Who is this woman? I heard she has had legal problems (she could not pay loans) in Nepal and she fled to the US. I also heard that she promissed some youths that she can bring them to the US and took thousands of rupees. She applied for asylum but has not been approved.
Watch out with her.

Is she any good looking ?

"..one of the disgruntled NY rallier.." - not sure what that means :-)

KaliG-jee,

यो गाई खाने भाषामा आफु अझै कमजोर रहेकोले भाषिक अस्पष्टताको लागि क्षमा माग्दछु ।

मेरो आसय NY Rally को बारेमा Peacejournalism मा आएको फटाहा रिपोर्टबाट असन्तुष्ट भएका एकजना -यालीकर्ताले कमला सरुपजीसंग गर्नु भएको गुनासोसंग सम्बन्धित छ ।

ok after reading her article "Maoists Ceasefire Is A Good Thing", i have concluded that she is out and out pro king.also, about her being in the king's support club in usa, i am not surprised.she has political ambitions, with the king taking power away from people it is obvious that she has sided with the king.wait till the people get the power, then she will delete all the pro-king articles and become a freedom fighter.

Nepe,

The battle hasn't started yet, so talking about victory now is nonsensical to say the least.

Suryagrahan does affect people. Even you are not impervious to it.

Nepe,

There's a fine line between democracy and anarchy.

Sarup does not fit in with your politics.
You can't live with this fact.

You have to find a way to ridicule her.

That is why, it was to your political advantage to appear helpless in front of her attackers who threw some one-sided personal stuff against her.

You know, I know and everyone else knows that Sarup's personal life is NOT anyone's business for it to be discussed in public.

Yet you went ahead, with a tinge of self-embarrassment, and shared bits of "tabloidy news " which concerned her.

It's easy to kick someone when that person is already down.

But wait, you do NOT want to alienate her too much.
Like Sears, the retailer, you have to show your softer side too.

Hence, you issue this spineless statement: "just in case Kamala-jee visits the thread- to let her know that I discourage indecency."

By saying that, you end up with a twofer. You get to add your kick on her back, but, unlike others, you also appear to be patting her.

I mean: Wow. What a show.
Spinelessness does not get better than that!

This is all I want to bring to the attention of Sajha people.

As for democracy allowing criticisms, I agree with you here.

******

Unlike you, I accept the existence of pro-King people in and out of Nepal just as I accept the existence of anti-King people in and out of Nepal. Acceptance here does NOT imply wholesale approval, but that Nepalis have political diverse beliefs.

But I also think that any responsible and democratically-minded Nepali's challenge is NOT to praise one side, and paint the other side as evil (you guys can do that all the time in New York and DC, but we are the ones who have to live with the mess in Nepal day in and day out . . . we are the ones whose lives are directly affected by these advarsarial relationships), but to get both sides to start talkinbg with one another, make compromises and get moving in this country that is Nepal.

Is that too much to ask?
Is our life doomed to refereeing this jhagada for ever?

On another note, I think the existence of Rajabadis counterbalances the excesses of Repubicans, and vice versa -- and that is just great.

To Sarup: Carry on with your whatever beliefs. Fell free to change them often, if you wish. It's all right for Murai Raj Sharma to engage in political activism in New York. It's OK for you too to write and speak for the King.

It's OK to believe in things you want to believe and stand up for what you want to believe. The mistake is to fall for anything.

oohi
ashu

"But I also think that any responsible and democratically-minded Nepali's challenge is NOT to praise one side, and paint the other side as evil (you guys can do that all the time in New York and DC, but we are the ones who have to live with the mess in Nepal day in and day out . . . we are the ones whose lives are directly affected by these advarsarial relationships), but to get both sides to start talkinbg with one another, make compromises and get moving in this country that is Nepal" - Ashu

I totally agree with Ashu on this one. Do not you all think we had enough? There is no way for peace without negotiated settlement involving all three parties in the conflict. Comprimise thats the mantra right now for the peace. Democracy can prevail only with peace.

Cheers Ashu

Time and again we've seen two kinds of people in sajha. One wants peace and one wants war. The ones who want war, want war in order to gain peace. But after their initial war is over, they will want more war for different causes.

Your are either for peace or for war. That's the yin and the yang of the present day world.

I wanted to observe "ceasefire" for Dashain but this thread provoked me to write something in favour of Kamala Saroop. I don't know who is this lady but I really like her efforts to write something about South Asia affairs in general and Nepalese affairs in particular. Every one has right to comment on her articles as she publish them regularly.

Only thing I didn't understand is that why people living outside Nepal get "irritated" when someone supporting Nepali nationality? I don't know how they define the nationality, but most of Kamala jee's articles advocates about safeguarding Nepali national interests, gender equality, woman rights, Nepalese economy, maoist terrorism, political situation of Nepal and most importantly she frequently writes on foreign interference in Nepal's internal affairs. I could not read the article mentioned in this thread.

Regarding her personal alignment - if she is Rajabadi or Nepalbadi - what is wrong? At least she is not Bhratbadi, Maobadi, Khaobadi, etc.

