An Open Letter to Babu Ramabadran

[Absaha]

I have on previous occassion bemoaned the divisive exchanges on this
newsgroup. As a new reader, seeking company of fellow compatriots (and I
use this word in the CULTURAL connotation), I was genuinely aghast at the
venom and spite that accompanied the anti-humanist postings. My knee-jerk
reaction was to express this feeling. At least one reader was surprised at
my apparent naivete, or at least at my style. So, I decided to silently
peruse the postings for a while, to gauge the pulse of the goings on.
While my feelings and reactions remain much the same,
perhaps I can relate better to this forum.

I am obviously somewhat older than most of this ng's participants, by
which
I mean that it allowed me to grow up in India in a time when we were
healing from
the wounds of the 1947 holocaust. Anti-secular feeling was not unknown,
but it
was actively ostracized. As a nation, we were proud to be able to share
our
meager resources with the 10 million beleaguered refugees from
EP/Bangladesh.
Incidentally, in my opinion the single most laudable achievement of
Calcutta
in my lifetime is the way in which it accomodated this deluge of the
dispossessed,
Hindu and Muslim alike. It came from the heart, it was the right thing to
do, and it
was not tinged with political expediency.

Around that time our family spent 2 years outside India,
where our closest tie to `home' was the company of a Pakistani family. I
learned
to treat human relationships above politics. I was in college in Delhi in
the heady
days when even one such as IG was VOTED out of office for her misdeeds. So
when I write expressing my astonishment at the filth traded by some users
of this
ng, I plead a state of intoxication from being witness to a better ideal.

The divisive incidents in India happened mostly after I left: first
the assault on the Golden Temple, and then the emergence of the Hindu
militants into the open.
The politicians found it expedient again (as they did in the 1940s) to
stoke the
communal flames to their own ends. But why must we common folk dance to
their wicked tune? Is there even ONE instance in history where reclaiming
`holy'
ground has led to anything but war and misery? The politicization of
religion
has never met with anything but a pitiful ending.

Coming from the above perspective, it goes without saying that
Babu R's
misguided `views' fill me with angst. But to call him names is not going
to solve
the problem either. Clearly his experiences are different from mine and
from most
others in this ng. We could simply ignore him, but then we would be
guilty of
`looking the other way'. So foolhardy (foolish?) that I am, I propose to
take him
on in a discussion, and to create for him a different experience. My
purpose is to
demonstrate to him that there is a higher value system, which I shall
glibly
refer to as 'universal humanism' , to which all systems of religious
belief aspire.
That it is infinitely more fun to explore this realm than to wrap oneself
in
a reactionary set of 'values' that poisons the mind to the point where you
want
to rewrite history. I invite all of you to join me in this.. but please,
no name calling.

Let me begin by adopting a fictitious (but not hypothetical --
and I claim no
credit for originality) persona, and ask Babu a question:

Babu, I am a 19 year old. I was born to a prostitute. My father's
identity is not
known definitely, but it is one of 3 possible Hindu scions of society. My
mother's
professional ethic demands that I not reveal who they are. My mother was
born
low-caste Hindu, was widowed, forced to sell herself in order to eat, and
as a result
so ostracized by reactionary Hindu society that she converted to Islam
and works
now as a domestic in a Muslim household. She has done all she could to put
me
through school, and I am qualified to study in the honours course in a
subject
that is taught only in Hindu College. However, they are required to admit
all
Hindu students above a certain grade first, and so even though I am at the
top of
the list, I cannot be admitted since my lineage cannot be established.
Rather, I am made to go through insufferable humiliation at each step.
Baburam Sir, what crime have I committed that
I should be so prejudicially treated? In your system of government, how
are people
like me to find justice?

Babu, please respond as to how your vision of a Hindutva driven
state
deals with this situation. Please be serious and consistent.

Regards
ASaha

PS-- Is posting this in SCB enough for RB to see it, or do I need to cross
post?

[Dasgupta]

Mr. Saha:

Please consider cross-posting your article in scindia and a few other
ngs.

Thank you for an outstanding post and the initiation...

Regards,

Shoumyo Dasgupta.

[Soumitra Bose]

This fictitious story reminds me of the famous story of Chandranath and
his mother Harimati. Sunil Ganguly did wonderfully depict such a story.
It was a true story and not a fiction ,(of course many fables attached
to it later on). We know what happened to Chandronath and how the
upper-caste "twice born" behaved with HArimati and him in Hindu
college(now Presidency College). Oh! how glad we are that in Bengal we
have somehow done away that casteist-lechrous culture of upper-caste
Babus .....Something Hindus of other parts of India might find it
interesting to check out..

[Absaha]

Soumitra Bose has correctly identified Chandronath/Hiramati as the roots
of the
`fictitious' character(s) I adopted, but then adapted slightly. I make no
claim for
originality here. Yes, Sunil Gangopadhyay's depiction was truly moving,
for that
matter, so were all his characters. I believe that the novel (Shei Shomoy)
would
be well worth translating -- do any of you know of any efforts to do so?

Abhijit

[BABU RAMABADRAN]

In <4v5tjf$q...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com> Soum...@ix.netcom.com(Soumitra

Sir: People like you and saha are living in fictoius worlds and
dreaming different things. Please come to senses so that you can
understand the real problems faced by India. Please let me know when
you are awake and able to sense real things.

Regards,
babu ramabadran

[BABU RAMABADRAN]

Mr A Saha: I read this post before and I did not see any
genuine enquiry in you post therefore I did not reply it in the
begining. You sent me an personal email asking to reply your
post,therefore I will try to answer your question in best possible way.
Also I have cross posted my on SCI as you asked.
== My reply to sahas post=====

In <4v547g$p...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> abs...@aol.com (Absaha) writes:
>

> I have on previous occassion bemoaned the divisive exchanges on
this
>newsgroup. As a new reader, seeking company of fellow compatriots
(and I
>use this word in the CULTURAL connotation), I was genuinely aghast at
the
>venom and spite that accompanied the anti-humanist postings. My
knee-jerk
>reaction was to express this feeling. At least one reader was
surprised at
>my apparent naivete, or at least at my style. So, I decided to
silently
>peruse the postings for a while, to gauge the pulse of the goings on.
>While my feelings and reactions remain much the same,
>perhaps I can relate better to this forum.

So far I have read only your experience on this ng and have
treid to describe your initial inhibtions to post this essay.

>
> I am obviously somewhat older than most of this ng's
participants, by

Sir: elsewhere in this article you have said that you assume
that you are only 19 years old ( and that you were born to some
prostitute). Why do you need assumption when we are trying to real
issues????

>which
>I mean that it allowed me to grow up in India in a time when we were
>healing from
>the wounds of the 1947 holocaust. Anti-secular feeling was not
unknown,
>but it
>was actively ostracized. As a nation, we were proud to be able to
share
>our
>meager resources with the 10 million beleaguered refugees from
>EP/Bangladesh.
>Incidentally, in my opinion the single most laudable achievement of
>Calcutta
>in my lifetime is the way in which it accomodated this deluge of the
>dispossessed,
>Hindu and Muslim alike.

Not only calcutta, all other places in India accepted
refugeess. I will enumerate some of the well know examples.

1. Kalyan in Bombay Metropolitan area is basically Punjabi Colony.
2. Delhi has fulfeldged Punjabi Bagh
3. Chandigarh was established to settle refugees etc.
Apart from these salient examples, refugees settled in all
parts of India. Calcutta was not only place which gave shelter to
refugees. I do not want to dilute the help extended by calcutta to
refugees, but I am pointing to your claim that you have seen the
holocoust of 1947 and you are sensitive to communal amity. All other
parts of India ( especailly north India ) has equally witnessed the
same events and has seen people settling around.

It came from the heart, it was the right thing to
>do, and it
>was not tinged with political expediency.
>
> Around that time our family spent 2 years outside India,
>where our closest tie to `home' was the company of a Pakistani family.
I
>learned
>to treat human relationships above politics. I was in college in Delhi
in
>the heady
>days when even one such as IG was VOTED out of office for her
misdeeds.

I do not know what IG you are talking about ???

So
>when I write expressing my astonishment at the filth traded by some
users
>of this
>ng, I plead a state of intoxication from being witness to a better
ideal.
>
> The divisive incidents in India happened mostly after I left:
first
>the assault on the Golden Temple, and then the emergence of the Hindu
>militants into the open.
>The politicians found it expedient again (as they did in the 1940s) to
>stoke the
>communal flames to their own ends.

Secualar politicians of India as represented by congress and
commie, did not solve the issues which led to the divison of India in
1947. For your information, hindus like me have not accpeted division
and i still see pakistan and bangaladesh as part of India. By
accepting division of india, secularist actully endoresed the two
nation theory of Jinnah. Secularism has only covered the problems that
existed at the time of partitioin of India. Unless those problems are
solved and issues are taken care of, the India will always be in
turmoil. Therefore if you are sincerly interested in welfare of india,
I wll request you to help remove the ills which divided india in the
first place.

But why must we common folk dance to
>their wicked tune? Is there even ONE instance in history where
reclaiming
>`holy'
>ground has led to anything but war and misery? The politicization of
>religion
>has never met with anything but a pitiful ending.

Love for ones country is not a wicked tune. Hindutvaa is a
nationalist movement ( not a wicked tune as heard by you). Yes, one has
to do anything for the sake of nation.

>
> Coming from the above perspective, it goes without saying that
>Babu R's
>misguided `views' fill me with angst. But to call him names is not
going
>to solve
>the problem either.

You are right that calling names will not solve any problems.
If you are really interested in resolving the issues facing indian
nationalism, we must debate this issues and find a solution to it. A
begining is needed to be made and what could be a better begining than
that you explain me how my views are misguided.

Clearly his experiences are different from mine and
>from most
>others in this ng. We could simply ignore him, but then we would be
>guilty of
>`looking the other way'. So foolhardy (foolish?) that I am, I propose
to
>take him
>on in a discussion, and to create for him a different experience. My
>purpose is to
>demonstrate to him that there is a higher value system, which I shall
>glibly
>refer to as 'universal humanism' , to which all systems of religious
>belief aspire.

Yes, you have to demonstrate that the high value system that
you hold is big enough to address the issues that worries nationalists.
If your model value system is capable of solving the problems without
compromising the interests of the nationalists, I am sure it will be
gladly accpeted.

>That it is infinitely more fun to explore this realm than to wrap
oneself
>in
>a reactionary set of 'values' that poisons the mind to the point where
you
>want
>to rewrite history. I invite all of you to join me in this.. but
please,
>no name calling.

Yes, this will be a genuine discussion. I do not mind being
name called. When people are not able to contest my ideas, they often
start attacking me only. I request netters to challange my arguments.

>
> Let me begin by adopting a fictitious (but not hypothetical
--
>and I claim no
>credit for originality) persona, and ask Babu a question:
>

Mr Saha, I hope you know one rule of debating. If you debate on
hypothetical issues( or fictious) you get only hypothetical (or
fictious) conclusions.

> Babu, I am a 19 year old. I was born to a prostitute. My father's
>identity is not
>known definitely, but it is one of 3 possible Hindu scions of society.

How can you say with confidence that your prostitute mother did
not sleep with any muslim???? I think your mother slept with some
muslims and becuase your mother did not want you to become muslim (as
she knew what being muslim man meant, as she had faced them in her
career)she lied that you are prouduct of some hindu male.

Your mother is not only a prostitute she is a liar also. Next thing
you need to do is to ask her to tell you truth. You can take her to
ransom that if she does not reveal truth, you will not call her mother
any more. ( you can think of some other plan also).

My
>mother's
>professional ethic demands that I not reveal who they are. My mother
was
>born
>low-caste Hindu, was widowed,

May be your mother was beautiful and some muslim goon wanted to
have sex with her ( as a muslim will marry only in extreme conditions)
and so he might have called his husband. Or may be that your mother was
in love with some one and she killed her husband ( so that the way is
cleared). After all it is difficult to trust words of prostitute. Not
all women take prostitution out of compulsion. There could be many
cases why your mother widowed.

forced to sell herself in order to eat, and
>as a result
>so ostracized by reactionary Hindu society that she converted to
Islam
>and works
>now as a domestic in a Muslim household.

As your mother( who killed her husband), later converted to islam
so that she can be member of harem of some influential muslims. Hindus
might have ostracized her for infidelty to her husband ( and her
involvement in his murder). Naturally no society will accept women of
low character. After she joined harem, she was able to raise you up
and send to higher education.

She has done all she could to put
>me
>through school, and I am qualified to study in the honours course in a
>subject
>that is taught only in Hindu College. However, they are required to
admit
>all
>Hindu students above a certain grade first, and so even though I am at
the
>top of
>the list, I cannot be admitted since my lineage cannot be established.

You are trying to besmirch hindu college. You say, you were on
the top of the list, but even if you were at the bottom of the list,
you could have get admission in Aligarh Muslim University and have
acquired what ever higher education they offer. YOur mother beloging to
muslim harem will help you get admission in AMU. I do not know whether
you were rejected their also as they did have seats only for some
influential communal muslim leader.

>Rather, I am made to go through insufferable humiliation at each step.

YOu should fight of that humiliatioins, You should learn why
you were humiliated you in such position. It was you prostitute mother.
She was not only characterless infidel who killed her husband, but also
took to prostition to make money. When she became old and her
prostituion was not getting good customers, she started working in some
houses as maid. If she were of good character, instead of selling her
body, she could have become maid/servant in the beging itself and thus
saving your from all the humiliation that you faced.

> Baburam Sir, what crime have I committed that
>I should be so prejudicially treated? In your system of government,
how
>are people
>like me to find justice?

Please ask you mother what crime did you committ??

>
> Babu, please respond as to how your vision of a Hindutva driven
>state
>deals with this situation. Please be serious and consistent.
>
>Regards
>ASaha

Mr Saha: Hindutva is not a comic writing. YOur fictoius story
sounds like plot of some indian movie. Such questions have movie like
solution. If you want to see such solutions, please see movie Bombay.

YOur stroy does says that your maturity level is still 19 years (
you may be older than that).

If you are looking for a career in film story writing, I can help
you as I have some good contacts in Bombay.

Regards,

babu ramabadran

[Absaha]

Shri Ramabadran,

In response to your various comments/queries to my post:

1) My admittedly long preamble was by of introducing myself, since we have
not
had exchanges

2) More on the assumed persona later in this message

3) Yes, many places accepted refugees, and are to be creditted. I know, I
grew
up in Delhi in an area that were primarily settlements of displaced people
from what is now Pakistan. Balraj Madhok was from our constituency. My
aside here was addressed at what I considered Calcutta's finest hour in my
lifetime, not to compare it with other places. I was also talking
specifically about the refugees in 1971. I did not claim to have been
around in 1947, and in fact I wasn't. I am not quite THAT old!
But I did live through the air-raids of 1965 -- old enough to be really
scared!

4) IG = Indira Gandhi -- perhaps the confusion re: my age misled you on
this.
I was in Delhi U 1973-78.

5) re: "secular politicians as represented by .... etc." Correct. I agree
with you!
I am disillusioned by politicians in general. I differ with your
conclusion though: Failure of congress or whoever else is not licence for
a theocratic government. At least not to my mind.

6) Love for one's country does not in my mind mean love for its misguided
icons --
in this case, the politicians. Re: "Yes, one has to do anything for the
sake of nation"...
I disgree with `anything'.
After all I'm sure the Nazi's thought they were performing their loyal
duty for the 'Vaterland'.

I believe that I cannot claim for myself a right that I
simultaneously deny another human being.
This is my 'dharma'; and for me the
ultimate test of whether something is just or not.
It is not an abstract idea -- give me any (well almost any) situation and
I can tell
you if a proposed course of action meets or fails the test.
It is perfectly consistent with Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity...

you name it. It is sometimes called 'secular humanism'.

I also believe that unconditional devotion to an abstract idea
is too easy, particularly if you are in the majority -- no fun in that.
And thi is why I
disagree with your sweeping statement "one has to do anything for sake of
nation.." Its like saying "one must give medicine to cure the sick" --
but
WHICH medicine? The wrong one could kill you know.

7) re: "If your model value system is capable of solving the problems
without
compromising the interests of nationalists, I am sure it will be gladly
accepted."
Interesting phrase that: 'the interests of the nationalists'. Just who
are these
nationalists and what are their interests? All I see is a bunch of
politicians lining their own pockets. Their interests do not interest me,
since they have ceased to be
adequate representatives of their constituencies. They have sacrificed
principle
and fomented divisive (read NOT nationalist) elements to promote their own
ends.
Now for instance Gandhi WAS a nationalist and NOTHING I have in my model
would have compromised his interests.

8) re: fictitious/hypothetical. I said fictitious (my fault I should have
said fictional -- to
give credit re: where I got the idea from ... but as Soumitra Bose pointed
out even this `fictional' character is based on true life) but NOT
hypothetical.

Which brings me to the business about assumed persona, etc. The POINT of
it all
is that I am asking you how your model would react in a specific instance.
After all the `big' issues of `national interest' are made up of many many
specific cases, right? (And yes, Hindus have very genuine grievances with
the current
setup -- so please feel free to ask me similar counter questions -- but
one at a time
since on a given sitting I can answer only so much!).
I am attempting to show why I find your views mis-guided, as you have also

challenged me to do. So I am throwing a specific situation at you, asking
you how
your model would deal with it.. sort of like a simulation experiment.
This is how this works:

We assume we are in your your model of Hindu Theocratic India (HTI) --
whatever
YOU want that to be or mean.
Now I adopt a persona and create a perturbation in your model.
You (a character in your model) gets to deal with this perturbation...
which in turn produces a reaction and so on. So we can see if the
system progresses towards a catastrophe (e.g. communal rioting) or whether

it calms itself down.

I do not have a secret or covert agenda here.. no tricks... I put
everything
on the table.

