Attack on Rajiv Gandhi during Guard of Honour parade in SL
sund...@me.uta.edu
Just after the accord was signed between SL, India and SL Tamils
Rajiv Gandhi visited Colombo and was given a guard of houour.
A SL soldier hit RG with the butt of his rifle.
The incident shows how much RG and India were hated by Sinhalese
I thought this if sinhalese hated the accord and India so much
it must have some grand concessions for Tamils. I was really
shocked and agonised when LTTE later repudiated the accord and
attacked IPKF. I am sure hundreds like me felt betrayed when
LTTE attacked IPKF.
India should not have encouraged the extremists earlier and
should not have interfered in the affairs of SL. From that point
of view the accord and IPKF were bad ideas. But I still feel
LTTE should have expressed very clearly that they did not like
the accord and should not have signed it. When IPKF was formed
and dispatched its was mainly seen as a buffer against SL army.
I consider LTTE attacking IPKF an act of high treason and betrayal.
Some SL Tamils are explaining the situation factually. It is a request
to them. Please let me see the other side of the story. I want
to learn the SL perspective on the issue of the accord and IPKF.
What were the terms of the accord?
What were the 'bad' aspects of it from SL Tamil perspective?
What were the 'bad' aspects of it from Sinhalese perspective?
Why did LTTE sign it and then repudiate it later?
Ravi Sundaram
UTA
Aero
_________________________________________________________________
PS: I have temporarily suspended my kill file. If this degenerates into
a flame war I'll restore it and stay away from this issue on the
net forever.
R.M.Viknarasah
>
> Just after the accord was signed between SL, India and SL Tamils
> Rajiv Gandhi visited Colombo and was given a guard of houour.
> A SL soldier hit RG with the butt of his rifle.
>
> The incident shows how much RG and India were hated by Sinhalese
> I thought this if sinhalese hated the accord and India so much
> it must have some grand concessions for Tamils. I was really
> shocked and agonised when LTTE later repudiated the accord and
> attacked IPKF. I am sure hundreds like me felt betrayed when
> LTTE attacked IPKF.
>
> India should not have encouraged the extremists earlier and
> should not have interfered in the affairs of SL. From that point
> of view the accord and IPKF were bad ideas. But I still feel
> LTTE should have expressed very clearly that they did not like
> the accord and should not have signed it. When IPKF was formed
> and dispatched its was mainly seen as a buffer against SL army.
>
> I consider LTTE attacking IPKF an act of high treason and betrayal.
>
> UTA
> Aero
I am seriously suffering from "lack of time". So here is some quick
tit bits. The details will be given after june 7th ...my last exam ... hmm
The following is take from the book ..
"India's Sri Lanka Fiasco
peace keepers at war"
by Rajesh Kadian
published by : Vision Books
*New Delhi * Bombay
This seems to be a very informative book. But for now I just give a
flavour of the fundemental problems.
Note, the following is quoted from the book. SO
all flames -> Rajesh Kadian
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"An exchange of letters between the Indian Prime Minister and Sri
Lankan President contained significant concessions to India: the island
republic pledged not to allow the deep-water port of Trincomalee to be used by
other foreign powers; to reach an understanding with India about the
employment and relevence of foreign military and intelligence personnel in Sri
Lanka; and to allow fro review of the agreements of foreign broadcasting
organisation there.
Amazingly, while the accord repeatedly emphsized the
territorial integrity of Sri Lanka it did not, in return guarantee the
important rights sought by the Tamils .ie. meaningful devolution bordering an
autonomy for minority community and protection from the Sinhala military might"
--------page 160
"... LTTE leader V Prabaharan publicly denounces the Accord on 4th August 1987
before a huge gathering in Jaffna. Surprisingly, Indian officials from 1987
upto 1990 refused to take his denuciation seriously .."
page next to 16, under a photograph.
For now, I think these should give a fair idea of
the author's view on reality. If I get good response, I will continue
after jue 7th.
raj
Lavanya-Mohan
> Just after the accord was signed between SL, India and SL Tamils
> Rajiv Gandhi visited Colombo and was given a guard of houour.
> A SL soldier hit RG with the butt of his rifle.
The accord was signed between India and SL. Tamils were not part of it. Tamils
were forced to take it.
> The incident shows how much RG and India were hated by Sinhalese
> I thought this if sinhalese hated the accord and India so much
> it must have some grand concessions for Tamils. I was really
> shocked and agonised when LTTE later repudiated the accord and
> attacked IPKF. I am sure hundreds like me felt betrayed when
> LTTE attacked IPKF.
LTTE didn't attack IPKF. It was IPKF which started attacking LTTE. Maybe IPKF
was "forced" to attack LTTE (but some inside stories say that IPKF was sent
with a clear intention of distroying LTTE, from the very beginning).
While IPKF was responsible to keep peace in the North and East of SL, SL navy
captured 13 LTTE men (in the North of SL) and the Colombo govt was insisting
that these 13 men must be taken to Colombo for further investigations, against
the accord. India was resisting, but later gave up. With IPKF failing in its
responsibilities, the prisoners finally suicided. The troubles began after
this incident. Also it was said, that while IPKF disarmed the tigers, they
didn't do so with the other rival groups...
In a recent report on the death of the then National Security Misnister Lalith
Athulath Mudali, the reporter said that Lalith agreed to him that he inten-
tionally insisted on taking the LTTE men to Colombo, knowing of the outcomes,
to turn India against the Tamils (and their course). So, even if IPKF was sent
with pure intentions to help, India fell in the trap of the Colombo govt.
> India should not have encouraged the extremists earlier and
> should not have interfered in the affairs of SL. From that point
> of view the accord and IPKF were bad ideas. But I still feel
> LTTE should have expressed very clearly that they did not like
> the accord and should not have signed it. When IPKF was formed
> and dispatched its was mainly seen as a buffer against SL army.
> I consider LTTE attacking IPKF an act of high treason and betrayal.
LTTE didn't accept the accord from the beginning. Prabhakaran was kept in New
Delhi under house arrest and forced to accept the accord, with some secret
personal promises from Ragiv Gandhi.
> Some SL Tamils are explaining the situation factually. It is a request
> to them. Please let me see the other side of the story. I want
> to learn the SL perspective on the issue of the accord and IPKF.
> What were the terms of the accord?
> What were the 'bad' aspects of it from SL Tamil perspective?
> What were the 'bad' aspects of it from Sinhalese perspective?
> Why did LTTE sign it and then repudiate it later?
I hope somebody would give you a sensible reply to these questions. I don't
have the time for it.
> Ravi Sundaram
> UTA
> Aero
_________________________________________________________________
> PS: I have temporarily suspended my kill file. If this degenerates into
> a flame war I'll restore it and stay away from this issue on the
> net forever.
I just wanted to clear some very basic misconceptions you seem to have. I have
no intentions to continue on this thread any more.....
- Mohan
--
= S. Lavanya-Mohan E-mail: mo...@tele.nokia.fi =
= Nokia Telecommunications Telephone: +358-0-511 5671 =
= Finland Telefax: +358-0-511 5615 =
=====================================================================
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
It was the other way around. People who accuse me of one-liners should
be more careful in doing the same.
-Suresh
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
They didn't have a choice. Prabakaran was air-lifted to Delhi and was
kept under house arrest. He had to sign the accord. LTTE was never
consulted when the accord was drawn up between GOI and SL
government(Jeyawardane). So, it was basically an agreement between two
heads of states that was forced upon Eelam Tamils. We had to digest it.
Prabakaran explained the whole deal to over 200,000 Tamils in the
now-famoud Suthumalai address after returning from Delhi. GOI wanted to
sideline LTTE's power and have groups that can swayed by GOI be placed
in power. Some of these groups like EPDP were created and nurtured by
RAW. They had no bearing on us. All along Dehli harbored this fear that
if LTTE assumes power in an independent Eelam, it will ignite Tamil
nationalism in Tamil Nadu. It still has the same fear. Whether this fear
is unfouned or not is a different matter to dissect for other netters.
Knowing our history, I can only laugh at such a notion. Add to all this
the poor intelligence RAW had on LTTE's strength and capacity to carry
on its own. A crucial mistake.
-Suresh
Meenan Vishnu
> Rajiv Gandhi visited Colombo and was given a guard of houour.
> A SL soldier hit RG with the butt of his rifle.
>
> The incident shows how much RG and India were hated by Sinhalese
> I thought this if sinhalese hated the accord and India so much
> it must have some grand concessions for Tamils. I was really
There is a logical flaw in your conclusion. To understand the situation
we must go back in history. The Sinhala-Buddhist Chauvanistic writings
started by Dharmapala did not recognoze Tamils and other minorities of
Sri lanka as legitimate citizens of Sri Lanka. There ideal solution
to the ethnic problem was to send all the minorities to India.
However, the Tamils have been living in Sri lanka over 2000 years.
(Aside: The above statement may be a trivial truth to many of us, but during my
campaign for votes for the formation of SCT, I was surprised to find many
Indian graduate students especially from Banglore city had the view that
ALL the Tamils in SL was taken there by the British during the last and
present century and that the Tamils have a bad habit of asking for separate
state whereever they go including Banglore (this BTW was the time when
Tamils in Bangalore was attacked my Kannada chauvanists). The other Sri
lankan who went with me told me it is useless to explain and that we should
go somewhere else. However, I spent sometimes and explained to this fellow
(a former RSS member) and I later discoverd that contrry to his
promise he voted NO for the formation of SCT!)
> shocked and agonised when LTTE later repudiated the accord and
> attacked IPKF. I am sure hundreds like me felt betrayed when
> LTTE attacked IPKF.
I have been following the Indo-Sri lankan accord and its development
quite closely and I have a collection of vedio cassettes containing
the documentary by BBC and other major news agencies on this. THE ACCORD
WAS NEVER (I REPAT NEVER) SIGNED BY THE LTTE. Even Suresh got this wrong.
Prabhakaran was taken to New Delhi and was put in a house arrest. He was given
a take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum and he promptly REFUSED TO SIGN IT.
that is, LTTE NEVER SIGNED THE JULY '83 ACCORD.
>
> India should not have encouraged the extremists earlier and
> should not have interfered in the affairs of SL. From that point
> of view the accord and IPKF were bad ideas. But I still feel
> LTTE should have expressed very clearly that they did not like
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the accord and should not have signed it. When IPKF was formed
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS THEY DID ... ABUNDANTLY CLEARLY.
> and dispatched its was mainly seen as a buffer against SL army.
>
The opinions of Indian insiders like Mohanlal differ. In his book MGR
the man and the myth, he clearly states that the primary objective
of the IPKF was to destroy LTTE.
> I consider LTTE attacking IPKF an act of high treason and betrayal.
It is the otherway. Even before the war started, the IPKF blew LTTE's
printing press; forced them to handover weapons while supplying new weapons
to EPRLF and TELO. A newly trained group TELO arrived from India shortly
after the arrival of the IPKF.
However, the major betrayal was when India decided to let the SL army
take 13 LTTE leaders to Colombo. Remember, according to the Accord
ALL the militants were given an amnesty and were not to be arrested.
Rajiv asked Prabha that he will give his fighter planes to transport
these 13 LTTE leaders unless PRABHA SIGNED THE ACCORD. Prabha refused
and sent cynide capsules to the 13 prisoners who were held in Palaly
and they all committed suicide. The Indian army commander resigned and
a new commander was brought in. This act and the death of Thileepan
made a turning point in the minds of the Tamil people and was the major
reason for failure of the Accord and IPKF.
> Some SL Tamils are explaining the situation factually. It is a request
> to them. Please let me see the other side of the story. I want
> to learn the SL perspective on the issue of the accord and IPKF.
>
> What were the terms of the accord?
The Accord was a farce. It said that the north and the east province
will be merged as had been demanded by the Tamil groups in Thimpu
talks. However, the merger can be reversed by a referendum. And
soon after the signing of the Accord, Sri lankan president J. R.
Jeyawardine (a cunning and experienced politician) settled scores
of Sinhala people in the east. He promised to the Sinhala people
(openly in an address) that he WOULD NEVER ALLOW the actual merger of
the north and east.
> What were the 'bad' aspects of it from SL Tamil perspective?
The bad aspect is many. one is mentioned above. The others are,
it was not implemented. Other Tamil groups were carrying arms.
These groups started slaughtering caste hindus. My roommates'
fathers' brother was taken from home by members of EPRLF and was
asked to kneel down and sing a thEvaaram. This he did and even before
he finished his hymn he was shot from behind. It is these type of
people the IPKF was nurturing.
> What were the 'bad' aspects of it from Sinhalese perspective?
The Sinhalese generally did not like the idea of Indian intervention.
> Why did LTTE sign it and then repudiate it later?
AGAIN THE LTTE TO THIS DAY, NEVER SIGNED THE ACCORD. THIS IS THE TRUTH.
PRABHAKARAN SAID THAT HE WILL RATHER FIGHT THE INDIANS THAN SIGN THIS
ACCORD WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE POLITICAL ASPIRATION OF THE SL TAMILS.
AND FIGHTING THE IPKF, HE DID.
> Ravi Sundaram
> UTA
> Aero
>_________________________________________________________________
>
>PS: I have temporarily suspended my kill file. If this degenerates into
> a flame war I'll restore it and stay away from this issue on the
> net forever.
I will not be able to answer further questions on this due to my busy schedule.
Anyone interested in understanding the Indo-Sri lankan Accord should read the
following books:
Citation 1 of 2
AUTHOR, ETC.: Dubey, Ravi Kant.
TITLE: Indo-Sri Lankan relations : with special reference to the Tamil problem
/ Ravi Kant Dubey. -
SUBJECT(S): Tamils (Indic people) - Sri Lanka - Politics and government. *
India - Foreign relations - Sri Lanka. * Sri Lanka - Foreign
relations - India. * Sri Lanka - Ethnic relations. * India - Foreign
relations - 1947-1984. * India - Foreign relations - 1984-
IMPRINT: New Delhi : Deep & Deep Publications, c1989.
NOTES: Bibliography: p. [211]-214. * Includes index.
ISBN: 8171001378
LANGUAGE: eng
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: xii, 216 p. : 1 map ; 22 cm.
Citation 2 of 2
TITLE: The Tamil national question and the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord / edited by N.
Seevaratnam. -
SUBJECT(S): Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord - Congresses. * Tamil (Indic people) -
Sri Lanka - Politics and government - Congresses. * Sri Lanka -
Politics and government - 1978- - Congresses. * India - Foreign
relations - Sri Lanka - Congresses. * Sri Lanka - Foreign relations -
India - Congresses.
IMPRINT: Delhi : Konark Publishers, c1989.
NOTES: Papers and proceedings of the First International Tamil Conference,
1988, held in London, organized by the World Federation of Tamils.
ISBN: 8122001386
LANGUAGE: eng
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: ix, 246 p. ; 23 cm.
ASSOCIATED NAME(S): Seevaratnam, N. * World Federation of Tamils. *>
Regards,
Meenan Vishnu
N Paramesh,Senior Lecturer
Assuming that all this is true, I could not still
find any reason why LTTE thought that assasinating Rajiv Gandhi
would win them freedom in their country?
Many of LTTE actions often go to convince a neutral observer
that LTTE is acting to take revenge upon its enemies
rather than achieve its goal
of independent Tamil Land.
N Pa.
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>In article <SUNDARAM.93...@k.me.uta.edu> sund...@me.uta.edu writes:
> > Just after the accord was signed between SL, India and SL Tamils
> > Rajiv Gandhi visited Colombo and was given a guard of houour.
> > A SL soldier hit RG with the butt of his rifle.
>The accord was signed between India and SL. Tamils were not part of it. Tamils
>were forced to take it.
> > The incident shows how much RG and India were hated by Sinhalese
> > I thought this if sinhalese hated the accord and India so much
> > it must have some grand concessions for Tamils. I was really
> > shocked and agonised when LTTE later repudiated the accord and
> > attacked IPKF. I am sure hundreds like me felt betrayed when
> > LTTE attacked IPKF.
>LTTE didn't attack IPKF. It was IPKF which started attacking LTTE. Maybe IPKF
>was "forced" to attack LTTE (but some inside stories say that IPKF was sent
>with a clear intention of distroying LTTE, from the very beginning).
anpu valaignarkaLE!
oru vari ezhuthuvathE emakku manam illai.
aayinum india arasaangkaththin kayamayai
en enRu solvathu?
The accord did not guarantee
anything for the thamizhs. The SL govt wants
thamizhs to be part of SL. First remove
all the racist ideologies in Buddhist text books
that justify killing of thamizhs. When a govt.
has all its army with people of one community
are the thamizhs fools to surrender everything?
>While IPKF was responsible to keep peace in the North and East of SL, SL navy
>captured 13 LTTE men (in the North of SL) and the Colombo govt was insisting
>that these 13 men must be taken to Colombo for further investigations, against
>the accord. India was resisting, but later gave up. With IPKF failing in its
>responsibilities, the prisoners finally suicided. The troubles began after
>this incident. Also it was said, that while IPKF disarmed the tigers, they
>didn't do so with the other rival groups...
Indian govt and RAW tried to bring perumaaL
in the forefront and use him as their kaippommai. While
the Indian govt. cannot guarantee self rule to its
states and dismisses duly elected govt.s where on
earth can they have the credibility to mediate.
Indian Army was killing women and children, raping
and looting. Meanwhile prEmathaasaa`s army was finishing
families of political oppoenets in the south.
Only when VP Singh came he asked the troops back.
The problem of the rulers at the top who
do not have human values are like the coconut
tree. They fall badly when there is a storm/hurricane.
"thennai iLang keeRinilE thaalaattum
thenRalathu
thennai thanai saaiththu vidum puyalaaka
varum pozhuthu"
What we need is that the rulers are saanRoors-wise
loving men like the grass that does not fall down
under a hurricane.
"aathank karai mEttinilE aadiniRkum
naanal athu
kaRRadiththaal saaivathillai; kanintha manam
veezhvathillai!"
>LTTE didn't accept the accord from the beginning. Prabhakaran was kept in New
>Delhi under house arrest and forced to accept the accord, with some secret
>personal promises from Ragiv Gandhi.
LTTE did not accept the accord, first place.
. the kayavarhaL[ all advisors, dikshit, raajeev,
vengkatraaman{for sending the army} and Co]
thrust the accord on the thamizhs, destroyed the voice
of thamizhs by bombing the thamizh press in the North.
This is an act of devious jackallic politics.
the same kayavarhaL later lead by jeya
even sent the refugees back.
