have veered AWAY from the tenets of "chiniya sanskritik
>kranti".

No. Unfortunately not.

The documents of CPN(Maoists) have amply shown (fortunately, I have read
most of party documents, along with Janadesh/Yojana/and Jhilko in the past)
that Prachanda Path is not veering away from Maoism, but sticking more firmly
to it. Any hardcore Maoist will slap you in face if you say their Prachanda Path
is 'veering away from Maoism'.

Maoism is enshrined in the documents of CPN(Maoists) and is like the Quran for
our rebels.Just ask a party person of CPN(Maoist) for that.

> Sure, they did start with a bow toward the North, but look where they are in their
>thought process now. That is why, to still see them as followers of Lin Biao and Jiang
>Qing is to fail to see how Nepali Maoists have evolved themselves to exploit
>strategic advantages to their favor. If anything's becoming clear: ideology means
>less and less to the so-called Maoists these days.

If you are trying to say that:

i) CPN(Maoists) have disavowed Jiang Qing and her fanatic form of revolution, then
will you please kindly tell me which is your source for this. Any Maoists related
newspaper, or party document will serve for this. Because I believe 'mahaan
saaskritik kraanti' remains the bedrock of CPN(Maoist) and RIM's idelogy.

ii) CPN(Maoists) are just opportunists, who care about power, not principle,and
will let status-quo after they come to power, then , well I think it is a merely
wishful thinking.


>This is why, to bring up China's Cultural Revolution ko kura is good for some historical
>prologue, but it fails to provide an analysis of why the Maoists are doing hat they are
>doing today.
I didn't bring that to provide 'analysis' of 'TODAY'S' activities of Maoists, I said
I shudder at the thought that once they are in the power, dejavu chaos of
cultural revolution and its attendant impact on nation's future will be felt in Nepal
too.


>[My understanding of recent Chinese history have come from reading and
>interpreting: "China Wakes" by Nicholas D. Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn, and "China: A
>New History" by Fairbank and Goldman. I am presently reading "Wild Swans: Three
>Daughters of China" by Jung Chang.]

Good luck in your understanding of China.

>Intellectuals:

>Well, I am NOT a psychoanalyst to declare that those hold different views from me
>are suffering from some kind of syndrome.

I have not said you are:-)

>Intellectuals and non-intellectuals in Kathmandu have many faults, but they ARE --
>under fairly difficult, unsafe circumstances -- trying every effort to let peace prevail
> in the country so that we can all get on with their lives.

I agree that there is hardship, but hardship can't be pretext for any kind of
opportunism. Targetting army unfairly and unnecessarily is as futile for the
restoration of peace as is targetting Maoists one-sidedly.

>It's one thing to be critical of certain strategies and thoughts of others, it's completely
> another characterize others as suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. This sort of >characterizaion kills the debate, and reduces ideas to the level of "he-is-like-this-and-
>no-he-is-not-like-that" sort of parlor-game.

No. It doesn't kill debate, unless debating party is devoid of modicum of tolerance
for analogy. This is pert analogy, and is found on other cases too.

It reminds me of present day India too. Someone said that while most of the
intellectuals shuddered at the thought of a communalist party ruling India in 1992s,
they slowly started feeling 'they can't be that bad' once BJP looked invincible.

And that's what is the case of present day Nepal too. It won't surprise me if some
of our intellectuals start buying and memorizing red books once they hear the
red-fatigued army is approaching Mugling bazaar.

Otherwise, how should I understand your 'four points' about why rebels are not
going to perform the replica of 'cultural revolution' in Nepal?

>For this kind of debate to go further and have some substance, the one thing we --
>intellectuals and non-intellectuals in Kathmandu -- can do without is some sort of
>unwarranted characterizaion from afar . . . the kind of characterization, which,
>oddly enough, reminds one of Maoist tactics.

Come on, from AFAR or WITHIN, I am still the one concerned with Nepal, and I have
right to do comment from AFAR in a website that also serves for people living AFAR
and WITHIN. And sorry to see you resorting to extreme comparison again.

>oohi
>ashu
>ktm,nepal


------------

Nepeji,

Well, I am sad to see you are trying to amplify the issue, ie to say that I am for
sankatkaal in sajha is blatantly wrong extrapolation. Because I didn't say that,
ever. I am for freedom to ventilate thoughts here. I was exercizing my freedom to
criticise others for what I saw as incorrect action. Let's not try to kill an ant with a
gun!

--------
Paschim and Guruji,

Lin Biao was an odd person. Two weeks ago, I was reading about him in New Yorker
and I found that this general who was hydrophobic had a 71-feet long indoor pool
in his mansion in Beidaihe. He was vice president at the time (sort of Hu Jintao of
today) and was fairly powerful a person.

There is this proverb in China which is fairly famous:

Tian yao xiayu.
Niang yao Gaijia.

(aakas baata pani parchha, (bidhawaa)aaimaile bihe garchhan nai. (rokna sakinna
bhayerai chhadchha bhanne artha maa))

But I am not sure if Mao said this in that particular moment. Even if Mao said that,
it wouldn't mean anything more than a comment. Lin Biao had long Russian
association, so may be Mao meant ' tyo moro Russia bhagchha nai '.
About Peng Dehuai: he was, it was said in China, hated by Mao because he
led the contingent comprised of Mao's son in Korea war, and returned with the
bodybag for Mao's son.