Now in this light, perhaps you will reconsider your answer to the question
put to you
by me as the desperate 19 year old. What my mother did or did not do... it
is done or not done.
Nothing you or I do will rectify that. She MIGHT be all you say, done all
you say.
She MIGHT also be what I say... maybe, just maybe, my story is true.
Street rioting may depend on what answer you give me... because
You are now
the local leader of the Hindutva party, the ultimate one to turn to for
mitigation of injustice. Even if my mother WERE what you say, your current
answer would
just ignite a fire in me. After all there is no place like AMU in your
model, so
I can't even go there... but even if there were, why can't I go where my
scholastic
achievement merits? Besides which I am not even Muslim myself -- are you
asking me to become Muslim?

Ask my mother why I am being humiliated?
Just because she was a prostitute she is automatically a murderess and a
liar?
Is this logical?
Is this the example of a right thinking `Hindu'? Of the local 'neta' in
HTI aka
Ram-rajya? To insult someone's mother!?!
My mother may have been a prostitute, but she taught me better than that!

Are you saying that my religion, heredity, caste, etc. should matter? If
that's the message you send me, and others like me, and if you
reply to me specifically as you have done, what do you think I will do?
And this
is my next question to you. If you leave me with no way out, if you
humiliate me
(no it is not my mother who is the cause of humiliation -- unless its the
fact that
she prevented me from dying of starvation by the only means available to
her i.e.
selling herself so that I am still alive and going through this!), perhaps
my reaction
will be catastrophic? So the question again: what do you think my reaction
will
be to your answer.

So will you reconsider you answer?

Regards

Abhijit Saha

PS -- re: "Mr. Saha: Hindutva is not comic writing.... "
Absolutely Right Mr. Ramabadran! Even if my 'maturity level is s still 19
years! :-)
When I see the world around me I just DON'T WANT to grow up!

[Dadu]

I'm a bit curious, is this ng is "SC-Babu Rambhadran", or "SC-Bengali"?

[Supratik Das]

On 17 Aug 1996, Absaha wrote:

> was actively ostracized. As a nation, we were proud to be able to share
> our
> meager resources with the 10 million beleaguered refugees from
> EP/Bangladesh.

As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
what was justly theirs.

> Incidentally, in my opinion the single most laudable achievement of
> Calcutta
> in my lifetime is the way in which it accomodated this deluge of the
> dispossessed,
> Hindu and Muslim alike. It came from the heart, it was the right thing to
> do, and it
> was not tinged with political expediency.

The right thing to do would have been to stay and fight, not to be a
burden on other people. In Punjab the punjabis fought and ensured that
they got a just share of resources and the refugees from Bangladesh (the
majority) are still living under poverty. Hindus sacrificed everything
for their beloved Bengali ethnicity and got nothing in return.

> The divisive incidents in India happened mostly after I left: first
> the assault on the Golden Temple, and then the emergence of the Hindu
> militants into the open.

Are you missing something here??? The politicians of your generation, who
are still ruling, and at some stage were mainly Congressis, presided over
the biggest divisive incident in Indian history, i.e. the partition of
1947. All other incidents so far are tiny compared to it. Long long
before the emergence of Hindu militancy as a political force the country was
divided into secular India and Muslim Pakistan. What were our secular
polity doing then??????

> Coming from the above perspective, it goes without saying that
> Babu R's
> misguided `views' fill me with angst. But to call him names is not going

I do however applaud your intention to 'guide' the misguided Babu. One
wonders if things would have been different if people of your generation
would have propagated and practiced genuine secularism instead of wilting
to fascist forces. Then Hindu militancy would never have taken root.
Babu is just a lesion from the long festering Hindu wound which has been
deliberately and purposefully allowed to fester. Before we take on the
small personalities like Babu why not take on the larger ones who have
and are still duping both you and me.

> demonstrate to him that there is a higher value system, which I shall
> glibly
> refer to as 'universal humanism' , to which all systems of religious
> belief aspire.

I agree but such a value system would apply only to a society which is
rid of its inherent contradictions. You cannot allow one side to preach
fanaticism and the other to practice universal brotherhood.

> Babu, I am a 19 year old. I was born to a prostitute. My father's
> identity is not known definitely, but it is one of 3 possible Hindu
scions of society. My > mother's professional ethic demands that I not
reveal who they are. My mother was > born low-caste Hindu, was widowed,
forced to sell herself in order to eat, and > as a result so ostracized
by reactionary Hindu society that she converted to Islam > and works
> now as a domestic in a Muslim household. She has done all she could to put
> me through school, and I am qualified to study in the honours course in a
> subject that is taught only in Hindu College. However, they are
required to admit > all Hindu students above a certain grade first, and
so even though I am at the > top of the list, I cannot be admitted since
my lineage cannot be established. Rather, I am made to go through
insufferable humiliation at each step. Baburam Sir, what crime have I
committed that I should be so prejudicially treated? In your system of
government, how > are people like me to find justice?

1) Babu stands for a theocratic and discriminatory state and this is in
contradiction to our democratic principle. I personally feel that Babu
should think ahead in terms of the future, for the future is in a democratic
system. We cannot and should not try to correct past injustices by forcing
on the perpetrators discriminatory practices because this is not the
middle ages but the 20th century. Hence, Babu definitely has to and must
change his views on propagating a discriminatory system as is apparent
from his posts. Otherwise his views will be thrown to the dustbins of
history. However, we must, I repeat must, ensure that past injustices
committed by foreign forces in collusion with domestic elements should
never be allowed to be repeated in future. Mr. Saha's glorified 10 million
should never become refugees in future. Unfortunately, as recently as
1994 nearly all Kashmiri pundits have been made refugees in their own
country. We are not learning from history and hence paying the price each
time.

2) The above story is extremely hypothetical and complicated. Obviously,
the exploitation is not only religious but also socio-political. As far
as I can remember Hindutva hasn't supported discrimination based on
socio-religious status. Hence, I would assume that it is either a figment
of the authors imagination or he is giving too much importance to what
Babu thinks in terms of his own version of Hindutva.

> ASaha

Supratik

[BABU RAMABADRAN]

In <Pine.SOL.3.91.960820213956.24318A-100000@post> Supratik Das

Supratik: Respecting your words, I would like to make following
comments to describe what I actually stand for.

1. I do not want to replace democracy by monarchy. I do not know how I
have been interpreted as anti-democratic.

2. Hindutva and democratic are intertwined. If you want it to be put
in simple words, we can say that it is possible to have hindu-state and
democracy at the same time. Hindutva and democratic states are not
mutually exclusive. In fact we have a good example of Nepal where
democracy and Hindutva are present together. Nepal has about fairly
good number of muslim population but we never hear any communal events
in Nepal. That is beauty of Hinduism. The minorities are best in Hindus
state. Therfero there is nothing to be alarmed about hindutvaa. I make
it clear to all that neither do I nor any other hindutvaa supporte want
the democracy to go. AB Vajpayee resigned when other MP's did not
support him. Is it not a democracy.

3. I personally do not see any theocratic government in near future. In
fact there is not much difference between in a truly secular state and
Hindu state. It is just matter of name. I want all the descrimanatory
parts of constitution to be removed.

The india is passing through a very cruciual phase as social and
political alignments are changing very fast. It will take some time for
dust to settle, but I am sure that things are happening for good.

Regards,
babu ramabadran

[Supratik Das]

On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, sayan bhattacharyya wrote:

> In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960820213956.24318A-100000@post> you write:

> >As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
> >can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
> >where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
> >what was justly theirs.

> People migrate for all kinds of reasons. For example, I notice that you
> are currently in the West. So you (or your ancestors) left your country
> for the West for some reason or another instead of "staying and fighting".

> Even assuming you have
> migrated temporarily and will go back home eventually, so did most of
> these 10 million migrants also eventually go back. So why are YOU
> any less guilty than these 10 million?

The above arguement by Sayan is very very silly to say the least. My
migration to the US has been totally voluntary, under no coercion or
discrimination, not against my choice and I'll benefit ultimately in
gaining knowledge currently not available in India and if I am capable
enough I'll give back to my country whatever I can. Too many NRIs think
that they are all really smart chaps who would have immensely benefitted
India given a chance. If you look at the 2 million Indians in US, most of
them coming from the so-called elite meritorious class you will find out
that their achievements on an average has been moderate (specially
Bengalies), nothing earth shaking. Contrary to past notions they would
now serve as important catalysts in the development process of their
homeland. They still retain the possibility of going back whenever they
want to. So do I and beleive me chances are I'll be better off that way.
Such a choice as I have was not and is not available to the refugees. So
I reiterate that no other ethnic group would have tolerated that. If 1.5
million Bosnians can fight so could we. Instead we were more busy writing
poetry about it and like Mr. Saha too busy romanticising the event which
is defecatory behaviour IMO. I think escapism from reality by eulogising
non-existant and irrelevant ideologies has been the bane of Hindu
Bengalies. Otherwise it wouldn't have taken 20 years to find out that
voodoo socialism is not going to work.

Supratik

[Mahmud Husain]

Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>>
>The above arguement by Sayan is very very silly to say the least. My
>migration to the US has been totally voluntary, under no coercion or
>discrimination, not against my choice and I'll benefit ultimately in
>gaining knowledge currently not available in India and if I am capable

>enough I'll give back to my country whatever I can......................................................................

>want to. So do I and beleive me chances are I'll be better off that way.
>Such a choice as I have was not and is not available to the refugees. So
>I reiterate that no other ethnic group would have tolerated that. If 1.5
>million Bosnians can fight so could we. Instead we were more busy writing

I take exception to your denigration of the Bengalis as a 'ethnic group'
and would like to remind you that Bengalis, regardless of their group
status, would indeed stand up and fight, as evidenced by numerous
episodes in Bengali history.Needless to say, they also exibited the human
tendencies of greed and betrayal and fear of the unknown and panic and is
perhaps no different in this regard.

[Supratik Das]

> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

Here I meant Bengali Hindus not all Bengalies. It was the Bengali Hindus
who fled in the face of Muslim oppression and many of whom are now trying to
preach pseudo-secularism to all and sundry.

Supratik

[T.H.Sanyal.]

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960820213956.24318A-100000@post>, Supratik Das
<d...@aecom.yu.edu> says:

>As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
>can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
>where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
>what was justly theirs.

Jews leaving Egypt of Pharaoh's? Rwanda? Sikhs and Hindus from Lahore?
Zoroastrians from Persia? You haven't thought very hard, have you?

ths.

[Dadu]

Rambabu- Rajababu, (babu) onek rokom hoi-
Aatababu, chaltababu- e babu se babu noi!

A limerick (not) written by Sukumar Roy-

A gift to the connoisseurs of (critics of) S. Ray

Dadu

[Arnab Gupta]

Dadu writes:

Fin-deshey bhin-deshey baash Helsinki
Limerick likhey dadu hotey chan king ki?

Limerick guney thik pabey pNach line-e
ayk-ayk-dui-dui-ayk mil dainey |

eishob baad geley shobii hobey psyche!!!!

Babu Arnab Gupta

[BABU RAMABADRAN]

In <Pine.SOL.3.91.960822143149.12187B-100000@post> Supratik Das

[Arnab Gupta]

Sambit Basu writes:

>> Fin-deshey bhin-deshey baash Helsinki
>> Limerick likhey dadu hotey chan king ki?
>
>

> Tui je eta likhli, taar aage jene niyechhish Dadubabu kaar
> belt-er nich lokkhyo kore oi ghNushigulo chalachchhilen?
> AtMorokkha-r odhikaar amar-o to aachhe.
>
>
> Sambit

Jeney niley ki labh hoto agey bol|

Arnab.

[Sambit Basu]

GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (Arnab Gupta) writes:

>Dadu writes:

>>A limerick (not) written by Sukumar Roy-
>>
>>A gift to the connoisseurs of (critics of) S. Ray
>>

[Mahmud Husain]

Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>
>
>On 22 Aug 1996, Mahmud Husain wrote:
>
>> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>
>> >The above arguement by Sayan is very very silly to say the least. My
>> >migration to the US has been totally voluntary, under no coercion or
>> >discrimination, not against my choice and I'll benefit ultimately in
>> >gaining knowledge currently not available in India and if I am capable

>> >enough I'll give back to my country whatever I can......................................................................
>> >want to. So do I and beleive me chances are I'll be better off that way.
>> >Such a choice as I have was not and is not available to the refugees. So
>> >I reiterate that no other ethnic group would have tolerated that. If 1.5
>> >million Bosnians can fight so could we. Instead we were more busy writing
>
>> I take exception to your denigration of the Bengalis as a 'ethnic group'
>> and would like to remind you that Bengalis, regardless of their group
>> status, would indeed stand up and fight, as evidenced by numerous
>> episodes in Bengali history.Needless to say, they also exibited the human
>> tendencies of greed and betrayal and fear of the unknown and panic and is
>> perhaps no different in this regard.
>
>
>Here I meant Bengali Hindus not all Bengalies. It was the Bengali Hindus
>who fled in the face of Muslim oppression and many of whom are now trying to
>preach pseudo-secularism to all and sundry.
>
>Supratik
>

We inhabit opposite polarities on our common national question. I happen
to stress the commonalities of the Bengalis rather than their religious
differences while you seem to consider one's religious identity as
paramount. I understand that and I know people on either side of the
religious divide who advocate the supremacy of religion on all the other
components that constitute a nation's identity. I am not sure if we can
ever reconcile these opposing trends in our national life and realize the
two thousand year struggle of the Bengalis to achieve undivided
nationhood.
BTW, do not make the mistake of believing that it was only Bengali Hindus
who had to suffer 'muslim oppression'. Apart from the genocide of 1971
when millions of Bengalis were slaughtered in the name religious
cohesion, throughout the history of our national resistance,the Bengalis
had to fight invaders,many of them muslim,and had to pay the price
irrespective of their religious affiliation.And yet,here we are blaming
each other and creating walls of hatred and mistrust,instead of joining
together to counter the forces of reaction and bigotry and aspire to a
undivided nationhood.

regards,
Mahmud.

[sayan bhattacharyya]

Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

>As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
>can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
>where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
>what was justly theirs.

>The right thing to do would have been to stay and fight, not to be a
>burden on other people.

Essentially, you are condemning people for not being heroes. Not
everyone is a hero. It is extremely naive of you not to realize
this. Most people have many commitments -- perhaps small children,
dependents, perhaps aged parents that they must care for, because
of which they cannot always stay and fight even if they want to.
It is completely unrealistic of you to expect that everyone will
be so courageous as to throw away their life without a thought!

Also, it is a little hypocritical for those who have never been
tested, themselves, to be loud in their condemnation of others
for putative acts of cowardice. It is well-known that people
who have never fought or shied away from fighting are usually
the ones who make the most hawkish posturings (e.g. Ronald Reagan),
so it is not a surprise to me that you who have never come under
fire yourself should be so vocal in your insistence that every
Bangladeshi should have acted like Superman and stayed put.

[Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya]

Mahmud Husain (mhu...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: components that constitute a nation's identity. I am not sure if we can
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: ever reconcile these opposing trends in our national life and realize the
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: two thousand year struggle of the Bengalis to achieve undivided
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: nationhood.

I deeply believe that we can and we shall, may not be as a single
political entity, but certainly as Bengalis as a cultural unit.

--
Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya

[Absaha]

Mahmud o Sayan babu:

Apnader dui jonaar mukhay phul chandan poruk!

Babu ke uddesh korei ei shutro shuru korechhilaam... tini jeno kaak e der
jhogra dhekay nijay ei shutro thheke chompot diyechhen.
Chheray debo na abaar dhoray aanbo?

ET
Abhijit

[Supratik Das]

On 23 Aug 1996, Mahmud Husain wrote:

> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

> >> >The above arguement by Sayan is very very silly to say the least. My
> >> >migration to the US has been totally voluntary, under no coercion or

[stuff deleted]

> >> I take exception to your denigration of the Bengalis as a 'ethnic group'
> >> and would like to remind you that Bengalis, regardless of their group
> >> status, would indeed stand up and fight, as evidenced by numerous
> >> episodes in Bengali history.Needless to say, they also exibited the human
> >> tendencies of greed and betrayal and fear of the unknown and panic and is
> >> perhaps no different in this regard.

> >Here I meant Bengali Hindus not all Bengalies. It was the Bengali Hindus
> >who fled in the face of Muslim oppression and many of whom are now trying to
> >preach pseudo-secularism to all and sundry.

> We inhabit opposite polarities on our common national question. I happen
> to stress the commonalities of the Bengalis rather than their religious
> differences while you seem to consider one's religious identity as
> paramount. I understand that and I know people on either side of the
> religious divide who advocate the supremacy of religion on all the other

> components that constitute a nation's identity. I am not sure if we can

> ever reconcile these opposing trends in our national life and realize the

> two thousand year struggle of the Bengalis to achieve undivided

> nationhood.

To start with I don't believe in Bengali nationhood because I believe in
Indian nationhood. IMO Bd is culturally and historically linked to the
Indian subcontinent and ultimately we should engage in discussing a
federation of all ethnic groups because we have never been nations and we
have never been isolated. Thus there is a constant fight between the two
characteristics. Bengalies, be it in WB or BD are historically and
culturally connected to the rest of India. A federation can be achieved
only when we accept the commonality of our ethnicity. If we continue
dividing nothing will be achieved. North WB is majority Nepali, Doars is
majority non-Bengali, Tripura has huge tribal population who are
non-Bengali, Bd even after driving away most minorities has non-Bengali
Chakmas. What will happen to them under Bengali nationhood? Bengali
culture, language and religion is connected to the rest of India. How
will we severe those ties? What shall we say to our grannies if they want
to spend their last life in Kashi? That they need to take a visa.

> BTW, do not make the mistake of believing that it was only Bengali Hindus
> who had to suffer 'muslim oppression'. Apart from the genocide of 1971
> when millions of Bengalis were slaughtered in the name religious
> cohesion, throughout the history of our national resistance,the Bengalis
> had to fight invaders,many of them muslim,and had to pay the price
> irrespective of their religious affiliation.And yet,here we are blaming
> each other and creating walls of hatred and mistrust,instead of joining
> together to counter the forces of reaction and bigotry and aspire to a
> undivided nationhood.

If we have to aspire for undivided nationhood it should include the
unification of India, Pak and Bd in a federation wherein every state
would be independent and yet retain their commonality.

