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.

[It is useless to call for civility in Sajha, so I am not going to do it, eventhough I don't like some poster's use of strong language to Kamala Sarup. (Note: I am saying this- just in case Kamala-jee visits the thread- to let her know that I discourage indecency.)]


Now about the Peacejournalism article that claimed NY rally was attended by a total of 65 people amidst other funny claims. Thanks Houston-jee for providing the link.

Unfortunately or fortunately, Kamala-jee has now removed that article from the website.

This article appeared as an editorial (with no name of author). However, Kamala-jee told one of the disgruntled NY rallier that the article was written by Sunil KC of New York.

I do not know this Sunil fella. But, if he is for real, New Yorkers might want to ask him in which elementary school did he learn to count ?

Whenever I stumble accross Kamala Sarup's articles I also get to read that she is doing PhD in some US university. Which university?

Here is a tabloid news about the crisis inside a newly formed "Rastrabadi [Mandal] Sangh".

According to the news Kamala Sarup is in the advisory board of the group.

- http://www.nepalnews.com.np/contents/nepaliweekly/janastha/2005/sep/sep28/mainnews.php#12

अमेरिकामा राजभक्तहरुबीच भाँडभैलो

न्यूयोर्क । माओवादीले जनसरकारमा गाउँका मान्छेहरुलाई सोध्दै नसोधी राखेजस्तै अमेरिकामा रहेका राजावादीहरुलाई जम्मा पारेर परराष्ट्रमन्त्री रमेशनाथ पाण्डेले खोलेको "नेपाली राष्ट्रवादी संघ" का पदाधिकारीहरुले संघ गठन भएको एक हप्ता नपुग्दै धमाधम अलग्गिन थालेका छन् । सरकारी ढुकुटीबाट पाँच हजार डलर खर्चर गरेर अर्जुन थापाको पहलमा मान्छे जम्मा गरी यसैहप्ता न्यूयोर्कको एउटा भारतीय भोजनालयमा सो संघको गठन गरिएको थियो ।

जसमा मनगढन्ते ढङ्गले पदाधिकारीहरुको मनोनयन गरिएको थियो । यसरी राखिएका मध्ये मुख्य सल्लाहकार डा. खगेन्द्र थापालाई आफ्नो नाम त्यसमा कसरी समावेश गराइयो त्यो कुरा नै थाहा छैन । डा. थापा भन्नुहुन्छ- "त्यो मन्त्री नै सिल्ली रहेछ, अमेरिकामा मैले यस्तो काम गरेर आएँ भनी राजाको आँखामा छारो हाल्न यस्तो काम गर्?यो, यस्तो संस्थामा मेरो नाम आएकोमा मेरो आपत्ति छ ।" आफ्नो नाम सल्लाहकारको रुपमा राख्नेहरुलाई फटाहाको संज्ञा दिंदै उहाँ थप भन्नुहुन्छ- "म त्यो संस्थाको सल्लाहकारको रुपमा बस्ने कुरै छैन ।"

यसैगरी अर्का सल्लाहकार डा. इश्वर देवकोटाले पनि सल्लाहकारमा आफूलाई राखिएकोमा असहमति जनाएका छन् । सल्लाहकारमा अब क्यानाडाका किरण ढुङ्गाना, कमला सरुप, नरेश श्रेष्ठ र कमल पाण्डेमात्र बाँकी छन् ।

