Banner Advertiser

Sunday, November 4, 2007

Re: [ALOCHONA] The war of at the birth of Bangladesh: as reported in the encyclopedia

Dear Alochok,
 
Once i believed Prothom-alo and daily star. But after coming abroad, reading all most every newspaper from bangladesh online,  now it seems that these two are  mostly views paper , not newspaper.
 
I read the Shah  Hannan  views in the daily star. It seemed he said nothing wrong in that conversession. later i saw  the view from you tube. After  that it seems to me that  Some people are  making noise without due reason to do so and  giving some publicity to Shah Hannan .
 
Such noise will die down soon.
 
With regards
 

Mahbubur Razzaque <mmrazzaque@me.buet.ac.bd> wrote:
Dear Alochoks,

I am sending an article titled "The war of at the birth of Bangladesh: as reported in the encyclopedia" to share with you.

Kind regards,

Dr. M. Mahbubur Razzaque
Dhaka

The war of at the birth of Bangladesh: as reported in the encyclopedia
Dr. Mahbubur Razzaque
Associate Professor, BUET

The recent ETV talk show that shook the nation led me to look into the matter from the academic point of view. I had a chance to see the talk show as well as to go through the reactions published in various newspapers. I will quote from the report of the Daily Star of Sunday, October 28, 2007:
"CIVIL WAR, NOT LIBERATION WAR
I frankly think it was a liberation war but it was also a civil war not only in the sense that it was between West and East Pakistan but also because it was a fight between political forces supporting a untied Pakistan and an independent Bangladesh."

Whereas Mr. Hannan says: "I frankly think it was a liberation war but it was also a civil war", it was placed in the title as: CIVIL WAR, NOT LIBERATION WAR. This title is clearly inappropriate to the text. According to the same report of the Daily Star, Mr. Hannan also said: "I know this much that in 1971 there was a civil war...Fine, it was also a Muktijuddha...From what I have read in foreign newspapers and encyclopaedia, it was a civil war and most people did not call it a "struggle for freedom". But there is no doubt that it was a genuine freedom fight by the people of Bangladesh." Mr. Hannan claims that various encyclopedia considers the liberation war of Bangladesh as civil war. To verify this, I browsed a number of authentic encyclopedia such as:
1. Encyclopedia Britannica of Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.,
2. World Encyclopedia, A Dictionary of World History, The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World and Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language of Oxford University Press,
3. The Columbia Encyclopedia of Columbia University Press,
4. Banglapedia: National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh and
5. MSN Encarta of Microsoft Inc.

The records under the entry Bangladesh are listed below:

1. Bangladesh emerged as an independent and sovereign country on 16 December 1971 following a nine month WAR OF LIBERATION.
Source: Banglapedia: National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh, Vol. 1, Published by the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, March 2003.

2. In 1971, the territory seceded from Pakistan during a short war and became independent.
Source: Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language, 1998, Author: TOM McARTHUR
3. The Awami League a political party campaigned openly for Bengali autonomy. In 1970 the Awami League won a majority of seats in the National Assembly, but the Pakistan government postponed convening the Assembly. Violence erupted and guerrilla warfare resulted. Millions of refugees fled to India, which finally entered the war on the side of the Bengalis and ensured West Pakistan's defeat. On December, 16, 1971, East Bengal became the independent nation of Bangladesh, with the capital at Dhaka.
Source: The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 1, Published by: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 1994.

4. In 1970 elections, the Awami League, led by Mujibur Rahman, won a landslide victory. In March 1971, the League unilaterally declared independence and civil war ensued. During nine months of fighting, more than one million East Bengalis were killed and millions more forced into exile, mainly to India. With Indian military assistance, East Bengal defeated Pakistan and gained independence as Bangladesh.
Source: World Encyclopedia, Published by Oxford University Press, 2005.

5. In 1966 the Awami League put forward a demand for greater autonomy which it proposed to implement after its victory in the 1970 elections. In March 1971, when this demand was rejected by the military government of Pakistan, civil war began, leading to a massive exodus of refugees to India. India sent help to the East Pakistan guerrillas (the Mukti Bahini). In the war of December 1971, Indian troops defeated the Pakistan forces in East Pakistan. The independence of Bangladesh was proclaimed in 1971 and recognized by Pakistan in 1974.
Source: A Dictionary of World History, Published by Oxford University Press, 2000.
6. The government's attempts to forestall the autonomy bid led to general strikes and nonpayment of taxes in East Pakistan and finally to civil war on Mar. 25, 1971. On the following day the Awami League's leaders proclaimed the independence of Bangladesh. During the months of conflict an estimated one million Bengalis were killed in East Pakistan and another 10 million fled into exile in India.
Source: The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., 2007, Columbia University Press.
7. By the mid 1950s Bengali enthusiasm for the Muslim League, which had spearheaded Pakistani independence, became deeply eroded. The growing rift between Pakistan's eastern and western wings broke into rebellion in 1971, and, led by the secular nationalist Awami League, an independent Bangladesh was born.

Source: The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, Vol. 1: Editor in chief: J. L.
Esposito, Published by: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Whether we like it or not, it is only the Banglapedia where the war of at the birth of Bangladesh is reported as the WAR OF LIBERATION. This encyclopedia is published by the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. Unfortunately other encyclopedias published by famous academic publishers associated with renowned academic institutions reported the war as either a civil war or a rebellion.

The records of other entries under Mujibur Rahman, Dhaka, India, Pakistan and India Pakistan Wars are listed below:
Entry: Mujibur Rahman
The conflict between East and West Pakistan climaxed after the Dec., 1970, elections, in which the Awami League won a majority. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto , leader of West Pakistan, refused to agree to demands for autonomy, and Mujib was imprisoned in West Pakistan. Civil war broke out in Mar., 1971, when Pakistani troops were sent to put down protests in East Pakistan. With the aid of India, East Pakistani guerrillas proclaimed an independent Bangladesh , and defeated the Pakistani army in late 1971.
Source: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2007
Entry: Dhaka
Severely damaged during the war of independence from Pakistan, it became capital of independent Bangladesh (1971).
Source: World Encyclopedia, Published by Oxford University Press, 2005.

Entry: India
But these years also witnessed three brief wars between India and Pakistan, the last of which resulted in an independent Bangladesh in 1971.
Source: The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 6, Published by: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 1994.