> regards,
> Mahmud.

Supratik

[Supratik Das]

On 23 Aug 1996, sayan bhattacharyya wrote:

> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

> >As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
> >can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
> >where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
> >what was justly theirs.

> >The right thing to do would have been to stay and fight, not to be a
> >burden on other people.

> Essentially, you are condemning people for not being heroes. Not

> everyone is a hero. It is extremely naive of you not to realize
> this. Most people have many commitments -- perhaps small children,
> dependents, perhaps aged parents that they must care for, because
> of which they cannot always stay and fight even if they want to.
> It is completely unrealistic of you to expect that everyone will
> be so courageous as to throw away their life without a thought!

It is difficult to argue that 10 million people didn't have a heroe and
yet the Chechens who are 4 million had Zokhar Dudayev and had been
fighting the Russians for two centuries. Didn't they have "children,
dependents, perhaps aged parents"??? Their committment is to their
country and identity first not to their children. That is why they
haven't been dislodged inspite of Tzarist and then Stalinist machinations.
Did they run away????? ARe they running away???? NO, my friend. They are
forcing the mighty Russians to negotiate. They are humiliating the
Russians at every stage. There is a saying "If you cannot avoid being raped,
try to enjoy it". My friend I must say you are suggesting the latter.

> Also, it is a little hypocritical for those who have never been
> tested, themselves, to be loud in their condemnation of others
> for putative acts of cowardice. It is well-known that people
> who have never fought or shied away from fighting are usually
> the ones who make the most hawkish posturings (e.g. Ronald Reagan),
> so it is not a surprise to me that you who have never come under
> fire yourself should be so vocal in your insistence that every
> Bangladeshi should have acted like Superman and stayed put.

By your own logic don't pass a comment on me or anyone else until I or
the other person has been tested. Wait until then. Of course the test is
going to be mine for you will flee once again.

Supratik

[Mahmud Husain]

Dhorey ano'un dada! Jham'yon Parthababu bolechennn, ektu nerey cherey
dekhi!

Mahmud.

[Mahmud Husain]

Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>To start with I don't believe in Bengali nationhood because I believe in
>Indian nationhood. IMO Bd is culturally and historically linked to the
>Indian subcontinent and ultimately we should engage in discussing a
>federation of all ethnic groups because we have never been nations and we
>have never been isolated. Thus there is a constant fight between the two
>characteristics. Bengalies, be it in WB or BD are historically and
>culturally connected to the rest of India. A federation can be achieved
>only when we accept the commonality of our ethnicity. If we continue
>dividing nothing will be achieved. North WB is majority Nepali, Doars is
>majority non-Bengali, Tripura has huge tribal population who are
>non-Bengali, Bd even after driving away most minorities has non-Bengali
>Chakmas. What will happen to them under Bengali nationhood? Bengali
>culture, language and religion is connected to the rest of India. How
>will we severe those ties? What shall we say to our grannies if they want
>to spend their last life in Kashi? That they need to take a visa.

Yes of course BD is historically and culturally linked to the Indian
subcontinent and all the different countries of the subcontinent,nations
or conglomeration of nations are derived from what can be broadly
described as 'Bharitiya Shobhyota'.Simply sharing common cultural roots
doesn't imply that we should be forming megastates,as historically such
states are in decline.In BD,Bengalis finally have an independent
state,unlike any other ethno-linguistic group in the subcontinent,and to
give up that sovereignity and merge into the Indian Union would be a step
backwards.Forming a separate state does not mean severing cultural
ties,the very fact that you and I have more in common than how much we
differ is a testament to the endurance of ethno-cultural ties.
Dont' worry about your granny getting a visa to visit holy places,my
granny needs one to visit hers,perhaps it will only equalize the process.

>
>
>If we have to aspire for undivided nationhood it should include the
>unification of India, Pak and Bd in a federation wherein every state
>would be independent and yet retain their commonality.
>

Common economic and political instituitions,similar to the ones being
developed by the European Union,will probably be a neccessity in the near
future,especially if we have to withstand the various trade blocs being
formed all over the place. But with the level of hatred and mistrust,
albeit from a minority,patricularly the religious extremists on all sides
who think only religion should be the basis of all interactions
between peoples,makes one apprehensive of the possibility of such an
outcome.

regards,
Mahmud.

[Mahmud Husain]

[sayan bhattacharyya]

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960823221530.3776K-100000@post>,

Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>
>
>On 23 Aug 1996, sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
>
>> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:
>

>> >As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
>> >can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
>> >where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
>> >what was justly theirs.
>

>> >The right thing to do would have been to stay and fight, not to be a
>> >burden on other people.
>

>> Essentially, you are condemning people for not being heroes. Not
>> everyone is a hero. It is extremely naive of you not to realize
>> this. Most people have many commitments -- perhaps small children,
>> dependents, perhaps aged parents that they must care for, because
>> of which they cannot always stay and fight even if they want to.
>> It is completely unrealistic of you to expect that everyone will
>> be so courageous as to throw away their life without a thought!
>
>It is difficult to argue that 10 million people didn't have a heroe and
>yet the Chechens who are 4 million had Zokhar Dudayev and had been
>fighting the Russians for two centuries. Didn't they have "children,
>dependents, perhaps aged parents"??? Their committment is to their
>country and identity first not to their children. That is why they
>haven't been dislodged inspite of Tzarist and then Stalinist machinations.
>Did they run away????? ARe they running away???? NO, my friend. They are
>forcing the mighty Russians to negotiate. They are humiliating the
>Russians at every stage. There is a saying "If you cannot avoid being raped,
>try to enjoy it". My friend I must say you are suggesting the latter.

Interesting. I see pictures and reports in newspapers daily about Chechen
refugees from Grozny and other cities. Some of the Chechens are fighting.
Some of the Chechens are fleeing (note that fleeing does not necessarily
mean that their sympathies are not with those fighting). Your suggestion
that not one Chechen has fleed from battle seems baseless.

You are also slandering the Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas who stayed and fought
in Bangladesh. Was Kader Siddiqui any less brave than Zokhar Dudayev? I
don't think so.

[Absaha]

So Babu! Where are you? You haven't replied to my second set of questions!
Come now... Surely you are not conceding the argument are you?
I was expecting more of a challenge!

Surely you cannot concede to a mere 'infidel' who still believes a
secular Taj Mahal? What will the neighbours say?

[Shyam]

Mash dui por bose babu! Sunechhi trim
o bhalo aachen? Aapnar ektai to dream
critic poDa o poDano. Jodi-o jaanben supreme
noi keu -i. Chidanondo chaliat, Ronjon bhuto; spleen
ki beDechhilo Chintai(na malaria-e)? khub clean-
Baad bakirao, bola jai naa. Otoeb- gotiheen
Dadu chhaDa. Ghum naa ele ektu aaping
neben rattire, dudhe gule. Keu bujhie din
gorib (Bose babue) ke. Tnar boDo soDo dim
maathai sohoje djoke na kichhu.

[Supratik Das]

On 24 Aug 1996, sayan bhattacharyya wrote:

> >> Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

> >> >As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I
> >> >can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
> >> >where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
> >> >what was justly theirs.

> >> >The right thing to do would have been to stay and fight, not to be a
> >> >burden on other people.

> >It is difficult to argue that 10 million people didn't have a heroe and

> >yet the Chechens who are 4 million had Zokhar Dudayev and had been
> >fighting the Russians for two centuries. Didn't they have "children,

[snip]

> Interesting. I see pictures and reports in newspapers daily about Chechen
> refugees from Grozny and other cities. Some of the Chechens are fighting.
> Some of the Chechens are fleeing (note that fleeing does not necessarily
> mean that their sympathies are not with those fighting). Your suggestion
> that not one Chechen has fleed from battle seems baseless.

Sayan Babu. Thanks for making me famous by putting my name on the header.
Who needs friends when I have opponents like you.

Your logic is gradually loosing its teeth. You are sounding more and more
like Soumitra babu i.e. blabbering without logic.

When a country fights not 100% of it joins the army, e.g. when India
fought Pakistan no one except the army fought. So your above arguement is
childish and worth ignoring. Please come up with something more sound.
It is painstaking to argue say if you say the sun doesn't rise in the East.

> You are also slandering the Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas who stayed and fought
> in Bangladesh. Was Kader Siddiqui any less brave than Zokhar Dudayev? I
> don't think so.

Where in my posts have I slandered Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas?? Next you
will slay I am slandering the Martians. Please stick to logic. The focus
of my arguement was Bengali Hindus never fought for their rights in BD
and Kadir Siddiqu has very little to do with it.

Supratik

[N. Tiwari]

sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@krusty.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: Supratik Das <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

: >It is difficult to argue that 10 million people didn't have a heroe and

: >yet the Chechens who are 4 million had Zokhar Dudayev and had been
: >fighting the Russians for two centuries. Didn't they have "children,

: >dependents, perhaps aged parents"??? Their committment is to their

: >country and identity first not to their children. That is why they
: >haven't been dislodged inspite of Tzarist and then Stalinist machinations.
: >Did they run away????? ARe they running away???? NO, my friend. They are
: >forcing the mighty Russians to negotiate. They are humiliating the
: >Russians at every stage. There is a saying "If you cannot avoid being raped,
: >try to enjoy it". My friend I must say you are suggesting the latter.

: Interesting. I see pictures and reports in newspapers daily about Chechen

: refugees from Grozny and other cities. Some of the Chechens are fighting.
: Some of the Chechens are fleeing (note that fleeing does not necessarily
: mean that their sympathies are not with those fighting). Your suggestion
: that not one Chechen has fleed from battle seems baseless.

: You are also slandering the Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas who stayed and fought

: in Bangladesh. Was Kader Siddiqui any less brave than Zokhar Dudayev? I
: don't think so.

This is a classic case of lynching. One false step, and
here we have a thread: Supratik says so an so... As long
as the notes of Supratik carry weight, stay silent. The
moment he raises a point, which is not that strong, come
out in the open. Criticize. Demonize. Label. And very
soon, he becomes a Babu. And after that, you do not need
to respond to him any more. Because he is one more of a
babu. Rather, you can make fun of him. Ridicule him. Even
though, there might be a lot of strength in some of his
arguments. But then, the battles is won. Propoganda is
complete. Good politics. Bad ethics. But since when did
leftism and ethic have been in-phase.

Nachiketa Tiwari

[Sambit Basu]

Shyam <Shyam.Ch...@hut.fi> writes:

Muktochhonder kobita-ti oshadharon Shyambabu. Bosebabu-o
swikaar korechhen. Jodio tini mone koren apnar shob
guliye jachchhe - mon diye na poDe shudhu chhNok chhNok
korle naaki ei-i hoy. Tobe tini apnake
e-o janate bolechhen je langul jokhon apnar, aaping-o
jokhon apnar - proshosto dibaaalok-e apnar langul-sonchalon-e
tNaar kono apotti nei. Shudhu tNaar upodesh, apni jol-e
dub deben na. Haalka jinish plobota-r dorun je bhabe
urdhomukhi hoy taate apnar mundu-ti dhoD theke khowano-r
somyok shombhobona roye-i jachchhe - ei aarki! Aar apnar
mundu gele tini khaben-ta ki? Amon muchmuche, khasta
khabar - tay 100% fatless - ke aar Bosebabu-r jonye shojotne
lalon korchhe, bolun?

Bosebabu-r hoye shubhechchha janiye,
Sambit

[Arnab Gupta]

Dadu writes:

>Mash dui por bose babu! Sunechhi trim
>o bhalo aachen? Aapnar ektai to dream
>critic poDa o poDano. Jodi-o jaanben supreme
>noi keu -i. Chidanondo chaliat, Ronjon bhuto; spleen
>ki beDechhilo Chintai(na malaria-e)? khub clean-
>Baad bakirao, bola jai naa. Otoeb- gotiheen
>Dadu chhaDa. Ghum naa ele ektu aaping
>neben rattire, dudhe gule. Keu bujhie din
>gorib (Bose babue) ke. Tnar boDo soDo dim
>maathai sohoje djoke na kichhu.

eta ki limerick, dosh line-i ?
chhonder kusti onek! jemoni temoni
melaley mele na dream|
tai oporisheem
cheshta choley khaoatey aaphing|

aha! shobii jodi hoto hing ba ting,
kingba shudhui chhot -
taholey hoito phot
korey melaley milto ghoDi
(lagle chhonder chhoDi)|
sheshe komlalebu hoye shoni,
Burgess Anthony -
shyambeshey limerick|

hotobhaga shey critic
goti-heen dadu chhaDa| porihaash
kothai ? hai Freud-er dash
korechho je chhondo-ke kana|
Psychic boley ki prem debona ?

[sayan bhattacharyya]

N. Tiwari <nti...@rs3.esm.vt.edu> wrote:
>: don't think so.
>
>This is a classic case of lynching. One false step, and
>here we have a thread: Supratik says so an so... As long
>as the notes of Supratik carry weight, stay silent. The
>moment he raises a point, which is not that strong, come
>out in the open. Criticize. Demonize. Label. And very
>soon, he becomes a Babu.

Please point out a single occasion where I have labelled
or demonized Supratik Das in any way.

And where have I called him a "babu" ? In any case, since
when is "babu" a term of abuse?

You are just being paranoid.

[Partha Banerjee]

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960825220458.19412B-100000@post>, Supratik Das
<d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

> Your logic is gradually loosing its teeth. You are sounding more and more
> like Soumitra babu i.e. blabbering without logic.

----

Please do not get personal. Can we argue without getting personal?
Believe me, nobody likes it when it's a personal feud. Many netters
stopped reading scb because of this reason.

And to me, Sayan and Soumitra are the two most well-read people who I
think are voices of reason in these newsgroups full of "cyber-bandits" if
you will. Their style may be different, but I would be very surprised if
one calls them blabberers without logic.

----

>
> When a country fights not 100% of it joins the army, e.g. when India
> fought Pakistan no one except the army fought. So your above arguement is
> childish and worth ignoring. Please come up with something more sound.
> It is painstaking to argue say if you say the sun doesn't rise in the East.
>
>
>

> > You are also slandering the Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas who stayed and fought
> > in Bangladesh. Was Kader Siddiqui any less brave than Zokhar Dudayev? I
> > don't think so.
>
>

> Where in my posts have I slandered Bangladeshi mukti-joddhas?? Next you
> will slay I am slandering the Martians. Please stick to logic. The focus
> of my arguement was Bengali Hindus never fought for their rights in BD
> and Kadir Siddiqu has very little to do with it.
>

----

Hindus left Bangladesh because they were put under treamendous pressure --
social, political, religious, emotional -- on individual and collective
basis. If we learn anything from history, the same thing happened in many
places at many different times. Jews in Nazi Germany would be a good
example.

It is very easy to brand someone coward from outside. You have to live
their situation to know what they actually go through.

And how do you know that Hindus in Bangladesh never fought for their
rights? They fought many times -- as Bangladeshis during Mukti Juddho, as
Hindus during the post-secular times. It would be totally a matter of
ignorance if you label them all as cowards.

And their are many many Muslims also in Bangladesh who have always sided
with the Hindus shoulder to shoulder. All these people are true heroes.
Because of these heroes, Bangladesh is still Bangladesh and we have a lot
of hope for it.

--
The above comments, etc. are my own and not necessarily my employer's.

[Supratik Das]

On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Partha Banerjee wrote:

> In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960825220458.19412B-100000@post>, Supratik Das
> <d...@aecom.yu.edu> wrote:

> > Your logic is gradually loosing its teeth. You are sounding more and more
> > like Soumitra babu i.e. blabbering without logic.

> Please do not get personal. Can we argue without getting personal?

> Believe me, nobody likes it when it's a personal feud. Many netters
> stopped reading scb because of this reason.

C'mon guys. You are becoming too sensitive. I do not have a better word
for 'blabbering without logic' and there is nothing personal about it. I
have almost never used abusive languages and the very few times I have I
retracted my comments. Soumitra babu and I frequently take digs at each
other and we do try to keep it within the limits of decency. Besides I am
not here to make friends but to make some points. I don't mind making a
few enemies if it is my perception of the truth that I am speaking. So
once again Sayan babus arguement appears illogical blabbering to me and
that is nothing personal. Here I am talking about his arguement and not
him. So technically it is very impersonal unless he wants to take it
personally.

> And to me, Sayan and Soumitra are the two most well-read people who I
> think are voices of reason in these newsgroups full of "cyber-bandits" if
> you will. Their style may be different, but I would be very surprised if
> one calls them blabberers without logic.

Honestly, I haven't read many of Sayan babus postings, so I can't
comment. However, saying Soumitra babu is well read is a stretch of
imagination by all means.

> > When a country fights not 100% of it joins the army, e.g. when India
> > fought Pakistan no one except the army fought. So your above arguement is
> > childish and worth ignoring. Please come up with something more sound.
> > It is painstaking to argue say if you say the sun doesn't rise in the East.

> Hindus left Bangladesh because they were put under treamendous pressure --

> social, political, religious, emotional -- on individual and collective
> basis. If we learn anything from history, the same thing happened in many
> places at many different times. Jews in Nazi Germany would be a good
> example.

To say that the Bangladeshi Muslim had no role in it is a big lie. The
Pakistani army was a good excuse. This is not to deny that countless Muslims
came forward to protect Hindus but politically Bds wanted to rid of
Hindus. Statistical calculations show that nearly 2 million Hindus are
unaccounted for. What happened to them?? Jews in Europe totalled 9
million before WW2 and they were scattered all throughout Europe. There
was no place where they were in significant numbers to put up a fight.
The Warsaw ghetto rebellion is a well documented event of Jewish
resistance against Nazis, apart from the numerous Jews who enlisted in
the resistance militias. There is no documented evidence that Hindus
fought for their rights even when they were the main target of Pakistani
army in collusion with the Razakars. Besides there is no story or rumor that
Hindus fought to stay in Bd, at least none I have heard in my family who
came from places as diverse as Khulna, Sylhet, Barishal, Dhaka and
Narayanganj. If there were we would definitely have heard of it. Even in
Noakhali where 400 hundred Hindus were burnt alive in a single warehouse
there is no evidence of armed or organized resistance. If you have any
source of information please let me know. BTW I am talking of 1947 when
the Pakistani army hadn't taken strong roots in EB, so it is obvious that
the elements involved were not only non-Bengali muslims. In 1971 the
ethnic cleansing of Hindus was more organized. The Pakis along with their
razakar informants would label Hindu houses and would label Hindus of a
village, line them in paddy fields, ask them to run and then cut them
down with machinegun fire. This would be setting an example for the
Muslims. If they still didn't give information about the mukti joddhas
they would follow the same fate. Again, most Hindus fled rather than join
the Mukti joddhas. Of the 10 million who fled to India, 80% were Hindus.
Of the 3 million who died in the genocide 70% were Hindus (no wonder I
have a special love for the Pakis).