Keep it up Kamala Jee! "KAG KARAUNDAI GARCHHA PINA SUKDAI GARCHHA" TAPAIN KO ARTICLES LE KATI KO PET CHHATI POLCHHA HOLA, POLNA DONOS, NEPAL KO KHATIR LEKHI RAHANUS.

I do have a soft corner for Kamala-jee. People might call it what goes by the name "reverse sexism", however, I do cherish the fact that she belongs to a rare and, therefore, a precious breed of Nepali women doing social works. And the sheer volume of her writings on variety of subjects, including literature, shows she is a person with enormous energy and enthusiasm. It is a different story that her writings show they have enormous room for improvements. And, in fact, I and some other Sajhaites have shared this with Kamala-jee right here in Sajha sometime in the past very frankly.

However, my note on decency regarding fellow posters' postings did not have much to do with the above. I simply wanted to discourage the use of strong language for the sake of atmosphere. That's all. Ashu called it "spinelessness". Obviously this gentleman has yet to learn to use the word properly.

There is not much left for me to talk about Kamala-jee. The fataha report about NY rally is already removed from PJ and I am not going to cry if she really is in the "Rastrabadi Sangha" as reported.

On the other hand, Ashu has brought some funny stuff. Let's have some entertainment.

Ashu's assumption of new role as a mediator between the pro-king and anti-king streams. Ashu writes:

>. . . get both [pro-king and anti-king] sides to start talkinbg with one another, make
>compromises and get moving in this country that is Nepal.

>Is that too much to ask?
>Is our life doomed to refereeing this jhagada for ever?

I do not want to ridicule Ashu for such an august thought, however, knowing Ashu's anti-republic rhetorics so intimately and personally over a period of several years, I doubt if Ashu best qualifies for the job.

Even if he does, there is one problem. Very serious one. The problem is that there is no job at all. The unarmed but militant pro-democratic force (a growing mass for now and soon going to be a decisive power) is not for a compromise with the King; they are for republican revolution. They will talk with the King only when he becomes an ordinary citizen after a successful revolution (that in case of no violent confrontation, less likely) or flees the country (in case of violent confrontation, more likely).

So there is no much chance for a compromise talk, definitely none for one through a mediator.

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

I find Ashu's following advice particularly about changing beliefs as often as suits you, hilarious. Obviously our counselor does not value "consistency" and "integrity" that much.

>To Sarup: Carry on with your whatever beliefs. Fell free to change
>them often, if you wish.

And here is, Ashu, talking to Sarup as if she is a middle-school teenager. Not bad though.

>It's OK to believe in things you want to believe and stand up
>for what you want to believe. The mistake is to fall for anything.

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

Finally, I would like to show a serious democratic deficiency in Ashu's thinking in treating anti-king and pro-king groups as equals at this juncture of our history.

At this juncture of our history, King is negating democracy and freedom. By supporting the King, the pro-king groups are doing the same. So the question is, do you have "democratic right" to reject "democracy" itself ? Can you have a freedom to deny freedom ?

Democracy and freedom are non-self-annihilating notions. May be I should call it a Democracy 201 for Ashu.

Pro-King and anti-King groups can have "equal democratic status" only when the King is a neutral notion, an object of plain choice, not when the King is taking over the power by a coup detat and is running a repressive regime. चेतना भया ।

Nepe

IF,

You must be talking about the final showdown, otherwise the battle has long started. What do you think about the final showdown ? Tiananmen square is very old history and Nepal is no China. Besides, UN-OHCHR is not in Kathmandu for no reason.

Nepe

Back to square one - hey bhagwan kati jhagada
Jaat ke ma phalnu gahat ko jhol ma bhaneko yahi ko ki kya ho?

IF,

You must be talking about the final showdown, otherwise the battle has long started. What do you think about the final showdown ? Tiananmen square is very old history and Nepal is no China. Besides, UN-OHCHR is not in Kathmandu for no reason.

Nepe Sir,

No, I am not talking about the final showdown. I am talking about the MAIN battle. What you are seeing in Nepal is not a battle, its minor skirmishes. So don't start claiming victory yet. One rule of the warfare which Chankya, Sun Tzu and Claude Von Clauswitz emphasized is: Never underestimate your opponents/enemies.


The presence of UN-OHCHR does not mean anything as long as India does not want the UN to play a meaningful role in Nepal. OHCHR is just a UN organ like UNESCO and UNICEF. It in itself does not have any power to influence or interfare in the country's affairs. Its just a monitoring body that submits its report to the Secretary General , which is then Submitted to the GA (depending on the seriousness of the situation).. then GA has to pass a resolution on Nepal, then the Security Council has to ratify it. If you are even a bit familiar of how the UN System works, you would know this. The UN is here just for the sake of it. When the UN decides to involve itself in a country, it first seeks approval and help from the neighbors of the country. As long as India and China do not approve of and agree to help with the UN operations/works and mediation in Nepal, it will not get itself involved in Nepal's affairs. Its simple as that.

Also look at things from a broader perspective. Nepal is bidding for a UN Security Council seat for the next term. If Nepal gets the seat, the governmnet will have more power to block the UN intervention and or presence in Nepal. Nepal can block any resolution on troops mobilization/humanitarian intervention or other UN operations in Nepal because the major powers of the world will need Nepal's vote to carry out other far more strategically important (for them) operations.


So much for this thread.