Entry: Pakistan:
In East Pakistan demands grew for Bengali autonomy, and civil war between East and West erupted in 1971. Aided by an invasion of the Indian army, East Pakistan became the independent county of Bangladesh in 1972.
Source: The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 9, Published by: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 1994.
East Pakistan declared its independence as Bangladesh on Mar. 26, 1971, but was then placed under martial law and occupied by the Pakistani army, which was composed entirely of troops from West Pakistan. In the ensuing civil war, some 10 million refugees fled to India and hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed. India supported Bangladesh and on Dec. 3, 1971, sent troops into East Pakistan. Following a two-week war between Pakistan and India, in which fighting also broke out along the India-West Pakistan border, Pakistani troops in East Pakistan surrendered (Dec. 16) and a cease-fire was declared on all fronts.
Source: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2007
Entry: India-Pakistan Wars
The third war arose out of the civil war between East and West Pakistan in 1971. India intervened in support of East Pakistan (Bangladesh), and (West) Pakistan suffered a decisive defeat.
Source: World Encyclopedia, Published by Oxford University Press, 2005.
The 1971 War
Indo-Pakistani relations deteriorated when civil war erupted in Pakistan, pitting the West Pakistan army against East Pakistanis demanding greater autonomy. The fighting forced 10 million East Pakistani Bengalis to flee to India.
Source: The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., 2007, Columbia University Press.

Article: Pakistan : wars : secession of Bangladesh: 1971: Pakistan
This year the differences between East Pakistan and West Pakistan erupted into a civil war that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands in the eastern part of the country, which is divided from West Pakistan by 1,000 miles and by profound differences in culture and language.

Source: MSN Encarta
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/search.aspx?q=Bangladesh+war

Other than in the entry Dhaka in the World Encyclopedia of Oxford University Press, the liberation war of Bangladesh is described as a civil war. So what Mr. Hannan said quoting encyclopedia is academically not incorrect. It is NOT Mr. Hannan who is responsible for these records. The intellectuals, writers and journalists who are accusing Mr. Hannan for terming the war at the birth of Bangladesh as both the war of liberation and civil war should instead ask themselves why they failed to make majority of the academicians of the west recognize Bangladesh liberation war in the academic records.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subhan Allah-  Only Allah flawless 
           Alhamdulillah - All praise to be of Allah 
                   Allahhuakbar - Allah, the Greatest
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Would Be Mahathir of BD
------------------------------------------------------------------
If it can be imagined, it is possible- NEC

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com __._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Re: I pledge to help Change Bangladesh not by changing my own status

Dear Alochok Robin

I thought it was clear but obviously I must have been writing gibbersih. Here is my best attempt yet: `The first step toward meaningful reform is the resignation or removal of Hasina and Khaleda.' You may stop reading here in order to be clear but my disclaimer is that what follows does not diminish this first point at all : )

What you see as angry language is the natural response to a uniquely
disgusting political culture that actually encourages and justifies
corrupt leaders to stay on. What should be shocking is that so little
offence is taken in the face of such corruption!

I never said that all problems will disappear if they are removed. I
am saying that if they stay all problems will stay. What are the many
other issues that you think are of more importance? Pray list the
issues that are helped by politics as exemplified by Hasina and
Khaleda.

I'm afraid that the lengthy dictatorships of Mujib's Baksal and Zia's
Army would not have turned Bangladesh into an Asian Tiger either. Nor
were these two fully eliminated – as you can plainly see.

Your characterization of me is simply the correct characterization of the our two democratically elected PMs: Hasina and Khaleda. Wow! I wish, oh how I wish, they would offend you as much as I offend you. But that could never happen – such is the condition of those who are very thoughtful and ever considerate and Bangladeshi too. That is the real magic on display.

I pray my words do sound like sweet nectar to those who are as
desperate for change as I am. Such desperation may be politically and
strategically incorrect, and may offend more delicate sensibilities,
but it is born of a rampant love for a nation sorely offended by
politicians. I wish I could do better and impress upon you more though I know I will fail. But may I never speak your own words that are far sweeter still to Hasina and Khaleda, offering them so kindly both comfort and encouragement.

In 3 or 4 decades there is the greatest possibility that sea levels
will rise a meter and engulf 15-20% of Bangladesh, hitting directly
30% of our rice production and 20 millions of our people. Please
glaze over the words as we glaze over our failures every day.

We don't have much time left to pander to our intellectual elites and political leadership. Either AL and BNP can change fast and lead us into the future. Or they can cling on to saris only to soon find the saris drape nothing but the corpse of corruption.

In the meantime let's all set high standards for the CTG and set no
standards for AL and BNP.

Oh God! We are a funny people!

Ezajur Rahman
Kuwait


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Fwd: Re: [vinnomot] Zia declaire the liberation of Bangladesh with no istru ction from Mujib



Note: forwarded message attached.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com __._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[vinnomot] A Poem on War Criminals [in Bengali]

Dear friends,
 
After 36 years of the liberation of Bangladesh, the then Sector Commanders and most of the political parties of Bangladesh once again are asking the government to bring the war criminals to justice. I, who also lost his father in the war, do want this delayed justice which no other government was courageous to serve it in the past. And to support the activities of the 'Sector Commanders' I wrote and dedicated the following poem to them. It is a shame that the war criminals, who were responsible for killing 3 millions of innocent people, are still living in peace and exercising Fundamentalism through their political activities.
 
Please click on the web link to read the poem. I am sorry for the English readers since the poem is in Bengali. But, if you want to support the process, pleases e-mail your concern to the Sector Commanders Forum at: m.harun@bdcom.com
 
 
 
Thank you.
 
Sincerely,
 
Hassanal Abdullah, editor
Shabdaguchha 




See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

Re: [vinnomot] 32 years on, jail killers still go unpunished

Why the ex-Prime Minister Sheikha Hasina did not prosecute/Punish the Jail killers while her government ruled the country ?

Why CTG will do this job who has no mandate from the people to do this prosecution ?

 

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

Re: [vinnomot] Zia declaire the liberation of Bangladesh with no istru ction from Mujib

Yes, Zia was not a simple reader of announcement of Bangladesh's independence. There was no full proof evidence that Sheikh Mujib instructed him(Zia) to declare independence on his behalf.