> It is very easy to brand someone coward from outside. You have to live
> their situation to know what they actually go through.

> And how do you know that Hindus in Bangladesh never fought for their
> rights? They fought many times -- as Bangladeshis during Mukti Juddho, as
> Hindus during the post-secular times. It would be totally a matter of
> ignorance if you label them all as cowards.

As mentioned above.

> And their are many many Muslims also in Bangladesh who have always sided
> with the Hindus shoulder to shoulder. All these people are true heroes.
> Because of these heroes, Bangladesh is still Bangladesh and we have a lot
> of hope for it.

I have no doubt that there are many secular muslims in Bd. However, a
true evaluation of the fate of Hindus is necessary in order to prevent
such events from happening in future, e.g. the Japanese after all these
years are apologizing to the Koreans for war atrocities. Similarly Bds
must acknowledge that there treatment of Hindus has been miserable and
that in future it will never be repeated.

Supratik

[Indrani DasGupta]

Eta diyechho bhalo kobibor!

Indrani.

[N. Tiwari]

T.H.Sanyal. (TH...@psuvm.psu.edu) wrote:
: In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960820213956.24318A-100000@post>, Supratik Das
: <d...@aecom.yu.edu> says:

: >As a Bengali of this generation I feel no pride in fleeing like rats. I

: >can't think of any other region in this world, past, present or future
: >where 10 million people would flee instead of staying and fighting for
: >what was justly theirs.

: Jews leaving Egypt of Pharaoh's? Rwanda? Sikhs and Hindus from Lahore?
: Zoroastrians from Persia? You haven't thought very hard, have you?

And Sri Sri 10008 T. H. Sanyal: Who were instrumental in driving
these folks out from their homelands. Think hard. Life is too short.

--
Nachiketa Tiwari

[rchow...@aspensys.com]

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960826134749.27110A-100000@post>,

Agreed 100%. It is the responsibility of all citizens of
Bangladesh to preserve the rights of the monority communities.
I hope we can get our act together and put "Bangali First" rather
than Hindus or Muslims.

Rashad Chowdhury-a Bangali from Bangladesh
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was posted to Usenet via the Posting Service at Deja News:
http://www.dejanews.com/ [Search, Post, and Read Usenet News!]

[Kousik Chakrabarti]

Partha Banerjee wrote:

> And to me, Sayan and Soumitra are the two most well-read people who I
> think are voices of reason in these newsgroups full of "cyber-bandits" >if you will.

Partha-da,

Tomer totha thasa lekha pora bhalo laglo.

Uporokto uktita bash sotti kotha bola mona hoy.Tobe amer nam nao ni
bola du:kho palam.Akmatro tomer kothay amer moto akachora chale SCB pore
ba kodacho lekha.Tobe bitorkito bisoy aria choli.Kichu kichu jaygay
nirobotay sobh chaya boro protibadh.Jani,manba na.

Onakdin samnasamni dekha hoy na.Goto bochorer moto BAGH er pujoy
sobay ka nia chole aso October a oti oboshoy.

Iffat Ara khan er onusthaner kotha amer simito porichito sobayka
janiachi.Oi week end a amer bhalo laga manus er akjoner satha Boston a
pray 11 bochor por dekha hobe.Tumi to janoy amer bhalo laga manus er
talikata bhison choto.Tay darun bhalo lagcha.Dinter dika takia achi.Aj
aber akhuni akta baktigoto e-mail palem ter kach theka.Prochur porimane
ni:shas nebo onak din por.

Bhalo thako.Arokom majamaja likho.Ami nischoy porbo.

~Kousik.

[Sambit Basu]

Dadubabu-r nirghosh:

>1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
>detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc.

Orthaat apni mone koren udor pindi budho-r ghaaDe chapanor purno
odhikaar apnar aachhe. If you don't have time, that's your problem. Why
should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?

>Though I usually
>zero in to the issue pretty fast; a long time practice.

Heh...heh...please aar binoy korben na!

>2. I'm here to have fun, and exchange ideas; also for some chidding
>(Bengali style).

And what makes you think that we are here to provide you with fun?
Prithibi-ta ki apnar niyome cholbe Dadubabu?

>However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like
>to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography. I noticed,
>you're keen to get go a discussion for a long time (I could see your
>posts ready to jump),

Abar bodhoy Udo-Budho case. Jodi doya kore dekhiye dyan ta'le
badhito hoi. Tobe substantiation chhaDa montobyo korar je tradition
ei olpodin-ei apni protishtha korechhen ta'te e asha bodhoy rakha
jay na.

>so possibly you've read my earlier posts, and may
>have noticed it; and possibly you're intelligent enough to understand
>what I mean.

Shotti bolte ki je bujhlum na.

>3. I have enough invectives (and slangs) at least in seven languages
>(Finnish, Swedish, Italian, French, English, Bengali, Hindi; and some in
>Czech as well) to match and surpass any body in this SCB (and probably
>somewhere else).

Bah!

>But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
>as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc.

And you expect everybody else to follow your standard! Dadubabu,
onyotro janina, kintu ekhetre "limit"-ta bodhoy ektu baDabDi rokom
chhaDiye jachchhe.

>I don't want my time
>wasted in pure slang exchanges. I deliberately restrain my discussions
>wasted in pure slang exchanges.

Apni mohaan. Kintu ta' bole apni ki koren aar ki koren na taar
haamboDai shunte hobe, eta ektu jobordosti hoye jachchhe na ki?

>I deliberately restrain my discussions
>only with certain people and I consider you as one of them. Not
>polished, or sophisticated enough.

And vice-versa.

>4. I've noticed, there are people who can match your wits, language and
>purpose. I'm sure you'd be happy to try your luck with them.

I generally do - noile atodine apnar shonge ontoto akta
torke-o ki joDiye poDtum na? Thanks for the advice, though.

>5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
>and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.

Unfortunately, it seems that you don't have enough intelligence
to understand that if you address Arnab Gupta by "Bosebabu" in your
pinching posts, other people get confused and the real Bosebabus
have every right to pinch you back. Why do you expect everybody to
follow your illogic?

Sambit

[Dadu]

Indrani DasGupta wrote:
>
> Arnab Gupta wrote:

..................stuff del...............

> Eta diyechho bhalo kobibor!
>
> Indrani.

Huummm, jaale pa tenechhe arro-o duchaarjon-ero; kara kara jeno mastuto
bhai (aar bon)?

Keu keu aama-e obohito korar chesta kore chhilen, aami guliye phelechhi
Gupta aar Basu-r modhye. Seta intentional- in fact, Bose hole ektu
subidhe hoi mil dite, nahole dhar korte hobe (for convenience)-

TNar gNop joDati paka, tNar mathaae indrolup(to)
mukh holud boron chaka,
(naki Koushik-eri kaka?) tini sworno-nidhi Gup(to)

"Psyche" sune-i Freud hNaken
(dictionary shikei rakhen)
Payeesh phele sukto (critic) chakhen

Hok-na aesthetics kNacha- tobu b}ab}akoron pok(to)
{baki buddhi obolup(to)?}

Disclaimer: Any possible synonymmity of words are purely for the sake of
art! Also the insignificant deviations in "five line" style is for the
sake of---

Dadu

[Dadu]

Sambit Basu wrote:
>
> Shyam <Shyam.Ch...@hut.fi> writes:

....stuff deleted.....

> Muktochhonder kobita-ti oshadharon Shyambabu. Bosebabu-o
> swikaar korechhen. Jodio tini mone koren apnar shob
> guliye jachchhe - mon diye na poDe shudhu chhNok chhNok
> korle naaki ei-i hoy. Tobe tini apnake
> e-o janate bolechhen je langul jokhon apnar, aaping-o
> jokhon apnar - proshosto dibaaalok-e apnar langul-sonchalon-e
> tNaar kono apotti nei. Shudhu tNaar upodesh, apni jol-e
> dub deben na. Haalka jinish plobota-r dorun je bhabe
> urdhomukhi hoy taate apnar mundu-ti dhoD theke khowano-r
> somyok shombhobona roye-i jachchhe - ei aarki! Aar apnar
> mundu gele tini khaben-ta ki? Amon muchmuche, khasta
> khabar - tay 100% fatless - ke aar Bosebabu-r jonye shojotne
> lalon korchhe, bolun?
>
> Bosebabu-r hoye shubhechchha janiye,
> Sambit

Thanks Sambit for your taste and appreciation.

A few words.

1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great

detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc. Though I usually

zero in to the issue pretty fast; a long time practice.

2. I'm here to have fun, and exchange ideas; also for some chidding
(Bengali style). However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like

to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography. I noticed,
you're keen to get go a discussion for a long time (I could see your

posts ready to jump), so possibly you've read my earlier posts, and may

have noticed it; and possibly you're intelligent enough to understand
what I mean.

3. I have enough invectives (and slangs) at least in seven languages

(Finnish, Swedish, Italian, French, English, Bengali, Hindi; and some in
Czech as well) to match and surpass any body in this SCB (and probably

somewhere else). But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc. I don't want my time

wasted in pure slang exchanges. I deliberately restrain my discussions

only with certain people and I consider you as one of them. Not
polished, or sophisticated enough.

4. I've noticed, there are people who can match your wits, language and

purpose. I'm sure you'd be happy to try your luck with them.

5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon. It may not be so, but if
he can't talk straight, I don't think I need to try my time with him
either.

Good Lick (and luck).

Dadu

[Chaitali Basu]

Arnab Gupta (GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu) wrote:

[dukher shonge baad diye]

: mil-er dadu, dadu-r mil-e dadu-ke jai chena|
:
: Regards,
: Bose-babu.

Apurbo hoyechhe. Kintu thread-er naam-ta bodle dile hoto na?

Aar kabyita kaar? Bose-babur naaki Babu Gupta-r?

Chaitali

[Dadu]

Addendum:

Besh kichhu din dhore "Psyche" ei shobder chorcha shunchhi. JNader
kachhe dictionary nei, tNader (ebong b}ay sonkocher) jonyo quote
korchhi;

Psyche '/saiki/' 1. of human soul or spirit. 2. human mind; mentality -
Oxford Advanced Dictionary of current English, by A.S. Hornby, Oxford
University Press 1974 ed.

I'm not sure the usage changed in the last 22 years, so that, "Psyche"
would only mean in Freudian context. I guessed, when AG pulled Freud in
context to "a narration of human psyche" (or some thing very close, I
don't remember the phrase exactly) written by Dadu, some of his
chaatukaars (and/or friends) would direct him to the difference. I made
a misjudgement of wits and intentions.

I was surprised with AG's referring to Freud to extract meaning of
"psyche"; and more with the pretention, as if Dadu (not AG himself!) put
the word Freud to mean "psyche"!

Freud-er dash shudu sur kaana-i (jodyopi chhondo-er JNan tNar
osadharon!) non, foul mouth hipocrite-o boten!!

Hypocrisy (and morbidness) Unbound!

Critic poDe fotur babu
(Gupto, na Bose-e?)
Psyche shune bejai kabu
(kahar upor rosh?)
(gorib Bose babu-ke keu ekta dictionary kine din na!)
jeno Otul Ghose-e!

Freud dekei aanen taani
(tini-o ki tNar Boss-eh?)
Bejai jor oi matha khani(r)
(shudhu-i noiko fNosh fNosh)
(tNaar chaatukaar-der haat theke keu ki aamake bNachaben na?)
Bohu holo bochon baanii
(gourober-i dosh-e!)

[Arnab Gupta]

(With due apologies to Sukumar Ray):

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

arey arey Oxford, esho esho esho
boltey paaro kothai thhaken Freud-babu'r mesho?
Freud-babu'r naam shononi? Psychic to cheno?
limerick psychic'eri mamashoshur jeno|
limerick'er du-line-i jamai limerick-i
hashchho keno ? mil'er tore dhan bhanchhe dhNeki|
mil-er tore hochhey koto, khobor kono rakho ?
gupta koto bose hochhey chokhta cheye dyakho|
eshob kichhui janbe nako shudhui kothar khela
mithhya bhasha mithhya thasha thakurghorer kola|
jahok ja boltechhilam jamai limericki,
naam na jani dham na jani, tar-i babar naki
khuDtuto ba pistuto bhai, Freud-babu'r mesho
lokhhi bhaiti thikana tar ektu jene esho|

thikana chao ? bolchhi daDao, EuropaDa-r morey
doshdikey dosh rasta gyachhe tar-i aykta dhore,
cholbe shidhe nak borabor chokhtakey thik rekhey
choltey giye dekhbey tumi shob-i gyachhe bNeke|
dekhbey shetha du-line-i limerick-er mela
tar-i bhitor korbe khanik golokdhNadha khela|
dekhbe shetha shat bhashatey korchhe kemon dhum,
olpo ektu Czech-er bhashao kaDbe tomar ghum|
dim-er matha boka-r matha matha hajaar rokom,
karor matha halka boDo, bheshey uthlei jokhom|
tupi-r torei matha ? naki matha-r tore tupi ?
bokor bokor boddo koro, tumi to ghor papi!!
dau-r baDi, dadu-r chhoDi, dadu kemon pana?

[Sharmila Mukherjee]

Srabani likhlo:
[...]
Tobe
> ami determined je one of these days, dadu ki bolen ami bujhe chhaDbo.

Aabar likhlo:

> Khub shahosh, na? dadu jokhon apnake Finnish-e finish kore deben, tokhon
> ki korben bhebe rekhechhen to?

Aaha hochcheta ki? Aykjon boyoshko bhodrolok-ke niye moshkora? Kaan
molo, shiggiri kaan molo!! :-)

Iti dadu-bhokto,
Sharmila

--
Dept. of Biochemistry
Room 376A

Ph:(713)798-8432

[Tera Baap]

> Bds
>> must acknowledge that there treatment of Hindus has been miserable....

Im an Indian Bengali and I have a question. In all my past associations with
Bangladeshi Muslims, all of which has been in the United States, I have heard
them make claims over and over again which would contradict the above claim.
They claim to be very tolerant and peaceful a people. And if hindu-muslim
relations in Calcutta are any indication, that's probably true ...

However, I don't know what the situation REALLY is ... would appreciate some
feedback on WHY different groups seem to have such radically differing
viepoints ....

[Srabani Banerjee]

Sambit Basu writes:

>Dadubabu-r nirghosh:

>
>>1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
>>detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc.
>>

> Orthaat apni mone koren udor pindi budho-r ghaaDe chapanor purno
> odhikaar apnar aachhe.

Of course, dekhchhen na onar kom shomoy. Apnar haat-e onek shomoy,
apni mon diye poDe uttor deben. Sheta ki shobar belay khate?

>If you don't have time, that's your problem. Why
> should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?

`Goof things up'??? What a language to use when talking to dadu!
And anyway, if dadu has every right to call Indrani Indira and Suparna
Supriya, why on earth should Bose(naki Gupta?)-babu have special status?

>>Though I usually
>>zero in to the issue pretty fast; a long time practice.
>

> Heh...heh...please aar binoy korben na!

Eta binoy chhilo bujhi? Hobe bodhoy, `pretty fast' is pretty subjective.

>>2. I'm here to have fun, and exchange ideas; also for some chidding
>>(Bengali style).
>

> And what makes you think that we are here to provide you with fun?
> Prithibi-ta ki apnar niyome cholbe Dadubabu?
>

>>However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like
>>to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography.

Eta mairi ekdom bujhini. Eta-r ki relevance achhe kono, naki
dadu amader emni-i janiye dilen?

>I noticed,
>>you're keen to get go a discussion for a long time (I could see your
>>posts ready to jump),
>

> Abar bodhoy Udo-Budho case. Jodi doya kore dekhiye dyan ta'le
> badhito hoi.

Uni to bollen je onar shomoy kom. Apni bhai ektu khNuje nin na.
Ami to ekhon-o khNujei jachchhi.

>Tobe substantiation chhaDa montobyo korar je tradition
> ei olpodin-ei apni protishtha korechhen ta'te e asha bodhoy rakha
> jay na.
>

>>so possibly you've read my earlier posts, and may
>>have noticed it; and possibly you're intelligent enough to understand
>>what I mean.
>

> Shotti bolte ki je bujhlum na.

Not `intelligent enough'! Apni jokhon shahosh kore bolei phellen
tokhon lojja na peye bolei di je ami-o kichhu bujhlam na. Tobe

ami determined je one of these days, dadu ki bolen ami bujhe chhaDbo.

>>3. I have enough invectives (and slangs) at least in seven languages
>>(Finnish, Swedish, Italian, French, English, Bengali, Hindi; and some in
>>Czech as well)

Ei re! Ingriji ar bangla niyei himshim kheye jachchhi je!

>to match and surpass any body in this SCB (and probably
>>somewhere else).
>

> Bah!

Shudhu `Bah!'!!!! Standing ovation din moshai!

>>But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
>>as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc.
>

> And you expect everybody else to follow your standard! Dadubabu,

Sure! And considering that he is so fond of those terms you could, at least,
oblige and give them back.

> onyotro janina, kintu ekhetre "limit"-ta bodhoy ektu baDabDi rokom
> chhaDiye jachchhe.
>

>>I don't want my time
>>wasted in pure slang exchanges. I deliberately restrain my discussions
>>wasted in pure slang exchanges.
>

> Apni mohaan. Kintu ta' bole apni ki koren aar ki koren na taar
> haamboDai shunte hobe, eta ektu jobordosti hoye jachchhe na ki?
>

>>I deliberately restrain my discussions
>>only with certain people and I consider you as one of them.