> > PS: I have temporarily suspended my kill file. If this degenerates into
> > a flame war I'll restore it and stay away from this issue on the
> > net forever.
No body cares about your kill file. We are here to put
our views plain and straight.
anban
Kathiravan
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
thiru paramEswaran avarhaLE!
LTTE did not kill raajeev. All the case
against the prime suspects were dropped. On the otherhand
raajeev has killed 1000's of LTTE men/ 8000's
of thamizh civilians by thrusting the accord
on them. They also killed 2000 indian soldiers.
Why? They swindled all the money meant for weapons.
They gave poor equipment for Indian army.
they made billions in bofors deal although
the Indian Army had preferred better weapons.
Please know that even in kashmir Indian
army has to use the guns recoverd from the militants.
Our army is using 0.202 against AK-47.
>N Pa.
ki. kathiravan.
Meenan Vishnu
>From article <0g0GcVO00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, by Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh <thund...@CMU.EDU>:
>>> Why did LTTE sign it and then repudiate it later?
>>
>> They didn't have a choice. Prabakaran was air-lifted to Delhi and was
>> kept under house arrest. He had to sign the accord. LTTE was never
Actually Ranjit Suresh is wrong here. Prabhakaran NEVER signed the
Accord!!
>> consulted when the accord was drawn up between GOI and SL
>> government(Jeyawardane). So, it was basically an agreement between two
>> heads of states that was forced upon Eelam Tamils. We had to digest it.
>> Prabakaran explained the whole deal to over 200,000 Tamils in the
>> now-famoud Suthumalai address after returning from Delhi. GOI wanted to
>> sideline LTTE's power and have groups that can swayed by GOI be placed
>> in power. Some of these groups like EPDP were created and nurtured by
>> RAW. They had no bearing on us. All along Dehli harbored this fear that
>> if LTTE assumes power in an independent Eelam, it will ignite Tamil
>> nationalism in Tamil Nadu. It still has the same fear. Whether this fear
>> is unfouned or not is a different matter to dissect for other netters.
>> Knowing our history, I can only laugh at such a notion. Add to all this
>> the poor intelligence RAW had on LTTE's strength and capacity to carry
>> on its own. A crucial mistake.
>>
>> -Suresh
>
>Assuming that all this is true, I could not still
>find any reason why LTTE thought that assasinating Rajiv Gandhi
>would win them freedom in their country?
First of all, it is not well established that LTTE infact carried out
the assasination. The suspicion is mainly based on the modus operandi
of the assasination (ie suicide attack == black tigers).
Assuming that LTTE indeed carried out the assisination (Note that this
is a big assumption) here are some of my (purely mine, not LTTE's)
explanation for such an act:
Rajiv had a big nose-cut by the LTTE and may have sought to revenge
LTTE if he comes to power (which he would have). So the LTTE may
have wanted to eliminate him before that happens. Now this is only
my wild imagination. Whoever actually committed the assasination,
there now seems local Congress I leaders were aware of this plan.
Let us wait for the court case which currently going on to determine
the culprit. The TN government has banned anyone from reporting the
court case contrary to the norms of a democratic country!
>Many of LTTE actions often go to convince a neutral observer
>that LTTE is acting to take revenge upon its enemies
>rather than achieve its goal
>of independent Tamil Land.
This may be true. But the LTTE has different explanation. When they
attacked TELO, they said that TELO was specially armed by the Indian
governemnt to destroy LTTE and that they spoilt that plan.
Many Tamils were not convinced at this explanation and thought that LTTE
was doing this to because of fascism and many Tamil all over the world
turned against the LTTE (esp. in UK). However, the actions of IPKF
convinced them that indeed India was out to destroy LTTE using
other Tamil groups and failing that it involved directly!!
There are many criticism of the LTTE. However I am of the opinion that
it is the best we have had. Our previous leaders betrayed us and so far
LTTE seems committed to its goal and continually laying down their lives
for the cause.
>N Pa.
Regards,
Meenan Vishnu
Bala SWAMINATHAN
First of all, LTTE did NOT sign the accord. Please read other
articles in this subject (esp. Meenan's).
>
>Assuming that all this is true, I could not still
>find any reason why LTTE thought that assasinating Rajiv Gandhi
>would win them freedom in their country?
>Many of LTTE actions often go to convince a neutral observer
>that LTTE is acting to take revenge upon its enemies
>rather than achieve its goal
>of independent Tamil Land.
>
>N Pa.
Please do not propagate your hypotheses/views as truth. All
cases against LTTE were dropped, for various reasons. The
only persons charged, finally, were an Indian citizen, Nalini, and
her husband.
S_Bala
--
____________________________________________________________________
| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
|__________________________________________________________________|
swaminathan,kashi r
>Please do not propagate your hypotheses/views as truth. All
>cases against LTTE were dropped, for various reasons. The
>only persons charged, finally, were an Indian citizen, Nalini, and
>her husband.
>
>S_Bala
>--
>____________________________________________________________________
>| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
>| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
>|__________________________________________________________________|
and some dead people like thanu etc.
Lavanya-Mohan
> AGAIN THE LTTE TO THIS DAY, NEVER SIGNED THE ACCORD. THIS IS THE TRUTH.
> PRABHAKARAN SAID THAT HE WILL RATHER FIGHT THE INDIANS THAN SIGN THIS
> ACCORD WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE POLITICAL ASPIRATION OF THE SL TAMILS.
> AND FIGHTING THE IPKF, HE DID.
As far as I know, Prabhakaran, in his speach at Suthmalai after he was "allow-
ed to return to" Jaffna (after the accord was signed), said very clearly that
he didn't believe that the accord would satisfy the Tamils' aspirations in the
long run. He said that LTTE was ready to "give it a try" because of India. If
I remember right, he even said that he placed the future of the SL Tamils in
the hands of India (please correct if I am wrong).
But, later, due to the unconvincing behavior of India and IPKF (encouraging
rival groups while disarming LTTE, allowing the SL govt to take 13 LTTE cadres
to Colombo which resulted in their suicide, having the eyes closed when Sinhala
colonization was proceeding at a high speed in the East even after the accord,
etc.), the future events took an unfortunate turn.
I am not sure if the LTTE was ever asked to sign the accord! India asked LTTE
to only "accept" the accord (keeping Prabhakaran under house arrest). I think
that the accord was meant to be signed only by both of the head of states.
Even the rival Tamil groups didn't sign the accord, though they accepted it.
India signed the accord "on behalf of the SL Tamils", but it was the enclosure
giving concessions to India (such as about the use of Trincomalee port etc.)
about which the Indian govt was most concerned.
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>In article <C7K7F...@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> mvi...@bcr5.uwaterloo.ca (Meenan Vishnu) writes:
>Even the rival Tamil groups didn't sign the accord, though they accepted it.
>India signed the accord "on behalf of the SL Tamils", but it was the enclosure
>giving concessions to India (such as about the use of Trincomalee port etc.)
>about which the Indian govt was most concerned.
>- Mohan
anparE!
All said and done the betrayal of thamizhs
by the indian politics and bureacracy is
open and naked. I have tried to strike
at this injustice and betrayal for
all these days. Thanks to all the
anpars, sundar, raj, sankarapaaNdi, meenan.
There is no compassion out
there. By sending army with a plan of finishing
off the life-line of thamizh liberation the
people at the helm of affairs in the center
[New Delhi] have shown to be jackals.
What has been done to alleviate the
sufferings atleast now?
Nothing. Infact the kayavars are again
trying their best to see that there is
no solution to the problem.
To the president sir vangkatraaman.
You are a thamizh. Don't you know that?
You are also a human.
How did you order the army into SL.
Could you not implement the supreme
court order on Cauvery dispute?
Do you know that
"karuNai pongkum uLLam
kadavuL vaazhum illam"
You and the entire clan can be
descibed by:
"karuNai maRanthE vaazhkinRaar
kadavuLaith thEdi alaikinRaar"
All these leaders visit temples
and get blessings of religious gurus.
But they have to know that compassion
and standing by justice is only thing
that will take them to gOd. Going
to thirupathi or falling on the feet
of sankaraachaaryya are all secondary.
But there is always hope.
"kaalam oru naaL maaRum
nam kavalaikaL yaavum theerum"
anban
Kathiravan
Balaji Kannan
swa...@troy.cc.bellcore.com (swaminathan,kashi r) writes:
SKR hit the nail..
When the modus operandi of a terrorist organization is to wipe out
*any* and ALL evidence of their involvement in crimes, [even if it
is at the cost of a dozen or say hundred of "their" own lives] it
is gonna be next to impossible to *prove* in a court of law beyond
all reasonable doubt that "so and so" committed the crime.
To that extent, I think LTTE is the *most committed* and the smartest
terrorist organization the world has ever seen. As an Indian, I have
no choice but to brand it *terrorist*.
As for the SL accord, I was wondering how IG would have handled the
problem were she alive at the time. Rajiv - being a political novice
(with little or no political instincts to help him) - was clearly
outfoxed by Jayawardane in reaching the accord. The real winner IMO
was the SL Govt which brought in the IPKF to save their own butts.
[In more than one source I 've read that but for the IPKF, LTTE would
have wiped out the SL army] As for Rajiv's reasons for rushing thru'
the accord, his and the TN govt's rear was on "fire" and had to act
quickly to show that they were doing something about it. Not to
mention, India's interst in seeing that no foreign power meddled with
the situation; that wud have been detrimental to India's interests in
the region. All goes to show that when realpolitik rather than genuine
interest in resolving the problem dictates political strategy/moves,
it will blow up on your face soon [in Rajiv's case, quite literally it
*did*] Almost all of Rajiv's accords "bombed". He signed accords left
& right in his first two years than any Prime Minister ever did in his/
her entire career.
Window-dressing can only cure the symptoms temporarily [that is itself
doubtful]; to cure the malaise genuine concern and grasp of the problem
is needed.... Rajiv was NEVER equal to the task. Even his mother, with
all those years of political experience miscalculated on more than one
occasion [which cost her *her* life too].
cheers,
bk
Meenan Vishnu
>In article <C7K7F...@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> mvi...@bcr5.uwaterloo.ca (Meenan Vishnu) writes:
>
> > AGAIN THE LTTE TO THIS DAY, NEVER SIGNED THE ACCORD. THIS IS THE TRUTH.
> > PRABHAKARAN SAID THAT HE WILL RATHER FIGHT THE INDIANS THAN SIGN THIS
> > ACCORD WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE POLITICAL ASPIRATION OF THE SL TAMILS.
> > AND FIGHTING THE IPKF, HE DID.
>
>
>As far as I know, Prabhakaran, in his speach at Suthmalai after he was "allow-
>ed to return to" Jaffna (after the accord was signed), said very clearly that
After the accord was signed by RAJIV AND JR. THE TAMILS HAD NO PART IN IT.
>he didn't believe that the accord would satisfy the Tamils' aspirations in the
>long run. He said that LTTE was ready to "give it a try" because of India. If
>I remember right, he even said that he placed the future of the SL Tamils in
>the hands of India (please correct if I am wrong).
Actually it is a lot more complicated than that. Prabhakaran flatly refused
to "accept" the Accord and said it was a "stab in the back" to the Tamil
people. Rajiv asked him to see the progress for 6 months and then accept
it. Of course within those 6 months the Accord showed every sign of being
an unfair one.
Prabhakaran said in his famous Suthumalai amman kOyil speech that his group
may have given up armed struggle but it will continue its struggle in
other forms. Thileepan then started his fast unto death to stop the large
scale Sinhala settlements in the eastern provinces and his demand was ignored
and he was allowed to die.
In short, Prabhakaran NEVER SIGNED THE ACCORD, NEVER ACCEPTED THE ACCORD
but said he will CORPORATE AND SUBMIT HIS GROUP TO THE iNDIAN DEMANDS and
surrender his weapons. He surrendered about 60% of his weapons (the
surrendered weapons filled the entire runway) and waited till other
groups did the same.
>But, later, due to the unconvincing behavior of India and IPKF (encouraging
>rival groups while disarming LTTE, allowing the SL govt to take 13 LTTE cadres
>to Colombo which resulted in their suicide, having the eyes closed when Sinhala
>colonization was proceeding at a high speed in the East even after the accord,
>etc.), the future events took an unfortunate turn.
>
>- Mohan
>
Meenan Vishnu
swaminathan,kashi r
>
>swa...@troy.cc.bellcore.com (swaminathan,kashi r) writes:
>
>>In article <1993May25....@wuecl.wustl.edu> b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWAM
>
>INATHAN) writes:
>>>Please do not propagate your hypotheses/views as truth. All
>>>cases against LTTE were dropped, for various reasons. The
>>>only persons charged, finally, were an Indian citizen, Nalini, and
>>>her husband.
>>>
>>>S_Bala
>>>--
>>>____________________________________________________________________
>>>| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
>>>| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
>>>|__________________________________________________________________|
>
>
>>and some dead people like thanu etc.
>
> is gonna be next to impossible to *prove* in a court of law beyond
> all reasonable doubt that "so and so" committed the crime.
>
>bk
I think that the sad part is that LTTE has disowned poor
THANU as a (few) piece(s) of trash.
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>
>>In article <1993May25....@wuecl.wustl.edu> b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWAM
>
>INATHAN) writes:
>>>Please do not propagate your hypotheses/views as truth. All
>>>cases against LTTE were dropped, for various reasons. The
>>>only persons charged, finally, were an Indian citizen, Nalini, and
>>>her husband.
>>>
>>>S_Bala
>
>>and some dead people like thanu etc.
Indian law does not allow charges to be filed against `dead people.' So,
your rejoinder is legally wrong. This is why I did not bother to reply
to your article. Now that of all people, bk is replying I am obliged to.
> SKR hit the nail..
> When the modus operandi of a terrorist organization is to wipe out
> *any* and ALL evidence of their involvement in crimes, [even if it
> is at the cost of a dozen or say hundred of "their" own lives] it
> is gonna be next to impossible to *prove* in a court of law beyond
> all reasonable doubt that "so and so" committed the crime.
>
> To that extent, I think LTTE is the *most committed* and the smartest
> terrorist organization the world has ever seen. As an Indian, I have
> no choice but to brand it *terrorist*.
*YOU* have already decided that LTTE is a terrorist organization. So, you
think that LTTE must have staged the attack. Every body is entitled to
his/her own opinion. But please say that it is
*your opinion*. As an Indian don't you also belive in Indian judiciary
system? 'Innocent until proven guilty' is a better motto, than accusing
an organization simply on the basis of prejudice or that *you have no
choice*.
S. Sankarapandi
In article <930526151...@mib10.eng.ua.edu> bka...@mib10.eng.ua.edu (Bala
ji Kannan) writes:
>
> Window-dressing can only cure the symptoms temporarily [that is itself
> doubtful]; to cure the malaise genuine concern and grasp of the problem
> is needed....
Well Said !
nOinaadi nOimuthal naadi athu thaNikkum
vaainaadi vaippak koLal -TiruvaLLuvar
It applies not only to the government but also individuals like us in
understanding any problem. In stead of looking at any problem superficially,
it is always better to learn about the problem thoroughly before passing
judgements.
--
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>swa...@troy.cc.bellcore.com (swaminathan,kashi r) writes:
>>In article <1993May25....@wuecl.wustl.edu> b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWAM
>INATHAN) writes:
>>>Please do not propagate your hypotheses/views as truth. All
>>>cases against LTTE were dropped, for various reasons. The
>>>only persons charged, finally, were an Indian citizen, Nalini, and
>>>her husband.
>>>
>>>S_Bala
>>>--
>>>____________________________________________________________________
>>>| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
>>>| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
>>>|__________________________________________________________________|
>>and some dead people like thanu etc.
> When the modus operandi of a terrorist organization is to wipe out
> *any* and ALL evidence of their involvement in crimes, [even if it
> is at the cost of a dozen or say hundred of "their" own lives] it
> is gonna be next to impossible to *prove* in a court of law beyond
> all reasonable doubt that "so and so" committed the crime.
> To that extent, I think LTTE is the *most committed* and the smartest
> terrorist organization the world has ever seen. As an Indian, I have
> no choice but to brand it *terrorist*.
As a thamizh I have no choice other than
to support thamizh liberation in the midst of killing
of thamizhs that is justified by religious scriptures.
Thanks for your compliment about smart. But if LTTE
is terrorist who are the Indian Govt. and supporters
who brand LTTE as terrorist.
nEthaaji was a terrorist. bhagath singh
was a terrorist in congress books. But not
in the minds of everybody.
In MO RSS is the terrorist organisation
of the world that has no cause to fight for.
anban
Kathiravan
Balaji Kannan
b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWAMINATHAN) writes:
[...]
>Indian law does not allow charges to be filed against `dead people.' So,
I guess that is true of most countries because you cannot bring
the ghost to trial. Unless there is a country which believes
"Ghosts Exist" or is crazy enuff even otherwise.
>your rejoinder is legally wrong. This is why I did not bother to reply
>to your article. Now that of all people, bk is replying I am obliged to.
Methinks, you failed to grasp the sarcasm in SKR's remark ....
>> SKR hit the nail..
>> When the modus operandi of a terrorist organization is to wipe out
>> *any* and ALL evidence of their involvement in crimes, [even if it
>> is at the cost of a dozen or say hundred of "their" own lives] it
>> is gonna be next to impossible to *prove* in a court of law beyond
>> all reasonable doubt that "so and so" committed the crime.
If you *now* see SKR's remark in a sarcastic light, you will also
get what the above para means.
>> To that extent, I think LTTE is the *most committed* and the smartest
>> terrorist organization the world has ever seen. As an Indian, I have
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> no choice but to brand it *terrorist*.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>*YOU* have already decided that LTTE is a terrorist organization. So, you
Yes, I have NO DOUBT in my mind that it is a TERRORIST organization. I
have *no reason* to believe that it adheres to Gandhian principles or
anywhere close to even midway in that moral spectrum going by what I
have read about the modus operandi (of its freedom struggle) from
credible reports. As to what is credible and what is not, I trust my
own judgement and no more.
But, I agree that it is a matter of perspective as to who is a terrorist
and who is a martyr [society will never be able to answer these questions
to everyone's satisfaction] and each one has to decide that for himself.