May be Ananta knows this better.

I think Bishow has taken the argument to the logical conclusion with a lot of honesty and courage...very rare quality among Nepali intellectual 'tappartuians.' To imply that because the jawan is holding his fore finger up, how do these intellectuals impute what he is saying? He could have raised the finger for any number of reasons...may be to say "just one shot, no more!" Does that mean that RNA is the monster?

Secondly, even if he meant to say "no photos", is that enogh to say RNA is despicable organization? Our intellectuals who have travelled around the world must no that security forces, even in "democratic country with civilian control over military" will not let you photograph if it jeopardizes their duty/operation. Try doing that a US military installation and you will end up in Camp X Ray in Cuba!

Why did the jawan asked not to be photographed? May be the intellectuals do not know, or wish to ignore, the army men and their families are being individually being identified and targeted by the Maoists. Have we read the reports in which dozens of retired soldiers, jawans on home leave and their families have been murdered by the Maoists? So if this particular soldier in the picture did not want to be identified, is that a big crime?

And these intellectuals who hold protest marches, bandhs, hadtals, and all sorts of moral and political sympathy for when one Maoists central committeed member Krishna Sen (he also worked as a journalist) is captured/killed by the government. The intellectulas think this is the higest moral crisis in Nepal.

But these same intellectuals do not raise an eye lid when a number of journalists working in the districts (Rolpa, Surkhet, Jumla etc) have been killed, abducted and disappeared. So for these intellectuals/human rights/civil society/ngo frauds, it becomes a tragedy only when the Maoists are killed...they laugh (some openly, many not so openly...like some of the postings here) when the police, army people and their families are murdered.
I personally think our intellectuals have very little moral capital left.

And these buddijibis never tire of complaining about the state of emergency as it is the biggest problem in Nepal. Do these intellectuals know that in two third of the country the Maoists are running their own emergency for the past seven years...they call it Mahakal (as opposed to sankatkal of the government). Under this maoist emergency, you can not perform your family rituals, you can not celebrate festivals and religious occasions, they search you and your house any time they want, you are forced to feed them all the time, villagers are forced to transport the maoists luggage for days. And then the Maoists control your movement, to go from one village to the next you have to apply to the local commander and you travel only when he gives you a 'pass' on a slip of paper.

I am sorry that the security personnel dared to ask poet Khagendra Sangraula to check his books, but can these intellectuals imagine what kind of life the villagers are being made to live by the Maoists?

I personally think these intellectuals who are quick to condemn the government/army/police but keep mum over Maoists atrocities are either vain and cowardly--they know they can get away criticizing the government side, because it has a certain moral high ground and you can appeal against it nationally and internationally.
Or, some of the intellectuals are the above ground part of the Maoist force...they fight the ideologcial/intellectual battle for the Maoists by discrediting and disparaging the government side so as to undermine its morale and to distance it from the people.

In Nepal, I think the most corrupt and debase are not the politicians (eve gpk,kbk etc) or the bureaucrats at the Tax Department, it is our intellectuals who hold this position...morally.

So the sipahi refuses to be photographed...how is that different from Mr. Sangraula refusing to disclose his books (theoretically, that could have been a bag of explosives; how can a sipahi, working under pressure, when five bombs have gone off in the city, know that this is a great intellectual and he should not be examined?

We intellectuals complain that the government is doing enough to provide security, but when a poor police jawan does his job by checking for explosives (risking his life in the process), we again claim an royal privilege of being exempt from rules meant for the common citizen? Our great intellectuals, how can one talk with them, they want to have it both ways, literally.

Peace,
buddujibi

I think Bishow has taken the argument to the logical conclusion with a lot of honesty and courage...very rare quality among Nepali intellectual 'tappartuians.' To imply that because the jawan is holding his fore finger up, how do these intellectuals impute what he is saying? He could have raised the finger for any number of reasons...may be to say "just one shot, no more!" Does that mean that RNA is the monster?

Secondly, even if he meant to say "no photos", is that enogh to say RNA is despicable organization? Our intellectuals who have travelled around the world must no that security forces, even in "democratic country with civilian control over military" will not let you photograph if it jeopardizes their duty/operation. Try doing that a US military installation and you will end up in Camp X Ray in Cuba!

Why did the jawan asked not to be photographed? May be the intellectuals do not know, or wish to ignore, the army men and their families are being individually being identified and targeted by the Maoists. Have we read the reports in which dozens of retired soldiers, jawans on home leave and their families have been murdered by the Maoists? So if this particular soldier in the picture did not want to be identified, is that a big crime?

And these intellectuals who hold protest marches, bandhs, hadtals, and all sorts of moral and political sympathy for when one Maoists central committeed member Krishna Sen (he also worked as a journalist) is captured/killed by the government. The intellectulas think this is the higest moral crisis in Nepal.

But these same intellectuals do not raise an eye lid when a number of journalists working in the districts (Rolpa, Surkhet, Jumla etc) have been killed, abducted and disappeared. So for these intellectuals/human rights/civil society/ngo frauds, it becomes a tragedy only when the Maoists are killed...they laugh (some openly, many not so openly...like some of the postings here) when the police, army people and their families are murdered.
I personally think our intellectuals have very little moral capital left.