I like millions heard his voice aired from Shadhin Bangla Betar Kendra's Kalurghat transmission.

Vested interest groups are trying to discredit Zia's name from the page of history and such effort will die down sooner than later as it happemed before.

Current CTG government had no mandate from the people to change the historical facts, they are a temporary government to restore peace in the society and conduct a free and fair election at the earliest. Although they are punishing the corrupt politicians and government officials, that is well supported by the people. But they must know that future elected governments will try Advisors like Geeti Ara's, who is allegedly broke the law and ecaped prosecuition and also changed the histoprical facts of the liberation of Bangladesh.

In Bangla there is a probad: Ek Maghe Shit Jay Na.

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] Jammat’s S.G’s recent remarks: A different Assessment

This was a very interesting and cogent analysis by Alochok Ali Ahmed Mabrur. I too agree, we should figure out the role of Jamaat in 71 and take appropriate action so that we can move beyond this very emotional issue. The actions should include objective analysis of the events, legal trials if needed and reconciliation.

Although most Islamic parties have a poor record around the world, it does not mean, religion based parties should be banned. Both secular and religion based parties can play an important role in politics and society. It is especially important for a Muslim country to allow both kind of parties. Whoever can solve a problem and make improvements to the nation should win elections - whether secular or religion based. Performance should be the ultimate criteria.

- M. Raheem
New York


----- Original Message ----
From: mahathir of bd <wouldbemahathirofbd@yahoo.com>
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2007 3:35:08 AM
Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] Jammat's S.G's recent remarks: A different Assessment

 I can not agree  more with the  article.
 
 We should control emotion and  settle the issue  for ever for the betterment of the country.
 


Ali Ahmad Mabrur <amabrur@yahoo.com> wrote:
Last 25th October 31, 2007, under the discussion project of Election
Commission with the political parties, Jammat-e-Islami Bangladesh
had met with three election commissioners led by their secretary
general Mr. Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujaheed. After the meeting, Mr.
Mujaheed gave answers to the journalists. He informed everyone about
the summery of the meeting. He expressed some particular views about
the voter list preparation and EC's roadmap too.

Apart from these election related opinions, peoples were very
interested to hear their reaction about the recommendations of some
religion-based parties of banning and rejecting them from the
election program. Those secular parties are trying in different form
to restrain them, to defy them as they took position against the
liberation forces during the liberation war.

Regarding this controversial issue, JIB Secretary General said,
there is nothing like anti-liberation force now in Bangladesh. He
added that, as Bongobondhu Sheikh Mujib, forgave all the recognized
(195 people) war criminal under the Shimla contact, and after this
forgiving, no one else were convicted as war criminal, so there is
no war criminal right now in Bangladesh too.

Very naturally, extreme reaction is vividly seen in different places
after this remarks. Particularly media and leftist political parties
are making a huge outburst after his statement. From here, I am
going to evaluate the whole situation in a different way.

I have some questions about the role of Jammat-e-Islami in 1971.
Such as: Had Jammat-e-Islami made any major fault, which may address
as war crime in 1971? Is there any option to punish them for their
deeds and statement? What should we do to as the primary
initiatives? What can Jammat do, to settle down the matter?

Historically it is established, that, Jammat-e- Islami did not work
in favor of our freedom fighters during the liberation war. But to
my consideration, principally it was a political stand. Any
political motivation or stands cannot be considered as war crime.
JIB or a particular party cannot stand for a vice or fault like war
crime. You can not address a whole party for war crime. You can say
that some persons of that party may involve with such tasks, which
can be considered as war crime. If we say in this tone, then I
think, the allegation will be more specific and more logical.
Because, if we bring the party name firstly, then it may loose the
weight of the allegation. If a party's political decision proves
faulty, then that should be condemned politically. You have no
chance to take over a decision factor to the court for trial.

According to the dictionary, war crime is a crime, which is vividly
a violation of international law and human rights. In a simple
definition, war crimes generally stands for killing, genocide, mass
rape, firing etc. Whenever we are talking, about the relevance of
Jammat-e-Islami with the war crime, then as the evidence of this
allegation, we bring the statement of Jammat leaders, which were
generally published in 1971 in their party's newspaper, "The Daily
Sangram". My question, is there any option to define any type of
statement or addressing as a war crime?

I do not want to do any favor to any one in this issue. But, I want
to settle down the issue immediately. The most important question to
me is, are we working for the establishment of Jammat in the name of
their punishment? On October 30th, I heard a discussion of Mr.
Naimul Islam Khan, the editor of "Daily Amader Shomoy" in the
satellite channel Bangla Vision. His views stroke me extremely. He
said, we went to court in the past with the issue of the citizenship
of Prof. Golam Azam, ex-Ameer of JIB. But the complainants lose in
that the case due their weakness in managing information. Their
allaegation against Mr. Azam, finally proved as a wrong one. From
that case, Golam Azam has been established finally. Naim said, that
loosing was a great setback for us. He indirectly discourages every
one to take the issue of war criminal into the court. As he thought,
that this case may also turn into a fake allegation again.

Naim is one of senior editor in Bangladesh. He was the founder
editor of The Daily Ajker Kagoj. What I know about him, he never
talks like a foul person. His views prove that, it will be really
difficult to prove JIB leader as a war criminal. Because, in the
last 36 years, no body even filed a single case against them. Every
one is criticizing them verbally. But no body claimed that this
particular Jammat leader had killed his/her lost person. Or he had
seen to participate any particular leader of JIB in the firing or
genocide activities. There is a far difference between political
statement and a war crime. We must be aware of that.

I think almost like the election commissioner Shakhawat Hossain
that, JIB secretary general's recent statement is mostly a political
statement. This is a part of their strategy (Offensive?) . So who
will take risk to go forward with a simple political statement?

But this statement has opened some new controversies, which will
take us almost near to the truth, I think.

The reaction, what we are observing and hearing in media, mostly it
is rhetorical and full of political ornaments. As our political
history and the culture of our leadership are not very praiseworthy,
so these statements are not sufficient enough to prove anything.
Some people still do not recognize or accept our leader or media
person's views at all. Whenever, they (political or media people)
are saying against some one, particularly without evidence, people
think that these are nothing but an expression of personal anger
ness. Such as in the last 30th October night talk show in Ekushe
Television, JSD leader Najmul Hoque Prodhan without any evidence,
simply said that, Jammat is the mother organization of all kinds of
existing fundamental wings in the country.