Dadu, apnar moton linguist noi, tai eta-o bujhlam na. Ektu banglay bujhiye
deben eta-r manet ki? Egg-head, bone-head, ja bolte hoy nahoy bole deben
shathe.

Not
>>polished, or sophisticated enough.

[...]

>>5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
>>and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.
>

> Unfortunately, it seems that you don't have enough intelligence
> to understand that if you address Arnab Gupta by "Bosebabu" in your
> pinching posts, other people get confused and the real Bosebabus
> have every right to pinch you back.

Khub shahosh, na? dadu jokhon apnake Finnish-e finish kore deben, tokhon

ki korben bhebe rekhechhen to?

Why do you expect everybody to
> follow your illogic?

Really, Dadu! That's too much to expect from us `egg-heads'.

Srabani

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dadu writes:

>Indrani DasGupta wrote:
>>
>> Arnab Gupta wrote:
>
>..................stuff del...............
>
>
>> Eta diyechho bhalo kobibor!
>>
>> Indrani.
>
>
>Huummm, jaale pa tenechhe arro-o duchaarjon-ero; kara kara jeno mastuto
>bhai (aar bon)?

Aha re! Boddo laglo na dadu? Indrani, eta kintu besh ekchokho
byapar hoye gyalo. Dadu-keo ektu bol.

>Keu keu aama-e obohito korar chesta kore chhilen, aami guliye phelechhi
>Gupta aar Basu-r modhye. Seta intentional- in fact, Bose hole ektu
>subidhe hoi mil dite, nahole dhar korte hobe (for convenience)-

Indrani, shabdhane thakish. Oto shokher pitridotto bodyi podobi-ta
bodhoy ebar-e khowate boshechhish.

>TNar gNop joDati paka, tNar mathaae indrolup(to)
>mukh holud boron chaka,
>(naki Koushik-eri kaka?) tini sworno-nidhi Gup(to)
>
>"Psyche" sune-i Freud hNaken
> (dictionary shikei rakhen)
>Payeesh phele sukto (critic) chakhen
>
>Hok-na aesthetics kNacha- tobu b}ab}akoron pok(to)
> {baki buddhi obolup(to)?}
>
>
>Disclaimer: Any possible synonymmity of words are purely for the sake of
>art! Also the insignificant deviations in "five line" style is for the
>sake of---

`Insignificant'? A limerick must necessarily have five lines, Dadu.
Eto janen ar eta janen na? Next what? Chaar line-e choturdoshpodi
likhben?

Srabani

[Indrani DasGupta]

Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
> Dadu writes:
>
> >Indrani DasGupta wrote:
> >>
> >> Arnab Gupta wrote:
> >
> >..................stuff del...............
> >
> >
> >> Eta diyechho bhalo kobibor!
> >>
> >> Indrani.
> >
> >
> >Huummm, jaale pa tenechhe arro-o duchaarjon-ero; kara kara jeno mastuto
> >bhai (aar bon)?

Chor-ChhNyachor bolchhen dadu? Nati-natni-der ato-ta dushte apni parlen??
Chhee!

>
> Aha re! Boddo laglo na dadu? Indrani, eta kintu besh ekchokho
> byapar hoye gyalo. Dadu-keo ektu bol.

Bolchhi. Dadu...apnar kobita-ta daaaaarrrrruuuuun! Ebaar bolun na ektu
shei Harish Park-er goppo-ta? Ato jholachchhen kano mairi?

>
> >Keu keu aama-e obohito korar chesta kore chhilen, aami guliye phelechhi
> >Gupta aar Basu-r modhye. Seta intentional- in fact, Bose hole ektu
> >subidhe hoi mil dite, nahole dhar korte hobe (for convenience)-
>
> Indrani, shabdhane thakish. Oto shokher pitridotto bodyi podobi-ta
> bodhoy ebar-e khowate boshechhish.

Aha...aaste bol! Matridottyo-o to hote paare...boddyi-der inbreeding
boDo bagha inbreeding...dadu jaanen. Aamader bodhoy choddogushthhi-r
shob-i noy DasSharma ba SenSharma. Arnab? Daulat? Didi-r bipod-e gele
kothay?

Indrani.

[Dadu]

Addendum 2. (to the post to Sambit)

Some kind readers raised a couple of points:

....del......
>
> 3. I have enough invectives (and slangs) at least in seven languages.......

1. I mean slangs and invectives only. (not to confuse with language-per
se; I'm not interested to chew through languages)

...... I consider you as one of them. Not
> polished, or sophisticated enough.

2. Pl. read, "....I do not consider you as one of them. Not polished, or
sophisticated enough."
>

Dadu

[Sambit Basu]

BANE...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu (Srabani Banerjee) writes:

>Sambit Basu writes:

>>Dadubabu-r nirghosh:

>>>Though I usually
>>>zero in to the issue pretty fast; a long time practice.
>>
>> Heh...heh...please aar binoy korben na!

>Eta binoy chhilo bujhi? Hobe bodhoy, `pretty fast' is pretty subjective.

Dadubabu-r onek dosh thaakte paare, kintu tini binoy-er
bhaare obonoto, e kotha tNaar porom shotru-o bolbe na.

>>>However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like
>>>to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography.

>Eta mairi ekdom bujhini. Eta-r ki relevance achhe kono, naki
>dadu amader emni-i janiye dilen?

Eta bujhlen na?
"dNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe."

Dadubabu-r mairi jobab nei.

Sambit

[Arnab Gupta]

Chaitali Basu wrote:

>Arnab Gupta (GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
>
>[dukher shonge baad diye]
>

>: mil-er dadu, dadu-r mil-e dadu-ke jai chena|
>:
>: Regards,
>: Bose-babu.
>
>
>Apurbo hoyechhe.

Dhonyobaad!

Tobe apnaar `chatukar' upadhita ebar elo boley| `Foul mouth'ed
shonaleo kichhu korar nei, bhodrotar sheema-ta keu keu nijer
proyojone bariye nitey bhalobashen|

> Kintu thread-er naam-ta bodle dile hoto na?

Dadu to kichhu bolenni aykhono e byapare|

>Aar kabyita kaar? Bose-babur naaki Babu Gupta-r?
>

Ontye mil-er juge keii ba Bose ar keii ba Gupta!

>Chaitali

Thanks,
Arnab.

[Dadu]

Sambit Basu wrote:
>
> Dadubabu-r nirghosh:
>
> >1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
> >detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc.
>
> Orthaat apni mone koren udor pindi budho-r ghaaDe chapanor purno
> odhikaar apnar aachhe.

No. But since unfortunately it happened, and that provides a chance to
open up a sewage! It is not, repeat not my intentions.

> ...........If you don't have time, that's your problem. Why

> should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?

I've noticed, there is at least one more 'Bose' in the net; I don't
understand, of all why you have to take responsibility (even knowingly,
these posts were not intended for you) to represent all Bose's? How come
it's your own fair share? It's just some body's goof up; let it go!

> Heh...heh...please aar binoy korben na!

That's not my virtue!

>
> And what makes you think that we are here to provide you with fun?

Exactly. I don't subscribe to things wich doesn't provide me with fun.
By the word "we" you mean whom? It's exactly my intentions, not to get
into exchanges with you, let alone have fun! So, exclude your self from
your "we"!

> > ............... I noticed,

> >you're keen to get go a discussion for a long time (I could see your
> >posts ready to jump),
>
> Abar bodhoy Udo-Budho case. Jodi doya kore dekhiye dyan ta'le
> badhito hoi.

Look at your posts on 23rd, and 26th in this thread. You'll remember,
you've been scratching yourself to get a go.

> Shotti bolte ki je bujhlum na.

Then let it die peacefully.

>
> >3. I have enough invectives ........
>
> Bah!

Yep, kheuD gaoata onek korechhi; ota korte aar raaji noi.

>
> >But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
> >as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc.
>
> And you expect everybody else to follow your standard!

I don't direct any thing to any body. But I insist on maintaining a
level of decency and careful use of words, when some body addressing me.

>
> >I don't want my time
> >wasted in pure slang exchanges.
>

> Apni mohaan. Kintu ta' bole apni ki koren aar ki koren na taar
> haamboDai shunte hobe, eta ektu jobordosti hoye jachchhe na ki?

I expected this popping up in your head, and that's why I'd put the
words again.

>
> >I deliberately restrain my discussions

> >only with certain people and I consider you as one of them. Not
> >polished, or sophisticated enough.
>
> And vice-versa.

Good enough, and excuse me.

...del............

> >5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
> >and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.
>
> Unfortunately, it seems that you don't have enough intelligence
> to understand that if you address Arnab Gupta by "Bosebabu" in your
> pinching posts, other people get confused and the real Bosebabus

> have every right to pinch you back. Why do you expect everybody to
> follow your illogic?

It may be my twisted standards that I expect at least honesty from
people subscribing to the same group. You know I never got into any
discussions to start with; you've seen Arnab replying to my post but
were not satisfied; you were sure in your 26th post, that mine was NOT
directed towards you (you replied on behalf of a 'Bosebabu', as Sambit).

But you still wanted to pinch!

Any way, probably there is no confusion, none of the Bosebabu's in my
posts, mean you.

Thanks in advance

Shyam

[Arnab Gupta]

dadu wrote:

>Addendum:
>
>Besh kichhu din dhore "Psyche" ei shobder chorcha shunchhi. JNader
>kachhe dictionary nei, tNader (ebong b}ay sonkocher) jonyo quote
>korchhi;
>
>Psyche '/saiki/' 1. of human soul or spirit. 2. human mind; mentality -
>Oxford Advanced Dictionary of current English, by A.S. Hornby, Oxford
>University Press 1974 ed.
>
>I'm not sure the usage changed in the last 22 years, so that, "Psyche"
>would only mean in Freudian context. I guessed, when AG pulled Freud in
>context to "a narration of human psyche" (or some thing very close, I
>don't remember the phrase exactly) written by Dadu, some of his
>chaatukaars (and/or friends) would direct him to the difference. I made
>a misjudgement of wits and intentions.
>
>I was surprised with AG's referring to Freud to extract meaning of
>"psyche"; and more with the pretention, as if Dadu (not AG himself!) put
>the word Freud to mean "psyche"!

Do you ever realise that giving reference from some sources only
does not make one a conoisseur of `critics' or `payesh phele
shukto khaoa'? If you do, and if you did it for pure fun, then
you should have the level of maturity to be able to accept
similar things directed at you.

>
>Freud-er dash shudu sur kaana-i (jodyopi chhondo-er JNan tNar
>osadharon!) non, foul mouth hipocrite-o boten!!
>
>
>Hypocrisy (and morbidness) Unbound!

Now, how about some clarification ? MIND IT, NO INSINUATIONS.
Quote me point by point to prove your accusations. I hope, by
`foul mouth' and `hipocrite'[sic], you mean something more
than `egghead', `coconut head' etc. which to you are mere funny.

>
>..[deleted]..

Arnab.

[Dadu]

Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
> Dadu writes:

> >Huummm, jaale pa tenechhe arro-o duchaarjon-ero; kara kara jeno mastuto
> >bhai (aar bon)?
>

> Aha re! Boddo laglo na dadu? Indrani, eta kintu besh ekchokho
> byapar hoye gyalo. Dadu-keo ektu bol.

Hummm... you could have done it? Naki, gourobe aapni-o oi dole?

> Indrani, shabdhane thakish. Oto shokher pitridotto bodyi podobi-ta
> bodhoy ebar-e khowate boshechhish.

Indrani-r pitridotto podobi-ta aamar computer-e khowano ektu mushkil
(jodi tini na iti modhye-i khuie thaken....)

....del....

> `Insignificant'? A limerick must necessarily have five lines, Dadu.
> Eto janen ar eta janen na? Next what?

Madaam, oi ekti jaiga tei PNaach aain bhangte chesta kore chhilum.
B}aktigoto bhabe, aami khub niom mafik. Aar to sobai jekhane sekhane...
bhangchhen, aar onyo ke gaalagali kore jachchhen. Ebong, aapnara side
line-e boshe haat taali dichchhen.....

Tao shuddhachaari der jonyo- bracket gulo baad dilei hoi-

[Sambit Basu]

Dadu <Da...@Finland.fi> writes:

>Sambit Basu wrote:
>>
>> Dadubabu-r nirghosh:
>>
>> >1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
>> >detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc.
>>
>> Orthaat apni mone koren udor pindi budho-r ghaaDe chapanor purno
>> odhikaar apnar aachhe.

>No. But since unfortunately it happened, and that provides a chance to
>open up a sewage! It is not, repeat not my intentions.

And I repeat, it's not possible for a mortal human being
like myself to know about your intention which directly
contradicts your behaviour.

>> ...........If you don't have time, that's your problem. Why
>> should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?

>I've noticed, there is at least one more 'Bose' in the net; I don't
>understand, of all why you have to take responsibility (even knowingly,
>these posts were not intended for you) to represent all Bose's? How come
>it's your own fair share? It's just some body's goof up; let it go!

I am forced to believe that logic is not your forte.
So let me point you out what makes me think the "Bosebabu"
in this thread is Sambit Basu and nobody else. Your first posting
on this thread had this line:

"A gift to the connoisseurs of (critics of) S. Ray"

(There was another similar slanted comment in another
thread. I am not counting that.)

Now in the thread of "Critics of Ray", Sambit Basu was the
only contributor with a last name which can be construed as
"Bose". (Bujhte oshubidhe hole bolben, lojja korben na.)

Then I asked dicreetly who are you referring to in your
sarcastic comment "A gift to the connoisseurs of (critics of)
S. Ray".

And then, the auspicious moment came when you came up
with your "egg-head" post addressing some "Bosebabu" (who
actually you claim to be Arnab Gupta.). Bhul-shombhashon-e
galagal debar odhikaar shudhu apnar-i aachhe erokom mone kora
apnar pokkhe swabhabik hote paare, kintu sheta-ke apnar mathar
byamo bole dhore neowa-r jouktikota-o amar aachhe bole-i mone
kori.

>> And what makes you think that we are here to provide you with fun?

>Exactly. I don't subscribe to things wich doesn't provide me with fun.
>By the word "we" you mean whom?

"connoisseurs of (critics of) S. Ray".

>It's exactly my intentions, not to get
>into exchanges with you, let alone have fun!

Then why are you? Is it just another manifestation of
your crooked illogic?

>> >you're keen to get go a discussion for a long time (I could see your
>> >posts ready to jump),
>>
>> Abar bodhoy Udo-Budho case. Jodi doya kore dekhiye dyan ta'le
>> badhito hoi.

>Look at your posts on 23rd, and 26th in this thread. You'll remember,
>you've been scratching yourself to get a go.

Actually I don't. All I was eager for was
to get level with you. Now I know that that's not possible
for me for technical reason. I need to hone my faculty
of illogic for a few decades to get there.

>> Shotti bolte ki je bujhlum na.

>Then let it die peacefully.

Amen.

>> >3. I have enough invectives ........
>>
>> Bah!

>Yep, kheuD gaoata onek korechhi; ota korte aar raaji noi.

Old habits die hard.

>> >But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
>> >as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc.
>>
>> And you expect everybody else to follow your standard!

>I don't direct any thing to any body. But I insist on maintaining a
>level of decency and careful use of words, when some body addressing me.

Subjective. By my standard if someone addresses somebody else
by "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head", then he/she deserves nothing
less. Tao to moshai ami apnar matha-ke shasthyo-shocheton bhinno
aar kichhui bolini.

>> >I don't want my time
>> >wasted in pure slang exchanges.
>>
>> Apni mohaan. Kintu ta' bole apni ki koren aar ki koren na taar
>> haamboDai shunte hobe, eta ektu jobordosti hoye jachchhe na ki?

>I expected this popping up in your head, and that's why I'd put the
>words again.

Ditto.

>> >5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
>> >and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it seems that you don't have enough intelligence
>> to understand that if you address Arnab Gupta by "Bosebabu" in your
>> pinching posts, other people get confused and the real Bosebabus
>> have every right to pinch you back. Why do you expect everybody to
>> follow your illogic?

>It may be my twisted standards that I expect at least honesty from
>people subscribing to the same group. You know I never got into any
>discussions to start with;

I know. You made caustic comment. Getting into discussion
is probably indecent by your standard.

>Any way, probably there is no confusion, none of the Bosebabu's in my
>posts, mean you.

Too late for this thread, but I hope you will be a little
bit more attentive in future while addressing somebody and call
him/her by his/her actual name.

Sambit

[Sharmila Mukherjee]

Srabani Banerjee wrote:

>
> Sambit Basu writes:
>
> >>>>However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like
> >>>>to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography.
> >
> >>Eta mairi ekdom bujhini. Eta-r ki relevance achhe kono, naki
> >>dadu amader emni-i janiye dilen?
> >
> > Eta bujhlen na?
> > "dNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe."
>

> Sharmila-di, kothay gele? Ebar-e Sambit-babu-ke bolo kaan multe.

> Srabani

Sambit-er shudhu kaan mulle hobe na, naake-o khot dite hobe!
Shyam-dadu, or hoye prothom maap-ta aami-ee cheye nichchi!

[Srabani Banerjee]

Sambit Basu writes:

>>>>However, I believe in limits, and maintain it. I like
>>>>to maintain difference between eroticism and pornography.
>
>>Eta mairi ekdom bujhini. Eta-r ki relevance achhe kono, naki
>>dadu amader emni-i janiye dilen?
>
> Eta bujhlen na?
> "dNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe."

Sharmila-di, kothay gele? Ebar-e Sambit-babu-ke bolo kaan multe.

> Dadubabu-r mairi jobab nei.

Srabani

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dadu writes:

>> Aha re! Boddo laglo na dadu? Indrani, eta kintu besh ekchokho
>> byapar hoye gyalo. Dadu-keo ektu bol.
>
>Hummm... you could have done it? Naki, gourobe aapni-o oi dole?

Kon dol-e, dadu?