It is quite normal for those *directly* "affected" and those "struggling"
to take a less harsher attitude towards violence as a means of achieving
their objectives. Then there are those that are sympathetic to the cause
of these people (for various reasons like common language, race, heritage
etc) to take an equally lenient position on violence and militancy as a
"means" of achieving the "end". *I* know when and where *I* have to draw
the line in according violence the sanctity and dignity that it otherwise
does not deserve and that I can identify myself with someone's cause for
freedom, human rights etc. will not come in the way of my denouncing
those involved in the bloody struggle if I feel like saying " Hey, this
is too much " of their violent ways. If you think that is prejudice then
so be it.
>think that LTTE must have staged the attack. Every body is entitled to
*Extreeeemely likely* True, motive alone does not a criminal make.
It is HIGH on my list of suspects. The only thing is that it is not
going to be easy proving it in the LTTE's case. [they bite into the
cyanide capsules faster than you or I can say "Shoot !"]
>his/her own opinion. But please say that it is
>*your opinion*.
I - personal pronoun (first person singular)
We - (plural)
Do I have to add any more than that ??
Unless otherwise stated (explicitly or implicitly thru my use of the
"collective pronoun" language) please take it that no one else is resp-
onsible for anything I mumble and neither do I intend it that way. [I
am *not* a spokesperson for other Indians. If I feel like talking on
behalf of someone else, I will say so explicitly]
>As an Indian don't you also belive in Indian judiciary
>system? 'Innocent until proven guilty' is a better motto, than accusing
Yup , I do believe. But let me ask you this. What do you think of
the Shiv Sena and Bal Thackeray ?? [In the light of their past
record of violence and the recent Bombay riots, are you going to
sit tight till the Indian govt. formally presses a charge against
the organization and its leader and *proves* that they are guilty.
I wudn't in this case either... Meaning, when I have sufficient
credible reporting to bank on I will start denouncing and will not
wait till someone is "technically" proved guilty . Afterall, I am
not hanging the person; I *certainly* will exercise caution in
blaming someone]
What do you think of Veerapan who has been evading the police dragnet
for a long time now ? I have only these words for him: Criminal thug.
Mind you, he has not been proved guilty in any court of law.
Would you *wait* till the Govt is able to prove in a court of law that
Phoolan Devi was a dacoit leader and that she was guilty of largescale
dacoity or when you think there has been reasonable information gathered
by the press [more than one source] that she indeed is a dacoit [and
say has even given an interview admitting so] would go ahead and
denounce her ??
Did you wait till it was proved in a court of law that it was the *BJP*
supporters who demolished the RJB structure [or like Virendra Verma
says it can be Congresswallahs no ?] before criticizing the BJP for its
stance on the issue and accsuing it of being fascist cos of the subse-
quent demoliton ?? Did you ?? I did not and will not wait.
Shall I take it from you that you will *not* in the future give your
opinions on any issue "accusing" an organization/person/persons....
unless it has been proved in a COURT OF LAW that so and so is guilty
of what you are accusing so and so ?????? Otherwise, I am gonna call
you prejudiced :-)
[Oh BTW, I have never in any of my posts explicitly said : LTTE is THE
organization that assasinated Rajiv Gandhi. Not yet. Check back if you
are interested. "As an Indian" was to stress Iam NOT a Srilankan Tamil.
If my butt was on constant fire, maybe (just maybe) I'd have taken a
far more charitable view towards violence. That is why I said, "As an
Indian, I have ....."]
>an organization simply on the basis of prejudice or that *you have no
>choice*.
>S_Bala
>--
>____________________________________________________________________
>| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
>| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
>|__________________________________________________________________|
cheers,
bk
Chandrasekaran Venkatapathy
>
> anban
> Kathiravan
I would like to add more to this thread. After 1983 riots
AIR radio regularly carried SriLankan/Eelam news in its
bulletins. That time, they referred any Tamil Eelam group
as 'PoRalligal' (fighters). After the accord, they
started them as terrorists.
In my opinion a terrorist organisation is one which carries
attacks for its personal/monetary gain. As far as LTTE goes, however
cruel, different they are, they do it only for Tamil Eelam.
Their way of winning freedom may be accepted by some of us.
Yet they are freedom fighters.
-Chandra Venkat
PS: Can PLOTE (I am not sure whether it is still active)
be termed as a terrorist group. Becoz they were acting
as merceneries in the unsuccessful maldives coup?
--
__________________________________________________________________
Home: Off:
1512 9th Avenue South, Apt# 1B Dept of Physiological Optics
Birmingham AL 35205 Room No. 512
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>
>They didn't have a choice. Prabakaran was air-lifted to Delhi and was
>kept under house arrest. He had to sign the accord. LTTE was never
>government(Jeyawardane). So, it was basically an agreement between two
>heads of states that was forced upon Eelam Tamils. We had to digest it.
>Prabakaran explained the whole deal to over 200,000 Tamils in the
>now-famoud Suthumalai address after returning from Delhi. GOI wanted to
>sideline LTTE's power and have groups that can swayed by GOI be placed
>in power. Some of these groups like EPDP were created and nurtured by
>RAW. They had no bearing on us. All along Dehli harbored this fear that
Are you telling me that LTTE never received any help from RAW ?
The reason that the LTTE is the strongest group is that MGR
decided for some reason that he was going to give TN govt. funds
and his own money (He had lots of it) to the LTTE. LTTE received
disproportionate % of funds and weapons during 83-87 period compared
to other groups. I remember 4 other groups - PLOT, EPRLF, TELO.
I forget the fourth one. Well it has been a long time.
Incidentally the reason TELO was wiped out was that TELO was
alleged to be supported by the DMK. MGR wanted no part of this.
That is the main reason that Indian Govt. did not do anything to
prevent the massacare of 200-300 TELO members and their leader
Sabaratinam. (sp?) If I remember, it occured in 85-86. (well before
July 87 accord) Kinda ironic, LTTE would kill their own people
especially when the Sri Lankan Army was having a field way killing
Tamils especially in the East.
Correct me, if I am wrong. LTTE was on the ropes in 1987 when
Sri Lankan Army took half of Jaffna penisula in a 3 week
offensive. If IPKF had not intervened, I am not sure that LTTE
would even exist. That and Rajiv Gandhi's problems (Bofors, HDW,
Zail Singh etc.) lead to IPKF intervention in Sri Lanka.
** Mr. Nobody **
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
>THANU as a (few) piece(s) of trash.
Yes....calm down(just telling myself)....peace..ignore this
hatred-message(and piercing the wound) There. WhooA! Engal thalai vithi!
M. Sundaramoorthy
>
>
>>> To that extent, I think LTTE is the *most committed* and the smartest
>>> terrorist organization the world has ever seen. As an Indian, I have
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> no choice but to brand it *terrorist*.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> have *no reason* to believe that it adheres to Gandhian principles or
> anywhere close to even midway in that moral spectrum going by what I
> have read about the modus operandi (of its freedom struggle) from
> credible reports. As to what is credible and what is not, I trust my
> own judgement and no more.
>
> But, I agree that it is a matter of perspective as to who is a terrorist
> and who is a martyr [society will never be able to answer these questions
> to everyone's satisfaction] and each one has to decide that for himself.
> It is quite normal for those *directly* "affected" and those "struggling"
> to take a less harsher attitude towards violence as a means of achieving
> their objectives. Then there are those that are sympathetic to the cause
> of these people (for various reasons like common language, race, heritage
> etc) to take an equally lenient position on violence and militancy as a
> "means" of achieving the "end". *I* know when and where *I* have to draw
> the line in according violence the sanctity and dignity that it otherwise
> does not deserve and that I can identify myself with someone's cause for
> freedom, human rights etc. will not come in the way of my denouncing
> those involved in the bloody struggle if I feel like saying " Hey, this
> is too much " of their violent ways. If you think that is prejudice then
> so be it.
>
I don't know at what stage you came to the conclusion that LTTE is
a TERRORIST organisation. From whatever you spoke so far on this issue
it seems to me that you think so after Rajiv's assasination allegedly
by LTTE.
As I mentioned in another post, they metamorphosised
from 'militants' => 'extremists' => 'terrorists' as far as
Indian state and media are concerned.
During the first phase, LTTE got material and moral support from
the Indian government.
Now my question is do you brand, *as an Indian*, INDIA AS A TERRORIST
STATE (applying similar logic of India wanting to brand Pakistan a
terrorist state for their support to Kashmiri militants)?.
As an extension, I am curious to know, if the government
doesn't adhere to Gandhian principles would you call it terrorist
government too?.
When and where do you draw the line?.
>
>
>cheers,
>bk
--
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
sun...@esv1.hsis.uci.edu
man...@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
> In article <kat.738457718@kira> k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
>>In <930526151...@mib10.eng.ua.edu> bka...@mib10.eng.ua.edu (Balaji Kannan) writes:
>>
>> was a terrorist in congress books. But not
>> in the minds of everybody.
>>
>These people didn't fight and kill members from other groups fighting for
the independence of our country. And they didn't believe in the massacre of
Muslims either. (Do you have access to any secret Congress books :-)
> attacks for its personal/monetary gain. As far as LTTE goes, however
> cruel, different they are, they do it only for Tamil Eelam.
> Their way of winning freedom may be accepted by some of us.
And I thought a terrorist organization was one that believed in
terrorizing people :-) ,by the way,this was a defination that could have
been used by Goebbels. Hitler could have also claimed that he didn't do
those gas chamber genocides for personal/monetary gain.(This analogy was
used just to counter your defination, not to equate the Nazis with anyone)
Rammanohar
T.S.Reddy
Nonsense. It was not a matter of military strength or lack of
intelligence. As a matter of fact, the IPKF was on it's way to smothering
the LTTE despite the heavy losses. It was the lack of political will and
direction to the whole operation. The LTTE and the SL Govt., if you
remember, signed an accord asking for the IPKF to leave. So the IPKF
was in an situation where it couldn't figure out who it was supposed to
help and who was the real enemy or what the purpose of the whole excercise
was.
And you are acting as if things are now much better so we can talk
about the past. The Tamils in Sri-Lanka are living in abject misery
under the terror of the LTTE and the bombings,killings and general
mayhem continue unabated just as before. Nothing has changed. So
it seems a bit premature to conduct a post-mortem.
S. Sankarapandi
In article <930527003...@mib10.eng.ua.edu> bka...@mib10.eng.ua.edu (Bala
ji Kannan) writes:
>
> Yes, I have NO DOUBT in my mind that it is a TERRORIST organization. I
> have *no reason* to believe that it adheres to Gandhian principles or
> anywhere close to even midway in that moral spectrum going by what I
> have read about the modus operandi (of its freedom struggle) from
> credible reports. As to what is credible and what is not, I trust my
> own judgement and no more.
>
I accept your arguments but differ with your perspective (you have
already okayed it !). I am giving my perspective and I am not requesting you
to redine yours.
I think there is an assumption that Gandhi or Congress adhered to Gandhian
principles. `Gandhian principles' are called so because Gandhi is one of the
persons who talked about non-violence. But Gandhi himself did not stick to it
rigidly when it was affect his interests and his class interests.
1. His interests:
I considered any freedom fighter who would jeopardise his leadership
as his enemy and liked to be eliminated from the scene by any means. There
were only two main components of the Indian freedom movement, one is the
moderates led by Gandhi and the extremists led by different leaders at
different times, eg. Nethaji, Bhagat Singh. There was a power struggle between
the two components and gandhi always won the struggle with the help of the
support of the British. He himself could have eliminated them, then he would
lose his credibility. But the British helped him because the British also
found it easy to tackle Gandhi and Co. The British consulted Gandhi before
hanging Bhagat Singh and there are sufficient documents to prove it. The
british also eliminated Nethaji and the evidence are yet to be found (similar
to the case of Rajiv's death !)
2. His class interests:
He often used to undergo fast (unto death) making sure that the
opponents would yield to him at one point. THere was one time when Ambedkar
was insisting for the separate_electorate for the Dalits, he went on fast in
order to press Ambedkar to give up his demand. He knew Ambedkar very well and
Ambedkar being a very mild person finally gave up his demand (not because he
was convinced but simply for Gandhi and the Dalit movements still consider this
as a black mail, besides the point).
If he really had enough faith in his own `Gandhian Principles' he
should have fasted against all those upper caste congress leaders and
land-lords to give up their upper-caste mentality and fought for the justice.
Till the end, he never had the courage to fight the caste injustices with the
same conviction as he had in many other `shows'. The simple reason his class
interests did not allow him to fight his own class and instead he was fooling
the Dalits by calling them as `harijans'.
What I want to say is that Gandhi did support the terrorism of the British
through which he could eliminate his political enemies Nethaji and Bhagat
Singh. He never had the courage to adhere to his own principles in fighting
the upper caste terrorism.
LTTE also did fight IPKF through the fast-unto-death of Thileepan India
and LTTE were not like the British and Gandhi. Naturally Thileepan died and
then they went for terrorism against India. I dont mean to say that they never
involved in terrorism before. They had killed many innocent Sinhales civilians
and TELO cadres through terrorism but they used violence agaisnt India after
India betrayed (it is wrong to say as betrayal, because India went there to
eliminate LTTE only). I would rather condemn the terrorism of LTTE against the
innocent Sinhalese and unarmed intellectuals like Rajini Thirakama (it is again
a strong suspicion, has not yet been proved).
Again, this is my own persepctive, well not as an Indian, but as a
human being who is bothered about the interests of all human beings (not
Indians alone) :-)
--
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Balaji Kannan
k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
>As a thamizh I have no choice other than
>to support thamizh liberation in the midst of killing
>of thamizhs that is justified by religious scriptures.
>Thanks for your compliment about smart. But if LTTE
Atleast when I wrote it, I did not intend it to
be a compliment (in the strict sense) It was a
very dispassionate observation.
I too support the Tamizh cause, but I would much
rather a support a solution which gives them the
equal rights and even autonomy within Srilanka than
a separate homeland.
[Don't tell me Buddhism as preached by
Buddha had something against Tamils]
>is terrorist who are the Indian Govt. and supporters
>who brand LTTE as terrorist.
>nEthaaji was a terrorist. bhagath singh
>was a terrorist in congress books. But not
>in the minds of everybody.
I don't deny that. In those days, they used the
term "extremists" instead of "terrorists" Maybe,
because they couldn't strike as much terror (&
with impunity) as the extremists today can with
the most modern and deadly firearms...
When Iam indeed *striking terror* to achieve what
I want, why all this brouhaha about the use of a
label which only means *that* ??
>In MO RSS is the terrorist organisation
>of the world that has no cause to fight for.
>anban
>Kathiravan
A terrorist organization always has a cause for
itself. Sometimes, people don't agree that
the cause is justifiable; sometimes people don't
agree if the *means* of fighting this cause is
justifiable.....
cheers,
bk
Balaji Kannan
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>I don't know at what stage you came to the conclusion that LTTE is
>a TERRORIST organisation. From whatever you spoke so far on this issue
The stage when they *took up arms* in the freedom struggle perhaps ??
>it seems to me that you think so after Rajiv's assasination allegedly
>by LTTE.
Nah. With Rajiv's assassination, I was only convinced that it is
always dangerous to "feed those/support those" who live by the
sword ..... It is a mighty risky thing !
>As I mentioned in another post, they metamorphosised
>from 'militants' => 'extremists' => 'terrorists' as far as
>Indian state and media are concerned.
I prefer not to distinguish between such fine shades of meaning.
All the above indicate "violence" [power from the barrel of the
gun] as a means of achieving the ends. "Terrorist" seems to be
the vogue word that the media prefer today.
>During the first phase, LTTE got material and moral support from
>the Indian government.
>Now my question is do you brand, *as an Indian*, INDIA AS A TERRORIST
>STATE (applying similar logic of India wanting to brand Pakistan a
>terrorist state for their support to Kashmiri militants)?.
If the Indian government provided support with the intent of
destabilising another country, maiming the citizens of that
country (largescale) so that the organization it supports is
able to achieve its ends ruthlessly, then I would consider
the state a terrorist state. I wudn't think US is a terrorist
state or the Bosnian muslims terrorists were the US to provide
arms support to them now. The context, intent, the nature of
atrocities are all important.
The reason, it is difficult to get a state branded TERRORIST
is because that is not what it is primarily preoccupied with.
That was in a technical sense. In our own minds, we know that
India is not about jungle justice though there may be stray
incidents of government perpetrating atrocities. An organization
involved in the freedom struggle on the other hand gets branded
terrorist *easily* because of the nature of its primary preoccu-
pation.
>As an extension, I am curious to know, if the government
>doesn't adhere to Gandhian principles would you call it terrorist
>government too?.
>When and where do you draw the line?.
You will have to look at the context in which i used the word
"Gandhian" . I was talking about it in the light of freedom
struggle and the means of achieving freedom/rights.....
I did not mean "Everyone who doesn't adhere to Gandhian princi-
ples is a terrorist...."
Let us say, India loses a business contract to another nation
that it was supposed to get from Nepal. If India decides to
blow up a Nepalese airliner carrying civilians to send a message
to Nepal I wud call the Indian Govt. a terrorist govt. Other
forms of coercion [political and economic enstranglement] will
not - unless India has a *direct* involvement in the havoc/disaster
- qualify as acts of terrorism according to me. Trying to kill
the head [who is not made in the mould of Hitler say] of another
state because of a souring of relations in the political/economic
sphere between two nations is tantamount to terrorism if the
state is directly involved in the killing or indrectly involved
as a co-conspirator. Along those lines.... I hope I made myself
clear.
cheers,
bk
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
>>As a thamizh I have no choice other than
>>to support thamizh liberation in the midst of killing
>>of thamizhs that is justified by religious scriptures.
>>Thanks for your compliment about smart. But if LTTE
> Atleast when I wrote it, I did not intend it to
> be a compliment (in the strict sense) It was a
> very dispassionate observation.
> I too support the Tamizh cause, but I would much
> rather a support a solution which gives them the
> equal rights and even autonomy within Srilanka than
> a separate homeland.
You go the monks, get their racists books
banned and then we will drop all the weapons.
Do know what you are talkin about?
Well do not make fun.
I was not telling Buddha preached racism.
Actually Brahmanism [manu and geetha]
preached racism.
Buddha countered that. The monks in
SL kill people at their will and justify
the killing as protecting "thamma".
How many thamizhs are in SL army?
Are you going to protect them.
Bandaranaike was killed by a monk
for giving concessions[he did not
give].
His son inlaw, an actor and very handsome
guy came to nalloor temple to talk with
LTTE leaders. He was killed when he went back.
poi mithavaatham pEsaatheerkaL aiyaah!
Every body talks about solution.
Drop the weapons. But pirabaa knows
exactly what it is to drop the weapons.