Islamic terrorism is one of the most controversial issues of the
country right at the moment. Our intelligence had worked a lot on
this issue, both in last political regime as well as in this free
and fair caretaker regime. But they cannot prove this fact of
linkage between Jammat and the other fundamentalists at all. Even
the recent investigation report by the renowned daily ' Prothom Alo'
& 'Daily Star" cannot find out any relevance in this perspective.
Unfortunately, due to lacking of authentic evidence, people already
start to consider these allegations against Jammat as fake and
false.

Simultaneously, if we want to establish the allegation of war crime
against Jammat-e Islami without evidence and witness again, people
may also be able to consider the allegations as a political
propagandas and biased attitudes as they do.

JIB people claim that Bongobondhu Sheikh Mujib has forgave all the
war criminals. Particularly the trial of 195 recognized war
criminals has been settled long time ago, under the Shimla contact.
By the contrary, the complainants against JIB claim that, that
decision of forgiveness is not applicable for the crime like rapes,
murders, firing etc. Ok, but who has the evidence that JIB leaser is
related to such destructive activities? After this general mercy,
Awami league was in power. Why they did not bring any JIB leader
under trial for these war crimes? Why they did not recognize any war
criminal from the Bengali community?

Again the complainant against JIB claims that, under the dalal
(Collaborators) law, thousand of people were arrested at that time,
when Bongobondhu was murdered in August, 1975. Surprisingly, no top
leadership of present JIB was among those arrested peoples. It
proves another painful truth, that immediately after liberation war,
the powerful and popular Awami league did not do or could not do any
thing against these so-called collaborators.

As the initial strategy of bringing war criminal under justice, some
people gave their views of immediate filing case against the
leadership of JIB. The problems lie here too. After the long 36
years, when the investigation officer of the local thana will move
forward with the case, will he get minimum evidence to prove the
allegation. Former law minister of 1996-01, Awamil league rgime, Mr.
Abdul Matin Khosru, came in a talk show in ETV named Ekusher Shomoy
on last 01-11-2007. He point out this problems and indirectly
expressed his frustration for this limitations of filing case
against JIB now?

In this complex situation, I think the exact number and aspect of
war criminal is yet to be proved. JIB is not the synonym of war
crime. For the proper punishment of war criminal, I think every body
should go forward to collect evidence. After collecting evidence,
government should try to punish the criminals according to the
aspect and forms of their crime. We should not turn this serious
issue into a blaming game again. This issue is to be settled down
with the highest sincerity and authenticity. Because, this matter is
creating major harm for the development program of the country even
after 36 years after the liberation war.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subhan Allah-  Only Allah flawless 
           Alhamdulillah - All praise to be of Allah 
                   Allahhuakbar - Allah, the Greatest
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Would Be Mahathir of BD
------------------------------------------------------------------
If it can be imagined, it is possible- NEC

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[vinnomot] Why British Women are turning to Islaam

Why British Women are turning to Islaam
 
THE SPREAD OF A WORLD CREED
The Times (London)
 
Lucy Berrington finds the Muslim Faith is winning Western admirers despite hostile media coverage.

Unprecedented numbers of British people, nearly all of them women, are converting to Islam at a time of deep divisions within the Anglican and Catholic churches.

The rate of conversions has prompted predictions that Islam will rapidly become an important religious force in this country.[1] "Within the next 20 years the number of British converts will equal or overtake the immigrant Muslim community that brought the faith here", says Rose Kendrick, a religious education teacher at a Hull comprehensive and the author of a textbook guide to the Koran. She says: "Islam is as much a world faith as is Roman Catholicism. No one nationality claims it as its own". Islam is also spreading fast on the continent and in America.

The surge in conversions to Islam has taken place despite the negative image of the faith in the Western press. Indeed, the pace of conversions has accelerated since publicity over the Salman Rushdie affair, the Gulf War[2] and the plight of the Muslims in Bosnia. It is even more ironic that most British converts should be women, given the widespread view in the west that Islam treats women poorly. In the United States, women converts outnumber men by four to one, and in Britain make up the bulk of the estimated 10, 000 to 20, 000 converts, forming part of a Muslim community of 1 to 1.5 million. Many of Britain's "New Muslims" are from middle-class backgrounds. They include Matthew Wilkinson, a former head boy of Eton who went on to Cambridge, and a son and daughter of Lord Justice Scott, the judge heading the arms-to-Iraq inquiry.

A small-scale survey by the Islamic Foundation in Leicester suggests that most converts are aged 30 to 50. Younger Muslims point to many conversions among students and highlight the intellectual thrust of Islam. "Muhammad" said, "The light of Islam will rise in the West" and I think that is what is happening in our day" says Aliya Haeri, an American-born psychologist who converted 15 years ago. She is a consultant to the Zahra Trust, a charity publishing spiritual literature and is one of Britain's prominent Islamic speakers. She adds: "Western converts are coming to Islam with fresh eyes, without all the habits of the East, avoiding much of what is culturally wrong. The purest tradition is finding itself strongest in the West."[3]

Some say the conversions are prompted by the rise of comparative religious education. The British media, offering what Muslims describe as a relentless bad press on all things Islamic, is also said to have helped. Westerners despairing of their own society - rising in crime, family breakdown, drugs and alcoholism [4] - have come to admire the discipline and security of Islam. Many converts are former Christians disillusioned by the uncertainty of the church and unhappy with the concept of the Trinity and deification of Jesus.

Quest of the Convert - Why Change?

Other converts describe a search for a religious identity. Many had previously been practicing Christians but found intellectual satisfaction in Islam. "I was a theology student and it was the academic argument that led to my conversion." Rose Kendrick, a religious education teacher and author, said she objected to the concept of the original sin: "Under Islam, the sins of the fathers aren't visited on the sons. The idea that God is not always forgiving is blasphemous to Muslims.

Maimuna, 39, was raised as a High Anglican and confirmed at 15 at the peak of her religious devotion. "I was entranced by the ritual of the High Church and thought about taking the veil." Her crisis came when a prayer was not answered. She slammed the door on visiting vicars but traveled to convents for discussions with nuns. "My belief came back stronger, but not for the Church, the institution or the dogma." She researched every Christian denomination, plus Judaism, Buddhism and Krishna Consciousness, before turning to Islam.