And these buddijibis never tire of complaining about the state of emergency as it is the biggest problem in Nepal. Do these intellectuals know that in two third of the country the Maoists are running their own emergency for the past seven years...they call it Mahakal (as opposed to sankatkal of the government). Under this maoist emergency, you can not perform your family rituals, you can not celebrate festivals and religious occasions, they search you and your house any time they want, you are forced to feed them all the time, villagers are forced to transport the maoists luggage for days. And then the Maoists control your movement, to go from one village to the next you have to apply to the local commander and you travel only when he gives you a 'pass' on a slip of paper.

I am sorry that the security personnel dared to ask poet Khagendra Sangraula to check his books, but can these intellectuals imagine what kind of life the villagers are being made to live by the Maoists?

I personally think these intellectuals who are quick to condemn the government/army/police but keep mum over Maoists atrocities are either vain and cowardly--they know they can get away criticizing the government side, because it has a certain moral high ground and you can appeal against it nationally and internationally.
Or, some of the intellectuals are the above ground part of the Maoist force...they fight the ideologcial/intellectual battle for the Maoists by discrediting and disparaging the government side so as to undermine its morale and to distance it from the people.

In Nepal, I think the most corrupt and debase are not the politicians (eve gpk,kbk etc) or the bureaucrats at the Tax Department, it is our intellectuals who hold this position...morally.

So the sipahi refuses to be photographed...how is that different from Mr. Sangraula refusing to disclose his books (theoretically, that could have been a bag of explosives; how can a sipahi, working under pressure, when five bombs have gone off in the city, know that this is a great intellectual and he should not be examined?

We intellectuals complain that the government is doing enough to provide security, but when a poor police jawan does his job by checking for explosives (risking his life in the process), we again claim an royal privilege of being exempt from rules meant for the common citizen? Our great intellectuals, how can one talk with them, they want to have it both ways, literally.

Peace,
buddujibi

test...can't post for some reason...

Thanks for that new info on Mao and Lin, Biswo -- was long wondering about it...I mean, your defence minister who you once groomed as heir to the Empire suddenly defects to an enemy country (with god knows how many State secrets) and your first reaction at midnight is, "skies rain, widows remarry". I really was puzzled. But if it is a local proverb, then it makes *perfect* sense.

If not a proverb I'd have ranked this alongside the magic utterances of Henry Kissinger's "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac" to our own Subarna Shumsher's appeal to Mahendra in 2024 that he wanted to end his exile in Calcutta in order to "bhakti-purbak sahayog takrayauna" to the Raja!

A pleasure to see Biswo in action. There's something in Chitwan ko paani :)

Biswo ji;

There is something to be said about critical thought. If education serves us right, it will enable us to think, analyse, compare and contemplate situations and Not take things at face value. So, what is wrong with the "intelligentsia" in KTM? What is right with the "intelligentsia" outside KTM? You refer to the intelligentsia and the leadership as both decaying....Whose leadership are you refering to? The leadership of those in control of the public "kursies" or the leadership behind RNA? You say, "no wonder the villagers march with rebels...they were shepherded..." Either you do not give credit to the "villagers'" and or commoners' ability to think or you think they are decaying as well. Ok, you have covered 3 groups of Nepalese population; The decaying intelligentsia, leaders and the bheda jasto commoners (villagers) who are ignorant enough to be "shepherded" along. This line of reasoning leaves out those who are not "decaying"; like the RNA, those "intellectuals living outside of Kathmandu" and perhaps the "brave non-questioning intellectuals" like yourself! Hmmmmmmmm that is quite a food for thought hoina ra?

But here is a thought: How can the "weak intellectuals" be called so if their weakness leads them to question the weakness in the system instead of mainstreaming?? Does the term Jumbo shrimp come to mind??? An oxymoron! Now, if by your ommision, you are referring to the "brave intellectuals living outside Kathmandu", I am speculating on whether you mean "abroad" or outside KTM but within Nepal! If, you are refering to the "brave, abroad-living patriotic Nepalese", I could fall into the category of abroad-living but I am neither brave nor patriotic by your definition!

But, I could experiment with being "brave" as well as "Intellectual" by saying "GO RNA, "nuke" the Maoists, wipe the countryside off those bheda-like villagers and oh yes, save democracy in the process"!!!!!! But, guess who is left to enjoy the democracy; the RNA, RNA-supporters, intellectuals who don't question and oh yes the "brave intellectuals" living outside Kathmandu! Hmmmmmm.... so what happened to "freedom of speech"? "freedom of expression"? or is there another form of "democracy" we are unaware of? has democracy translated to "divine law", "military oppression" or "intellectual suppression"???????

Oh yes, and how dare Ashu post the article!!!! Such an attrocity committed on Sajha.com....a Boston based cyber nagar!!!!!! How dare he not corroborate before posting anything against the RNA!!! Did not know "your" brand of democracy extended upto Sajhapur of Boston! Were you self righteously questioning the heinous act of Ashu's queries or his audacity of having posted "without corroborating" with those, such as yourself?