All the cowards will then go [as IPKF did]
and kill them.
>[Don't tell me Buddhism as preached by
>Buddha had something against Tamils]
>>is terrorist who are the Indian Govt. and supporters
>>who brand LTTE as terrorist.
>>nEthaaji was a terrorist. bhagath singh
>>was a terrorist in congress books. But not
>>in the minds of everybody.
> I don't deny that. In those days, they used the
> term "extremists" instead of "terrorists" Maybe,
> because they couldn't strike as much terror (&
> with impunity) as the extremists today can with
> the most modern and deadly firearms...
>
> When Iam indeed *striking terror* to achieve what
> I want, why all this brouhaha about the use of a
> label which only means *that* ??
>
>>In MO RSS is the terrorist organisation
>>of the world that has no cause to fight for.
>>anban
>>Kathiravan
> A terrorist organization always has a cause for
> itself. Sometimes, people don't agree that
> the cause is justifiable; sometimes people don't
> agree if the *means* of fighting this cause is
> justifiable.....
Indian Govt will say veerrarhaL one day
when they think they can use them. The next day they
find they cannot cheat them they will say "terrorists"
But who broke the accord. Who handed over 13 LTTE men
to SL army.
Did GOI stop forced colonization
of sinhalese?
cheers,
Kathiravan
>cheers,
>bk
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>> so be it.
>>
> I don't know at what stage you came to the conclusion that LTTE is
> a TERRORIST organisation. From whatever you spoke so far on this issue
> it seems to me that you think so after Rajiv's assasination allegedly
> by LTTE.
Singing tune with the govt is very easy.
This is a typical physche. When you accuse LTTE
as terrorist "as an Indian" then I can see your point.
"alaiyOda pOkum vallam
vilaiyOdu pOkum maanam" -naan sollum inRaya izhinilai.
ithE manapakuvam uLLavarhaL solvathE
"munnaaL pOr aaLi
innaaL theeviravaathi
maRunaaL payangkara vaathi"
pathavikkaaka makkaL uyirai vilai pEsum arasu
payangkaravaathaththai vida yaarum mOsamaaka
irukka mudiyaathu.
anban
Kathiravan
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>
>>your rejoinder is legally wrong. This is why I did not bother to reply
>>to your article. Now that of all people, bk is replying I am obliged to.
>
> Methinks, you failed to grasp the sarcasm in SKR's remark ....
>
>>> SKR hit the nail..
> get what the above para means.
This sarcasm is definitely unwarrented. May be I was naive to think that
the SCT is moulding into a ``discussion'' group after the series of "Requests
to TN Tamils," "Request for Eelam Tamils," etc. Sarcasm in sensitive issues
can lead to the subject being hijacked to something unwanted, IMO.
[statement of personal standing deleted]
>>As an Indian don't you also belive in Indian judiciary
>>system? 'Innocent until proven guilty' is a better motto, than accusing
>
> Yup , I do believe. But let me ask you this. What do you think of
> the Shiv Sena and Bal Thackeray ?? [In the light of their past
> record of violence and the recent Bombay riots, are you going to
> sit tight till the Indian govt. formally presses a charge against
>
> What do you think of Veerapan who has been evading the police dragnet
> for a long time now ? I have only these words for him: Criminal thug.
> Mind you, he has not been proved guilty in any court of law.
>
> Would you *wait* till the Govt is able to prove in a court of law that
> Phoolan Devi was a dacoit leader and that she was guilty of largescale
>
> Did you wait till it was proved in a court of law that it was the *BJP*
> supporters who demolished the RJB structure [or like Virendra Verma
> says it can be Congresswallahs no ?] before criticizing the BJP for its
You have given a good number of examples, where the Indian system doesn't
work. And you seem to have good faith in the system, which obviously
doesn't work (I can give more examples if you want).
> Shall I take it from you that you will *not* in the future give your
> opinions on any issue "accusing" an organization/person/persons....
> unless it has been proved in a COURT OF LAW that so and so is guilty
> of what you are accusing so and so ?????? Otherwise, I am gonna call
> you prejudiced :-)
I am entitled to *my own opinion.* Ain't I? I will try to make it clear
that it is my opinion (without any sarcasms, btw). (I am not trying to
say that you propagate your opinions as general truth.)
regards
swaminathan,kashi r
I agree. It is sad enough that LTTE did not want to claim
responsibilty for the bomb, or for THANU's body, and, except for the head
which was used by the police for identification, the rest of THANU
was swept into trash. I can understand LTTE as a group not wanting to take
the responsibility.
What is more sad is that even the LTTE supporters on the net want to
deny that THANU did it on behalf of LTTE, and seem to claim that she
did it as an individual. On the other hand I would expect THANU to
be treated as a tamil heroine.
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
reffering to pre-war condition(LTTE vs IPKF). I have read extensively
into & talked to people who were in Jaffna when IPKF launched its
haphazardly planned siege/frontal attack on the second largest city in
SR. Had RAW known of LTTE's actuall strength and the extant of its
support network between them and the civilians, IPKF would have thought
twice before launching such a devastating campaign on Jaffna City! And
the arrogance they displayed('lungi clad low caste boys with AK-47s',
'No problem. We'll capture the city in 48 hrs').
In the 87 offensive, SL armed forces did capture Vadamaraachi(northern
part of Jaffna Peninsula). This is a stretch of land encompassing urban
cities and farm lands, all interwined together in a tight network.
Civilian casualties started to pile due to indiscriminate aerial
bombings, navy shells and artillery/mortar fire from army bases. So,
LTTE just retreated from these areas. It was only a tactical withdrawal
on their part. Later when a explosives-laden car rammed into one the SL
army's make-shift army camps(a school in Nelliady?) and took out
basically the whole compound(very HEAVY casualties!) and LTTE shot down
a plane in Jaffna, JR got the the message very clear(and maybe a rather
rude awakening on the mechanisms of a guerilla warfare!). Believe me, if
IPKF hadn't waged a crippling war on LTTE, SL armed forces would have
been in a rather uncomfortable spot down the road. That's all I can
write for now.
-Suresh
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
against the
>innocent Sinhalese and unarmed intellectuals like Rajini Thirakama (it
is again
>a strong suspicion, has not yet been proved).
Are you refering to those Sinhalase who were settled on Tamil lands
after the Tamil families were 'uprooted.' In the 60s, my granfather used
to own a store in Marutodai(alteast the name now. I hope I'm correct on
this one), northeast of Vavuniya. Then suddenly one day, the town
'became' a Sinhalase town. It's 'see ya' for the Tamils who lived there.
Innocent Sinhalase? Yes, and I'm not-so innocent Tamil who lost the home
twice(77 & 83) to 'innocent' Sinhalase.
Many also forget what happened to thousands of Tamils and their homes in
Trincomalee after 83. The city burned for months(it was some of these
'refugees' that Jeya sent back!). If there's such a thing called ethnic
clensing, SL government wrote the book on it.
I couldn't resist to clarify this.
-Suresh
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh
Now this getting rather funny. Do you expect us to fight state-sponsored
terrorism with flowers? What logic do you propose for us? Or trust GOI
to protect us? We did. And see what happened? Don't give me this
Gandhian business. That also had been tried. For 4 decades!
>>it seems to me that you think so after Rajiv's assasination allegedly
>>by LTTE.
>
> Nah. With Rajiv's assassination, I was only convinced that it is
> always dangerous to "feed those/support those" who live by the
> sword ..... It is a mighty risky thing !
Wait a minute. You missed the part where 'those' were given swords by
Indira in the first place. Be consistent to be fair.
> If the Indian government provided support with the intent of
> destabilising another country, maiming the citizens of that
> country (largescale) so that the organization it supports is
> able to achieve its ends ruthlessly, then I would consider
> the state a terrorist state. I wudn't think US is a terrorist
> state or the Bosnian muslims terrorists were the US to provide
> arms support to them now. The context, intent, the nature of
> atrocities are all important.
>
> The reason, it is difficult to get a state branded TERRORIST
> is because that is not what it is primarily preoccupied with.
If I follow you logic correctlty, this is what you're saying. As much as
you're preoccupied with branding LTTE a terrorist organization, we are
eaually justified in preoccupying ourselves in branding India a
terrorist state. After all, you seem to imply the availability of time
and preoccupation of what is what not is an important issue to be the
deciding factors in determing whether a country/organization is
terrorist in nature. Am I correct?
> - qualify as acts of terrorism according to me. Trying to kill
> the head [who is not made in the mould of Hitler say] of another
> state because of a souring of relations in the political/economic
> sphere between two nations is tantamount to terrorism if the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> state is directly involved in the killing or indrectly involved
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> as a co-conspirator. Along those lines.... I hope I made myself
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> clear.
>
>cheers,
Under the difficult circumstances we all live in, I thank you for the
honesty you displayed. Kittu wasn't a head of state. But, he had the
respect of his people and had sacrificed much his life for his people.
Neither for money nor for fame. Something no self-conscious Indian cay
say about Rajiv and his manthrigal. Since GOI caused Kittu's and other
senior LTTE funtionaries' death in act of sea-piracry, how shall we
label GOI? Do we have the right to the same niceties that are enjoyed by
the citizens of an internationally recognized state? Where do we go when
we are at the mercy of a large powerful nation and a powerful smaller
nation, with both setting the rules of what is what not is fair game?
-Suresh
Srinivasan Gopalaswamy
Disclaimer: Let me state, right at the beginning, that what follow are my
-----------
own opinions so that no body can claim I am passing judgements.
I think the discussion on the SL Tamils is going pretty good for the *most*
part. However I feel it is fast getting to be a pro-LTTE or pro-Indian Govt.
argument. Are not there any SL Tamils in the net who dont owe allegiance to
any of the militant groups? Atleast who support groups other than LTTE? The
reason I ask is, there is a lot of aspersions cast on the other groups and I
see no defence.
Now, the article by Shankarapandi on this issue (in reply to Balaji Kannan)
pulled me into the discussion (well, I am not saying it was provocative
...). Before I make my counter-attack on his arguments which I think were
intellectually rich but impoverished in wisdom, let me state my basic point
as regards to terrorism, LTTE and the Indian Govt.
Terrorism, by my definition, is a means followed by some groups to achieve
their ends, in which harm and damage are caused to civilian life and
property with the *intention* of creating fear in the civilians and
emotionally weakening them. The netters may provide feedback on this
suggesting changes, additions or their own definitions. In this regard, I
disagree with Balaji Kannan that LTTE is a terrorist group just because it
took up arms. In that case, every Government that uses an army to achieve
its ends would be terrorist.
However, IF LTTE did commit atleast ONE of the following acts, I would say
without hesitation that it is indeed a terrorist group:
- Set up booby traps, bombs in civilian settlement areas (Sinhalese or
Tamil) thus causing loss of civilian human life.
- Cause damage to civilian property like public transportation like trains,
buses etc.
- Kill civilian life including political leaders (Sinhalese or Tamil).
- Invite opposing group leaders for peaceful talks and assassinate them when
they are unarmed.
If LTTE can *honestly* say it did not commit any of these acts, it can be
considered `not terrorist', but just a militant group fighting for a cause.
Now the question some of you are going to raise is "well then, does this
definition apply to Indian Govt. aswell?" Yes, ofcourse it does. As for as I
know, IPKF was sent by India to implement the accord and fight LTTE if
necessary, but not to kill civilians. So it was not a terrorist act. (BTW, I
do think IPKF was a very bad idea and it did not help the SL Tamils, but
that is beside the point here).
However, it is important to emphasize the *intention* in the definition
here. In fighting terrorism, very often it happens that terrorists mingle
with civilians that loss of civilian life becomes inevitable, *very*
unfortunately. But this does not make fighting terrorism terrorism by
itself.
Now are Bhagat Singh, Subash Chandra Bose terrorists? Bose did not disrupt
civilian life. He went to Japan and organized an army, so he was only a
militant, not a terrorist. Bhagat Singh, if I know right, bombed a court, so
indeed he was a terrorist. Why do we glorify him? Dont ask me!
Now, the counter-attack to Shankarapandi:
In article <1u1e45$a...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>lose his credibility. But the British helped him because the British also
>found it easy to tackle Gandhi and Co. The British consulted Gandhi before
>hanging Bhagat Singh and there are sufficient documents to prove it. The
>british also eliminated Nethaji and the evidence are yet to be found (similar
>to the case of Rajiv's death !)
Now this is a real slander against Gandhi. For people like Gandhi, their
deeds speak for themselves. If I was willing to be make asmuch a fool of
myself (take it good spirits please), I could go and say Mother Teressa is
amassing personal wealth through her organization. Now are you trying to
imply that Gandhi okayed the hanging, and without his okay British would not
have hanged Bhagat Singh! If this is how Gandhi is treated, no wonder lot of
people start as good social workers and end up as corrupt selfish
politicians.
> If he really had enough faith in his own `Gandhian Principles' he
>should have fasted against all those upper caste congress leaders and
>land-lords to give up their upper-caste mentality and fought for the justice.
>Till the end, he never had the courage to fight the caste injustices with the
>same conviction as he had in many other `shows'. The simple reason his class
>interests did not allow him to fight his own class and instead he was fooling
>the Dalits by calling them as `harijans'.
This is really funny. It is like wanting a friend to do your homework, and
when he does half the work for you, telling him "If you are a real friend,
you would do the full work for me"! Everyone knows Gandhi worked till his
last breath on one social problem after another. Everyone knows how much he
cared about equality and love for everyone. I agree there were social
problems he did not have the time to consider.
> LTTE also did fight IPKF through the fast-unto-death of Thileepan India
>and LTTE were not like the British and Gandhi.
This is not a terrific argument. If Gandhi had not been an immensely popular
person by the time he started his fasts, so popular that letting him die
would have caused a tremendous fury all over India, it is quite possible
that the British would have ignored his fasts-unto-death. Gandhi was also
very smart, apart from being a great person. This is not to belittle
Thileepan's effort in any way. I have great regards for Thileepan and my
heart goes out to him. But having created an image in which the LTTE lets
its fighters bite through cyanide capsules all the time, how did the LTTE
expect anybody to take Thileepan's fast seriously?
>then they went for terrorism against India. I dont mean to say that they never
>involved in terrorism before. They had killed many innocent Sinhales civilians
>and TELO cadres through terrorism but they used violence agaisnt India after
>India betrayed (it is wrong to say as betrayal, because India went there to
>eliminate LTTE only). I would rather condemn the terrorism of LTTE against the
>innocent Sinhalese and unarmed intellectuals like Rajini Thirakama (it is again
>a strong suspicion, has not yet been proved).
This is mostly news to me, and I tend to believe you.
Srini
Meenan Vishnu
>
> Are you telling me that LTTE never received any help from RAW ?
> The reason that the LTTE is the strongest group is that MGR
> decided for some reason that he was going to give TN govt. funds
> and his own money (He had lots of it) to the LTTE. LTTE received
Is that the only reason or one of the reasons ?
> disproportionate % of funds and weapons during 83-87 period compared
> to other groups. I remember 4 other groups - PLOT, EPRLF, TELO.
> I forget the fourth one. Well it has been a long time.
Actually you are quite mis-infromed. The RAW gave most of the weapons to
TELO and EPRLF. LTTE and PLOTE did receive some. LTTE literature says
India gave them but Mohanlal in his book says Prabhakaran asked for it
seeing that other groups are growing beyond his with the Indian help.
The weapons that were given the Sri lankan militants were specially
made for them. They were made of cast iron so that they cannot be
fired continuously. They can be fired for a while and one has to cool
it before using it again. This is an ingenius plan of RAW to keep the
militant activity contained. The weapons can be used to brew trouble
in Sri lanka but not enough to defeat the army. The LTTE realized this
and continued to rely on its own arm purchase.
One reason TELO was defeated easily by the LTTE was that TELO relied
almost entirely on Indian supplied cast iron arms whereas LTTE
bought superior arms.
>
> Incidentally the reason TELO was wiped out was that TELO was
> alleged to be supported by the DMK. MGR wanted no part of this.
> That is the main reason that Indian Govt. did not do anything to
> prevent the massacare of 200-300 TELO members and their leader
> Sabaratinam. (sp?) If I remember, it occured in 85-86. (well before
> July 87 accord) Kinda ironic, LTTE would kill their own people
> especially when the Sri Lankan Army was having a field way killing
> Tamils especially in the East.
LTTE's explanation for its action was that TELO was planning an attack
on it. It was not convincing then to many Tamil people and LTTE lost
its popularity somewhat until the IPKF fiasco.
>
> Correct me, if I am wrong. LTTE was on the ropes in 1987 when
> Sri Lankan Army took half of Jaffna penisula in a 3 week
> offensive. If IPKF had not intervened, I am not sure that LTTE
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> would even exist. That and Rajiv Gandhi's problems (Bofors, HDW,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Zail Singh etc.) lead to IPKF intervention in Sri Lanka.
Again you are quite misinformed. According to the present Indian
high-commisioner, in a BBC interview said that "Had the Indians not
intervened in 1987, the demand for Eelam was irrepressible".
Eventhough LTTE survived the Indian attack. It was quite weakened.
Scores of LTTE cadres lost hope and left (and are in Canada).
Many good fighters died. Now the LTTE is primarily consists of
teenagers (13-16) and women cadres. Thanks to India.
In my opinion, the only good thing Indian intervention did was to
identify to the people who were sincere and who were selfish. Such
a lesson came at a heavy price both for the LTTE and the Tamil
people.
> ** Mr. Nobody **
Meenan Vishnu
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
sree let us take your definition that supposes wisdom
and not impoverished in intellect.
How come based on your definition "it was not a terrorist act".
The intention on news media and paper of "IPKF" can be as holy
as anything that could be painted to ones whims and fancy.
>However, it is important to emphasize the *intention* in the definition
>here. In fighting terrorism, very often it happens that terrorists mingle
>with civilians that loss of civilian life becomes inevitable, *very*
>unfortunately. But this does not make fighting terrorism terrorism by
>itself.
How come you are ignoring facts. You assume that IPKF was
sent to fight Tigers. The accord does not allow IPKF's first
crime. It had no right to destroy thamizh eezham newsprint office
first. IPKF rather RAWs act was terrorism not according to
your own definition but if we could
*add>- Invite yourself to a country with a publicity of
protecting opressed community and doing everything contrary
to the agreement that was not even agreed by the
oppressed minority. Note even the other groups were
not consulted.
*add>-unarm a freedom fighter and supply covert arms
and training to others.
