But, as it is often the case, 'one book' readers are troublesome idiots. I had a student in my Remedial English class once at York College of CUNY who had a hard time learning not to capitalize the 3rd person masculine pronoun. "It's written in the book that way," he would argue. What book? King James Version of The Bible, 1611 AD is the only book he had read up to then. The problem of 'one book' reading gets compounded in people with limited imagination who invariably have a limited capacity for empathy. Well, what can you expect from someone who has the maturity (?) of signing his name as "the lambent wit!" He is so flushed with the flashes of his own brilliance that he forgets to gather his wits about him and distinguish between hogwash and what is plausible or real Munir has the nasty habit (and the accompanying computer skills) of snooping at e-forums that he does not belong to or has been kicked out of. So he got this message out of 'uttorsuri' e-forum that called for a protest rally demanding trial of the war criminals of 1971 Genocide. Mr. Flashing Brain does not realize that "protest rally" is another form of "taking the issue to the people." War crimes are not tried in normal courts of law. A special War Crimes Tribunal has to be set up to try the war criminals. Also, individuals cannot bring suits to the War Crimes Tribunal. The State must be the plaintiff. The purpose of a popular rally is to let the Govt. of Bangladesh know of the long unfulfilled desire of the people for a trial of the war crimes or crimes against humanity committed in 1971. How is it different from "pressure tactic or bullyism?" Answer your own dumb question, Mr. Dimwit. He quotes Rummel again: "It was Yahya Khan, then President of Pakistan, who said: "Kill three million of them and the rest will eat out of our hands." (p315) The intended number to be killed mentioned in the statement is not nearly as important as the explicit aim for mass killing that is expressed here. And the aim of this mass killing was to make "them" eat out of "our" hands. Munir's contentions about the tired old argument of civil war vs war of liberation with the help of some muddleheaded Dr. Rummel are the most irritating. He quotes: Non-Bengalis numbered 5 to 6 million and, as the fierce demonstrations and protests for independence peaked in March (1971), as the general strike against Almost every assumption and fact in the above statement is distorted, wrong or patently false. The events leading up to The "massacre in Rummel's repeated use of the term 'civil war' is inaccurate in more aspects than one. There was a very sound and firm Declaration of Independence of Bangladesh radio broadcast by Major Ziaur Rahman on behalf of Sheikh Mujib and shortly thereafter a Govt. in Exile was formed at Mujibnagar on 18th of April. From that day Pakistani military became an occupying force and the strife became a war of liberation for the sovereignty of Lastly, this kerosene 'kuppi' of a lambent wit is full of soot dusted off a blackened soul. It is mischievous of him to post this venomous anti-liberation war of It is not for nothing that we are rallying for a concerted cry for justice against the War Crimes of 1971 committed by the Razakars. A Pakistani cannot be a Razakar by definition. Moreover, a Pakistani who is a Balochi, or Sindhi, or Pashtun, or even a Sirakai Punjabi can be considered a better friend of Responding to Ms Farida Majid's comments: In response to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/45201 Dear Mr K Irfani, Greetings. Please consider my response below to the vapid vituperations from Ms Majid. (Mukto-Mona Post #45201) I respectfully request that you forward it to all the eforums, etc., where you shared my previous comments. Furthermore, I would hope that the eforum Mukto-Mona, which considered her personal attacks worthy of a release, would have the decency and fairness to share my response below, written in language that I hope would serve as an example of restraint slightly better than Post #45201. Thank you. Regards, TLW PS: Any other recipient of this response may distribute it to any list of their choice, along with the link to Ms Majid's comments on M-Mona. Thanks. Responding to Ms Farida Majid's comments: In response to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/45201 "Ours is a civilization astonishing in the degree to which it seems to see and to know. Never before in history have there been such enormous elites carrying such burdens of knowledge…Elites quite naturally define as the most important and admired qualities for a citizen those on which they themselves have concentrated. The possession, use and control of knowledge have become their central theme—the theme song of their expertise. However, their power depends not on the effect with which they use that knowledge but on the effectiveness with which they control its use."