As for the "weak intellectuals" being afflicted by THE "syndrome", you might want to watch out; it can be highly contagious.... and YES, CRITICAL THOUGHT can be a dangerous commodity to possess in the days of anarchy and unaccountability (misutilization...?)of Power!!!!! You and those, such as yourself are better off not possessing it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Siphai refuses wrote:

So the sipahi refuses to be photographed...how is that different from Mr. Sangraula refusing to disclose his books (theoretically, that could have been a bag of explosives; how can a sipahi, working under pressure, when five bombs have gone off in the city, know that this is a great intellectual and he should not be examined?


--
Well, said SR. I agree with you neither less nor more than 100%. Yes, "KATOji"
in kathmandu think that govt. should put them above normal citizens when it comes
liberal, freedom and legal issues. A intellectual in Kathmandu thinks that he should
be exempted from all security checks, KATOji thinks that he should be allowed
to drive a car or motobike even while on drink, KATOji in KTM thinks that he should
be allowed to ride motorbike without helmet, because he says he knows that its
dangerous, and he is careful enough to avoid those accidents, because of his
knowledge. ... KATOji always think that they are great intellectuals and should be
given special priveleges .. in every aspect....

HG

well written, sipaahi refuses ji.

Sitara wrote:

Biswo ji;

There is something to be said about critical thought. If education serves us right, it will enable us to think, analyse, compare and contemplate situations and Not take things at face value. So, what is wrong with the "intelligentsia" in KTM? What is right with the "intelligentsia" outside KTM? You refer to the intelligentsia and the leadership as both decaying....Whose leadership are you refering to? The leadership of those in control of the public "kursies" or the leadership behind RNA? You say, "no wonder the villagers march with rebels...they were shepherded..." Either you do not give credit to the "villagers'" and or commoners' ability to think or you think they are decaying as well. Ok, you have covered 3 groups of Nepalese population; The decaying intelligentsia, leaders and the bheda jasto commoners (villagers) who are ignorant enough to be "shepherded" along. This line of reasoning leaves out those who are not "decaying"; like the RNA, those "intellectuals living outside of Kathmandu" and perhaps the "brave non-questioning intellectuals" like yourself! Hmmmmmmmm that is quite a food for thought hoina ra?

But here is a thought: How can the "weak intellectuals" be called so if their weakness leads them to question the weakness in the system instead of mainstreaming?? Does the term Jumbo shrimp come to mind??? An oxymoron! Now, if by your ommision, you are referring to the "brave intellectuals living outside Kathmandu", I am speculating on whether you mean "abroad" or outside KTM but within Nepal! If, you are refering to the "brave, abroad-living patriotic Nepalese", I could fall into the category of abroad-living but I am neither brave nor patriotic by your definition!

But, I could experiment with being "brave" as well as "Intellectual" by saying "GO RNA, "nuke" the Maoists, wipe the countryside off those bheda-like villagers and oh yes, save democracy in the process"!!!!!! But, guess who is left to enjoy the democracy; the RNA, RNA-supporters, intellectuals who don't question and oh yes the "brave intellectuals" living outside Kathmandu! Hmmmmmm.... so what happened to "freedom of speech"? "freedom of expression"? or is there another form of "democracy" we are unaware of? has democracy translated to "divine law", "military oppression" or "intellectual suppression"???????

Oh yes, and how dare Ashu post the article!!!! Such an attrocity committed on Sajha.com....a Boston based cyber nagar!!!!!! How dare he not corroborate before posting anything against the RNA!!! Did not know "your" brand of democracy extended upto Sajhapur of Boston! Were you self righteously questioning the heinous act of Ashu's queries or his audacity of having posted "without corroborating" with those, such as yourself?

As for the "weak intellectuals" being afflicted by THE "syndrome", you might want to watch out; it can be highly contagious.... and YES, CRITICAL THOUGHT can be a dangerous commodity to possess in the days of anarchy and unaccountability (misutilization...?)of Power!!!!! You and those, such as yourself are better off not possessing it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--------------
Everything gone above my head.. hehehhhhhhhhhhhhh...ee
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee............. What else shall i add......
for my inability to understand P. article.

P stands for:

paranoia

\Par`a*noi"a\, n. (Med.) A chronic form of insanity characterized by very gradual impairment of the intellect, systematized delusion, and usually by delusious of persecution or mandatory delusions producing homicidal tendency. In its mild form paranoia may consist in the well-marked crotchetiness exhibited in persons commonly called ``cranks.'' Paranoiacs usually show evidences of bodily and nervous degeneration, and many have hallucinations, esp. of sight and hearing.

Okay, I was refraining from commenting on the "mainstream" debate of this thread, because this topic has been talked about with candor in the past -- and I'm not fond of reinventing wheels; but I see some remarks here that might portray Biswo-ji as this "mainstream" voice who is supporting RNA unconditionally, one who is being hostile to "dissenting" views and questioning people's efforts to question things, one who is disparagingly generalizing the rural populace, etc.

Frankly, if there is one person here on Sajha who has criticized the RNA most brutally *AND* offered some of the most imaginative suggestions to better that institution at the same time, it is him. And only him.