*add>-hand the freedom fighters over to the oppressor
contrary to the agreement. Basically traitor.
>militant, not a terrorist. Bhagat Singh, if I know right, bombed a court, so
>indeed he was a terrorist. Why do we glorify him? Dont ask me!
bhagath singh is a great hero, so is vaanjinaathan
so is VO sithambaram piLLai etc.
Now by adding two more rigthfulclauses the GOI [RAW]
is termed terrorist as well.
>Srini
anban
Kathiravan
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>>nEthaaji was a terrorist. bhagath singh
>>was a terrorist in congress books. But not
>>in the minds of everybody.
Nethaaji never massacared British civillians and murdered
fellow Indians in the name of liberation struggle.
He was a brave person. He fought the British Army.
** Nobody **
A joke about Bill Clinton:
It is said Bill Clinton is considering changing the
Democratic Party emblem from a donkey to a condom, because it
stands for inflation, protects a bunch of pricks, halts
production, and gives a false sense of security while being
screwed.
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
> from 'militants' => 'extremists' => 'terrorists' as far as
> Indian state and media are concerned.
Actually it is extremists => terrorists => militants => ultras
>
> During the first phase, LTTE got material and moral support from
> the Indian government.
Things LTTE supporters will not talk about.
>
> Now my question is do you brand, *as an Indian*, INDIA AS A TERRORIST
> STATE (applying similar logic of India wanting to brand Pakistan a
> terrorist state for their support to Kashmiri militants)?.
>
During the cold war, everything was fair game. Now with the cold war
over, RULES have changed.
> As an extension, I am curious to know, if the government
> doesn't adhere to Gandhian principles would you call it terrorist
> government too?.
>
> When and where do you draw the line?.
There is no clear line.
** Mr. Nobody **
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>> the poor intelligence RAW had on LTTE's strength and capacity to carry
What a joke. Have you forgotten where the LTTE was in May 87.
If IPKF had not intervened, LTTE would have been eating SHIT.
>> on its own. A crucial mistake.
>>
>> -Suresh
>
> Nonsense. It was not a matter of military strength or lack of
>intelligence. As a matter of fact, the IPKF was on it's way to smothering
>the LTTE despite the heavy losses. It was the lack of political will and
>direction to the whole operation. The LTTE and the SL Govt., if you
>remember, signed an accord asking for the IPKF to leave. So the IPKF
There are rumors that Sri Lankan military gave the LTTE weapons
to fight the Indian Army.
Moral of the day: Never support people blindy because you just
happen to be of the same language, religion, race or caste.
** Nobody **
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>
>I think that the sad part is that LTTE has disowned poor
>THANU as a (few) piece(s) of trash.
You really are not helping the cause of keeping a discussion going.
Sir, you don't want people to discuss the Eelam Tamil issue. Do you?
What are you afraid of? Are you scared that the `truths' that come
out of this `discussion' (which you want to destroy by your insinuating
one liners) will not be in your best interests? In case you know all
the truth, you can tell us.
Please, will you refrain from making such statements. Won't you?
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>>
>> Are you telling me that LTTE never received any help from RAW ?
>> The reason that the LTTE is the strongest group is that MGR
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> decided for some reason that he was going to give TN govt. funds
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> and his own money (He had lots of it) to the LTTE. LTTE received
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Is that the only reason or one of the reasons ?
The primary reason. It takes resources to fight wars. Without
the blank check LTTE got from TN State Govt., LTTE could not
have imposed the type of discipline on its members that is needed
to build a ruthless military organisation. Remember cyanide capsules,
no marriage rule etc. Not many young men can afford to do that
no matter how badly they are treated. Unless of course, you
"indoctrinate" them.
Interestingly, the LTTE chief Prabhakaran was exempt from the
no marriage rule. I don't think that rule exists any longer.
I guess that they learnt the heard way that everyone is human.
>
>> disproportionate % of funds and weapons during 83-87 period compared
>> to other groups. I remember 4 other groups - PLOT, EPRLF, TELO.
>> I forget the fourth one. Well it has been a long time.
>
>Actually you are quite mis-infromed. The RAW gave most of the weapons to
>TELO and EPRLF. LTTE and PLOTE did receive some. LTTE literature says
>India gave them but Mohanlal in his book says Prabhakaran asked for it
>seeing that other groups are growing beyond his with the Indian help.
>
The amount of money the RAW and Centre << funds from TN State./MGR
>The weapons that were given the Sri lankan militants were specially
>made for them. They were made of cast iron so that they cannot be
>fired continuously. They can be fired for a while and one has to cool
>it before using it again. This is an ingenius plan of RAW to keep the
>militant activity contained. The weapons can be used to brew trouble
>in Sri lanka but not enough to defeat the army. The LTTE realized this
>and continued to rely on its own arm purchase.
>
Most of the weapons used by LTTE and other groups were bought
on international market. It would be hard for Sri Lankans to
prove that India of helping the LTTE.
>One reason TELO was defeated easily by the LTTE was that TELO relied
>almost entirely on Indian supplied cast iron arms whereas LTTE
>bought superior arms.
>
LTTE had more men, more weapons, better organisation and the killer
instinct. TELO had no chance. It wasn't even a defeat. Call it a
massacare.
>
>LTTE's explanation for its action was that TELO was planning an attack
>on it. It was not convincing then to many Tamil people and LTTE lost
>its popularity somewhat until the IPKF fiasco.
That was always been the excuse. TELO had 200-300 members. LTTE
had 3000-4000 armed militants. Why would TELO want to attack ?
Are they that foolish ?
>
>
>Again you are quite misinformed. According to the present Indian
>high-commisioner, in a BBC interview said that "Had the Indians not
>intervened in 1987, the demand for Eelam was irrepressible".
>
I suggest that you read newspapers and journals in the period
BEFORE the July 87 accord.
>Eventhough LTTE survived the Indian attack. It was quite weakened.
>Scores of LTTE cadres lost hope and left (and are in Canada).
>Many good fighters died. Now the LTTE is primarily consists of
>teenagers (13-16) and women cadres. Thanks to India.
>
They might be weaker than before.
It looks to me like that the LTTE is more intimidating than ever.
** Nobody **
Balaji Kannan
Ranjith Ravindiran Suresh <thund...@CMU.EDU> writes:
[...]
>Now this getting rather funny. Do you expect us to fight state-sponsored
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>terrorism with flowers? What logic do you propose for us? Or trust GOI
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Did I say that ? I only replied to Sunder's qn. as to whether I
branded LTTE "terrorist" *after* Rajiv's assassination.
>Wait a minute. You missed the part where 'those' were given swords by
>Indira in the first place. Be consistent to be fair.
That is why I said, it is risky to support people who believe in
living by the sword. Yes, I know GOI supported the LTTE and other
organizations and covertly helped them a lot in the initial stages.
But, that was the time the Tamils were at the receiving end and
there was widespread local support for such action as a defensive
measure. Something like the Bosnian Muslim situation *now*.
>If I follow you logic correctlty, this is what you're saying. As much as
>you're preoccupied with branding LTTE a terrorist organization, we are
>eaually justified in preoccupying ourselves in branding India a
>terrorist state. After all, you seem to imply the availability of time
>and preoccupation of what is what not is an important issue to be the
>deciding factors in determing whether a country/organization is
>terrorist in nature. Am I correct?
Yes, it is very important. India is a democratic country with
democratic institutions that work howsoever poor the quality of
Indian democracy in the overall picture. It is not an organizat-
ion that lives by the sword and *swears* by it. Atleast, the
constitution [a piece of paper] talks about adhering to certain
principles which by no stretch of imagination can be branded
"terrorist". How far the Indian govt and its people have gotten
used to these principles and the spirit behind it is debatable,
but atleast we strive hard to keep it working ....
The reason I talked about preoccupation is because, you have to
convince the *world* that India is terrorist right ?? (if u want
to use that to ur advantage) This won't be easy. On the other hand,
the world will treat the LTTE as a terrorist organization w/o
even giving much thought to it. Maybe you should ask why and you
will see what I meant.
>Under the difficult circumstances we all live in, I thank you for the
>honesty you displayed. Kittu wasn't a head of state. But, he had the
>respect of his people and had sacrificed much his life for his people.
>Neither for money nor for fame. Something no self-conscious Indian cay
>say about Rajiv and his manthrigal. Since GOI caused Kittu's and other
>senior LTTE funtionaries' death in act of sea-piracry, how shall we
>label GOI? Do we have the right to the same niceties that are enjoyed by
If you *think* that the Indian govt sent the IPKF to maim the
innocent SL Tamils, rape Tamil girls and assassinate Tamil
leaders, you may want to go ahead and label it TERRORIST.
But...
It is gonna be difficult for the LTTE to win back the trust of
the GOI or the majority of Indian people anytime in the future.
Not that the LTTE maybe looking forward to it, but if the SL
govt. starts its offensive once again [I wud think not and hope
not], India will not intervene militarily one more time. Maybe,
it will try to settle this issue once and for all [depending
on the political resolve of the Indian leader in power] by
getting all the parties involved to negotiate and thats about
it. It will try to keep its hands clean next time. I would
consider that the best approach too. Because, in a three way
tussle such as this where there is soooo much mutual distrust
between the three parties involved and where each one tries to
play one against the other as a means of undermining each other
and to settle old scores, I wud say it is *best* to KEEP OFF.
I wudn't want (and I will safely assume that there are many
other Indians like me too) another one of our leader's innards
bombed the hell out of him however much I/(we) dislike him
*politically*.
>the citizens of an internationally recognized state? Where do we go when
>we are at the mercy of a large powerful nation and a powerful smaller
>nation, with both setting the rules of what is what not is fair game?
The problem is, somewhere down the line all three messed it up
and the seeds of hatred has been sown. Can all the three learn
to trust each other [live by the trust] and solve this problem
amicably in a spirit of compromise ?? That is very much possible
but *now* requires the presence of atleast one GREAT LEADER among
the three parties involved.
[Well some*one* messed up right at the start. The Srilankan govt. seems to
be the biggest culprit in all this as far as fuelling hatred and in its
ruthless treatment of its citizens. It was very much within its power to
find a peaceful solution w/o India's involvement at any stage. No such
heartfelt desire on its part I would say..... The Tamil groups shd also
learn to give up their hardened approach if they need peace]
cheers,
bk
Srinivasan Gopalaswamy
discussions on this issue. It is only fair to expect that all parties in the
discussion show respect to each other. Just as we expect LTTE supporters to
show respect to Indian Govt., the vice versa is expected as well. This is
important for healthy discussions.
In article <kat.738530890@lore> k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
> sree let us take your definition that supposes wisdom
> and not impoverished in intellect.
hey, that was only a friendly jab ;-)
> How come based on your definition "it was not a terrorist act".
> The intention on news media and paper of "IPKF" can be as holy
> as anything that could be painted to ones whims and fancy.
>>However, it is important to emphasize the *intention* in the definition
>>here. In fighting terrorism, very often it happens that terrorists mingle
>>with civilians that loss of civilian life becomes inevitable, *very*
>>unfortunately. But this does not make fighting terrorism terrorism by
>>itself.
>
> How come you are ignoring facts. You assume that IPKF was
> sent to fight Tigers. The accord does not allow IPKF's first
> crime. It had no right to destroy thamizh eezham newsprint office
> first. IPKF rather RAWs act was terrorism not according to
> your own definition but if we could
I am no friend of the accord, because it did not consult one important
representative group of the Tamils. However, even though the accord was
signed between the heads of states, as far as I know, all the other Tamil
groups were consulted, and they agreed with the accord too.
>
> *add>- Invite yourself to a country with a publicity of
> protecting opressed community and doing everything contrary
> to the agreement that was not even agreed by the
> oppressed minority. Note even the other groups were
> not consulted.
> *add>-unarm a freedom fighter and supply covert arms
> and training to others.
>
> *add>-hand the freedom fighters over to the oppressor
> contrary to the agreement. Basically traitor.
>
>
> Now by adding two more rigthfulclauses the GOI [RAW]
> is termed terrorist as well.
I am an ordinary citizen of India. I dont know about RAW. But if indeed RAW
was a GOI sponsored organization that helped develop the terrorism in SL,
then, yes, GOI did commit terrorism.
>>militant, not a terrorist. Bhagat Singh, if I know right, bombed a court, so
>>indeed he was a terrorist. Why do we glorify him? Dont ask me!
>
> bhagath singh is a great hero, so is vaanjinaathan
>so is VO sithambaram piLLai etc.
>
I guess people are different. I wouldn't consider the first two heroes to be
worshipped and followed. (doesnt mean I dont respect them or doesnt mean
that I think I am better than them).
VOS? yes, he is a hero.
I am not passing judgements on violence, even though in my own personal
moral books, physical and emotional violence is bad, to be avoided as much
as possible. However, my opinions in these discussions are not even based on
my own moral books. They are based on the 2 axioms of societal living:
1. We all live together in this society
2. Each one is as important as the another.
Srini
Balaji Kannan
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>I think there is an assumption that Gandhi or Congress adhered to Gandhian
>principles. `Gandhian principles' are called so because Gandhi is one of the
>persons who talked about non-violence. But Gandhi himself did not stick to it
>rigidly when it was affect his interests and his class interests.
My reaction to any kind of historical revisionism is one of guarded skepticism.
And while you were successful in raising my eyebrows atleast twice :-) in the
course of reading your article, Iam *not* the one to draw any inferences about
Gandhi's character and his views on freedom struggle from what I read on a
billboard post unless I see books and authors extensively quoted that can be
verified. And that is just me. No offence intended.
[...]
cheers,
bk
Balaji Kannan
sr...@caravan.ece.cmu.edu (Srinivasan Gopalaswamy) writes:
[...]
>suggesting changes, additions or their own definitions. In this regard, I
>disagree with Balaji Kannan that LTTE is a terrorist group just because it
>took up arms. In that case, every Government that uses an army to achieve
>its ends would be terrorist.
No, that is not what i meant. I used the word "strike terror" in
the minds of people more than once. As for branding LTTE "terrorist"
because they took up arms in the struggle, I did not mean 'Just
because they did that.." Otherwise, I would consider America a
terrorist state and Americans terrorists, because people have the
right to carry arms [guns] here and defend themselves. Hope that
clarifies. Anyways, I tht you gave a pretty neat definition of
"terrorist" activities.
[...]
cheers,
bk
S. Sankarapandi
Warning: This is a long post, read when you are patient. However, it is a
------- reply for Srini, BK and two others who sent me e-mails.
In article <C7p7v...@fs7.ece.cmu.edu> sr...@caravan.ece.cmu.edu (Srinivasan
>
>I think the discussion on the SL Tamils is going pretty good for the *most*
>part. However I feel it is fast getting to be a pro-LTTE or pro-Indian Govt.
>argument. Are not there any SL Tamils in the net who dont owe allegiance to
>any of the militant groups? Atleast who support groups other than LTTE? The
>reason I ask is, there is a lot of aspersions cast on the other groups and I
>see no defence.
Hi, Srini, they are all in Indian territory and they have to get
permission from Indian government to come up with any statement :-)
On a serious note, I can tell you about EROS, which IMHO is (was ?) the
best Tamil organisation in all aspects except in its vigour. They were not
chauvunistic, never after power, never acted as stooges for India and never
indulged in any adventurous killings. They were the own who did serious
research on the economic and social aspects of the liberation and post-
liberation. They were very concerned about the welfare of the innocent and
poor Sinhalese too. They were the only ones who made the plantation tamils
issue as one of the major aspects of the liberation. Unforunately they could
not withstand (both popularitywise and militarywise) against the SL state
terrorists who could be very well manageg only by LTTE. India was also looking
at EROs with very much suspicion because it would never became the puppet for
India's poltics.
>
>Now, the article by Shankarapandi on this issue (in reply to Balaji Kannan)
>pulled me into the discussion (well, I am not saying it was provocative
>...). Before I make my counter-attack on his arguments which I think were
>intellectually rich but impoverished in wisdom,
KK, dont take it seriously. I want this sort of decent discussions
instead of name callings. I respect Srini and BK for their logical arguments.
>let me state my basic point
>as regards to terrorism, LTTE and the Indian Govt.
>
I more or less agree with your definition of terrorism. But it is too
long to read. Let me simplify it with an example.
I and You (generic) discuss/debate over an issue which must be resolved
for our peaceful existence. Suddenly the discussion
becomes more emotional and I start abusing you. You can do two things, either
keep silent or retaliate with abuse (that depends upon your intelligence).
Now, I start attacking you physically and you have to attack me for your
self-defence. Now, I am a terrorist and you are just defending. Now, since
you have been trained by me :-), and you had the taste of it, if you go and
settle all your scores with anybody with this physical-talk, then you are also
a terrorist.
>However, IF LTTE did commit atleast ONE of the following acts, I would say
>without hesitation that it is indeed a terrorist group:
>
Not only LTTE all governments and liberation organisations inolved in
atleast one of this. Either call all of them as terrorists. Or, if you dont
want to call a govt as a terrorist, then call LTTE also a liberation movement
which uses terrorism as one of the weapons. I agree with the latter
definition.
>- Cause damage to civilian property like public transportation like trains,
> buses etc.
>
India has done damage to civilians by indiscriminately bombing civilian
targets in SL. Very recently US did it in Iraq.
>However, it is important to emphasize the *intention* in the definition
>here. In fighting terrorism, very often it happens that terrorists mingle
>with civilians that loss of civilian life becomes inevitable, *very*
>unfortunately. But this does not make fighting terrorism terrorism by
>itself.
Well, this is where we all differ. So I just take this as your opinion.
>Now, the counter-attack to Shankarapandi:
>
I hope, there are no bombs :-)
>
>>lose his credibility. But the British helped him because the British also
>>found it easy to tackle Gandhi and Co. The British consulted Gandhi before
>>hanging Bhagat Singh and there are sufficient documents to prove it. The
>>british also eliminated Nethaji and the evidence are yet to be found (similar
>>to the case of Rajiv's death !)
>
>Now this is a real slander against Gandhi. For people like Gandhi, their
>deeds speak for themselves. If I was willing to be make asmuch a fool of
>myself (take it good spirits please), I could go and say Mother Teressa is
>amassing personal wealth through her organization. Now are you trying to
>imply that Gandhi okayed the hanging, and without his okay British would not
>have hanged Bhagat Singh! If this is how Gandhi is treated, no wonder lot of
>people start as good social workers and end up as corrupt selfish
>politicians.