~(from) Voltaire's Bastards, by John Ralston Saul, Vintage, 1993, p8. When someone focuses on 'taste' of a set of questions/inquiries and considers it provocative, the implied elitism is but obvious and, by (at least) some tangible measures of civility, unwarranted. After all, was there a democratic voting that accorded one the status of thought-elite on the subject, or was it an authoritarian declaration? I shall respond to Mr Majid's comments in the order in which she (un)crafted them. I am amazed by the false presumptions, for which Ms Majid shows a recurring penchant. First, she cannot prove that my reading of one book, by Dr Rummel in this context, was not humbling, or that it did not open my mind to the possibility of other accounts in existence. Yet she slips these conjectures in the beginning, likely hoping to prejudice the readers' mind and position them for the repeat rape of logic that she was about to thrust. Note her additional maneuvers to prejudice the readers: the anecdote of a student in her Remedial English class at York College of CUNY, for instance. An academic crafty at the art of (un)composition, Ms Majid tried to cling to power by way of controlling and directing the minds of readers. Trial lawyers are good at it, too, when they set the stage with deft use of language, bent on prejudicing the jury while also conforming to the legal formalities of a trial. I'm not too sure, though, that Ms Majid conformed to any formality in a civil debate. In my follow-up comments to Mr Belal Beg [Mukto-Mona] I quoted Dr Rummel's admission that "For eighteen districts the total is 1,247,000 killed. This was an incomplete count, and to this day no one really knows the final toll. Some estimates of the democide are much lower—one is 300,000 dead---but most range from 1 million to 3 million." (3; p331) With it, I argued that it was redundant of Mr Beg to assert that Rummel's count was 'incomplete'. I also wondered whether Mr Beg tried to misdirect the issue that, as we have no clear survey of the final toll, sticking with the 3-million headcount which might have begun when Yahya Khan ordered his troops to kill East Pakistanis might not be most prudent/accurate. Ms Majid was curiously silent on this flashing point likely because Mukto-Mona had not released my response to Mr Beg, which I sent to Mr Irfani as I am not a member of the eforum by choice. Consider another point. When anyone writes using a pen name, readers are free to presume the identity of the writer. But can they really be sure beyond reasonable doubt? In case of Ms Majid, however, she seems certain about the identity of 'The Lambent Wit.' One wonders whether her certitude would hold up for evidence in 'normal courts of law.' Besides, what additional morsels of flashing wisdom were presumed due upon the readers on the subject, as Ms Majid declared the name of the person that she thinks is 'The Lambent Wit'? [Remember Saul's above quote: "their power depends not on…control its use."] Indeed, Ms Majid couldn't help herself, as if her response was a personal vendetta. For instance, how relevant was her elaboration of the pen name poked with terminologies that she plucked, for its offshoots? What exactly did she call 'hogwash'? Might it be Rummel's book? After all, the reference was from his book. I'm curious: Maybe Ms Majid could define the distinction in context, after clarifying the subject that she labeled as 'hogwash'? Rather predictably albeit sadly, Ms Majid gets bawdier as she slaps more words onto her response. For instance, consider the two PUBLIC eforums, posts from which I commented on. In the day and age of the internet exactly how much 'computer skills' does one need, to access public eforums housed in Yahoo? Besides, as a point of logic, how could it be a 'nasty' habit to review posts on public eforums? Since when did it become a rule that one has to be a 'member' of a public eforum, in order to read its posts? It is a choice of the moderation of such eforums to keep their posts for public view. In case of both Mukto-Mona and Uttorshuri, their posts are public. Given this 'real' scenario, how exactly could one 'snoop' their posts? It seems quite likely that I am not the one, Ms Majid, who forgot to gather their wits! For the record, I left Mukto-Mona once back in 2001 out of disgust over their bias and selectivity, contrary to their stated forum policies. Several years later, one of their board member honchos, with whom I kept private cyber connection, requested that I reconsider the eforum. He assured me the forum had evolved to become more fair and balanced. I joined in late 2006. Unfortunately, before long I learned once again that the forum hadn't changed its biased spots, (like a leopard) so I left it again in disgust. As for Uttorshuri, I was never a member of it. I knew its founder once as a cyber friend, with whom I had many disagreements long before she decided to launch the forum. I had had