A subtle reader will note that I don't agree with all he is saying -- and we have had disagreements on many issues before. But I *do* share the thrust of his points here that the so-called intelligentsia in Nepal and beyond -- from the bazaar academics and Rights activists to writers and the Bikase ilk -- has often found it fashionable to dwell on low-risk-high-return gambits of fact-less opinion making. And RNA being an untested, feudal, detached, sort of an unholy cow with royal links is a sexy target for cheap shots today, because despite all its flaws, you know a Jawaan won't come to your house in Teku to behead you at broad daylight. So by all means indulge and "critique". Try writing the same about the Maoists -- who incidentally probably don't know that even Chairman Mao said "heads don't grow back like chives", calling for some 'politeness' before killing a civilian senselessly.

Thanks to Nepali democracy, institutions like RNA and its patron the Palace, are no longer sacrosanct and have been vilified famously in recent years. You no longer become a hero in Nepal by saying unpleasant things about them. But we have to recognize that these are extremely trying times for Nepali sovereignty; and while cautioning and warning the RNA against excesses (and post-war possibilities of, for example, trying Nepali Generals from the Jungi Adda in the Hague for war crimes) have great merits, to pretend that what is ongoing in Nepal is a fair, refereed match between two disciplined sportsmen -- and to come up with novellas about broken and rigged rules that gentlemen shouldn't be breaking lest the "quality of war" falls, is absurd. This is a bloody, barbaric tussle that is guaranteed to produce NO victors, only losers. The sooner all this violence is subdued or ended, the better.

I am NOT urging anyone to keep quiet about the RNA, or support it blindly. The state HAS to act more responsibly and it can't stoop to the level of the terrorists in tactics it adopts; but at times like these, we have to choose sides and extend constructively critical support to a party by doing *least* damage to its mission (and this doesn't mean shut your eyes). And if you are a journalist looking for an opportunity to secure a story in the New York Times or a place on a discussion panel at some obscure Danish university, my polite suggestion to you is: go write about apple orchards in Jumla or smiling Japanese tourists climbing bloody Mount Annapurna.

gosh!
bloody? from you?? hehehe
whatever are you and arnico drinking these days.
tsk tsk :)

Nepal has done some PR for which we need to give it credit. For example, in the beginning it went to the villages with the aim of construction and wining people's trust. Fact is, people just don't remember the good deeds in the long run.

Also just because the CNC of army was performing Puja need not necessarily mean that he was not paying attention to the goings on of the army. For example, the CNC of the american army used to spend hours at the press conference and also he may have spent considerble time praying his own gods but that was not brought out as something evil. SO why does praying to the Hindu Gods need to be brought out as something evil?

May be the CNC was in the inauguration ceremony of the "priti" cassette as a PR exercise. But was mis-interpreted. I don't know the CNC and am not a insider of army but we have to give them credit when they diserve. We always criticize any and all the people in office without regards to whether that particular person is good or not.

What This will do is: it will frustate those good people in high office from trying to compete with the bad-doers since the people do not differenciate between them.

Paschim Ji,

I agree with you but, it is quite disheartening to listen to people denounce those who question; raise issues and question the "facts" they read. I am neither for the Maoists nor the RNA ( Unfortunately, I fall into the category of those Passivists:...Human Rightist).... but when I went to KTM this summer, and after talking to the local people, found out that people are as frightened of the RNA as of the Maoists.
They are still dealing with the the trauma of the Royal tragedy....'truth' has been vague or assumed and loyalties toward the throne are divided. The young people in KTM are afraid that they will be swiped off the street on bogus charges of being "Maoist". Two youth from our neighbourhood disappeared for a few days before they were released! And no, there was no accountability from anyone. Yes, people do live in fear of both. I talked to so many people, "intellectuals" as well as "non intellectuals", and the general tone of the environment is one of paranoa or apathy!

No! it is not one of my grieviances against My country but rather against those who have no qualms about throwing adjectives and or hurling insults against those who "post" or "question" here. It is almost like George Bush's "If you are not with us, you are against us!" Such a thought translates into "If you don't fight terroists, you are yourself a terroist". Why????????????? What is the harm in "thinking" things out, "talking" and or "expressing" opinions? By my two previous posts; one on "human rights" and the other one on "weak intelligentsia", I have no doubt that I will be cheerfully hanged as a "Maoist" or a "Mao sympathizer" by some of the Patriots here in Sajha!

And with this said.... I rest my case on this subject!!!!!!!!


Hahooguru ji;
As a well-meaning fan, I suggest you extract the "chewing gum" that seems to be stuck on your teeth; Hence, the sound of "GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" Were you trying to take the "Christian God's" Name in Vain? As for things flying over your head, it must be the Halo around your esteemed head!!!
:)

I think someone said it before...we cannot hide all the ills, pretend all is fine, and simply try to move on--we cannot just write/talk about "orchards in Jumla, or smiling Japanese tourist climbing the bloody Mt. Annapurna" (gosh, one would have reasons to believe Annapurna literally might be bloody these days!) while the country is in turmoil.

The ONLY way to solve the crisis at hand is to take it head on, struggle with the reality, laud the parties when they deserve it, criticize them when they fail to deliver (constructively, of course!), introduce numerous creative ideas, and try each one of those ideas until you find the one that works.

While I agree that some intellectuals/politicians may be criticizing the RNA simply to find an escape goat to hide their own short comings, which is utterly wrong, I also think there are some other quarters that are critical of either side of the conflict in a constructive manner. Where they err, no matter which side they are, I believe it is a rightful duty of the enlightened to be critical of them.