सो संगठनको सभापतिमा विशालविक्रम शाहलाई राखिएको छ, जो तत्कालीन परराष्ट्रमन्त्री नरेन्द्रविक्रम शाह, एमालेको नौ महिनेकालमा न्यूयोर्क मिशनको स्थायी प्रतिनिधि भई आउँदा भान्सेको रुपमा अमेरिका भित्र्याइएका थिए । सदस्यको रुपमा राखिएका र कोलोराडोमा बस्दै आएका इलामे गङ्गा चौलागाईंले पनि फटाहा मन्त्रीले गठन गरेको संघमा आफू नरहने जनाउँदै गरिब राष्ट्रको मन्त्रीले राष्ट्रको सम्पत्ति ब्रम्हलुट गरी आएर गठन गरेको बताएका छन् । संगठनको उपाध्यक्षमा राखिएका आङकामी शेर्पा र नवराज गुरुङले यसअघि नै आफ्नो असहमति जनाइसकेका छन् भने राप्रपाका कार्यकर्ता चन्द्रबहादुर गुरुङले समेत त्यस्तो संस्थामा आफ्नो नाम कसरी आयो भनी प्रश्न गर्न थालेका छन् । यो संस्थाका अधिकांश पदाधिकारीहरु न्यूयोर्कस्थित ३९७७ एकाउन्ट स्ट्रिट बुडसाइडको बिल्डिङमा बस्ने गरेका छन् ।

अचम्मको कुरा त यो छ कि, नेपाली राजाको गुणगान गाउनका लागि गठन गरिएको संघमा भूटानीलाई समेत राखिएको छ । उनी हुन्- विष्णु प्रधान । खुदुनाबारी क्याम्पमा रहेका प्रधान भूटानी आन्दोलन छाडेर अमेरिकामा शरणार्थीको रुपमा बस्दै आएका छन् ।

अमेरिकामा रहेका बहुसंख्यक लोकतन्त्रवादीहरुलाई काउण्टर दिन यसरी गठन गरिएको सो संस्थाका कारण उल्टै राजावादीहरुबीच भाँडभैलो मच्चिएको छ । त्यसैले संगठनमा राखिएका महासचिव आमोद कटुवालले नै भन्न थालेका छन्- यस्तो संगठन गठन गरेर केही पनि हुँदैन । संघमा आफ्नो नाम राखिएकोमा उनले पनि आपत्ति जनाउन थालिसकेका छन् । राजावादी संगठन निर्माणका लागि दिलनाथ गिरी र गोविन्द गिरी कस्सिएर लागेका थिए । उनीहरुको चाहना संघको अध्यक्ष हरि शर्मालाई बनाउनुपर्छ भन्ने थियो । यही कुरा लिएर वासिङ्टनडीसीमा परराष्ट्रमन्त्री पाण्डे पुग्दा भेट्न गएका गिरी बन्धुहरुलाई मन्त्रीले कुनै टेरपुच्छर नलगाएपछि उनीहरु जिल्लिए । उता गिरीबन्धुले दरबारबाट स्वागत समारोहका लागि आएको रु ५० हजारमध्ये २५-२५ हजार बाँडेको आरोप राजावादीबाटै लागेको छ भने गिरीबन्धुहरु उल्टो राजाको नाममा आफूहरुको आठ सय डलर खेर गएको बताउन थालेका छन् ।
_____________

Nepe,

Glad to see you transform into a tolerant republican democrat. Its good to read that you no longer ridicule others who think differently than you and that you are committed to encouraging decency in Sajha.

Is this transformation caused by today's Surya Grahan? :-)

It's obvious that Kamala Sarup --who I do NOT know; though as a voracious reader of Nedpali media, I have read some of her pieces here and there -- is being persecuted
for her political beliefs on Sajha.

This is NOT surprising.

Persecuting others for their (disagreeable) beliefs is a favorite past time of some
of Sajha's chest-thumping, take-me-seriously-please "democrats".

Look at, to cite one example, how our dear Nepe takes this moral high ground:

He intones, rather grandly:

"It is useless to call for civility in Sajha, so I am not going to do it, eventhough I don't like some poster's use of strong language to Kamala Sarup. (Note: I am saying this- just in case Kamala-jee visits the thread- to let her know that I discourage indecency.)]"

He then gets off his moral high horse, wades through the gutter to then share, as he helpfully warns, "a tabloid" news about Sarup.

I mean, what do you say to a behaviour like this?