Many converts from Christianity reject the ecclesiastical hierarchy emphasizing Muslims' direct relationship with God. They sense a lack of leadership in the Church of England and are suspicious of its apparent flexibility. "Muslims don't keep shifting their goal-posts," says Huda Khattab, 28, author of The Muslim Woman's Handbook, published this year by Ta-Ha. She converted ten years ago while studying Arabic at university. "Christianity changes, like the way some have said pre-marital sex is okay if its with the person you're going to marry. It seems so wishy-washy. Islam was constant about sex, about praying five times a day. The prayer makes you conscious of God all the time. You're continually touching base.

Footnotes

1 This is one of the reasons why there is an onslaught of bad press against Islam and the Muslims. Whoever considers Islam carefully with its principle belief Tawheed (the Uniqueness of Allaah, His and His sole right to subservience, worship and legislation), the sum total of its injunctions, formulated by Allaah (which are harmonic and define the true nature, position, rights and responsibilities of both sexes), and its justice in every sphere of life (social, economical and political) for all categories of people - wives, husbands, children, orphans, women, the poor and indigent, the poverty-stricken - will realize why it poses a threat to the leading elite of the western civilizations (i.e. those who benefit most from the unfair and unjust forms by which the people are governed). It is in the hands of such people that the control of peoples beliefs and ideas lie (via television, Magazines, Films, Education) and naturally this advantage is used to maintain the existing status quo. Muslims are not governed by and enslaved the false beliefs and ideas of humans, they are enslaved to and governed by Allah alone. This is the essence of Islam - That enslavement is to none but to Allah alone and everything besides Him is undeserving of worship and subservience.

2 It is now an established fact that around 5,000 of the US Troops who were stationed in Saudi Arabia became Muslims during and shortly after the Gulf War.

3 Much of the alleged oppression of women is due to localized culture which is based on a superstition that is more akin to Hinduism. It is, however, portrayed as being Islamic in origin which in turn seriously affects the 'independence of thought' of those who do not bother to pursue the matter in an objective manner - which includes most people.

4 One of the biggest industries in the West is that of entertainment and amusement. This is essential to maintain the false idea of progress, that what comes next is better and worth enduring for. Peoples minds are preoccupied with their own pleasures and other pursuits while others are being murdered, slaughtered, women raped, innocent babies and children butchered with axes and knives, innocent by-standers in robberies and muggings killed, the aged battered to death by adolescents, thousands dying of drug abuse, thousands of innocent lives destroyed by the consumption of alcohol, drunkards beating their women and children... the list is endless. The entertainment industry is one of the effective tools in the 'normalization of the thought process', the 'desensitization of the humanistic concern', and the intensification of the 'my pleasure and gratification is what is most important' syndrome.
 

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Our representative to WTO

Dear Alochoks:

I learned in today's Daily Star that Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, our representative to the World Trade Organization is leaving for Switzerland today. From the article (listed below), it is clear that this man is highly qualified and an expert in international trade negotiations. It is great to see such able and highly qualified people are being selected to represent and fight for Bangladesh's trade interests.

Interestingly, I also read a week ago that a professor from BUET has filed a case against the nomination of Dr. Bhattacharya on the grounds that his wife is a Russian citizen. Isn't it amazing?! Who knows what this BUET professor's agenda is. Perhaps he has a legitimate reason. But it is sad example of how poisonous the environment in our country is! Every good deed has a million enemies!

It also makes me appreciate the work of the good people in our nation - from Dr. Yunus to the common villager trying to help his community. Doing good in Bangladesh is very, very difficult and yet these people somehow find the courage and perseverance to do the right thing.

- M. Raheem


Dr Debapriya Bhattacharya, who was recently appointed ambassador and permanent representative of Bangladesh to the World Trade Organisation and the UN Office at Geneva, flies to Switzerland today to take over his new assignment.

Debapriya, a noted macro-economist and civil society activist, has also been accredited to represent the country at UN agencies in Vienna and will concurrently act as Bangladesh's ambassador to the Vatican.

He had been a long-time executive director of the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) -- a leading think tank in South Asia --before being chosen for the new posts late September.

Born in 1956, Debapriya studied at St Gregory's High School in Dhaka and at Dhaka College. He did his MSc in Economics with distinction and PhD from Plekhanov Institute of National Economy, Moscow.

He was a post-doctoral fellow at Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.

Before joining CPD, Debapriya worked as a senior research fellow at Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) and was a senior Fulbright fellow at the Centre for Global Development (CGD), Washington D.C. in 2004-05.

He was also a visiting fellow at United Nations University-Institute of New Technology, Maastricht, and at Department of economics, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.

Debapriya has conducted joint research with Institute of Developing Economics (IDE), Tokyo, and Institute of Development Planning and Management (IDPM), Manchester.

He undertook assignments for a number of international organisations, including the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNCTAD, ILO as well as bilateral development agencies from the USA, Japan, the UK, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Sweden.

He has more than one hundred publications to his credit, including chapters in books, monographs, journals, articles and research reports.

Debapriya was a member of the official Bangladesh delegation to the fourth ministerial meeting of the WTO in Doha (2001) and the second meeting of the LDC trade ministers held in Dhaka (2003).

He played a critical role in the national preparatory process for the WTO ministerials held in Cancun (2003) and Hong Kong (2005) and helped organise the pre-WTO ministerial international civil society forums on LDC interests, held in Dhaka in 2003 and 2005.

He was the general secretary of Bangladesh Economic Association for three consecutive terms and is a member of the governing body of Brac, the world's largest NGO.

He also sits on the academic council of Brac University.

In the recent past, Debapriya played a leading role in promoting good governance in the country and, particularly spearheaded the civil society campaign for "Clean and Competent Candidates" for parliamentary elections in Bangladesh.

He is married to Dr Irina Shebanova, an economist, with a daughter, Alexandra Bhattacharya, who is studying Law at London School of Economics.