The RNA has a boulder task on it's shoulder, of fighting the terrorists while maintaining the balancing act of seeming humanitarian while being tough. We must certainly be cautious in criticizing an organization that has been called upon to do something that many had failed to do to begin with. However, when they commit egregious blunders like failing to pick up on the "bhela" of thousands of Maoists near their bases, one would only wonder if they are at all upto their task. It would also help if they let the journalists roam the war zones freely so that the public can confirm their "clean" handling of the battles, that they are doing their utmost in respecting human rights both of the enemies and of the civilians. I certainly loathe the jungalee Maoists when they commit crimes against human dignity, but it is worse when a well-established state institution does the same. I fail to comprehend the idea that gaining popularity by doing the right thing can be harmful to the morale of the soldiers.

There are, of course, other qualms I have about the RNA, like nepotism, casteism, corruption ("commissions" on purchase of military hardwares), etc.(the fact that these are prevalent in other sectors of the governmental institutions does not justify it's presence in the army), but these are issues that would require a whole new debating forum.

So long!

Biswo wrote:

Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

***************

Biswo,

You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

Now, is there anything further for you to say?
No.

Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
treason or being a traitor.

But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and really
want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.

You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
RNA.

Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]

******************

Biswo wrote:

Yes, army has problem, but our intellectuals too have problem, and often that
problem is so glaring, gaping that it doesn't behoove them to stand in the
pedestal of virtue and smirk piously and selfrighteously at the army.
------------

Well, even if people are indeed smirking at the RNA, so what?

Would other people's smirking destroy the RNA as we know it?
No.

And if you say that smirks would kill the RNA, then what kind of RNA do we have anyway that cannot even handle criticisms by some members of the public -- the
very folks who fund the army in the first place?

Our democracy is far from pefect, but if we can all push forth the idea that in our democracy, no one -- including the King and the Army and the political leaders -- is ABOVE critical questioning either by the individuals or by the mediam that would be such a great achievement.

If the RNA doesn't know this, well, it should -- BY NOW. And it's our duty -- as citizens -- to remind the RNA that we are not back in some pre-1990 ko Nepal.

***************

Biswo wrote:

I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

________


Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
hand?

If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.
If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with counter-evidence?

Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
GENERAL gaali.

So what's new?

Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

Biswo wrote:

Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

***************

Biswo,

You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

Now, is there anything further for you to say?
No.

Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
treason or being a traitor.

But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and really
want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.

You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
RNA.

Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]

******************

Biswo wrote:

Yes, army has problem, but our intellectuals too have problem, and often that
problem is so glaring, gaping that it doesn't behoove them to stand in the
pedestal of virtue and smirk piously and selfrighteously at the army.
------------

Well, even if people are indeed smirking at the RNA, so what?

Would other people's smirking destroy the RNA as we know it?
No.

And if you say that smirks would kill the RNA, then what kind of RNA do we have anyway that cannot even handle criticisms by some members of the public -- the
very folks who fund the army in the first place?

Our democracy is far from pefect, but if we can all push forth the idea that in our democracy, no one -- including the King and the Army and the political leaders -- is ABOVE critical questioning either by the individuals or by the mediam that would be such a great achievement.

If the RNA doesn't know this, well, it should -- BY NOW. And it's our duty -- as citizens -- to remind the RNA that we are not back in some pre-1990 ko Nepal.

***************

Biswo wrote:

I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

________


Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
hand?

If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.
If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with counter-evidence?

Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
GENERAL gaali.

So what's new?

Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal

>Biswo wrote:

>Let's put it this way, my case rightnow is not about RNA and its publicity
>stunts, but about intellectuals and their easy way to show their flashes of
>brilliance and courage by attacking whichever side is easy to attack.

>After all,RNA is ,at least, less evil among the two party exchanging barrages in
>battlefields rightnow. The victory of RNA is means status quo for intellectuals, and
>its succumbing to rebels doesn't mean that.

>There is no point for us to laugh out loud at the bad luck of RNAs, and try to
>portray them in worse light unwarrantedly, like the photographer was doing.

>***************


>Biswo,

>You have already declared -- quite grandly -- that the so-called intellectuals in
>Kathmandu (whoever they are!) are suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome".

>Now, is there anything further for you to say?
>No.

Why?

>Now, I am NOT going to sit here and argue with you whether people in Nepal are
>suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome" or not.

Unfortunately, that is what you are picking in my whole posting.

The problem with your posting is it is quite ambivalent: reflecting perhaps your own
views in almost everything including our previous debates. Your
views like I don't like Maoists/ I don't like RNA / Maoists are not gonna do
cultural revoultion stuff /So I am right is just the sign of that.

>As someone living in Kathmandu, I know that people here -- both intellectuals and non-
>intellectuals -- are simply tired of the violence, and are eager to get on with their lives.

I didn't say they are not. I said that, however, their action has something I find
objectable.

Please refute what I have said. If I haven't said something, then refuting that
is not gonna yield any point for you.

If your point is they are so true all the time, they are so inspiring in this time of
difficulty, then , that is what I am going to disagree on.

>They also know that when the jawaans with last names such as Rai, Gurung, Magar,
>Pun and so on get killed in the field, those hapless souls seem to get killed under
>circumstances that only go on to hint loudly about RNA's own puzzling states of
>unpreparedness and even, by extension, overall lack of seriousness about
>WINNING this war, if this is what they want.