>
Friend, I did not intend to slander Gandhi. I am only against treating
him God and attributing all the acheivements of our freedom fighters to him and
the congress alone (that is the way our history books taught us). Some people
even quesioned me whether I know anything about Gandhi. Though I am a sholar,
I was once atracted by Gandhian ideals and went for a diplamo in Gandhian
thought in Madurai University (not for the diplamo, but learn more about him).
I was also a faithful supporter of Gandhi (I still prefer non-violence etc) and
used to argue with `radical' minded people. But latter when I read about the
other part of Gandhi and Congress, I changed my blind devotion towards him.
Even now, I appreciate him as a popular mass leader and some of his Kirama
Swarajya principles.
I have a book in India (a biography of Bhagat Singh) which has published
the photocopy of the correspondence between the British govt and Gandhi
regarding the hanging of Bhagat Singh. I will try to get the book from India.
It was a Tamil book by Subha.Veera Pandiyan who spent many months in New Delhi
to get the documents from the museums and other archives.
>> If he really had enough faith in his own `Gandhian Principles' he
>>should have fasted against all those upper caste congress leaders and
>>land-lords to give up their upper-caste mentality and fought for the justice.
>>Till the end, he never had the courage to fight the caste injustices with the
>>same conviction as he had in many other `shows'. The simple reason his class
>>interests did not allow him to fight his own class and instead he was fooling
>>the Dalits by calling them as `harijans'.
>
>This is really funny. It is like wanting a friend to do your homework, and
>when he does half the work for you, telling him "If you are a real friend,
>you would do the full work for me"! Everyone knows Gandhi worked till his
>last breath on one social problem after another. Everyone knows how much he
>cared about equality and love for everyone. I agree there were social
>problems he did not have the time to consider.
>
Srini, it is not simple problem as you describe above. I will provide
some more hints for the whole issue from an EPW article. It was actually
Ambedkar's questions, not mine.
============================================================================
Excerpts from DN's article "Gandhi, Ambedkar and Special Electorates Issue",
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economical and Political Weekly, May 25, 1991, pp. 1328-1330.
------------------------------------------------------------
The objective of Gandhi's `epic' Yeravada fast was to force the dalits,
under Ambedkar, to accept their position of being subordinated to the
politically dominant sections of the Hindu community.
..........................
As British colonialsim sought to prolong its stay in India, it used every
conceivable form of division in Indian society to try and destroy the prospects
of unity in the anti-colonial struggle. Until Ambedkar, the dalit movement
hadlargely seen its enemy as merely the upper caste Hindus and often sided with
the British in opposing the oppression of the caste Hindus.
The congress on the other hand, allowed this tactic to be partially
successful by refusing to take up questions of internal contradictions in order
to strengthen the anti-colonial struggle. As it may be put, the Congress
refused to consider, even without equating them, the internal class questions
along with the national question, however haltingly and partially it did the
latter.
..........................
Gandhi, as is well known, started out as a staunch supporter of caste in
all its orthodoxy. He supported prohibitions on inter-dining and
inter-marriage as supposedly promoting "self-restraint". He held that caste
was a vital institution of Hinduism (hindu community ?) "I believe that caste
has saved Hinduism from disintegration. But like every other institution it
has suffered from excrescences. I consider the four divisions alone to be
fundamental, natural and essential. The innumerable subcastes are sometimes a
convenience, often a hinderance. The sooner there is fusion the better"
(Gandhi, Young India, 1964).
..........................
All along Gandhi insisted that caste (varna) was essential to Hinduism.
"If caste and varna are convertible and if varna is an intgeral part of
Hindusim, I do not know how a person who rejects caste, i.e., varna can call
himself a Hindu" (Gandhi, Harijan, 1936)
..........................
Gandhi's solicitous attitude towards the upper castes is revealed time and
again. In the 1924 Vykom Satyagraha against untouchability he asks the leaders
"not to overawe the orthodox" (Dalton in "India and Ceyon: Unity and Diversity"
ed. Philip Mason, 1967). At the time of the Yeravada fast Gandhi asked
Kelappan to call off his fast for opening up the Guruvayur temple in Malabar on
the special ground that "not enough notice had been given" (Pyarelal, "The
Epic Fast", 1932). Gandhi frequently cautioned that "there should be no
coercion. We must, by patient toil and self-suffering, convert the ignorant
and superstitious but never seek to compel them by force" (Pyarelal, 1932).
This "patient toil and self-suffering" in the struggle against
untouchability DID NOT INCLUDE A FAST UNTO DEATH, a weapon he was willing to
wield AGAINST AMBEDKAR and the demand for separate separate electorates for the
untouchables, but NOT AGAINST THE UPPER CASTES to demand an end to
untouchability. No wonder Ambedkar was compelled to ask, "why did he not
undertake a fast unto death against untouchability ?" (Ambedkar, "Dr.Babasaheb
Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, Vol. I, 1979).
==========================Excerpts end here===================================
Now, please dont go into the issue of good and bad of separate electorate
issue that needs a separate discussion and Ambedkar has many valid points to
offer. I dont want to digress from the issue of "Gandhism and Non-violence"
(Re: SL tamils issue) and hence I will not continue discussions on the Ambedkar
issue.
My main aim of bringing Ambedkar and Dalit issue is to show that how
Gandhi himself failed his own principles depending upon the circumstances. So
it is very easy to preach non-violence to others but we should think of
ourselves in the same position of fighting the evil which itself uses
terrorism.
It is not definitely my intention to defend terrorism, but I want to think
of the realities. I may be a very kind and quiet man but when somebody comes
to physically attack my own people, I will not even think about the
consequences and I will go for resisting the attack furiously. It is a general
human tendency.
Now, the question is where to draw this line of self-defence and when it
leads to wanton terrorism. This has to be debated by taking one's record of
self-defence and the circumstances. In that respect, I think no government, no
liberation movement (leave alone terrorist movements without any real cause)
and no intelligence agency can be discarded from the list of terrorists. Sure,
there is lot of variation in the magnitude of terrorist activities.
Finally I conclude with a request, let us not belittle the liberation
struggle of the SL Tamils who has no other choice except supporting LTTE,
however `terrorist' they are. I hoped that EROS would become dominant in the
arena but unfortunately SL govt and Indian govt, by their repressive and
imperialistic attitude made LTTE as the dominat movement. It is a reality and
we have to condemn the terrorism of LTTE, alongwith the state terrorism of SL
and Indian governments. By blaming only LTTE, we are only jeopardising the
interests of the `50 yeard' old struggle.
Thanks, I may not continue in this thread because of time.
--
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
Mr Nobody this represents your class of joke.
pakkuvam theriyaatha moorkarOdu muyavEnE!
makkaL saakiRaarkaL enRaal ethO uRai paRRi
pithaRRal umakku ethukku.
anban
Kathiravan
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
> on the political resolve of the Indian leader in power] by
> getting all the parties involved to negotiate and thats about
> it. It will try to keep its hands clean next time. I would
> consider that the best approach too. Because, in a three way
> tussle such as this where there is soooo much mutual distrust
> between the three parties involved and where each one tries to
> play one against the other as a means of undermining each other
> and to settle old scores, I wud say it is *best* to KEEP OFF.
> I wudn't want (and I will safely assume that there are many
> other Indians like me too) another one of our leader's innards
> bombed the hell out of him however much I/(we) dislike him
> *politically*.
Very positive suggestion. By knowing the jackallic
politics of srilankan and indian politics the trust
is lost. thamizhs do not want their help. thanks.
oru kaiyil pazham koduththu azhaiththu kaRpazhikka
thamizharkaL adimaikaL illai. You can India will
no help if SL army is going to finish tigers.
Sir, Thanks. The SL army knows that it needs
India to finish tigers. 100000's of SL soldiers
have deserted the ranks. The govt that is so
ruthless can't keep them. How come tigers
are still strong and dedicated.
You can after all send all the thamizhs to
heaven. It is better to die of shots than
being raped gracefully.
Thanks,
thamizhanban
Kathiravan
***thamizhanin thaakam thamizheezhath thaayakam******************8
One place where we can preserve our arts, literature
and temples.
The SL army did not even spare the temples and libraries.
>cheers,
>bk
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
What is revision?
Gandhi underestimated the Hindu fanatics.
Who came to power "not irumbu sardar patel"
not iron man, "sardar patel". not "karma veerar
kaamarj" Why can't lower caste people come
to power. Jinnah was smart. He did a good
thing.
nehru the hero
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^vs sardar
Police had assembled to stop people
hoisting Indian national flag. They threatened
to shoot whoever raises the flag. Nehru was
sitting behind wundering. Our sardar goes
amidst all the 1 million crowd raises the flag.
Nobody dares to shoot him.
who grabbed the power. nehru-
******
who killed gaandhi-gOdsE
*****
Nehru followed by Inthira, rao.
Dalits are maimed in UP/Bihar. They are slaves
all over India. Only a certain caste that is 5%
of India is in power all these days after freedom.
What does that show? Violence everywhere-
Sikhs who sacrificed so much for freedom
just killed in 1000's like some crow or something
in delhi. Explanation: Tree fell; grass will fall.
Humans. Take them. worship them call it democracy.
Proud democracy.
anban
Kathiravan
>[...]
>cheers,
>bk
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>>
>>Now, the article by Shankarapandi on this issue (in reply to Balaji Kannan)
>>pulled me into the discussion (well, I am not saying it was provocative
>>...). Before I make my counter-attack on his arguments which I think were
>>intellectually rich but impoverished in wisdom,
> KK, dont take it seriously. I want this sort of decent discussions
>instead of name callings. I respect Srini and BK for their logical arguments.
On the same note: I do respect your views. I am maybe emotional
but do not resort to name calling. If I do please indicate explicitly.
Infact I requested anpar vignesh personally for details and he
set the tone for all this. I also wrote against RRS for
the one linesm and asked for facts.
I have sympathy for RRS[do understand
that RRS has lost close relatives to the IPKF killing
spree]. He has agreed to observe restrain. I poinetd
to meenan personally that I did not like the caste
doctor and disgusted with India thing. He cancelled
the article.
I learnt a lot from sundar aiyaah! May be I am
not still the best but if anybody points any
wrong I have an open mind to review my words.
thanks
Kathir
> Friend, I did not intend to slander Gandhi. I am only against treating
>him God and attributing all the acheivements of our freedom fighters to him and
>the congress alone (that is the way our history books taught us). Some people
>even quesioned me whether I know anything about Gandhi. Though I am a sholar,
>I was once atracted by Gandhian ideals and went for a diplamo in Gandhian
>thought in Madurai University (not for the diplamo, but learn more about him).
>I was also a faithful supporter of Gandhi (I still prefer non-violence etc) and
>used to argue with `radical' minded people. But latter when I read about the
>other part of Gandhi and Congress, I changed my blind devotion towards him.
>Even now, I appreciate him as a popular mass leader and some of his Kirama
>Swarajya principles.
ask our bengaali friends. they would consider nEthaaji
above gaandhi. I respect both equally. But history does
not.
> I have a book in India (a biography of Bhagat Singh) which has published
>the photocopy of the correspondence between the British govt and Gandhi
>regarding the hanging of Bhagat Singh. I will try to get the book from India.
>It was a Tamil book by Subha.Veera Pandiyan who spent many months in New Delhi
>to get the documents from the museums and other archives.
It is true that gaandhi did not bother to save
pagath singhs life.
>untouchability. No wonder Ambedkar was compelled to ask, "why did he not
>undertake a fast unto death against untouchability ?" (Ambedkar, "Dr.Babasaheb
>Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, Vol. I, 1979).
ambEdhkaar was a kinder soul than the power hungry upper
castes.
anban
Kathiravan
Meenan Vishnu
>In reply to Mennan Vishnu
>>>
>>> Are you telling me that LTTE never received any help from RAW ?
>>> The reason that the LTTE is the strongest group is that MGR
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> decided for some reason that he was going to give TN govt. funds
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> and his own money (He had lots of it) to the LTTE. LTTE received
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Is that the only reason or one of the reasons ?
>
> The primary reason. It takes resources to fight wars. Without
> the blank check LTTE got from TN State Govt., LTTE could not
> have imposed the type of discipline on its members that is needed
> to build a ruthless military organisation. Remember cyanide capsules,
> no marriage rule etc. Not many young men can afford to do that
> no matter how badly they are treated. Unless of course, you
> "indoctrinate" them.
This clearly shows that urban Indian city dwellers have not understood the
psychology of LTTE cadres. No one can be convinced to suicide with
money.
>
> Interestingly, the LTTE chief Prabhakaran was exempt from the
> no marriage rule. I don't think that rule exists any longer.
> I guess that they learnt the heard way that everyone is human.
The marriage rule was made when there was one organization called TNT
(The Tamil New Tigers). At that time there were handful of militants
only (say about 20). They made a vow that they will not marry. But
later when the struggle became a popular mass struggle, such rules are
not necessary. One can still continue the struggle even when one is
married which was not possible when TNT was an urban guerrilla
organization. Infact most elderly LTTE members now are married and
having children.
>
>>
>>> disproportionate % of funds and weapons during 83-87 period compared
>>> to other groups. I remember 4 other groups - PLOT, EPRLF, TELO.
>>> I forget the fourth one. Well it has been a long time.
>>
>>Actually you are quite mis-infromed. The RAW gave most of the weapons to
>>TELO and EPRLF. LTTE and PLOTE did receive some. LTTE literature says
>>India gave them but Mohanlal in his book says Prabhakaran asked for it
>>seeing that other groups are growing beyond his with the Indian help.
>>
>
> The amount of money the RAW and Centre << funds from TN State./MGR
While I thank MGR for his support of the LTTE and Sri lankan refugees and
students. He did a great help. Considering the military expense of the
LTTE (A single bullet cost 60 ruppees. In a practice there are hundred
thousand bullets used per day!) MGR's well publicised gifts were small.
(Nevertheless it is much appreciated and every Tamil should be grateful
to him)
>
>>The weapons that were given the Sri lankan militants were specially
>>made for them. They were made of cast iron so that they cannot be
>>fired continuously. They can be fired for a while and one has to cool
>>it before using it again. This is an ingenius plan of RAW to keep the
>>militant activity contained. The weapons can be used to brew trouble
>>in Sri lanka but not enough to defeat the army. The LTTE realized this
>>and continued to rely on its own arm purchase.
>>
>
> Most of the weapons used by LTTE and other groups were bought
> on international market. It would be hard for Sri Lankans to
> prove that India of helping the LTTE.
>
>>One reason TELO was defeated easily by the LTTE was that TELO relied
>>almost entirely on Indian supplied cast iron arms whereas LTTE
>>bought superior arms.
>>
> LTTE had more men, more weapons, better organisation and the killer
> instinct. TELO had no chance. It wasn't even a defeat. Call it a
> massacare.
This is not true. In terms of man count. TELO and EPRLF had the most.
TELO and EPRLF and PLOTE had about 6000 men each. LTTE had only about
2000 full time members (LTTE had more sympathysers)
>>
>>LTTE's explanation for its action was that TELO was planning an attack
>>on it. It was not convincing then to many Tamil people and LTTE lost
>>its popularity somewhat until the IPKF fiasco.
>
> That was always been the excuse. TELO had 200-300 members. LTTE
> had 3000-4000 armed militants. Why would TELO want to attack ?
> Are they that foolish ?
These numbers are way off.
>
>>
>>
>>Again you are quite misinformed. According to the present Indian
>>high-commisioner, in a BBC interview said that "Had the Indians not
>>intervened in 1987, the demand for Eelam was irrepressible".
>>
>
> I suggest that you read newspapers and journals in the period
> BEFORE the July 87 accord.
I suggest you read Hohanlal's book "MGR: the man and the myth".
>
>>Eventhough LTTE survived the Indian attack. It was quite weakened.
>>Scores of LTTE cadres lost hope and left (and are in Canada).
>>Many good fighters died. Now the LTTE is primarily consists of
>>teenagers (13-16) and women cadres. Thanks to India.
>>
>
> They might be weaker than before.
> It looks to me like that the LTTE is more intimidating than ever.
It is LTTE's committment that will always be intimidating to the
imperialists.
>
> ** Nobody **
>
Meenan Vishnu
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>>A joke about Bill Clinton:
>> It is said Bill Clinton is considering changing the
>> Democratic Party emblem from a donkey to a condom, because it
>> stands for inflation, protects a bunch of pricks, halts
>> production, and gives a false sense of security while being
>> screwed.
KK writes
> Mr Nobody this represents your class of joke.
> pakkuvam theriyaatha moorkarOdu muyavEnE!
> makkaL saakiRaarkaL enRaal ethO uRai paRRi
> pithaRRal umakku ethukku.
No personal attacks please. If you cannot answer the questions,
keep quiet. I can also get give sermons and call names.
You compared Netaji and Subhas Chandra Bose with LTTE.
I am saying that they did not kill fellow Indians and innocent
British civillians.
Do you still deny that LTTE killed innocent
Sri Lankan Tamils (I am not talking about other Tamil militant
groups. I am talking about doctors, teachers and human right activists
who spoke up against wrongdoings of the LTTE)
Do you deny that LTTE massacared Sinhalese and Tamil Muslims (including
women & children) in the East ?
Do you deny the massacare of 150 policemen who surrendered on the
promise that they will be treated properly ?
I don't expect anyone to be perfect. Nor should you.
I will like to hear from Raj, Vicky and other Sri Lankan Tamils
(outside the KK, MV, RRS co.)
BTW, I live in United States of America. At least as of Friday,
May 28, 1993, I am allowed to freely criticize the government
of U.S.A. without getting killed or tortured. I am not sure
how it works in Canada ? Or that matter in Tamil Eelam ?
Probably you want to inform everyone. I am serious.
** Nobody **
All standard disclaimers apply
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
>
> Very positive suggestion. By knowing the jackallic
> politics of srilankan and indian politics the trust
> is lost. thamizhs do not want their help. thanks.
Well, "thamizhs" asked for help in 1983.
I wonder what you mean by "thamizhs"?
>
> oru kaiyil pazham koduththu azhaiththu kaRpazhikka
> thamizharkaL adimaikaL illai. You can India will
> no help if SL army is going to finish tigers.
> Sir, Thanks. The SL army knows that it needs
> India to finish tigers. 100000's of SL soldiers
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sri Lankan Army, Air Force and Home Guards are less than 100,000
in strength. So don't push your point too much.
Didn't mean to nitpick.
** Nobody **
Balaji Kannan
A major first in any "healing process" is an ADMISSION OF GUILT.