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Re: Jammat’s S.G’s recent remarks: A different Assessment

Well, where were Go Ajam, Nijami, Mujahid etc. before the murder of
Bangabandhu in 1975? Didn't the top leadership of Jama'at, Al Badr
and As Shams go into hiding in Pakistan, Saudi and other places right
after the liberation war? Why did Go Ajam lose his Bangladeshi
citizenship? Why was Jama'at banned from politics? Wasn't Moulana
Abul Kalam Azad (aka Bachchu rajakar and now renowned NTV Islamic
scholar) rotting in prison with thousands of other war criminals
before dictator Zia grabbed power? Didn't honest Zia set all of them
free? We should also assess these very questions.

All the political parties (including even some Islamic ones) except a
very few are united on this issue now. All the war criminals and
their sympathizers all over the world should really get worried.
Please also read the following interesting article:

http://www.shamokal.com/details.php?nid=78755

> Ali Ahmad Mabrur <amabrur@...> wrote:
> Last 25th October 31, 2007, under the discussion project
of Election
> Commission with the political parties, Jammat-e-Islami Bangladesh
> had met with three election commissioners led by their secretary
> general Mr. Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujaheed. After the meeting, Mr.
> Mujaheed gave answers to the journalists. He informed everyone
about
> the summery of the meeting. He expressed some particular views
about
> the voter list preparation and EC's roadmap too.
>
> Apart from these election related opinions, peoples were very
> interested to hear their reaction about the recommendations of some
> religion-based parties of banning and rejecting them from the
> election program. Those secular parties are trying in different
form
> to restrain them, to defy them as they took position against the
> liberation forces during the liberation war.
>
> Regarding this controversial issue, JIB Secretary General said,
> there is nothing like anti-liberation force now in Bangladesh. He
> added that, as Bongobondhu Sheikh Mujib, forgave all the recognized
> (195 people) war criminal under the Shimla contact, and after this
> forgiving, no one else were convicted as war criminal, so there is
> no war criminal right now in Bangladesh too.
>
> Very naturally, extreme reaction is vividly seen in different
places
> after this remarks. Particularly media and leftist political
parties
> are making a huge outburst after his statement. From here, I am
> going to evaluate the whole situation in a different way.
>
> I have some questions about the role of Jammat-e-Islami in 1971.
> Such as: Had Jammat-e-Islami made any major fault, which may
address
> as war crime in 1971? Is there any option to punish them for their
> deeds and statement? What should we do to as the primary
> initiatives? What can Jammat do, to settle down the matter?
>
> Historically it is established, that, Jammat-e- Islami did not work
> in favor of our freedom fighters during the liberation war. But to
> my consideration, principally it was a political stand. Any
> political motivation or stands cannot be considered as war crime.
> JIB or a particular party cannot stand for a vice or fault like war
> crime. You can not address a whole party for war crime. You can say
> that some persons of that party may involve with such tasks, which
> can be considered as war crime. If we say in this tone, then I
> think, the allegation will be more specific and more logical.
> Because, if we bring the party name firstly, then it may loose the
> weight of the allegation. If a party's political decision proves
> faulty, then that should be condemned politically. You have no
> chance to take over a decision factor to the court for trial.
>
> According to the dictionary, war crime is a crime, which is vividly
> a violation of international law and human rights. In a simple
> definition, war crimes generally stands for killing, genocide, mass
> rape, firing etc. Whenever we are talking, about the relevance of
> Jammat-e-Islami with the war crime, then as the evidence of this
> allegation, we bring the statement of Jammat leaders, which were
> generally published in 1971 in their party's newspaper, "The Daily
> Sangram". My question, is there any option to define any type of
> statement or addressing as a war crime?
>
> I do not want to do any favor to any one in this issue. But, I want
> to settle down the issue immediately. The most important question
to
> me is, are we working for the establishment of Jammat in the name
of
> their punishment? On October 30th, I heard a discussion of Mr.
> Naimul Islam Khan, the editor of "Daily Amader Shomoy" in the
> satellite channel Bangla Vision. His views stroke me extremely. He
> said, we went to court in the past with the issue of the
citizenship
> of Prof. Golam Azam, ex-Ameer of JIB. But the complainants lose in
> that the case due their weakness in managing information. Their
> allaegation against Mr. Azam, finally proved as a wrong one. From
> that case, Golam Azam has been established finally. Naim said, that
> loosing was a great setback for us. He indirectly discourages every
> one to take the issue of war criminal into the court. As he
thought,
> that this case may also turn into a fake allegation again.
>
> Naim is one of senior editor in Bangladesh. He was the founder
> editor of The Daily Ajker Kagoj. What I know about him, he never
> talks like a foul person. His views prove that, it will be really
> difficult to prove JIB leader as a war criminal. Because, in the
> last 36 years, no body even filed a single case against them. Every
> one is criticizing them verbally. But no body claimed that this
> particular Jammat leader had killed his/her lost person. Or he had
> seen to participate any particular leader of JIB in the firing or
> genocide activities. There is a far difference between political
> statement and a war crime. We must be aware of that.
>
> I think almost like the election commissioner Shakhawat Hossain
> that, JIB secretary general's recent statement is mostly a
political
> statement. This is a part of their strategy (Offensive?). So who
> will take risk to go forward with a simple political statement?
>
> But this statement has opened some new controversies, which will
> take us almost near to the truth, I think.
>
> The reaction, what we are observing and hearing in media, mostly it
> is rhetorical and full of political ornaments. As our political
> history and the culture of our leadership are not very
praiseworthy,
> so these statements are not sufficient enough to prove anything.
> Some people still do not recognize or accept our leader or media
> person's views at all. Whenever, they (political or media people)
> are saying against some one, particularly without evidence, people
> think that these are nothing but an expression of personal anger
> ness. Such as in the last 30th October night talk show in Ekushe
> Television, JSD leader Najmul Hoque Prodhan without any evidence,
> simply said that, Jammat is the mother organization of all kinds of
> existing fundamental wings in the country.
>
> Islamic terrorism is one of the most controversial issues of the
> country right at the moment. Our intelligence had worked a lot on
> this issue, both in last political regime as well as in this free
> and fair caretaker regime. But they cannot prove this fact of
> linkage between Jammat and the other fundamentalists at all. Even
> the recent investigation report by the renowned daily ' Prothom
Alo'
> & 'Daily Star" cannot find out any relevance in this perspective.
> Unfortunately, due to lacking of authentic evidence, people already
> start to consider these allegations against Jammat as fake and
> false.
>
> Simultaneously, if we want to establish the allegation of war crime
> against Jammat-e Islami without evidence and witness again, people
> may also be able to consider the allegations as a political
> propagandas and biased attitudes as they do.
>
> JIB people claim that Bongobondhu Sheikh Mujib has forgave all the
> war criminals. Particularly the trial of 195 recognized war
> criminals has been settled long time ago, under the Shimla contact.
> By the contrary, the complainants against JIB claim that, that
> decision of forgiveness is not applicable for the crime like rapes,
> murders, firing etc. Ok, but who has the evidence that JIB leaser
is
> related to such destructive activities? After this general mercy,
> Awami league was in power. Why they did not bring any JIB leader
> under trial for these war crimes? Why they did not recognize any
war
> criminal from the Bengali community?
>
> Again the complainant against JIB claims that, under the dalal
> (Collaborators) law, thousand of people were arrested at that time,
> when Bongobondhu was murdered in August, 1975. Surprisingly, no top
> leadership of present JIB was among those arrested peoples. It
> proves another painful truth, that immediately after liberation
war,
> the powerful and popular Awami league did not do or could not do
any
> thing against these so-called collaborators.
>
> As the initial strategy of bringing war criminal under justice,
some
> people gave their views of immediate filing case against the
> leadership of JIB. The problems lie here too. After the long 36
> years, when the investigation officer of the local thana will move
> forward with the case, will he get minimum evidence to prove the
> allegation. Former law minister of 1996-01, Awamil league rgime,
Mr.
> Abdul Matin Khosru, came in a talk show in ETV named Ekusher Shomoy
> on last 01-11-2007. He point out this problems and indirectly
> expressed his frustration for this limitations of filing case
> against JIB now?
>
> In this complex situation, I think the exact number and aspect of
> war criminal is yet to be proved. JIB is not the synonym of war
> crime. For the proper punishment of war criminal, I think every
body
> should go forward to collect evidence. After collecting evidence,
> government should try to punish the criminals according to the
> aspect and forms of their crime. We should not turn this serious
> issue into a blaming game again. This issue is to be settled down
> with the highest sincerity and authenticity. Because, this matter
is
> creating major harm for the development program of the country even
> after 36 years after the liberation war.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
> Subhan Allah- Only Allah flawless
> Alhamdulillah - All praise to be of Allah
> Allahhuakbar - Allah, the Greatest
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------Would Be
Mahathir of BD
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> If it can be imagined, it is possible- NEC
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[vinnomot] Pakistan - Black Saturday