Well, I checked last time, and I found jawaans of more diverse sirnames among the
killed. So, there goes your attempt to narrow the list of killed ones.

And if you check more ordinary people killed by Maoists, you will find more diverse
name.

But most importantly, the defeat of RNA in some fronts doesn't provide people with
excuse to laugh out loud and pretend THEY ARE GREAT and 'maile ta bhanekai
thiye ni'.

>No, I am NOT saying that the jawaans are not serious: but what infuriates me -- as a
>citizen -- is that: more and more I see the jawaans being made some sacrificial lambs
>when BETTER and MORE THOROUGH preparations against Maoist attacks could have
>been made . . . in Surkhet, in Dang, in Arghakachi and so on . . . but were not.

I didn't say you were saying Jawaans were not serious.

So, it surprises me to read your rebuttal, you are rebutting something that I haven't
said.

>You and others seem to think that being critical of RNA is tantamount to being
>supportive of the Maoists, or that it is tantamount to commiting some act of
>treason or being a traitor.

Again, untrue.

My posting is this: ridiculing RNA jawaans for all reasons, including for not mugging
for photograph, is something ridiculous.

>But the truth is that most people crticize the RNA because they care about it, and
>really want it to succeed and are sorely disappointed, even crushed, when it doesn't.


>You know, Paschim seems to admire your bravery. But the fact is that you could NOT
>even confront me openly about that posting which I posted -- in my own name,
>the one about a journalist's account that was critical of the RNA.

This is crazy. I didn't criticize you on that posting because I was not interested in
arguing with you at that time. I have my right to ARGUE with you when I LIKE,
where I LIKE, and I am only amused at your charge of ' aginai kina bhaninas'
type.

It also proves, folks, that I was not against postings of such kind.

I was against the attitude of posters who find it easy to attack and, circulate
unfounded truth about, RNA.

Period.

I find your whining about all that story and your drawing of Nepe's name on this
as 'your friend in argument' as unnecessary and ludicrous. Because frankly I have
replied Nepeji already about my comment on his comment.

If you post something, but you are not ready to take criticism about that, then
what kind of readiness for argument is that? What kind of "I WRITE IN MY
NAME, I AM READY TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT" claim are you making?
And for your information, in this forum I am also writing stuff in my name,
and your argument about that, again and again, only is like 'indra ko agaadi
swarga ko bayaan'.

>Records show that you showed your disdain NOT by arguing with the SUBSTANCE of
>that report but by announcing that my (the poster's) tone was "gleeful", and tried
>to "fasao" me into some sort of "guilt by association" with Lucia, as though I myself
>were in some sort of cahoots with other intelletuals in Kathmandu to denounce the
>RNA.


I didn't show my disdain for you.On the contrary, I respect you as a fellow
poster.

Your posting was an instance in this site, which I could use as my argument at any
time I like.

That is what posting in public domain means.

Your record is here, for all us to see: how you try to argue about things you don't
know, how you try to circulate things without corroborating, how you try to kill
arguments about SUBSTANCES by resorting to extreme comparisons despite
repeatedly promising not to do that.

And of course, I could use that as an example any time.

>Such was your tactics that others like Nepe felt compelled to remind you NOT to
>extend the state of Emergency into sajha!!

>And you accuse me of "resorting to extreme comparisons"!!

>[Sure, I play hardball, but you can't accuse me being unfair, and I remember my
>previous debates with you re: Safa Tempo, re: that poet from Alabama,
>re: Kunda Dixit's statement and so on.]


I don't mind your playing hardball, because I stand by my opinion.

I am also NOT afraid to express my opinion openly about my friends and talk
openly about them. I don't defend someone just because they are my friends.

To speak up your mind about your friends, you once needed courage. Now, take
RNA as example, you are speaking about RNA with harshness because, one can
argue this way also, you know you don't need courage, or you don't run risk of
antagonizing anyone seriously, and unlike with friends,you don't risk a friendship
with RNA jawaan.

I know this statement sounds harsh to you, but I am sure you will be able to
look at your own previous arguments, and take this as a good advice from me,
my friend.



>Biswo wrote:

>I didn't say that. And let's not overkill the matter by unnecessarily bringing everything
>about army. The issue we are addressing now is : are our intellectuals right
>in condemning army in everything, running gleefully at every chance to condemn
>army, circulating propoganda without even bothering to corroborate them?

_>_______


>Well, listen, you cannot have it both ways.

Ashu, you are making this argument unnecessarily boring.

I am providing examples ka examples about why I think what I think.This was one
of them.

>You cannot declare the intellectuals as people suffering from Stockholm Syndome
>on the one hand, and then turn around and ask for "corroborartion" on the other
>hand?

Why I can't? What kind of censorship is this?


>If they are suffering from SS, then they can't corroborate.

No. Stockholm syndrome is different from ability to corroborate. Even during the
'hypnotism' of hostage takers, one can corroborate the facts.

>If they can corroborate, then, they are not suffering from SS.

Well, you know better:-)

>Still, to test your own hypothesis (i.e. that the intellectusla say things wthout
>corroborating) why don't you, for a start, take Lucia's article as it is, and then start
>proving it WRONG or exaggerated by visiting the field yourself and coming up with
>counter-evidence?