If Japan and US can sink their differences and forgive each
other after having slit each others' throats ROYALLY, [to the
extent that their economies are very closely knit today] I don't
see any reason why any two countries/organizations that have
been fighting each other for a long time cannot do the same...
In the current SL Tamil struggle, almost all the parties who
have/had a role in it have done their share to fuel hatred &
mistrust. If the Indian army is indeed culpable of largescale
rape and plunder of Tamil civilians in SL then the GOI should
publicly apologize for that and all other acts of (c)ommission..
The SL govt should also apologize for all the atrocities it
perpetrated on the Tamils who are SL citizens like any other
Sinhalese Buddhist or Christian. The LTTE for its part, shd
come clean on all its past terrorist actions and admit its
share of guilt. Same goes for the other parties/organizations
involved in the mess.
Iam assuming that all of them desire peace. In which case, before
coming to the negotiating table, they *will have* to come clean
on all their past "misdeeds".
My last post on this thread. I don't intend wasting my "dry logic"
on unsuspecting souls who have emotional pipelines jutting out
of their eyes, mouths and fingers ..... There is this chap who
considers himself the sole guardian of Tamil/Dravidian rights and
doesn't miss an opportunity to shoot off his hips under the guise
of arguing sensibly. I don't want to be labelled ina drOhi one more
time on this net and I pretty well know this is one topic I cud
invite the wrath of this fool if I continued any further. Not to
be judgmental, but I tht RRS and MV for a change argued quite
coolly on an issue that is of greater concern to them. Thanks to
others who have been discussing this important Tamizh issue quite
"sensibly" on sct. I hope SL's like VIcky and Raj would contribute
more in terms of articles and opinions so that all of us can learn
more. Afterall, this net can be used constructively too. A case in
point is the recent spate of Fax messages to the US Senators.
[That reminds me of : Why the US or the UN haven't/don't show as much
interest in this problem as they have/do in others ?? Is it because
we are "dark-skinned people with no cultural ties with the West"
or is it because they have no "vital economic, political interest"
in seeing this problem resolved ??? Just wondered...]
cheers,
bk
Srinivasan Gopalaswamy
> My last post on this thread. I don't intend wasting my "dry logic"
> on unsuspecting souls who have emotional pipelines jutting out
> of their eyes, mouths and fingers .....
Thanks, you spoke for me too. (Rest of the article was good too)
First step in a fruitful discussion is to not to suspect the other side's
sincerity.
Just, as a matter of fact to some netters, please dont think arguing on SCT
with dry logic is the only source of amusement to me.
(This was not directed against Shankarapandi. Thanks to you, Shankarapandi,
for excellent articles on LTTE and comments on EROS. It is a pity GOI did
not encourage EROS but did contrary)
Srini
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
>
>
Several portions deleted to save bw and also because I either agree or have
no comments.
> I don't want to be labelled ina drOhi one more
> time on this net
Really 8-) ? OK, here we go - "bk ! You ina drOhi !" :-)
[disclaimer - couldn't resist pulling bk's leg. This is NOT to
be taken seriously ! All flames will be ignored]
> "sensibly" on sct. I hope SL's like VIcky and Raj would contribute
> more in terms of articles and opinions so that all of us can learn
> more.
Yes, the articles by several netters (SS, Vicky, Raj and others) have been
helpful in making people see the other side of the argument. Good to see
such a constructive discussion.
> [That reminds me of : Why the US or the UN haven't/don't show as much
> interest in this problem as they have/do in others ?? Is it because
> we are "dark-skinned people with no cultural ties with the West"
> or is it because they have no "vital economic, political interest"
> in seeing this problem resolved ??? Just wondered...]
Probably the latter - remember how the self-proclaimed defenders of the
Kurds in Iraq never even bothered about the Tiannenmen Square incidents
in China (China has once again been given the 'most favoured nation' status
as far as trading with US goes) ? Well - every country looks after its own
interest - and all these holier-than-thou attitudes and moral posturing
only makes one wonder at the hypocrisy.
Gayathri.
--
A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
R.M.Viknarasah
>
> Why not start some new topic of major discussion.
I support this. We had a good discussion. But I think we had
enough of it. It rather getting toooooooo boring to see the same issue
over and over again.
Lets start some thing "light" for a change.
{ how about the "weight" of Gayathiri ? --- sema "ice" ;-) }
But it is good to see that we can discuss "rationally" even
in such a sensitive issue.
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>--
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>'kaappaaRRik koLLa padimamum (image), pangu peRa adhikaaramum
> illaadhapOdhu eLiya uNmaigaL thaamaaga veLippadum'
> - Sundara Ramaswamy
To see duality is to see falsity. The world is non-dual.
The duality is due to ignorance of self. So to see truth is to
see falsity.
--- paramAthma R.M.Viknarasah
{ attitude problem or what ! ;-)) }
raj
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
KK writes
>
>
> What is revision?
>
> Gandhi underestimated the Hindu fanatics.
> Who came to power "not irumbu sardar patel"
> not iron man, "sardar patel". not "karma veerar
> kaamarj" Why can't lower caste people come
> to power. Jinnah was smart. He did a good
> thing.
Just in case you didn't know,
Sardar Patel was responsible for "imperial state of India."
He used the same tactics to unify India that the GOI is using to
keep India intact. In fact, Patels are "upper castes". He was the Home
minister from 1947-50. He died of a heart attack in 1950. In fact,
if he was alive today, you would be calling him a right wing
reactionary.
deleted irrelevant stuff
Take the weekend off. Relax.
** Nobody **
Knicks over Bulls in 5
Sarath Krishnaswamy
|> If Japan and US can sink their differences and forgive each
|> other after having slit each others' throats ROYALLY, [to the
|> extent that their economies are very closely knit today] I don't
|> see any reason why any two countries/organizations that have
|> been fighting each other for a long time cannot do the same...
True (although the situation between the US and Japan after
WWII was a bit different in that it was pretty clear who the
aggressors in WWII were).
|> In the current SL Tamil struggle, almost all the parties who
|> have/had a role in it have done their share to fuel hatred &
|> mistrust. If the Indian army is indeed culpable of largescale
|> rape and plunder of Tamil civilians in SL then the GOI should
|> publicly apologize for that and all other acts of (c)ommission..
|> The SL govt should also apologize for all the atrocities it
|> perpetrated on the Tamils who are SL citizens like any other
|> Sinhalese Buddhist or Christian. The LTTE for its part, shd
|> come clean on all its past terrorist actions and admit its
|> share of guilt. Same goes for the other parties/organizations
|> involved in the mess.
|>
Although most likely (if a settlement is reached), there
will be no admission of guilt, but rather a compromise
on principle by all sides (and potentially reparations).
I'd consider it unlikely, though, that India would be
heavily involved in the process. Clearly past attempts
at intervention have not been successful from anyone's
point of view.
|> Iam assuming that all of them desire peace. In which case, before
|> coming to the negotiating table, they *will have* to come clean
|> on all their past "misdeeds".
Not necessarily true, in the exciting world of international
politics. And not even necessary. I don't think that many
people are looking for a solely moral victory here; what
will count are concessions or compromises that *have been
implemented*.
|>
|> My last post on this thread. I don't intend wasting my "dry logic"
|> on unsuspecting souls who have emotional pipelines jutting out
|> of their eyes, mouths and fingers ..... There is this chap who
|> considers himself the sole guardian of Tamil/Dravidian rights and
|> doesn't miss an opportunity to shoot off his hips under the guise
"...shoot off his hips..."? Bk, you're getting weird :-)
|> of arguing sensibly. I don't want to be labelled ina drOhi one more
|> time on this net and I pretty well know this is one topic I cud
|> invite the wrath of this fool if I continued any further. Not to
|> be judgmental, but I tht RRS and MV for a change argued quite
|> coolly on an issue that is of greater concern to them. Thanks to
|> others who have been discussing this important Tamizh issue quite
|> "sensibly" on sct. I hope SL's like VIcky and Raj would contribute
|> more in terms of articles and opinions so that all of us can learn
|> more. Afterall, this net can be used constructively too. A case in
|> point is the recent spate of Fax messages to the US Senators.
|> [That reminds me of : Why the US or the UN haven't/don't show as much
|> interest in this problem as they have/do in others ?? Is it because
|> we are "dark-skinned people with no cultural ties with the West"
|> or is it because they have no "vital economic, political interest"
|> in seeing this problem resolved ??? Just wondered...]
|>
|>
Almost certainly the latter. Then again, one can make
the case that without "vital economic or political interest"
countries shouldn't get involved anyway. I'm not sure
to what degree I agree with that, but the naked truth is that
big countries can afford to avoid moral judgements in order
to safeguard their own interests. Way of the world, until
we all start becoming more trustworthy and more respectful
of each other :-)
|> cheers,
|> bk
Sarath.
(of the perpetual thesis program, inc.)
--
*********************************************************
* Sarath Krishnaswamy *
* MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory *
* 545 Technology Square room 828 *
* Cambridge, MA 02139 (617) 253-1513 *
* skri...@ai.mit.edu *
*********************************************************
nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu
deleted ...
>
>This clearly shows that urban Indian city dwellers have not understood the
>psychology of LTTE cadres. No one can be convinced to suicide with
>money.
Trying to guess my identity !! I have spent several years in rural
Tamilnadu.
My point was that if LTTE had not received the initial support
from GOI, TN State Govt. and RAW, they would not have been able
to build their core organization.
No one can be convinced to suicide with money. That is true. I
can easily lure unemployed youths (who are threatened by Sri Lankan
Army) to training camps. Once they are in training camps (safe
from the Sri Lankan Army) I can brainwash and motivate them into
decent warriors. You don't have to be a superman to defeat the Sri
Lankan Army.
deleted
>
>The marriage rule was made when there was one organization called TNT
^^^
What is next ? TBS, CNN, CBS ? :))) (Sarcasm for the humor
impaired creatures on the net)
>
>While I thank MGR for his support of the LTTE and Sri lankan refugees and
>students. He did a great help. Considering the military expense of the
>LTTE (A single bullet cost 60 ruppees. In a practice there are hundred
>thousand bullets used per day!) MGR's well publicised gifts were small.
>(Nevertheless it is much appreciated and every Tamil should be grateful
>to him)
>
I am not taliking about high profile public gifts. I am talking
about beneath the table money laundered by TN political parties
to militant groups.
I remember the DMK collecting money for Sri Lankan Tamils.
DMK decided to give Rs X to the five different Tamil groups.
Interesting to note: LTTE did not accept the money from DMK.
DMK took the money allocated to LTTE and gave it to TELO.
This was before MGR got the stroke which paralyzed him.
deleted some stuff
>
>This is not true. In terms of man count. TELO and EPRLF had the most.
>TELO and EPRLF and PLOTE had about 6000 men each. LTTE had only about
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>2000 full time members (LTTE had more sympathysers)
TELO 6000
EPRLF 6000
PLOTE 6000
Total 18,000
LTTE 2,000
Grand
Total 20,000
That is a lot of men. So is it safe to say that LTTE and sympathizers
killed most of 18,000 members of other groups. That is lot more than
the number of Tamils killed by Sri Lankan Army.
>
>These numbers are way off.
I will back up numbers with solid proof.
>
>I suggest you read Hohanlal's book "MGR: the man and the myth".
>
It is Mohandas, not Hohanlal.
deleted
>
>It is LTTE's committment that will always be intimidating to the
^^^^^^^^^^^
Committment to what ? Make sure that actions match your rhetoric.
>imperialists.
>
Thanks for your reply. Glad to see no name calling or personal attacks
from you.
** Nobody **
N Paramesh,Senior Lecturer
> In <930527201...@cicada.berkeley.edu> nob...@cicada.berkeley.edu writes:
>
>>KK writes
>>>>nEthaaji was a terrorist. bhagath singh
>>>>was a terrorist in congress books. But not
>>>>in the minds of everybody.
>
>> Nethaaji never massacared British civillians and murdered
>> fellow Indians in the name of liberation struggle.
I hear in Australia (from Tamils here ) that when Subhash Chandra Bose
had fought the British (while in exile), most of the "soldiers" in
his "army" were only Tamils (mostly from Burma and Indo-China).
Anyone knows more about this?
N Paramesh
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
> In article <2C06819...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
> >
> > Why not start some new topic of major discussion.
>
> I support this. We had a good discussion. But I think we had
> enough of it. It rather getting toooooooo boring to see the same issue
> over and over again.
>
> Lets start some thing "light" for a change.
> { how about the "weight" of Gayathiri ? --- sema "ice" ;-) }
En swamy, nAn nalla irukkaradhu umakku pidikkaliyA :-) ? oNNum
theriyAdha appAvigaLai ippdi vambukku izhukkalAmA ? "sema ice"
enRu neengaL solvathai ninaiththAl enakku jaladOsham pidikkum
- otherwise if you mean "light" in the same sense as "kuchchi",
you are not doing justice to me :-).
[aside: should I start flaming Raj ? :-) vEndAm - ippOdhaikku
vittu vidalAm - avarE "engE nimmadhi" enRu pAdikkoNdirukkiRAr ]
> --- paramAthma R.M.Viknarasah
^^^^^^^^^^
8-) ! ummai antha paramAthmadhAn kAppARRavEndum :-) !
S. Parthasarathy
>>
>> Why not start some new topic of major discussion.
> Lets start some thing "light" for a change.
> { how about the "weight" of Gayathiri ? --- sema "ice" ;-) }
naNbarE. light... weight. neer pulavar. neer pularvar. neer "weight"aana
party. ippadi logicaa ice vaikiReer, thaikulaththiRku (if i may say so :-).
sometime back someone wasn't happy about this word. well ...... ;-)
(courtesy: michel madhana kaama rajan for a similar joke)
Parthasarathy S.
Chemical Engg
Monash Uni
affable
>- otherwise if you mean "light" in the same sense as "kuchchi",
>you are not doing justice to me :-).
;-)Hereafter, we should be reminded of poosanikkaai/parankkikkaai/muttaikkOs
Bindugosh/present day kushbu, and not "kucchi" whenever we hear the name
Gayathri. Are you satisfied, GK? edhO ennaal mudintha "justice". ;-)
>Gayathri.
>--
>A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
What happened to your "Never trouble trouble..."? Or does this .sig
convey the same meaning,analogizing unicorn,leapfrog,plays all to trouble? :-)
Cheers,
Venkat "who wants to be in read only mode" Aruna.
--
ar...@jetson.uh.edu | If you love something,set it free.
ar...@menudo.uh.edu | If it comes back, it is yours.
ar...@uhupvm1.uh.edu | If it does not, it never was.
ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)|
ar...@lisa.cc.uh.edu (-do-) |
(713)225-6426(h) & (713)743-4250(w) |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
R.M.Viknarasah
>
>;-)Hereafter, we should be reminded of poosanikkaai/parankkikkaai/muttaikkOs
>Bindugosh/present day kushbu, and not "kucchi" whenever we hear the name
>Gayathri. Are you satisfied, GK? edhO ennaal mudintha "justice". ;-)
>
ennadhu! poosanikkai, parankkikkai ,....... hmmmm
"edhai eduppadhu edhai viduvadhu enathth thEdum idam
maNiyammAl textile"
---- sorry, edhO pazhaya (madras) njyAbaham.
--- thanks to AIR adds.
vidukadhai
----------
maraththil vAzhum geevan peyar enna ?
I mean who lives "at" a tree ( excuse my grammer ;-)) ?
sariyAna vidai ezhudhi anuppa vENdiaya idam
"vaNdaloor zoo"
clue
----
>ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)|
^^^^
sorry, could not resist this. No offence meant.
raj
ps
kadihal jAkkradhai !!
affable
[deleted]
>vidukadhai
>----------
> maraththil vAzhum geevan peyar enna ?
> I mean who lives "at" a tree ( excuse my grammer ;-)) ?
> sariyAna vidai ezhudhi anuppa vENdiaya idam
> "vaNdaloor zoo"
>
>clue
>----
>>ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)|
> ^^^^
> sorry, could not resist this. No offence meant.
No offence taken, Raj. But, copyright belongs to Meena(me...@top.cis.syr.edu)
as she implied, way back, sth similar to your implication now. :-)For her,
she came with @top of the world, not giving me a chance to retort. ;-)
>ps
>kadihal jAkkradhai !!
Hah, should it not be "naaikaL jaakkiradhai" ? ;-)
Cheers,
Venkat "who wanted to be in read-only-mode but yielded to Raj's bait" Aruna.
--
ar...@jetson.uh.edu | If you love something,set it free.
ar...@menudo.uh.edu | If it comes back, it is yours.
ar...@uhupvm1.uh.edu | If it does not, it never was.
ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)|
ar...@lisa.cc.uh.edu (-do-) |
(713)225-6426(h) & (713)743-4250(w) |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
> In article <64...@gos.ukc.ac.uk>, r...@ukc.ac.uk (R.M.Viknarasah) writes:
>
> > Lets start some thing "light" for a change.
> > { how about the "weight" of Gayathiri ? --- sema "ice" ;-) }
>
> naNbarE. light... weight. neer pulavar. neer pularvar. neer "weight"aana
> party. ippadi logicaa ice vaikiReer, thaikulaththiRku (if i may say so :-).
idhaivida oru ice irukkamudiyumO, Raj :-) ?
And Mr.Parthasarathy, are you married ? En kEtkarEnna, ippdi
thaikulamnellAm neenga sonna indha kAlathu peN ungaLai kalyAnam
paNNikkamAttA. "Is it our *prime duty* to society to be mothers
or is it something we may choose to be during some part of our life ?"
appdInnu ethir kELvi kEtpA - in that sense you might agree that the
word is condescending.
So, if you are unmarried and want to get married, you may have to seek
some 'pAttikulam' :-). Oh, I forgot - you did tell CV once that you were
very old, right ? That explains it ;-).
> sometime back someone wasn't happy about this word. well ...... ;-)
If this is a reference to my posting on 'motherhood', 'sacrifice' etc,
I was just pointing out that if you take a man/woman (any individual),
these are desirable characteristics if you substitute 'parenthood' for
'motherhood' (obviously the latter word doesn't fit a man - 'fatal error'
as FFT would say :-) ) but may not be the most important characteristics.
Not that I was unhappy about the word 'motherhood' - I have nothing
against it. If you didn't refer to my posting, then I'll let it pass.
However, women (self included) may not like the word 'thaikulam',
(direct translation : race of mothers) as it is condescending.
>
> Parthasarathy S.
> Chemical Engg
> Monash Uni
Gayathri.