 
SAN-Feature Service
SOUTH ASIAN NEWS-FEATURE SERVICE
November 4,2007
 
Pakistan: Black Saturday
 
 November 3 will go down as another dark day in Pakistan's political and constitutional history. It can be safely said that this is one of General Pervez Musharraf's gravest errors of judgment, and a sorry indication that nothing has been learnt from the mistakes of the past.
 
SAN-Feature Service : November 3 will go down as another dark day in Pakistan's political and constitutional history. It can be safely said that this is one of General Pervez Musharraf's gravest errors of judgment, and a sorry indication that nothing has been learnt from the mistakes of the past. The imposition of emergency rule and suspension of the 1973 Constitution announced on Saturday is only going to destroy the very institutions that this country crucially needs for evolving into a true democracy, particularly the judiciary, media and parliament. It will further fracture an already weakened federation, alienate those who have grievances against the centre, such as the Tribal Areas and Balochistan, and push whatever little credibility the government had down a very deep abyss. Such a draconian step will also have little effect on our ability to fight terrorism and extremism. It would be fair to assume that the emergency has been imposed only to target two institutions: the judiciary and the media but it may well have poisonous effects on another: i.e. parliament. Those in the ruling PML-Q will be foolish not to realise that the legislative branch of government has received a death blow as well since the imposition has come from an army general.
 
The fact that the official statement carrying the emergency announcement used 'army chief' rather than president to refer to the authority behind the promulgation is significant as well indicating that perhaps what we have on our hands is a de facto martial law -- one in which the assemblies will function but only to give the impression that democracy has not been hampered in any manner. Furthermore, the timing of the proclamation, a few days before an expected judgment on a case that could have potentially declared the president's re-election null and void, is such that very few people in this country, or overseas for that matter, will buy the argument that it has been imposed to arrest the deteriorating law and order situation and to allow the government to focus on fighting extremism and militancy. It will be difficult to remove public doubts that it has only been imposed to target a superior judiciary that has finally found some spine and is carrying out its constitutional role of acting as a watchdog on the executive, which in Pakistan's case was often overstepping its constitutionally-defined authority. As for the media, the fact that private television channels were blacked out for the better part of Saturday is a grim indication of the government's intentions. However, here too, such bans are essentially counter-productive and will be seen by ordinary Pakistanis as a desperate act of a regime bent on shielding itself from criticism.
 
Meanwhile, the Chief Justice of Pakistan has been informed that his services were no longer required. In any case, the promulgation of a provisional constitutional order would mean that most of the judges of the Supreme Court who had in recent weeks taken a brave and defiant stand against the government and the military would be pushed aside and not be invited to take a fresh oath; many would in all probability decline such an offer. As news of the imposition of emergency spread, eight members of the Supreme Court defiantly struck down the proclamation, which could well trigger off a new stand-off. The future is not looking good -- not least because the president's move is bound to have massive repercussions and a severe response from all segments of civil society. Such acts are indefensible at any time, more so in this day and age. --SAN-Feature Service
 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com __._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___

[vinnomot] [humanist_international] Humanism and Spirituality: (Basic 4): Birth and Death Issues I...