reservations about her ability to remain fair/objective. Hence I never joined her forum. She however asked me to help translate some Bengali essays and articles into English after starting her forum; she also published my English translation of a poem by Poet Shamshur Rahman as we remained minimally connected. These are the 'real' facts, Ms Majid. Now, may I request some evidence for your 'hogwash' of an insinuation that I was 'kicked out of' either eforum? Ms Majid contends that a protest rally is another form of 'taking the issue to the people'. Due to the emotional nature of the subject, we may ignore the implied elitism here. For instance, are these 'people' members of a jury who have no access to news media? The urge to take the issue to the people might be engorged with the false presumption that it is not with them, yet. Or did they have it at one time but simply lost it so its finders must stage world-wide rallies, to return it to them? Indeed Ms Majid and other rally-endorsers likely presumed the people have had amnesia if only because they are not staging rallies on their own. The endorsers are also certain that the rallies would increase the odds for the current government—an interim, military government, to begin the trials of the war criminals of 1971. Ms Majid explicates the 'purpose' of such a rally while slipping on it a 'popular' label. I am curious, Ms Majid: If the rally was indeed 'popular' (meaning it has public support) then how come a group of self-styled rally-rousers had to plan its staging, intending to take 'the issue to the people'? If indeed people have had a 'long unfulfilled desire' for a trial of the war crimes and, if indeed the issue is 'popular', I wonder why she or anyone else would deem it necessary to call for protest rallies world-wide! Relevant, too, is the question who appointed these rally-rousers to represent the 'people'? Was their election democratically voted, or did they simply anoint themselves with such representation by way of sheer arrogance and elitism? Another flash of Ms Majid's elitism is her calling my question a dumb question. You either choose to answer it, or you do not, Ms Majid. But may I remind you that a question does not become a dumb question just because you say so, if you consider yourself a civil debater and respectful of people's freedom of speech? Wasn't it a flash of fanaticism, when inquiries are shut off by 'pressure tactic or bullyism'? For all the words you wasted waxing personal on me, Ms Majid, does it seem likely that you supplied a fire-shooting verbal dragon head…of both 'pressure tactic' and 'bullyism'? And bravo! Ms Majid. Killing of Biharis is 'collateral damage'? Perhaps, but the classification smacks of US neo-con definition of the over-one-million civilian casualty in Iraq due to the US invasion under false pretenses. I presume you read many books, so it seems likely that you'd know 'collateral damage' is US Military term/double-speak. ""collateral" may also sometimes mean "additional but subordinate," i.e., "secondary" ("collateral meanings of a word"), and that specific meaning of a rather obscure word in the English language seems to have been picked up and broadened by the military in the expression "collateral damage" (1) I'd be curious whether there might be protest rallies against the neo-con term from those Biharis, who lost a relative or two at the hands of Bengali nationalists in 1971. Ms Majid, perhaps you were not paying attention when scouting for my flashes of wit! It was not I but Dr Rummel, who called your 'reprisal killings' genocide. "The mass-murder of the non-Bengalis is therefore the responsibility of the Awami League and should be considered genocide." (3; p334.) By evidence, therefore, unwarranted burns your inference that I was a nitwit about classifying the Bihari mass-murder. It is alright for people to disagree, Ms Majid. It is their freedom and right. I'm sure you are familiar with that in both your academic as well as likely-not-quite so, circles. Thus I'm curious: why did you call Dr Rummel 'muddle-headed'—an unwarranted personal attack? It hardly cemented your presumptive superiority in an argument; rather, it served to implode the academic veneer, from beneath which you have flashed a habit of flinging un-academic personal attacks. Just for the record, I do not think Dr Rummel lost a professorship at any prestigious US university under questionable circumstances and could find no better venue to flash his academic wit than teaching remedial English courses part-time at York College of CUNY. I also do not think Dr Rummel was so muddle-headed about his finances as to be evicted from his apartment, forced to leave the country to which he had emigrated back to his motherland, and become a lodger at his parental house…likely lighting a 'kerosene "kuppi"' of a hope to come into some funds, when his ailing mother passed away. It seems likely, Ms