>> Indrani, shabdhane thakish. Oto shokher pitridotto bodyi podobi-ta
>> bodhoy ebar-e khowate boshechhish.
>
>Indrani-r pitridotto podobi-ta aamar computer-e khowano ektu mushkil

Kano? manet Gupta jodi oto shohoj-e Bose hoye jay, DasGupta niye ektu
cheshta korlei ekta kichhu baniye phelte parben.

[...]

>....del....
>
>> `Insignificant'? A limerick must necessarily have five lines, Dadu.
>> Eto janen ar eta janen na? Next what?
>
>Madaam, oi ekti jaiga tei PNaach aain bhangte chesta kore chhilum.

Ta besh to. Korun na. Limerick na bollei to jhamela chuke jay.

>B}aktigoto bhabe, aami khub niom mafik.

Sheta ar ki emon byapar - nijer ichchhe moton niyom baniye nilei holo.

>Aar to sobai jekhane sekhane...
>bhangchhen, aar onyo ke gaalagali kore jachchhen. Ebong, aapnara side
>line-e boshe haat taali dichchhen.....

Kholsha korun, please. HNeyali korle egg-head-der bujhte oshubidhe hoy.

>Tao shuddhachaari der jonyo- bracket gulo baad dilei hoi-

Thik tao noy - limerick-e kishob 3 feet, 2 feet byapar thake, ar
metre-ta bodhoy anapaestic hoy. Tobe apnar latest chhoDa-ta niye to
kichhu bolini. Aage ekta du-line-er chhoDa-ke limerick bollen kina,
tai arki... Jakge, ei niye ar kotha na baDanoi bodhoy bhalo.

Srabani

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dadu writes:

>Sambit Basu wrote:
>>
>> Dadubabu-r nirghosh:
>>
>> >1. Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
>> >detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc.
>>
>> Orthaat apni mone koren udor pindi budho-r ghaaDe chapanor purno
>> odhikaar apnar aachhe.
>
>No. But since unfortunately it happened, and that provides a chance to
>open up a sewage!

Sewage? Where did you see that? Or is it that once the flame is directed at
you, anything that is otherwise acceptable, becomes sewage? And, BTW, was it
you who, just a few days back referred to somebody as a `son of a gun'?

>It is not, repeat not my intentions.

And yet, it is so difficult to simply offer an apology.

>> ...........If you don't have time, that's your problem.

>> should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?
>
>I've noticed, there is at least one more 'Bose' in the net; I don't
>understand, of all why you have to take responsibility

Well, taking responsibility, is not something you appear to understand at
all. Anyway, if this helps at all, when you came up with that Bose-babu
gem, even I thought it meant Sambit - because he, as far as I could remember,
was the only one with that surname who had ever responded to you and had
written on this particular thread. Now, give us one good reason why we should
have thought that your Bose-babu referred to someone else.

>(even knowingly,
>these posts were not intended for you)

Are we (gourob-e bohubochon, dadu - apni-i shikhiechhen) to read your mind
then?

>to represent all Bose's? How come
>it's your own fair share? It's just some body's goof up; let it go!

What if we don't? What if we keep harping on it? Your standards are not ours.
Why do you expect them to be?

[...]

>> >3. I have enough invectives ........
>>
>>
>> Bah!
>
>Yep, kheuD gaoata onek korechhi; ota korte aar raaji noi.

tai?

>>
>> >But, I deliberately restrain it; my chidding here goes
>> >as far as "dumb head; plastic brain; egg head" etc.
>>
>> And you expect everybody else to follow your standard!
>
>I don't direct any thing to any body. But I insist on maintaining a
>level of decency and careful use of words, when some body addressing me.

The best way to ensure that would be to follow it yourself. Remember your
first posting to SCB? You, perhaps, set the standard about how people would
talk to you right then. Even then, I don't think I've seen people use
the language that you do, when talking to you.

[...]

>> >5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
>> >and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.

I did not understand why Sambit let you go on that `chatukaar' business.
Maybe, it was below his standards to quibble over that.

>>
>> Unfortunately, it seems that you don't have enough intelligence
>> to understand that if you address Arnab Gupta by "Bosebabu" in your
>> pinching posts, other people get confused and the real Bosebabus
>> have every right to pinch you back. Why do you expect everybody to
>> follow your illogic?
>
>It may be my twisted standards that I expect at least honesty from
>people subscribing to the same group.

Expecting honesty from people while not expecting it from one's own self
is more like double standards'

You know I never got into any

>discussions to start with; you've seen Arnab replying to my post but
>were not satisfied; you were sure in your 26th post, that mine was NOT
>directed towards you (you replied on behalf of a 'Bosebabu', as Sambit).

So he did. And i thought it was just wonderful the way he had handled it.

>But you still wanted to pinch!

And why not??? Do you reserve that right exclusively?

Srabani

[id2...@american.edu]

Sharmila-di likhechhen:
>
> Srabani likhlo:
> [...]

> Tobe
> > ami determined je one of these days, dadu ki bolen ami bujhe chhaDbo.

> Aabar likhlo:

> > Khub shahosh, na? dadu jokhon apnake Finnish-e finish kore deben, tokhon
> > ki korben bhebe rekhechhen to?

> Aaha hochcheta ki? Aykjon boyoshko bhodrolok-ke niye moshkora? Kaan
> molo, shiggiri kaan molo!! :-)

Kaar kaan...Sharmila-di? :)

> Iti dadu-bhokto,
> Sharmila

Iti sref "bhokto",
Indrani.

[Chaitali Basu]

Arnab Gupta (GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
:

: Chaitali Basu wrote:
:
: >Arnab Gupta (GUP...@er6.eng.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
: >
: >[dukher shonge baad diye]
: >
: >: mil-er dadu, dadu-r mil-e dadu-ke jai chena|
: >:
: >: Regards,
: >: Bose-babu.
: >
: >
: >Apurbo hoyechhe.
:
: Dhonyobaad!
:
: Tobe apnaar `chatukar' upadhita ebar elo boley|

Amar kachhe jekono upadhiyi gourober. Apnar ichhe hole `chatukar'
bolun. Ami compliment hishebe nebo. Karon chatukarita korteyo
creativity laage.

`Foul mouth'ed
: shonaleo kichhu korar nei, bhodrotar sheema-ta keu keu nijer
: proyojone bariye nitey bhalobashen|

E khetre amar proyojon-ta ami nijeyi realise korini. Apni
bujhe thakle amake ektu bujhiye deben? Tobe bhadrotar
kholosh chaDar kono abipraye akhono amar jageni e kotha
shikar korchi.

: > Kintu thread-er naam-ta bodle dile hoto na?

:
: Dadu to kichhu bolenni aykhono e byapare|

Thread-e ki Dadu aka likhchen je shob uni-I bolben?

: >Aar kabyita kaar? Bose-babur naaki Babu Gupta-r?

: >
:
: Ontye mil-er juge keii ba Bose ar keii ba Gupta!

Amon kotha bhuleyo bhabben na. Bose baaDi'r lokera nijeder jayega
onnoder shonge ato shahoje adolbadol kore na (in general).

: Thanks,

Eta kisher jonno - bujhini.

: Arnab.

Chaitali

[N. Tiwari]

: Mahmud Husain (mhu...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: : components that constitute a nation's identity. I am not sure if we can
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: : ever reconcile these opposing trends in our national life and realize the
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: : two thousand year struggle of the Bengalis to achieve undivided
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: : nationhood.

What two thousand year struggle are you talking about.
Against whom. For what.

--
Nachiketa Tiwari

[Dadu]

Oh, Srabani esechhen? Etodin kothai chhilen? Kolkata giechhilen ki? You
have a volley of fires towards me;

Where is a Dadu-bhokto lukkaito in the net; tini ki Srabani-r wrath
theke amake ektu-o bNachabar chesta korben na?

Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
> Dadu writes:
>

....del....

> >No. But since unfortunately it happened, and that provides a chance to
> >open up a sewage!
>
> Sewage? Where did you see that? Or is it that once the flame is directed at
> you, anything that is otherwise acceptable, becomes sewage? And, BTW, was it
> you who, just a few days back referred to somebody as a `son of a gun'?

Huummmmm.... a flame (means what exactly?) when directed to me? I
welcomed some discusions and talks; also some terse comments. I'm used
to it. But I didn't want to get in to kada chhNoDa chhNuDi. I don't
remember if I initiated it any where, but not intentionally.

Is "Son of a gun" even remotely an unparliamentary word? Any comments
from any of "we"-s (with or without dictionary?) I heard this phrase in
J.L. Hooker's song- "Hoochie Koochie Man", and countless times since-
used as an exclamation!

Clapton has the same song recently in his album "From the Cradle". it is
available in US I know.

Let me read your mind; you just read the first two words, and correlated
the third with some thing else!

> >It is not, repeat not my intentions.
>
> And yet, it is so difficult to simply offer an apology.

about what? If I made any mistakes, I'd surely do. (Again, I'm afraid,
you're having conclusions based on the "son of a gun"; and a whole set
of inference engine started rolling on; as it was previously, got in
your head, and you started The saga of "sowrd flaunting ...."; Na, oi je
shashuDi-der topa kul bolechhilum? I still don't find any thing wrong in
it.

Kintu line by line aapnar jobab dite gele Poroshuraam-er golpo hoe
jaabe. Ebong, aami thik ei jinish tai eDate chaichhilum.

> >> ...........If you don't have time, that's your problem.
> >> should Bosebabu take his undue share just because you goof things up?
> >
> >I've noticed, there is at least one more 'Bose' in the net; I don't
> >understand, of all why you have to take responsibility
>
> Well, taking responsibility, is not something you appear to understand at
> all.

Good. You usually take responsibility of what you say. Any particular
example regardin this comment? the s-o-g?

Let's take one thing at a time! Please, aabar vanish hoe jaaben na.
Aapnar songe bak}alaap korar sujog-i hoi naa.

> Anyway, if this helps at all, when you came up with that Bose-babu
> gem,

which one you mean? the "two line limerik", or the mukto chhondo stuff?
Both contains "Bose-babu"!

> even I thought it meant Sambit - because he, as far as I could remember,
> was the only one with that surname who had ever responded to you and had
> written on this particular thread.

I don't remember having any discussion with Sambit before the ten liner.
Aapni nischoi "US" bolte, at least aapni, ebong Sambit-ke bujhiechhen?
na aaro oneke aachhen?

> Now, give us one good reason why we should
> have thought that your Bose-babu referred to someone else.

Simple Watson. An Arnab Gupto popped up right there; not any Sarmila or
Indira or onyo mohaaan keu (why Arnab? easy).

> >(even knowingly,
> >these posts were not intended for you)
>
> Are we (gourob-e bohubochon, dadu - apni-i shikhiechhen) to read your mind
> then?

No. but then, are you talking about your own self? Aapni ki khub
tension-e bhogen? Aage-o aamar mone hoe chhilo. Kobiraaji mote ektu
basok pata veja jol khele tension kome.

Yes, now there is a question; whether some body would or not,
participate in it. There are a few basics I believe. This was not a
general discussion on some thrown topic. It was an invitation to a
particular person to have some fun. So, probably when one takes this as
below belt or above, he/she should've been pretty sure--

(by the way; aapni duto bhasha-r invectives pray sob jaanen? Jodi-o
Bangla aar English stock aamar kom nei, tobu, aapnar kaach theke notun
kichhu paoa jaabe? replenishing aarki.

Aar, amar sat-ta bhasha-e invectives: ota ekta free advertisement;
Language school-e shekha jaae, kintu, oi somosto remote bhasha-r
invectives jodi kaaro kaaje lage, tobe tu-pice kamie neoa---

> >to represent all Bose's? How come
> >it's your own fair share? It's just some body's goof up; let it go!
>
> What if we don't? What if we keep harping on it? Your standards are not ours.
> Why do you expect them to be?

Again who is "we", "you" or "them"? are you referring the same group of
people?

Nothing. That'll prove my another conjecture that, people want to vent
their professional and personal frustrations in this cyber space by mock
fighting and calling names; which they can't afford in practical lives.

..del............

> >I don't direct any thing to any body. But I insist on maintaining a
> >level of decency and careful use of words, when some body addressing me.
>
> The best way to ensure that would be to follow it yourself. Remember your
> first posting to SCB?

Sure; I don't remember, any thing beyond "South Calcuttan Yappies", and
"egg heads"; How you interprete them?

> You, perhaps, set the standard about how people would
> talk to you right then. Even then, I don't think I've seen people use
> the language that you do, when talking to you.

Ki muskil, aapni ekebaare gaach komor bNedhe-

well,

> [...]
>
> >> >5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
> >> >and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.
>
> I did not understand why Sambit let you go on that `chatukaar' business.
> Maybe, it was below his standards to quibble over that.

or he read the sequence from the beginning, and admits that he was
talking on behalf of AG! You'll also be pretty sure if you read his post
on 26th.

> >It may be my twisted standards that I expect at least honesty from
> >people subscribing to the same group.
>
> Expecting honesty from people while not expecting it from one's own self
> is more like double standards'

Hummm... eta sei jol khaoar goppo hoe jachchhe na ki? Are you serious of
it?

Aapni aamake onek gulo proshno baane jorjorito (ebong onek gulo dosharop
korechhen) Aamar mone ekta khotka jaagchhe- ihar karon sombondhe; kindly
kholosha korben? Jodi-o aami ektu humboDai aachhi, aar baaje boke
thaki(ebong chai- amar dwitio post-e bolechhi) tobu post poDe-i uttor
di-i.

> You know I never got into any
> >discussions to start with; you've seen Arnab replying to my post but
> >were not satisfied; you were sure in your 26th post, that mine was NOT
> >directed towards you (you replied on behalf of a 'Bosebabu', as Sambit).
>
> So he did. And i thought it was just wonderful the way he had handled it.

I don't have much problems about it! By the way, is he also included in
the above "we"-s?

Just gives a feeling (very similar way the phrase s-o-g might strike
some thing else in your mind), is there a net-gang existing? I just
thrown a dhil to the bhimrul-er chak- unknowingly? Some body (completely
unrelated) also expressed the feeling in context to Bengali functions
per se, very recently.

>
> >But you still wanted to pinch!
>
> And why not??? Do you reserve that right exclusively?

Not at all. But, I don't want to go beyond pinching!

And, you see the controversy? You started with the apaprent confusion of
'Bose babu', and went to 'why not'? Do they go togather?

If one is acceptable, then not the other.

Extremely logical Watson.

> Srabani

onek kichhu-i bola holo naa. Aapnaar saathe ki ekdin-o sohoj bakya laap
korar sujog paabo na?

Greetings-

Dadu

[Mahmud Husain]

The struggle of the Bengalis to realize their national aspirations.

>Against whom.

Various invaders encroaching on our sovereignity.

>For what.

Nationhood.

>Nachiketa Tiwari

Mahmud Husain.

[Dadu]

Supratik Das wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Partha Banerjee wrote:
>
...........del...............

> > Hindus left Bangladesh because they were put under treamendous pressure --
> > social, political, religious, emotional -- on individual and collective
> > basis. If we learn anything from history, the same thing happened in many
> > places at many different times. Jews in Nazi Germany would be a good
> > example.
>
(probably the above is from Partha Banerjee)

> To say that the Bangladeshi Muslim had no role in it is a big lie. The
> Pakistani army was a good excuse. This is not to deny that countless Muslims
> came forward to protect Hindus but politically Bds wanted to rid of
> Hindus.

I believe, possibly a couple of points are overlooked here. First,
whatever the word secularism mean, the general post independance feeling
was, India is a Hindu country, as opposed to, the Pakistan - a Mulsim
one. Even this was never uttered, it was in the air- in everybody's
belief, irrespective of both Hindu and Muslims. So, some of the Muslims
deliberately moved to the other side of Bengal (by exchanging
properties- etc.) some were forced. But, a lot of Hindus- moved from
East Pakistan, and a lot more were chased out (and quite were killed).

To note, I personally have the feeling that, it was the Bengali Hindu's
who had to take the afterburn of the partition; I know of quite a few
MarwaDi families who never moved out of East Pakistan, and still making
a good living in present Bangladesh.

Secondly, after famine, ravage of war and freedom fighting, every body
wanted to have peace. And when Pakistan was created, nobody wanted to
fight- there was no motivation; Hindu's in East Pakistan started to
believe that, India is their Homeland, not E.Bengal. And the dream city
of Calcutta- which provides for every body- they moved out to have a
better life.

Thirdly, as far as I can remember, Hindu's, specially Bengali's were
never united. Some body here and there are hero-s; but its very
difficult to get Hindu Bengali's put to the same idea, and get some
thing working. Probably, the only person politically, (I heard it has
also to do with baNgal-ghoti Marxism) was Charu Mojumdar. And nobody
else in any other areas (was there a Bengal Regiment ever? I don't
remember).

As a group, Bengali Hindu's are cowards- I tend to agree with this
thought; I've seen years togather- small time rawdies rule streets of
Calcutta and subberbs- nobody even protested-

I do see nobody even now (with the present vanity of being ELITE
Indians) talks even against small and big social injustice, let alone
cure of a lot of solvable problems!

> of hope for it.
>
> I have no doubt that there are many secular muslims in Bd. However, a
> true evaluation of the fate of Hindus is necessary in order to prevent
> such events from happening in future, e.g. the Japanese after all these
> years are apologizing to the Koreans for war atrocities. Similarly Bds
> must acknowledge that there treatment of Hindus has been miserable and
> that in future it will never be repeated.

I tend to agree again. But, then it is very difficult-

Dadu.

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dadu writes:

>Oh, Srabani esechhen? Etodin kothai chhilen? Kolkata giechhilen ki? You
>have a volley of fires towards me;
>
>Where is a Dadu-bhokto lukkaito in the net; tini ki Srabani-r wrath
>theke amake ektu-o bNachabar chesta korben na?

[...]

>Huummmmm.... a flame (means what exactly?) when directed to me? I
>welcomed some discusions and talks; also some terse comments. I'm used
>to it. But I didn't want to get in to kada chhNoDa chhNuDi.