*****

My general question:

INSTEAD of getting on some sort of a moral high horse on a is-she-for-us-or-is-she-against-us manner:

Why not have the strightforward honesty to say: I (agree or) disagree with Sarup's politics, but I respect her freedom to espouse ANY political belief she wishes to take
up as long as she does so without engaging in violence?

And to add further: Sarup's personal business should be her personal business alone, and responsible Sajha folks sould NOT indulge in washing her dirty laundry in public.

What's the harm in saying all that?

Only such a consistency, let me be clear, allows ANY democrat -- self-proclaimed or
otherwise -- to DEFEND

either

Murari Raj Sharma (remember him? BTW, I defended his right to do as he did) for his alleged "pro-democracy" activism in New York

or

Kamala Sarup for her alleged "pro-king activism" in America.


Defense of these two different individuals does NOT imply wholesale approval of
their political beliefs.

Defense is simply a recognition that to be for democracy NECESSARILY means to be
able to allow EVEN those whose views one finds disagreeable to FREELY express
their views.

Democracy, after all, thrives in an EXCHANGE of views -- NOT in a Taliban-like one-sided attacks on those whose views one finds disagreeable.

oohi
ashu

IF,

सुर्यग्रहणले त के छुन्थ्यो मलाई, बरु देशमा बढ्दै गएको राजग्रहणले पो हो कि ? राजभक्तहरुको नैतिक कन्तबिजोग देखेर करुणा उत्पन्न भयो कि, के बेर ? पराजित शत्रुप्रति करुणा भनेको विजेता-मनोविज्ञानको एउटा पक्ष हो भन्छन् जो ।


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


अलिक समय भएको थियो, आशु के के न लिएर आए भनेको त पुरानै ढर्राको थाङ्ने कुरा पो बोकेर आएछन् ।

ए बाबा, कमलाजीको पत्रिकामा आएको प्रमाणिक फटाहा कुरा (verifiable lies) को आलोचना गर्नु कसरी persecution भयो ?

Ashu can keep on defending Kamala-jee's right [to promote lies] if he wants, however, here is a shocking news to Ashu.

Kamala-jee not only has removed the disputed article from her website, but also has APOLOGIZED for it and have promised to publish a formal apology in her magazine !

Now, what is Ashu going to say ? "Well, I was not SPECIFICALLY defending that article, my defense was rather a GENERAL one to defend her general right to political views and expression" ?

Let me show how थाङ्ने कुरा that will be.

Defending somebody's right makes sense when the person is DEPRIVED OF medium, podium, voice, pen, typewriter or computer keyboard. Is that is what happening with Kamala-jee ?

Nope.

What is happening with Kamala-jee here (I am responsible to my postings only !) is some CRITICISM about her magazine and to some extent her pro-king activism.

Now, if Ashu wants to defend pro-king activism out of his political conviction, fine. No further question.

However, if he is pretending to defend it on a basis of democratic principle, then here is a million dollar question- why does Ashu stops at Kamala's right ? Why does he not go up to defend Ram Bhadur's right to criticize the moral basis of Kamala's alleged support to the King as well ? If Ashu is doing that too, then what the hell is left for him to be pissed off the way he is acting ?

So here is democracy 101 for Ashu.

Criticism is a part of democratic rights.

And here is ethics 101: You have no right to criticize the criticism for being a criticism per se, otherwise that will be a self-contradiction.

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

Some more unhappy news about 'Peacejournalism'. Citing differences with the way PJ is running after Feb 1, the following gentlemen have decided to dissociate themselves from PJ (advisory board).

Dr. Shyam Karki
Dr. Shiva Gautam
Roger Adhikari
Gaury Adhikary

Much earlier, three other gentlemen including Prof. Alok Bohora had done the same.

Still, others who have non-political (literary) association with Kamala-jee are contemplating about PJ's political bias.

More lonely journey for PJ ahead unless more rajbhakta like Dr. Khagendra Thapa come to fill the space.

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.