R.M.Viknarasah
>In article <1993May30...@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>, cen...@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (S. Parthasarathy) writes:
>
>
[.....]
>So, if you are unmarried and want to get married, you may have to seek
>some 'pAttikulam' :-). Oh, I forgot - you did tell CV once that you were
>very old, right ? That explains it ;-).
hahahahahah ippadi oru thiruppam !
{
"thAikkulaththil" ippadi oru sangadam irukkumnu enakkuththeriyAmap
pOchchE ! yappA ! inmE jAkkiradhaiyAha irukkanum. ;-)
}
idhO oru (cinema) pAdal... enadhu anbuk kANikkai
"Old'ellAm gold'u --un
maNdai bald'u
Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA -- nee
Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA "
{ sung by P.Susila . Film = Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA ??}
>> Parthasarathy S.
>
>Gayathri.
raj
Balaji Kannan
r...@ukc.ac.uk (R.M.Viknarasah) writes:
> "Old'ellAm gold'u --un
> maNdai bald'u
> Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA -- nee
> Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA "
> { sung by P.Susila . Film = Odi viLaiyAdu thAththA ??}
:-) Good one Raj ! Brought back memories when, as a kid I used to
- No kidding ! - laugh at the sight of bald people and even
came up with an elaborate nomenclature [latin names included]
for all kinds of Sotta Thalais. Ha ha ! Summertime is turning
out to be real fun :-)
Stop posting all those kaadhal songs before I send you some
mail bombs :-) All us ondikattais have a long way to go
[atleast 2 years for me] before we start singing those songs
to our wives !
cheers,
Mr. Lonelyheart
"At twenty we don't care what the world thinks of us..
At thirty we begin to worry what it thinks of us....
And at fifty we find it was not thinking of us at all."
Affable
(Balaji Kannan) writes:
[deleted]
> Ha ha ! Summertime is turning
> out to be real fun :-)
>
> Stop posting all those kaadhal songs before I send you some
> mail bombs :-) All us ondikattais have a long way to go
> [atleast 2 years for me] before we start singing those songs
> to our wives !
Yep, summertime is turning out to be real fun. :-) I could read lots
of things between the lines of bk. Couldn't resist following up.
Here you go:
[1] bk implies,"gals, I won't be available atleast for two more years". :-)
[2] " " "gals, start applying after two years" :-)
[3] " " "I'm not interested in love marraiges" ;-)
>cheers,
>Mr. Lonelyheart
I pray to the almighty for some Miss.Lonelyheart to wait for bk for
two more years. :-)
I'd like to take this chance to quote Dr.CRS's mail here. [It's one
of the rare mails which I've not deleted yet. Hope CRS won't mind
in revealing his e-mail contents here. CRS, if you do mind, let me know,
I'll cancel the article immediately.]
---------------------------CRS's unedited mail-------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 17:07:32 -0400
From: "C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering"
<selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>
To: Venkatachalam Aruna <ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu>
Subject: Re: affable
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
In-Reply-To: <1rhluv$o...@menudo.uh.edu>
References: <1rh9jr...@phakt.usc.edu>
Organization: University of Waterloo
Cc:
nalvaazhththukkaL !
miga arithaagavE meyyaana kaathal thuLiRkkum !
kaathaliththuththaan thirumaNam ceyya vENdum enbathu illai,
thirumaNam ceythapinnum anbOdu pazhaga pazhaga aazhamaana
kaathal uNarvu thuLirkkalaaam.
aazhamaana kaathal ERpattaal
kaLLanum, kolaigaaranum kooda thirundhividuvaarkaL.
kaaNpathu ellaam kaathal alla, thirumaNam aanavargaL ellaam
kaathal uNarndhavargaL illai ..
illaRa vaazhkkai pErinbaththiRkkum vazhi kaattum.
vaazhththukkaLudan
-Selvaa
------------------------mail ends----------------------------------------
Regards,
Venkat "who still wants to be in read-only-mode but lured by the fun" Aruna.
--
ar...@jetson.uh.edu | If you love something,set it free.
ar...@menudo.uh.edu | If it comes back, it is yours.
ar...@uhupvm1.uh.edu | If it does not, it never was.
ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)|
ar...@lisa.cc.uh.edu (-do-) |
(713)225-6426(h) & (713)743-4250(w) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
>
>;-)Hereafter, we should be reminded of poosanikkaai/parankkikkaai/muttaikkOs
>Bindugosh/present day kushbu, and not "kucchi" whenever we hear the name
>Gayathri. Are you satisfied, GK? edhO ennaal mudintha "justice". ;-)
>
appdiyA ? Justice, huh :-) ? Here's some logic theory ;-) for you (Raj,
ennai vambukkA izhukkareenga :-) ?). Bindu Ghosh may not be "kuchchi" but
hey, Sridevi and Madhuri Dikshit are not "kuchchi" either (by kuchchi I meant
as thin as the comedy actor Omakuchchi) :-). Affable - I'm scandalized.
You claim to be my aNNa and this is the justice and support you give me !
Too bad, too bad :-)...you drOhi :-) ! [Now, why does this remind me of
bk :-) ? No connection ;-) ]
Gayathri.
Disclaimer : Everything written above is in the lighter vein and is NOT to
be taken seriously.
Balaji Kannan
Aruna writes:
> Yep, summertime is turning out to be real fun. :-) I could read lots
>of things between the lines of bk. Couldn't resist following up.
Since you are in read-only mode, you have the luxury of reading
above, over, under and between the lines what ?? :-)
bk, *IF* he felt like "saying" something atall wud have "said" it this way:
Here *I* go:
>Here you go:
>[1] bk implies,"gals, I won't be available atleast for two more years". :-)
"Please, can't you wait atleast for 2 more years" :-)
>[2] " " "gals, start applying after two years" :-)
"Please, consider me after two more years" :-)
>[3] " " "I'm not interested in love marraiges" ;-)
I wud have let this one pass but felt like saying
"Boooooooo !" :-)
AiyyO Venkat, you have to stoop to conquer man. The days of "rescuing
damsels in distress" are all over. Sadly ! :-)
Nah, Nah. I don't see the 2 options I would have liked to see.
4] I'm just suffering from a bout of summertime homesickness.
5] See what too much of SCT can do to Mr. Lonelyheart.
Thanks for your prayers though !
Who knows, I may *really* need it when the time comes and if I haven't
still gone crazy :-)
And get back to post-also mode or else you will be reading between the
lines of everyone of my post and I will have to shift to clarify-only
mode after that :-)
cheers,
Mr. Cheerfulheart
R.M.Viknarasah
> Stop posting all those kaadhal songs before I send you some
> mail bombs :-) All us ondikattais have a long way to go
> [atleast 2 years for me] before we start singing those songs
> to our wives !
>
>
>
>cheers,
>Mr. Lonelyheart
appAda !. ennappOla innoruththan kAyiRAna ? idho oru
"veRuppEththum padalam"
soRkaLE, indhamAdhiri ondikattaihaLai veRuppEththungal.
pOr muzhangattum ....
kaNNammA en kAdhali
by
bAradhi
"thillith thurukkar seidha vazhakkamadi ! peNgal
thiraiyittu muhamalar maRaiththu vaiththal
valliyidaiyinaiyum Ongi munniRkkum -- indha
mArbaiyum mooduvadhu sAththiram kaNdAi
valliyidaiyinaiyum mArbinaiyum - thuNi
maRaiththadhanAl azhahu maRaindhadhillai
sollithth therivadhillai manmadhakkalai -- muhach
sOdhi maRaiththumaoru kAdhlinguNdO ?
Ariyar munneRihal mEnmaiyengiRai paNdai
Ariyap peNgaLukkuth thiraihaL uNdO ?
Oriru muRai kaNdu pazhahiya pin -- veRum
oppukkuk kAttuvadhindh nANamennadi ?
yArirunth ennaiyingu thaduththiduvAr -- valu
vAha muhaththiraiyai ahaRRivittAl ?
kAriyamillaiyadi veeN pasappilE -- kan
kaNdavan thOlurikak kAththiruppEnO ?"
hmmmmmmm.........
raj
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
A lot of thamizh maRavars volunteered from
Malaysia and Singapore as well. thamizhs have
always fought bravely. Incidentally, Madras Regiment
was the first ragiment in India.
On the side we should also remember that
before Nethaaji there was a Sikh maRavar[I forgot his name]
who recruited a lot of Sikhs from Vancouver[Sikhs were
in canada even during 1870's. They were brought to work
in lumbering industry] and set on sail to attack the
British. The mission failed.
kathiravan
>N Paramesh
>
S. Parthasarathy
> In article <1993May30...@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>, cen...@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (S. Parthasarathy) writes:
>> In article <64...@gos.ukc.ac.uk>, r...@ukc.ac.uk (R.M.Viknarasah) writes:
:-) mode on
do_confirm :-) mode on
| And Mr.Parthasarathy, are you married ? En kEtkarEnna, ippdi
| thaikulamnellAm neenga sonna indha kAlathu peN ungaLai kalyAnam
| paNNikkamAttA.
oru pEchchukku sonna intha ainthu ezhuthu vaarththaikaakavaa ? ammaadi!
ithukkE ippadinnaa, kalyaaNaththukku pin naan vaayilla poochchi illai
vaayillaa poochchi, athu maadhiri aaka vEndiyathu thaan :-) pOlirukku.
| "Is it our *prime duty* to society to be mothers
| or is it something we may choose to be during some part of our life ?"
| appdInnu ethir kELvi kEtpA - in that sense you might agree that the
| word is condescending.
thaaraaLamaa kEkkattum. naan vENdaannu sollalai. i wrote that stuff in a
lighter vein (note :-) in the end). athukkaaka ippadi kObappadalaamO ?
ippadi seriousaa edhuththuNdaa eppadi ?
:-) mode off
:-( mode on (serious mode)
yes, if you attach the pharse *prime duty* to motherhood, then the word
"thaaikulam" is condescending, as you say. i for one, never even
contemplated that *motherhood* is a *prime duty* of a woman. but if some woman
do feel that way, then i am sorry. imo "motherhood" is a
responsibility [fortunately or unfortunately] which nature has rested on
the shoulders of females to ensure the survival of mammals.
unfortunately, no male, even if they want to, can share that
responsibility [ at least as of today. science and technology might
prove me wrong in due course ]. i admire and respect women for what they
go thro in bearing a child. so lemme rest my case with that.
:-( mode off
:-) mode on
nature, imo is a poor thing [like me perhaps ;-). it did not anticipate
these kind of gender supression etc etc. had it done so, well ... you
know what i mean :-)
| So, if you are unmarried and want to get married, you may have to seek
| some 'pAttikulam' :-). Oh, I forgot - you did tell CV once that you were
| very old, right ? That explains it ;-).
EthO oru pEchchukku "thaaikulam"nnu sonnathukkE ippadi oru pEchchuu.
ithil naan "paatikulam"nnu specify paNNI thEdinEn, naan ambEl thaan.
;-). vENdaamdaa saami. aLai viduNGkO.
>> sometime back someone wasn't happy about this word. well ...... ;-)
>
> If this is a reference to my posting on 'motherhood', 'sacrifice' etc,
< stuff deleted>
> Not that I was unhappy about the word 'motherhood' - I have nothing
> against it. If you didn't refer to my posting, then I'll let it pass.
aiyaiyO. enakku vENum. enakku vENum. naan generala sonnEn. avvaLavu thaan.
yaar sonnathunnu theriNYchirunthaa, pEr sollaama irunthiruppEnaa ? [atleast
antha vaarththaiyai thaan use paNNiruppEnaa ?] i did not refer to your
article. i did not even know that it was you who was involved in that
discussion about "motherhood".
> However, women (self included) may not like the word 'thaikulam',
> (direct translation : race of mothers) as it is condescending.
sorry about it. i just mentioned it on a lighter note. thats all.
again on a lighter note on ur suggestion about "paatikulams", i don't know
whether you had this experience. vayathil ennai vida periya peNmaNiyai
mariyaathai kuduththu "maami"nnu sonnEn, udanE "maami"nnu koopidaathE. romba
vayasaana maathiri irukku. pEr solliyE kooppidunnu, enakku oru advice. so
no one is going to accept that they belong to "paatikulam" :-)
EthO "light"aa comment adichchu ippadi "weightaa" oru padhil
vaaNGkaNumaa ? ithu thaan vidhiNGkaRathu. tharaiyil kidantha eRumbai
kaadhil viduNNdu kudaiyuthE kudaiyuthEnnu solRa nilamai. oru uvamaikku
sonnEn :-) pidikkalainnaa vERa pazha mozhiyai payan paduththik koLLavum.
yaar eRummbunnu tharkaam seiyavENdaam ;-). ellaam kaalamdaa saami.
kaalam.
:-) mode off
PS: IMO, in India, one of the best way of reducing population growth is
to have the mandatory presense of husbands during wives' delivery. once
they [the husband] see what it is all about, i will bet most would
never even dare to put their wives thro' that ordeal again. well,
just a thought.
> A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a unicorn.
if your sig does not have any inner meaning ;-), then
in down under, he never plays leapfrog with a kangaroo.
--
Affable
>In article <1u8c30$n...@menudo.uh.edu> Venkatachalam Aruna
<ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu> writes:
> >
> >;-)Hereafter, we should be reminded of poosanikkaai/parankkikkaai/muttaikkOs
> >Bindugosh/present day kushbu, and not "kucchi" whenever we hear the name
> >Gayathri. Are you satisfied, GK? edhO ennaal mudintha "justice". ;-)
> >
>
>appdiyA ? Justice, huh :-) ? Here's some logic theory ;-) for you (Raj,
>ennai vambukkA izhukkareenga :-) ?). Bindu Ghosh may not be "kuchchi" but
>hey, Sridevi and Madhuri Dikshit are not "kuchchi" either (by kuchchi I meant
>as thin as the comedy actor Omakuchchi) :-). Affable - I'm scandalized.
>You claim to be my aNNa and this is the justice and support you give me !
>Too bad, too bad :-)...you drOhi :-) ! [Now, why does this remind me of
>bk :-) ? No connection ;-) ]
You know, I'm not a "pasamalar" Sivaji. :-) If somebody insults "kuchchi",
[As I'm slightly better than "kuchchi". :-) Or, I can proudly say, slim and
slender. But don't ask for slenderness ratio. ;-)] I use to retaliate. :-)
enga thalaivar :-) Omakuchchiyaip paRRi avathooRu pesuvathuRkku, intha thabaa
chumma vidaREn. :-) adutha thabaa aNNannu koodap paarkka maattEn. :-) GK,
ennathaan aNNan-thangai enRaalum vaayum vayiRum vERa paaru.:-) [variation of
someother proverb]. Anyway, I assure all the netters, GK is neither "kuchchi"
nor "poosankkai" and she is a perfect role model. :-)
>Disclaimer : Everything written above is in the lighter vein and is NOT to
>be taken seriously.
Sigh! What is the need for this disclaimer? unnai paRRi enakkuth theriyaadhaa?
Cheers,
Venkat"who wants to be in read-only-mode but wanted to do `real' justice" Aruna
Affable
>Aruna writes:
>> Yep, summertime is turning out to be real fun. :-) I could read lots
>>of things between the lines of bk. Couldn't resist following up.
>
> Since you are in read-only mode, you have the luxury of reading
> above, over, under and between the lines what ?? :-)
Wants to be in read-only-mode, but couldn't yet implement it. Probably,
if I stop reading SCT, I may achieve my intention.:-( The "fun" in SCT
entices me to post the "junk" perpetually. :-)
>bk, *IF* he felt like "saying" something atall wud have "said" it this way:
>
>Here *I* go:
>
>>Here you go:
>>[1] bk implies,"gals, I won't be available atleast for two more years". :-)
>
> "Please, can't you wait atleast for 2 more years" :-)
>
>>[2] " " "gals, start applying after two years" :-)
>
> "Please, consider me after two more years" :-)
>
>>[3] " " "I'm not interested in love marraiges" ;-)
>
> I wud have let this one pass but felt like saying
> "Boooooooo !" :-)
Nothing to say. It clearly proves, "bk ai vaathathil vella iyalaathu" :-)
Anyway, dear gal(s), bk explained his intentions clearly and hope this helps
you to plan accordingly. ;-)
> AiyyO Venkat, you have to stoop to conquer man. The days of "rescuing
> damsels in distress" are all over. Sadly ! :-)
Quite true, particularly to conquer bk.:-( Now, let me see whether some
"damsel" come to rescue this "guy in grievance". ;-)
> Nah, Nah. I don't see the 2 options I would have liked to see.
>
> 4] I'm just suffering from a bout of summertime homesickness.
> 5] See what too much of SCT can do to Mr. Lonelyheart.
Now, do you see? good. :-)
> Thanks for your prayers though !
kaasaa, paNama, edhO ennaal mudinthathu. :-)
>cheers,
>Mr. Cheerfulheart
Cheers,
Venkat "who wants to be in read-only-mode but obliged to cheerfulness" Aruna
Kirubakaran P.
|> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 93 17:07:32 -0400
|> From: "C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering"
|> <selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>
|> To: Venkatachalam Aruna <ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu>
|> Subject: Re: affable
|> Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
|> In-Reply-To: <1rhluv$o...@menudo.uh.edu>
|> References: <1rh9jr...@phakt.usc.edu>
|> Organization: University of Waterloo
|> Cc:
|>
|> nalvaazhththukkaL !
|>
|> miga arithaagavE meyyaana kaathal thuLiRkkum !
|>
|> kaathaliththuththaan thirumaNam ceyya vENdum enbathu illai,
|> thirumaNam ceythapinnum anbOdu pazhaga pazhaga aazhamaana
|> kaathal uNarvu thuLirkkalaaam.
|>
|> aazhamaana kaathal ERpattaal
|> kaLLanum, kolaigaaranum kooda thirundhividuvaarkaL.
|>
|> kaaNpathu ellaam kaathal alla, thirumaNam aanavargaL ellaam
|> kaathal uNarndhavargaL illai ..
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I suspect this might be a bigger (sad !)truth than we are aware of ..
One of the reasons why the low divorce rate in India could be used
to buttress the argument of "arranged marriages's success"..
|>
|> illaRa vaazhkkai pErinbaththiRkkum vazhi kaattum.
|>
|> vaazhththukkaLudan
|>
|> -Selvaa
|> ------------------------mail ends----------------------------------------
|>
|> Regards,
|> Venkat "who still wants to be in read-only-mode but lured by the fun" Aruna.
- kiruba