And where was the `kada chhNoDa chhNuDi' (mixed your N's there, dadu)?
Who started it and where? I would be really happy if you could point it
out.

I don't
>remember if I initiated it any where, but not intentionally.

You don't remember if you initiated it but you remember that you
did not initiate it intentionally? :) :)

>Is "Son of a gun" even remotely an unparliamentary word? Any comments
>from any of "we"-s (with or without dictionary?) I heard this phrase in
>J.L. Hooker's song- "Hoochie Koochie Man", and countless times since-
>used as an exclamation!
>
>Clapton has the same song recently in his album "From the Cradle". it is
>available in US I know.

And, I am told that even Chaucer had used the F-word in his writings - it
still remains a four-letter word.

>Let me read your mind; you just read the first two words, and correlated
>the third with some thing else!

No, I did not. You are not very good at mind-reading.

>> >It is not, repeat not my intentions.
>>
>> And yet, it is so difficult to simply offer an apology.
>
>about what? If I made any mistakes, I'd surely do.

How about for mixing up surnames and starting this entire business?

(Again, I'm afraid,
>you're having conclusions based on the "son of a gun"; and a whole set
>of inference engine started rolling on; as it was previously, got in
>your head, and you started The saga of "sowrd flaunting ...."; Na, oi je
>shashuDi-der topa kul bolechhilum? I still don't find any thing wrong in
>it.

I will not get into this discuusion with you again, you have no straight
answers and you had me confused for other people. So forget it.

>Kintu line by line aapnar jobab dite gele Poroshuraam-er golpo hoe
>jaabe. Ebong, aami thik ei jinish tai eDate chaichhilum.

I am sure you were!

[...]

>> >I've noticed, there is at least one more 'Bose' in the net; I don't
>> >understand, of all why you have to take responsibility
>>
>> Well, taking responsibility, is not something you appear to understand at
>> all.
>
>Good. You usually take responsibility of what you say. Any particular
>example regardin this comment? the s-o-g?

How about Bose-babu?

>Let's take one thing at a time! Please, aabar vanish hoe jaaben na.
>Aapnar songe bak}alaap korar sujog-i hoi naa.

Ei sherechhe! Onek-e to achhen net-e, dadu. Ei gorib-ke chheDe din.

>> Anyway, if this helps at all, when you came up with that Bose-babu
>> gem,
>
>which one you mean? the "two line limerik", or the mukto chhondo stuff?
>Both contains "Bose-babu"!

The two-line `limerick' had Bose-babu? I don't remember. Anyway how does it
matter?

>> even I thought it meant Sambit - because he, as far as I could remember,
>> was the only one with that surname who had ever responded to you and had
>> written on this particular thread.
>
>
>I don't remember having any discussion with Sambit before the ten liner.

But he had responded. No other Bose had. I thought this was rather simple.

>Aapni nischoi "US" bolte, at least aapni, ebong Sambit-ke bujhiechhen?
>na aaro oneke aachhen?

kon `us' - porer line-er? How does it matter how many people `us'
refers to?

>> Now, give us one good reason why we should
>> have thought that your Bose-babu referred to someone else.
>>
>>
>Simple Watson. An Arnab Gupto popped up right there; not any Sarmila or
>Indira or onyo mohaaan keu (why Arnab? easy).

Easy!!!! An Arnab Gupta becoming Bose-babu is easy!! Or do you know
something about Arnab that the rest of us don't? :)

>> >(even knowingly,
>> >these posts were not intended for you)
>>
>> Are we (gourob-e bohubochon, dadu - apni-i shikhiechhen) to read your mind
>> then?
>
>No. but then, are you talking about your own self?

Manet ki etar?

Aapni ki khub
>tension-e bhogen?

Well Dr. Freud, if and when I need an analysis, I'll ask for it. O.K.?

>Aage-o aamar mone hoe chhilo. Kobiraaji mote ektu
>basok pata veja jol khele tension kome.
>
>Yes, now there is a question; whether some body would or not,
>participate in it. There are a few basics I believe. This was not a
>general discussion on some thrown topic. It was an invitation to a
>particular person to have some fun. So, probably when one takes this as
>below belt or above, he/she should've been pretty sure--

I am not sure what this is supposed to mean. But since your comments
do appear to create a lot of confusion, why don't you add these
disclaimers whenever you make one of those `invitation to particular
person' stuff?

>(by the way; aapni duto bhasha-r invectives pray sob jaanen? Jodi-o
>Bangla aar English stock aamar kom nei, tobu, aapnar kaach theke notun
>kichhu paoa jaabe? replenishing aarki.

Aami to asha kore boshechhilam, apnar posting poDe shikhbo.

>Aar, amar sat-ta bhasha-e invectives: ota ekta free advertisement;
>Language school-e shekha jaae, kintu, oi somosto remote bhasha-r
>invectives jodi kaaro kaaje lage, tobe tu-pice kamie neoa---

Oi shat-ta bhashay egg-head-ke ki bole, dadu?

>> >to represent all Bose's? How come
>> >it's your own fair share? It's just some body's goof up; let it go!
>>
>> What if we don't? What if we keep harping on it? Your standards are not ours.
>> Why do you expect them to be?
>
>
>Again who is "we", "you" or "them"? are you referring the same group of
>people?

`You' refers to you, dadu. `We'-ta motamuti gourob-e bohubochon - keu
jodi protibaad koren tahole tini baad. `Them' refers to your standards.

>Nothing. That'll prove my another conjecture that, people want to vent
>their professional and personal frustrations in this cyber space by mock
>fighting and calling names;

Considering the fact that you had started this unwarranted name-calling
business, what conclusions are to be drawn from your statement above?

>which they can't afford in practical lives.
>
>..del............
>
>> >I don't direct any thing to any body. But I insist on maintaining a
>> >level of decency and careful use of words, when some body addressing me.
>>
>> The best way to ensure that would be to follow it yourself. Remember your
>> first posting to SCB?
>
>Sure; I don't remember, any thing beyond "South Calcuttan Yappies", and
>"egg heads"; How you interprete them?

As language that, as far as I remember, none had used before you.

>> You, perhaps, set the standard about how people would
>> talk to you right then. Even then, I don't think I've seen people use
>> the language that you do, when talking to you.
>
>Ki muskil, aapni ekebaare gaach komor bNedhe-

Right, kintu ami jeta bollam sheta-ke contradict korte parlen na kintu.

>well,

[...]

>> I did not understand why Sambit let you go on that `chatukaar' business.
>> Maybe, it was below his standards to quibble over that.
>
>or he read the sequence from the beginning, and admits that he was
>talking on behalf of AG!

He does???? Where? Or do you infer that from his `bose-babu-r hoye...'
stuff? But at that point of time, only you, in your infinite wisdom,
know who Bose-babu actually is, `we' don't. Remember?
And, suppose, he did talk on behalf of Arnab. Why does that make him
a `chatukaar'?

>You'll also be pretty sure if you read his post
>on 26th.
>
>> >It may be my twisted standards that I expect at least honesty from
>> >people subscribing to the same group.
>>
>> Expecting honesty from people while not expecting it from one's own self
>> is more like double standards'
>
>Hummm... eta sei jol khaoar goppo hoe jachchhe na ki? Are you serious of
>it?

`Serious of' what?

>Aapni aamake onek gulo proshno baane jorjorito (ebong onek gulo dosharop
>korechhen) Aamar mone ekta khotka jaagchhe- ihar karon sombondhe; kindly
>kholosha korben?

Ki kholsha korbo? Kano apnake proshno korechhi?

Jodi-o aami ektu humboDai aachhi, aar baaje boke
>thaki(ebong chai- amar dwitio post-e bolechhi) tobu post poDe-i uttor
>di-i.

Khub mon diye poDen na, dadu. Aager thread-e jor kore aami ja bolini
tai amar ghaDe chapanor cheshta korchhilen.

>> You know I never got into any
>> >discussions to start with; you've seen Arnab replying to my post but
>> >were not satisfied; you were sure in your 26th post, that mine was NOT
>> >directed towards you (you replied on behalf of a 'Bosebabu', as Sambit).
>>
>> So he did. And i thought it was just wonderful the way he had handled it.
>
>I don't have much problems about it! By the way, is he also included in
>the above "we"-s?

Keep guessing!

>Just gives a feeling (very similar way the phrase s-o-g might strike
>some thing else in your mind), is there a net-gang existing? I just
>thrown a dhil to the bhimrul-er chak- unknowingly?

I am sure you have drawn your own conclusions, and you are free to
do so. But I don't think all this curiosity is really healthy - so
let me tell you this - the `we', as far as I am concerned, refers
to myself and to people I feel honoured to consider my friends.
Satisfied?

>Some body (completely
>unrelated) also expressed the feeling in context to Bengali functions
>per se, very recently.

Oh really? How interesting!

>>
>> >But you still wanted to pinch!
>>
>> And why not??? Do you reserve that right exclusively?
>
>Not at all. But, I don't want to go beyond pinching!

And everybody should follow suit? And what, in your subjective
opinion, constitutes going `beyond pinching'?

>And, you see the controversy? You started with the apaprent confusion of
>'Bose babu', and went to 'why not'? Do they go togather?

Eta-o bujhlam na.

>If one is acceptable, then not the other.

Anything that you do or say is acceptable, anything in retaliation
is not?

>Extremely logical Watson.

Pity! Till this day, Holmes used to be a personal favourite.

>onek kichhu-i bola holo naa. Aapnaar saathe ki ekdin-o sohoj bakya laap
>korar sujog paabo na?

Ki je bolen! Apni ar sohoj kotha?

>Greetings-

To you too,

Srabani

p.s. Oi `eroticism and pornography'-r byaparta kano likhechhilen,
bollen na to? Sambit-babu-r `DNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe'-ta
mene nilen naki? Jai bolun, ota kintu uni heavy diechhilen.

[Dadu]

Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
You've a b---ii--g post; I have to answer Bose Babu first, but only one
thing now;
.....del..

> You don't remember if you initiated it but you remember that you
> did not initiate it intentionally? :) :)

Yep, I'll come to it later.

>
> >Is "Son of a gun" even remotely an unparliamentary word? Any comments
>

> And, I am told that even Chaucer had used the F-word in his writings - it
> still remains a four-letter word.

That's a good comparison; but does that mean, s-o-g is even remotely an
unparliamentary word? How Chaucer's F-word comes here? Some body else
used "Good Lord!", even that also in this comparison? Does in any way,
be it Chaucer or Hooker to use it, become change the meaning?

> No, I did not. You are not very good at mind-reading.

I understood, you object use of the word s-o-g? Could you enlighten?

> >about what? If I made any mistakes, I'd surely do.
>
> How about for mixing up surnames and starting this entire business?

that I've to think! If I can still escape!

> As language that, as far as I remember, none had used before you.

Does that make these words unparliamentary?

> p.s. Oi `eroticism and pornography'-r byaparta kano likhechhilen,
> bollen na to? Sambit-babu-r `DNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe'-ta
> mene nilen naki? Jai bolun, ota kintu uni heavy diechhilen.

Na re baba; ektu hNaap chhaDi; eksonge koto joner uttor debo? Aapni,
Sambit, Bosebabu, Indrani- ei sob "WE"-ke eka saamlate hochchhe!

Dadu

[Sambit Basu]

Dadu <Da...@Finland.fi> writes:

>which one you mean? the "two line limerik", or the mukto chhondo stuff?
>Both contains "Bose-babu"!

Brambhishaak shunechhi sMriti-bhrongsho dur korte sahajyo
kore. Oboshyo ta'te bhimroti-r kono suraha hoy kina
jaanina.

>> >> >5. Last, I believe, Bose Babu (I meant Arnab Gupta) is grown up enough,
>> >> >and doesn't need a "chatukaar" to rely upon.
>>
>> I did not understand why Sambit let you go on that `chatukaar' business.
>> Maybe, it was below his standards to quibble over that.

>or he read the sequence from the beginning, and admits that he was
>talking on behalf of AG!

For the record: I am reading the sequence from the beginning
and I did _not_, even for once, speak for AG (that's the
acronym for Arnab Gupta,I guess), let alone admit it.

But I do admit that your practice of decency and
sophistication and your concept of fun are sick
by my standard and that's why I didn't want to talk about
this.

>Jodi-o aami ektu humboDai aachhi, aar baaje boke
>thaki(ebong chai- amar dwitio post-e bolechhi) tobu post poDe-i uttor
>di-i.

Probably, but not in detail. In your own words,

"Unfortunately, I've less time to read all the posts, and in great
detail. So, often I mess up with name, surname etc."

Self-denial following?

Sambit

[Soumitra Bose]

Otota boloni Dadu , Ami Udbastu Colony theke eshechhi , amader parai o
somosto Dokshin Kolkatar bangal odhhushito onchole bohudini churi
dakati , meye der hirik dewo , mastani bondho , amader parai to 77 er
pore hoie keu par peye jai ni, gono dholaie mara jai. oshob jaigate
mastan ektai MAku party.....Tobe public kintu ektu beshi matratei
shojag.

[Dadu]

Soumitra Bose wrote:
>
> Otota boloni Dadu , Ami Udbastu Colony theke eshechhi , amader parai o
> somosto Dokshin Kolkatar bangal odhhushito onchole bohudini churi
> dakati , meye der hirik dewo , mastani bondho , amader parai to 77 er
> pore hoie keu par peye jai ni, gono dholaie mara jai. oshob jaigate
> mastan ektai MAku party.....Tobe public kintu ektu beshi matratei
> shojag.

Aami second shobdo ta thik bujhlum na. Aami udbastu colony-r khub kachha
kachhi chhilum. Ebong, aami mastani-r kotha thik bangal proshonge
bolini; in general, W.Bengal-e bolechhilum.

Aar, goto bodh hoi dosh bochhor ei somosto ektu kom, kaaron, bibhinno
rokom kaaje chhelera b}asto. Employment er scope beDechhe bole.

Aami Bangal -ghoti tenechhi- shudhu Communism-er prosonge; aami jotota
bujhechhi, Charu Mojumder-er alada hoe jaoa ta muloto: East Bengal -er
(sp. J.B.) lokera Maku party te jordar howar jonyo.

Given the level of conciousness expected from Calcutta people (sp. due
to the existanceof accademics), tar ek ongsho-o noi.

Maku party chhaDa aachhe tai ba ki? Onyo ra to eki doler-

Baad baki tate I agreed with Supratik Das (or Partha Banerjee?)

....

[Indrani DasGupta]

Dadu wrote:
>
> Srabani Banerjee wrote:

> > p.s. Oi `eroticism and pornography'-r byaparta kano likhechhilen,
> > bollen na to? Sambit-babu-r `DNaDe dNaDe drum, deDe deDe deDe'-ta
> > mene nilen naki? Jai bolun, ota kintu uni heavy diechhilen.
>
> Na re baba; ektu hNaap chhaDi; eksonge koto joner uttor debo? Aapni,
> Sambit, Bosebabu, Indrani- ei sob "WE"-ke eka saamlate hochchhe!
>
> Dadu

Dadu...amake shamlate apnake hobe na. Cholun aami aar apni dujon-e mile
ei shob kota bachcha-ke shamlai. Raaji to?

Indrani.

[Arnab Gupta]

Dadu, prothomei apnaake dhonyobaad janai uttor deoar jonyey| Ami to
bhablam WE'er aykjon chhaDa bakira aar keu uttor-i pabe na|

Dadu writes:

>..[deleted]..

>> >I was surprised with AG's referring to Freud to extract meaning of
>> >"psyche"; and more with the pretention, as if Dadu (not AG himself!) put
>> >the word Freud to mean "psyche"!
>>
>> Do you ever realise that giving reference from some sources only
>> does not make one a conoisseur of `critics' or `payesh phele
>> shukto khaoa'?
>

>We are going back to the Ray etc. Yes, you referred some critics in
>context to S.Ray. Take ki gelo elo?
>
>Well, you referred Western critics to explain social context of Ray's
>films (not other works; which I enjoy equally, if not more). Which I
>felt a bit amusing. I feel any Bengali has understands the social
>context of Ray's works better than any Westerner (however long one lives
>in Bengal).

Dadu-babu, er uttor'ta ami dubhabey ditey pari| But first, let me
stick to the context.

1. You are trying to justify why you called me `connoisseur of Ray's
critic' or `payesh pheley shukto khaoa'. Well, a poor try, if you
allow me to say so. In the very post where I quoted them, I had clearly
mentioned that instead of giving my own opinion, I am quoting from
sources avalable at my hand. You objected to it on the ground that
they were *Western* critcs!!! That I am a `connoisseur of Ray's critics'
was totally your construct.

2. The `social context' is your later attempt to escape my query. Let me
quote from one of the posts of the Satyajit Ray thread:

******************************begin quote*************************

Shyam Chakroborty wrote:

>>This is the first time I am coming across a view that I don't need to
>>read anything on Ray because I am a Bengali!
>>
>I didn't exactly mean so. I just wanted to exclude critics, and the wway
>you wanted to quote them (e.g. in context to Freudian flavour etc.)

You earlier wrote:

"Being a Bengali, if you have to read critics (Western, Indian, Bengali
etc.) to understand Ray, then, I am wasting my time."

Understanding an artist is a complex process involving several facets
of his/her art, and these are not independent of each other. You cannot
understand Ray simply by following the storyline. It's probably
impossible to exctract an artist's mind from his/her creation if you don't
follow his/her style also.

>> ...............The process of involvement
>>that you have talked about is something very preliminary to appreciati
>>of any art (at least I think so).

>Not in all forms of visual arts (at least to my opinion).
>
> ..... Ray, to me, is a lot more than that.

>>I am not saying that it is impossible to form an opinion based on the
>>artists creation only. But to go deeper and to get `more' out of it
>>you need to form a background. In case of Ray's films there are two
>>things that, I think, comprise this background. First, a knowledge
>>of the person himself, the type of social/cultural/political/etc..
>>background he has and, second, a knowledge of the art and history of
>>films.

>You've quoted critics of Ray not in context to the cinematic content,
>but to the social context! Can you find the contradictions?