Because I don't have to do that, because I am not the writer or I am not the
circulator. Listen, if you are trying to circulate something, if you are hoping the readers
to believe that you are veracious, the onus is upto you to corroborate at least
something.

>Then I and others can take your criticisms seriously.

which 'others'? Don't say you are not taking my criticisms seriously. Because this
is gonna be a big lie from you. Otherwise, why are you awake in the midnight
and writing so furiously and voluminously?

>Unless you can do that, or have that done, let's face it, your GENERAL gaali-stuffed
>criticisms of Nepali intellectuals from afar are as HOPELESS as their, as you say,
>criticisms of the RNA . . . and, if so, that makes you both hopeless in your own
>GENERAL gaali.

Your argument here is again devoid of SUBSTANCE.

>So what's new?

>Re: Maoism -- let us simply agree to disagree, and let that be that.

Yes, because you couldn't find any source to prove your points that Prachanda
Path is different from(revision of) Maoism and that Cultural revolution is something
they are not gonna repeat in Nepal or what?

Anyway, you are always free to write whatever you write, and run away from that
whenever you want.And even to accuse others of being like Maoist when someone finds
fault in them.

>A very Happy Indra Jatra to everyone!!

Same to you!

>oohi
>ashu
>ktm,nepal

Two respected heavywights of Sajha. Ashu and Biswo... :) Good debate guys. We got chance to learn.

So far Biswo is little bit stronger than Ashu in this debate game. Let's see what will happen in next round.

A few words of ignorance!

1. There are many motivations/reasons/interests from which I see people criticizing the Nepali government/army. Among these positions I find two important constituencies:
a. Dyed in the wool communists who want to have a communist republic. They are not formal Maoists guerrillas who fight in the trenches in Sandhikharka or Accham, but they do it with their pens in Kathmandu. Their sole purpose is to discredit the government, create schism between the government and the people..and generally give the impression that the Maoists are better than this chor government. They might say I am neutral, I am independent leftist (a la Tuladhar), I am only a human right activist or civil society person, but you know where their sympathies lie by reading a couple lines from their writing or speaking.
b. The second group of people I see attacking the government/security forces are the actual beneficiaries of the present and the past regimes...they or their ancestors became "successful" by bribe, commission, contract, or outright embezzlement of public positions. Now they have some guilt and fear of being brought to justice or notice (like the now aborted CIAA actions against the 22 Tax officials). The best way to hide that blemish and blend with the 'people' is to shout the loudest against the government and show off your leftist/romantic/progressive image. So if you blast the RNA now as corrupt, feudal, castist, murderous, genocidal...etc. etc., you get the credentials of being the enlightened popular conscience. After all,what better credentials of speaking for the people than legitimating the Maoist ...who are The People!
2. And there are those who criticize the Government/army, from a foreign perspective...foreign journalists, human rights, Amnestry etc., foreign governments, and scholars. They all have their own ideological/political axes to grind in the Nepali conflict.
3. And there are a few people who criticize the government when it fails through omission or commission. This criticism is constructive, to improve the governannce. They don't make a mountain of a mole hole when the army chief was found to be releasing the music tape when the Maoists made a suprise attack. When the al Kaida struck the Twin towers and the Pentagon, Mr. Bush was chatting with grade school children in Florida. Nobdoy laughed at Bush saying "Look, the country is being attacked viciously, what is our president doing...playing with keta keti!" The RNA chief was lucky that the journalists did not find him in a bath room at the time..."Kasto bekuf senapati, uta tetro hamala huindaicha, yeta eu turi gardicha!"

Peace!

What it looks from Ashu vs Biswo?

Citing dissatisfaction on previous threads, is sign that they are tending to
be personal. When you get personal, you end up quite away from
the core of the thread. Your relation will soon end up in GALI-GALOUSE
and never reparable. ITs based on my experience in SAjha.com and
other places like SCN, TND. So, either one party should stop, even though
we have not drawn a final conclusion. Well, there are some topics which
has no clear cut, YES NO borders, but, very blurred. The topic you are
discussing surely has a blurred border line, and its better to suspend
before your personal engine cools down. Well, discussion is never ending
process when we have border that is very blurred, as in the current topic.
Both of you had valid points, and we have to take it. Let all readers grasp
it, before it becomes:

First, its interesting.
Now it is tending to be boring.
Let it not be, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawing.

A friend of mine, who was very agressive in his college and univ days, is
now so cool. When I asked him whats the reason. He told following story:

Two very knowledgable bidwans "RISHI MUNI", were invited to discuss/debate
on a topic and asked to discuss on either side of topic. king, the organizer,
asked peoples to listen to them. The discussion / debate started, it continued
for days, almost 1 week. Then, the wife of "A" rishimuni, stood up and said
that his husband is goig to loss this debate. Well, every one was surprised,
because there was no indication who could be winner. The wife clarified that
her husband's voice is now up, she addred "it seems he is drained out of contents for
further discussions (he knows it), well, it may take another one week to finally
conceive the loss, but, I suggest him to give up right now, before it becomes
late, he loss all his achievements of the pasts". Well, after hearing her reco.
the RISHI realized and gave up the debate until he gathered more material to
continue the topic..... Shall we?

Sunne lai sun ko mala, bujhne ... jala....

Iti sri.

HG