Majid, that one's elitism could engender arrogance, so much so that one refuses to take a good look at oneself in the mirror before calling others ugly, figuratively speaking! I am most amused, Ms Majid, by your closing remarks which were, predictably inevitably, personal. It would be only factual, Ms Majid, to mention that your latest contribution to the 'concerted cry for justice against the War Crimes of 1971' was Mukto-Mona Post #44834 (2), where you lampooned Mr Shah Abdul Hannan. What is your proof, Ms Majid, that indeed Mr Hannan was a 'razakar' on the run, just as your lampoon licks the label upon him? Because war crimes are not tried in 'normal courts of law', do we stop presuming someone is innocent until proven guilty? Indeed, what does a War Crime Tribunal consider evidence of war crimes in addition to your lampoon of Mr Hannan, for instance? At any rate, I would certainly hope that any such Tribunal would gather its wits about itself and 'distinguish between hogwash and what is plausible or real,' in case of your allegations against Mr Hannan. Lastly, I did not send my comments to a Pakistani forum, Ms Majid. I had shared it privately with a cyber friend, who circulated it on some lists as he saw fit. Thus your conclusion 'It is mischievous of [me] to post this venomous anti-liberation war of Bangladesh 1971 in a Pakistani forum hoping snootily that there would be takers' was patently false. Indeed, it is way overdue, Ms Majid, for everyone to get real and stop crawling about in an inhuman world in their mind flushed with snooty anger. It is opprobrious for an academic. And miserably uncivil, too. Regards, TLW Notes: (1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_damage (2) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/44834 (3) Death By Government, Dr R J Rummel, Seventh printing, 2006. ----------------------------------------- Faiz in his poem "Returning from After how many meetings we will be close again? Saleem Mir
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re. " the other, silent genocide in 1971?" Date: 11/29/2007 3:55:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time From: farida_majid@hotmail.com
Farida Majid
From:
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 19:49:19 -0500
Subject: [mukto-mona] Fwd. Re. " the other, silent genocide in 1971?"
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:14 PM
To: Kirfani@aol.com
Subject: Re: Fwd. Re. " the other, silent genocide in 1971?"
Both sides i.e Bengali's and Biharis (a pseudonym used for all non Bengali's ) can amass as much evidence as they wish to prove their point, but for one like I who spent close to six years in the then East Pakistan and still maintain friendship with many Bengali's, it is a horror chapter in our history and it is about time we repent, apologize and embrace one another.
"After those many encounters, that easy intimacy,
we are strangers now--
When will we again see a spring of untainted green?
After how many monsoons will the blood be washed
from the branches?
Faiz, what you'd gone to say,ready to offer everything,
even your life--
those healing words remained unspoken after all."
It's time to utter the healing words aloud.
*****************************************
Sign the Petition : Release the Arrested University Teachers Immediately : An Appeal to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh
http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/university_teachers_arrest.htm
*****************************************
Daily Star publishes an interview with Mukto-Mona
http://www.mukto-mona.com/news/daily_star/daily_star_MM.pdf
*****************************************
MM site is blocked in Islamic countries such as UAE. Members of those theocratic states, kindly use any proxy (such as http://proxy.org/) to access mukto-mona.
*****************************************
Mukto-Mona Celebrates 5th Anniversary
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/5_yrs_anniv/index.htm
*****************************************
Mukto-Mona Celebrates Earth Day:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Earth_day2006/index.htm
*****************************************
Kansat Uprising : A Special Page from Mukto-Mona
http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/kansat2006/members/
*****************************************
MM Project : Grand assembly of local freedom fighters at Raumari
http://www.mukto-mona.com/project/Roumari/freedom_fighters_union300306.htm
*****************************************
German Bangla Radio Interviews Mukto-Mona Members:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/german_radio/
Mukto-Mona Celebrates Darwin Day:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/index.htm
*****************************************
Some FAQ's about Mukto-Mona:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/faq_mm.htm
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___