I did quote from others, so what's wrong in that? You referred to Devi
as exploration of human psyche (I am waiting still now for a detailed
elaboration on this with concrete examples), which considering some
prominent readings of it seems improbable. I quoted some of these instead
of giving my own opinion. Surely I support some of these, else why would
I quote them ?

Anyway, amar mot-ta na diye je apnake bNachiye diyechhi eta-to apni agey
shikar-i korechhen|:-)

Now again a related quote from your earlier post:

"My objection is that, if you want to understand Ray (or any artist and
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
his works) please do it your self, without taking help from critics. Try
~~~~~~~~~~
to understand the social, cultural and family backdrop, find threads of
moods, and motivations. There is no "made easy" for understanding art
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
and artists, it not Higher Secondary Examination."
~~~~~~~~~~~

Do you realise that you made a generalised comment?

Your initial disregard for critics did not seem to touch upon the
social aspect' part. My apologies, if you actually meant so, although
I still remain opposed to the idea of doing away with critics even if
`social aspect' of art is concerned.

***********************end quote**********************************

You, as usual, chose to come back to it later.
But as we know, for you, `later' never comes.

>> If you do, and if you did it for pure fun, then
>> you should have the level of maturity to be able to accept
>> similar things directed at you.
>

>Hummm....

>
>
> >
> >Freud-er dash shudu sur kaana-i (jodyopi chhondo-er JNan tNar
> >osadharon!) non, foul mouth hipocrite-o boten!!
>

>ok. Let's dig Freud up! I remember saying "a narration of human psyche"

>(or some thing very close, I

>don't remember the phrase exactly) in context to Devi. Now, enter Freud.
>I don't remember the words exactly, but as such, you straigt away
>derived Freud from my usage of Psyche-; explained in detail (with some
>more reference to some more critics) that, even Roy said, Devi has
>nothing to do with Freudian tinge etc.
>

Well, I referred to Freud in two different threads, under different
contexts.

You had categorised `Debi' as `exploration of human psyche'. I asked
you repeatedly to substantiate it, but without luck. Now, it is beyond
my furthest limits of imagination to get concrete elements in that
film to categorise it as such. The closest reference to psychic
elements in Debi that can be found in regular discussions is the
Freudian connotation of Dayamoyee's `pa-tepa' sequence. That is the
first `Freud' of this discussion.

`Freud' came up in the second thread to emphasize your preoccupation
with `psyche' while dealing with `Debi. Yes, yes, I know `Psyche' is
not all `Freud', but isn't that something like extending `critcs'
to `connoisseur of critics' ?

>That's also ok. But, after wards, you are referring Freud, as if, I've
>used Freud to begin with, in context to Devi! If so, you're jokingly or
>not, trying to put some thing which I didn't even mention. And allmost
>Goebls (what's the right spelling?) style-e!

`allmost'[sic] correct, tobe aykta `e' bodhoi baad porechhe|

> You've been repeating it
>allmost everywhere. I took it as a joke in the begining, and didn't

Eikhaney ektu bhul korey phellen dadu| Apnakey ager chithi-ta lekha-r
agey ami aykbari byabohaar korechhi kothata, oi je:

"..............porihaash kothai ?
hai Freud-er dash..............."

To apni amaake hypocrite, etc.,etc. onek kichhu bollen| Tappor ami
abar likhlam, tobey ebar aar Freud non, `Freud'er mesho'| Shey jakge,
apni obhijog-ta korechhilen oi uporer line-tar context-e| Shutorang
abar ami shudhu shudhu (I hope) doshi holam|

>indicate that it was you to refer to Freud, not me.
>

Otuku to chhoDa-kaar'er shadhinota dadu| Apnaar kachh thhekei
to shikhechhi|

>
>How do you put it? You were just joking? Isn't it hipocritic?
>

Ami to bolbo `joke' korchhilam| `hipocritic'-ta to apnaar
shongjojon. Onek-ta dhorun oi ghotonatar moto| Apni amake
`egg-head' ityadi aro koto kichhu bollen, ami bollam je
eta bhalo korenni, aar apni bole dilen je ota joke chhilo
(hindi-te aro kichhu juDechhilen bodhoi)|

Amar jonyo-o oi jukti-i taholey thhaklo dadu|

>
>And, if you harp the same phrases day in and out, isn't it Unbound?
>

Shey to gyalo (apnaar definition onujayee) `hipocrisy', kintu
`morbidity' ? Ota kintu ghorotoro kharap byapar, ami Oxford
khuley dekhechhi|

>Let's clear this part; we'll come to the rest afterwards-
>

O hobena, ami jani| (uporer duto bakyo-r jonyei amar ayki
uttor roilo)|

>By the way, I've used egghead; but is it some thing which you don't find
>comfortable? Let me know. I'll withdraw it.

Cool! Allow me to start this withdrawing business.

I hereby take back all the intentional and unintentional references
to Dr. Sigmund Freud that I made in course of my discussion with
dadu.

Thanks,
Arnab.

[Dadu]

Let's make the post looooooog so that no body other than you reads it
(just gets bored)
>

Srabani Banerjee wrote:

> Dadu writes:
>
> [...]
> >
> >>>> ......................And, BTW, was it

> >>>> you who, just a few days back referred to somebody as a `son of a gun'?

.....del.................

> >> >Is "Son of a gun" even remotely an unparliamentary word?
> >
> >>

> >> And, I am told that even Chaucer had used the F-word in his writings - it
> >> still remains a four-letter word.
> >

> >So? I still don't understand your referring to s-o-g! Is Chaucer's use
> >of F-word (4 letter or 8 letter?), make has any thing to do with s-o-g?
>
> Onek kichhu delete kore diechhen, shegulo monet koriye di arekbar.
> `Son of a gun' proshonge Hooker ar Clapton-er kotha enechhilen - kano
> enechhilen?

Yah it was just to say, you can listen this word in the "son of a gun"
as an exclamation;

uddeshyo-ta jodi shudhu-i names-dropping hoy, ta'le maap cheye
> nichchhi.

Please oti korben na. Aami khub lojja pabo.

>....... Ami bhebechhilam je naam-kora lok-era kotha byabohaar korle sheta
> ekta added acceptability dyay - etai apnar argument. Argument-ta dNaday na
> eta bojhatei Chaucer.
> Bojha gyalo?

Ektu o na. I didn't refer to Hooker just to say "'cause he used the
word, its clean; I said, its clean as such; and I felt you have some
objection to this word (am I right?). Then I referred to a commonly sung
song, where you may hear the word in American way, and can decide your
self, if it is any way objectionable.

It'll be nice if you kindly let me know your impressions about the
phrase s-o-g, after listening the song!!

Probably, I could establish that, your reference to my utterance of
s-o-g in context to Mr. Babu is not objectionable? Then we can rewrite
the history togather----

>
> >Does it make s-o-g objectionable?
>
> `Objectionable' kintu ami ekbar-o bolini. Apni `sewage'-er kotha bolechhen.
> Sheta jodi arekta `dNaDe dNaDe drum...' na hoye thake, tahole apni ja

Let's keep this part within ourselves; And about this your enquiry,
we'll be back later.

> likhechhilen tar ortho ei dNaday je apnar posting-er uttor jNara diechhen
> tNader karur lekha apnar `sewage' monet hoyechhe. Apnar jodi monet hoy
> `s-o-g' objectionable noy, tahole shei maap-kathite kon bhasha `objectionable'
> ebong ke sheta kothay byabohaar korechhen sheta ektu dekhiye din.
>
> >I guess, you're also from Jadavpur (I didn't see the Alumni list
> >though)?
>
> Tate ki elo gyalo?

Just wild guess. By the way, I had a degree from JU also. So I
smelled----

Gosthi boddhota aar ki!!

>
> [...]
>
....

> ........
>
> Abar shob guliye gyachhe apnar. Apni ekta bhul korlen, lok-e react korlo,
> apni chNyachamechi shuru korlen.Konta `undesirable'?

Kichchu guloi ni. Aapni io s-o-g-r moton, ekta bhul dharona niye aamake
shudhu dosha rop kore jachchhen; aami chai na aapnar kono-o bhul dharona
thakuk aamar opor. Kaaron? pore aaschhi tate--

>
> [...]
>
> >> How about Bose-babu?
>

......But, if you will pardon me for saying
> so, mixing up surnames and then blaming people for misunderstanding is
> pretty stupid.

Yep, i don't deny that. i just don't want people start using abusive
language from that excuse---

>
> [...]

>
> >> The two-line `limerick' had Bose-babu? I don't remember. Anyway how does it
> >> matter?
> >

> >that's true; the "bottom line remains same;
>
> Incidentally, I went back and checked. Lots of babu-s but no Bose in the
> two-liner.

stilll---- the bottom line remains the same------

>
> >> >I don't remember having any discussion with Sambit before the ten liner.
> >>
> >> But he had responded. No other Bose had. I thought this was rather simple.
> >

> >That's that. And, I didn't find his style comfortable enough to start a
> >discussion.
>
> That's your business. But why blame him for thinking that Bose-babu referred
> to him?

No; but I just didn't want to discuss any thing with him------

>
> [...]

>
> >> Easy!!!! An Arnab Gupta becoming Bose-babu is easy!!
> >

> >So? even if it is not easy; what? Does that affiliate any body any
> >thing?
>
> Manet? Sambit Basu-ke Bosebabu na bhebe Arnab Gupta-ke Bosebabu bhaba-ta
> beshi logical? Ar kotobar ek kotha bolbo mairi?

the question is not whether it is logical- but if it is beyond decency.
I don't think mixing up Indrani to Indira, or Gupta to Bose is not
indecent----, though not logical.....

I prefer to be decent than logical...

> [...]

>
> >>>Are we (gourob-e bohubochon, dadu - apni-i shikhiechhen) to read your mind
> >>> then?
> >
> >> >No. but then, are you talking about your own self?
> >>
> >> Manet ki etar?
> >

> >Simple. is this "you" is ekbochon (ogourobe ba gourobe) na onyo keu-o?
> >Aamar songe kara dialog chaalie jachchhen, ektu bujhte hobe to!
>
> Kano? Posting-e naam thake na?

Aapni majhe majhe-i "we2 lekhen bole---

>
> >>
> >> Aapni ki khub
> >> >tension-e bhogen?
> >>
> >> Well Dr. Freud, if and when I need an analysis, I'll ask for it. O.K.?
> >

> >Very well Ms. Baltimore; I'll be waiting. (I don't exactly know what Ms.
> >Baltimore means;
>
> Neither do I.

Well, addressing me as Dr. Freud is very similar to addressing you as
Ms. Baltimore. Let me know if you got any clue for either of them----

I can't put down more than this; my head is breaking---

Dadu

... del.....

> >
> >Why? Any body is invited, till the time one restricts table courtsey (at
> >least)
>
> Apni to bollen `particular person', kothay kothay palti khan kano?
> Table courtesy-ta ki bostu? Ke decide kore?

Table courtsey is like table wine, which you may like to use in a
dinner----

It was directed to a particular person, but any body invited, with a
decent language---

Do you ask me if I've been decent? You've indicated so before. Let me be
clear.

Is it my use of egg head? or s-o-g? Which make you think I haven't been
decent? If not why you pulled them? Kindly be kind to me---

>
> >>
> >> >(by the way; aapni duto bhasha-r invectives pray sob jaanen? Jodi-o
> >> >Bangla aar English stock aamar kom nei, tobu, aapnar kaach theke notun
> >> >kichhu paoa jaabe? replenishing aarki.
> >>
> >> Aami to asha kore boshechhilam, apnar posting poDe shikhbo.
> >

> >Kintu shekhabo bolini. Tu-pice kamanor chesta korchhi ota diye. aapni
> >claim korechhen duto bhasha-r, ebong himshim khabar-o. at least notun
> >South Cal stuff kichhu rakhben bhebechhilum
>
> Etao bojhen ni? Ami bojhate chailam je apni ekhon porjonto duto
> bhasha-tei lekhen, tatei himshim khachchhi.

naa heaNli te aapni aamar theke kom jaan na :-) Aapni "invective"
prosonge ullekh korechhilen je duto bhashae himshim kheye jachchhen.
Tai, aamar niriho koutuhol je notun kichhu aachhe kina aapnar kaachhe.

>

> >Firstly, egg-head shobdo ta invective bole mone hochchhe?
>
> Egg-head ki khub bhalo kotha? Je kono lok-ke ichchhe holei bola jay?

Ota ki khub kharaap kotha? Kake kake bola jai na? Ichchhe hole-i ki
"bhat khabo" bola jaai?

Bangla-e ota ke ki bole Madam?

> Eta ekta honest query, rhetoric noy.

I beleive, your posts are not rhetoric, I find them sincere enough.

>
> >E-o ki Psyche
> >shune Freud -er naam nome kora?
> >
> >Bapyar ta ki bolben? Aapni s-o-g ke aapottikor bole chalate cheyechhe;
> >ekhon egg-head; aapni ei shobdo tar modhye aapotti jonok kichhu dekhlen
> >kothai.

Aapni onek kichhu bollen, kintu jegulo niye aapnar boDo soDo aapotti
chhilo, segulo niye kichhu bollen na!!

aami eta uddeshyo mulok bolbo na, kintu ektu far fetched hoe
> >jachchhe naki?
>
> Apnar conclusions gulo besh far-fetched, eta shwikaar kortei hoy.

:!)

>
> [...]
>
>
> Amar proti ei pokkhopatitto kano, dadu? Er chaite dher kom oporadh-e lok-ke
> `chatukaar' baniye diechhilen.

Taear karon aapni okalot ra chaatukaar der theke sanghatik--

>
> >> Right, kintu ami jeta bollam sheta-ke contradict korte parlen na kintu.

> >Aapni aamake ektu-o ni: shash felar somoy dichchhen na. Aapni son-of-gun
> >ke, egg head ke ebong South Cal. Yuppi ke object korechhen je somosto
> >karone ta holo:
> >
> >1. s-o-g: Chaucer used the F-word! (I didn't understand what it has to
> >do with s-o-g)
> >
> >2. nobody used those words before (in the scb)!
> >
> >Let's come back to it when "you" elaborate they are clearly
> >objectionable.
>
> O.K., back to square one. I have not called anything objectionable, you did.
> I was hoping you would apply the standards, that you apply to others, to
> yourself also. Chaucer followed Hooker and Clapton. I can't make this more
> clear.

Now, I've seen the light ( the girl with the lamp for the blind
Minotaur)! You didn't find any thing objectionable (not sog, not egg
head, etc.?) Good. Then I'm confused, why you pulled them up? As
reference? Then what the discussion is all about? Is it, why I find
someone's post objectionable?

Kindly let me know. That seems to me the crux of everything.

>
> [...]

>
> >> He does???? Where? Or do you infer that from his `bose-babu-r hoye...'
> >> stuff? But at that point of time, only you, in your infinite wisdom,
> >> know who Bose-babu actually is, `we' don't. Remember?
> >> And, suppose, he did talk on behalf of Arnab. Why does that make him
> >> a `chatukaar'?
> >

> >I still believe, Arnab can post him self; no body has to talk on behalf
> >of him.
>
> Who did? And why should you object?

I didn't say I'd object. But I'd feel it will be very unfair; no body
here to talk on behalf of me! Can't you see? Isn't it gonna be one
sided?

There was one Dadu bhokto- people whown her (or him) guns and threatened
:-(

>
> >>
> >> `Serious of' what?
> >
> >that I've been dishonest in my posts? Except mixing the names (and
> >surnames)?
>
> Isn't that bad enough?

So, you consider mixing up names is some thing dishonest, even if I've
admitted that? I admit that's bad though!

>
> >> Ki kholsha korbo? Kano apnake proshno korechhi?
> >

> >I'm getting confident that at last some body understands me (even on the
> >other side of the pond) :!)
>
> Apnar lekha poDe proshno jaglo, kore phellam. Is that good enough a reason?

I just getting confident that, some body understood me right that, it
was a question. It was so soothing---

> Apnar conspiracy theory-ta oboshyo supported holona.

Aami conspiracy theory khaDa korechhi ki kothao? I just dreamed the lamp
for the blind minotaur -----

>
> [...}

(perhaps, this deleted part is solved--)

> >>
> >>
> >> p.s. Oi `eroticism and pornography'-r byaparta kano likhechhilen,
> >> bollen na to?
> >

> >Op. The diferrence is, what exists between the word s-o-g, and what you
> >thought it to be. One is just showing the cleavage, the other is just
> >throwing off the bra-
>
> Do you act dumb or do you really have problems comprehending simple stuff?
> I did not ask you to explain to me the difference.

Well, I thought you demanded me to explain the difference. If you know
the difference, probably, then you know where to draw the line :)

......... I am not interested in
> knowing where you draw the line. I was simply asking you _why_ you wrote that
> `eroticism and pornography' line? Did it have any relevance there?

Now, the question of your's has two parts; One is, you ask my opinion,
where I draw the line. The other, what is the relevance of it in this
context.

Allow me to answer the second first. The context is, just chidding or
making jokes (without calling names) is to me similar to erotic; I do
so; a lot of other do also so. What I don't do, and despise, when other
doing, is calling names; I'd use the word s-o-g to tickle some senses in
your brain; but I'd never use s-o- you thought what.

The second question. Do you still want to have the answer?

Kindly let me know. Otherwise we'll go some where ------

Dadu.

[Soumitra Bose]

Charu Majumdarer proshonge oi kothata beshii kostokolpito , khubii
monogoto , tobe amio besh koeyekbochor dhorei erokom ekta kostokolpito
ashadre totte bishwas korchi (eta amar sompoorna empirical data theke
tana conclusion bolte paro - beshhii kostokolpito) je NAxalbari
poroborti juba bidroho kintu besh khaniktai ghoti juba somajer
modhyekar decadent dombondho oboshta theke beriye ashbar jonno ghoti
juva bidrohi der onekta sujog kore diyeche. ontoto juva bidroher
kendro gulo bichar korle ta bojha jai , sei orthe bangaal onchole MAku
der probhabii beshi chilo. Ar bhalo kotha Charu Mojumdar nije kat
bangal chilen kintu..