 
Developing Human Potential Without Religion
 
Part 4: Birth and Death Issues
 
Where modern, industrial or non-natural methods of living life are accepted as necessary part of day to day life (like eating frozen food, Coca Cola or juices from the fridge, preserved foods, flying in aeroplanes, talking on telephone, using internet etc. etc.), then this industrial (non-natural) or modern create  moral and ethical issues about creating, or ending or controlling life which are always to the fore in the personal, situational experiences of life, as well as in the broader spectra of social concerns. Many may raise moral and ethical eyebrows when the female menopause is delayed or menses restarted in a post-menopausal woman in order to make pregnancy possible again. Does it make sense to conceive at the age of sixty-plus? For many women it probably does, and they have valid reasons for spending a good deal of anxiety and money to conceive. After all, the moral and ethical eyebrows are barely raised at all for the aging male who sires a child.
However, aside from the issue of post-menopausal conception, what of the woman who finds herself pregnant but, for reasons of physical, mental or social health, does not want to let the little genetic-drop to continue to grow into a fetus, (for example, what choices are there for a little girl who is raped and so is forcibly made pregnant?) It is the religious groups, in particular, who are opposed to the interference of science or medicine in the beginning of life or ending it, (although they do not protest when surgeons remove naturally-formed stones in the gall-bladder or in the kidneys; is it not human interference in the natural process in the interest of physical, mental and social health of a human-being just like in the case of woman seeking an unwanted or forced early pregnancy ?). The ignorant and medieval-minded Roman Catholic Church, for example, is against any form of artificial insemination (AI) as an answer to medical problem of  infertility, even if the sperm donor is the marriage partner of the female. It regards the AI process of reproduction as non-natural, being mechanical and outside the "normal" sexual union of marriage. However, it seems that artificial heart pacemakers -- no less an intrusion into the natural body -- are quite acceptable. Equally so, it is illogically and myteriously opposed to abortion, particularly in cases of nuns carrying forced and illegitimate pregnancies out of the rapes by the Christian bishops and priests !
Abortion
Abortion is the premature expulsion or removal of the drop-like little genetic-mass from the womb of a woman to prevent its conrinuation and growth. Humanists are not always in favour of abortion on itself. They would like rather a child be conceived responsibly through choice, welcomed in a family, and have a caring environment. But these are ideal situations; not all pregnancies are wanted, not all circumstances are favourable, and some circumstances are definitely harmful to a baby to be born, as some pregnancies are harmful to the health of the mother;(for example :Female infanticide in India and Pakistan is related to the low status of femael in the society as well as the fact that women needs to be married off to others and need alienating a part of property and need dowry as well, therefore millions of female genetic-masess are aborted each year in India / Pakistan and Bangladesh that amounts togenocide by other mean ; one could also mention a custom in one tribe in Arab Bedouins of 7th century who used to bury their female babies alive as being female, or being a father of a female, was amatter of shame and dishonour !)
An efficient contraception isould ideally prevent any unwanted, pregnancy. However, clearly it does not. According to the Abortion Law Reform Association (ALRA) in Britain, for example, three-quarters of the women who have abortions had been using some sort of contraception. This confirms that many methods of contraception cannot guarantee absolute protection against unwanted conception.
For those women who find that they cannot face pregnancy for whatever physical, mental or social circumstances, humanists believe that the choice of terminating the pregnancy is their basic human right, as it is their own body which have to carry the pregnancies, suffer from disease and discomfort during pregnancy, as well as  suffer from the painful and sometimes lethal process of child delivery, especially in 3rd world countries where hundreds of thousands women die during child-delivery every year, or become physically disabled  because of inefficient or inadequate services. Since humanists are devoted to enhancing the quality of life, in cases of abortion it is the quality of life of the mother as well as the genetic mass to  develop as a foetus that is taken into account. If mother, child, or both are likely to suffer in case the the pregnancy is allowed to continue, then humanists generally consider that termination of that genetic maas is the morally acceptable solution. However, the classical religions like Christianity, Hinduism and Islam talk on these problems with ignorance of the whole process, and therefore are unbelieveable and untrustwothy.
The case for abortion
How far should a genetic mass with life potential dictate the future of the life of the woman that carries it in her womb? It is only the woman carrying that unborn potential who can really answer this question. In today's world, individuals are less likely to accept their lot in life by submitting to whatever life brings them. This has much to do with the rejection of medieval-minded religious compulsions for the way society ought to think, and the acceptance of a more rational freedom of individuals in seeking quality of life. It may well be that there are ethical implications of ending a potential life, but there are also ethical implications involved in condemning a woman to suffer for or offer a welcome to a potential life she does not want.
Few women take the choice to abort lightly and abortion clinics are only too familiar with the timidity, fear and distress of most women who cross their thresholds. Some women are happy to have many children; some do not want any at all. For each woman there is a limit beyond which the quality of life vanishes, and there is also a time when it is right to have a child and a time when it is radically wrong.
"Pro-life" groups as they call themselves, (most hypocratically, they do not care for millions of deaths in Hiroshima,Vietnam or Iraq but of just the potential Christian life of a genetic mass!), or Anti-abortion Rights campaigners, often make the point that adoption, or putting a child in care, are better options than abortion. But pro-abortion rights groups demand, "Better for whom?" Certainly not for the mother, who has the added burden of carrying a genetic mass she does not want to continue, a birth process that she does not want, and then the guilt of parting with the child, if she let it go to some institution of family. And orphanages were full when abortion was illegal: clearly, without abortion there will be many unwanted children in institutional care.
Bringing another human being into the world is a highly responsible and important act. Unless that being can be offered a considerable measure of quality it seems futile to bring him or her into a world where quality of life would be lacking. The fundamental rights of women mean little if they cannot have choice in matters of their own fertility. The woman is a living, conscious human being, with knowledge of the joys and vicissitudes of life. Her life, balanced against an unconscious potential life is more precious than the potential life that she carries. Without quality in her life -- in whatever way the woman understands that word -- her life expression is diminished.
One of the most important criteria for terminations of pregnancies is the evidence that the foetus is seriously handicapped either mentally, physically, or both. Most women who carry a potential child in their womb are radically concerned that they will bear a "normal" baby. And only Some women will cope admirably with a handicapped child; others would never be able to cope.
Given the increasing overpopulation of the planet, abortion is seen as one way of limiting population expansion. In China, for example, abortion is compulsory for those who have more than one child (though this has brought increasing evidence of infanticide for baby girls), and in Tibet, one has to have a certificate in order to become pregnan (which is clearly a repressive pracice)t. Severe financial penalties ensue for those who conceive again. In Bangladesh a choice between sterilization and starvation has been the policy in years past.
 
In India it is often potential female-genetic-mass that are aborted, partly because of the crucial difference an extra mouth to feed can make in impoverished families, but also because a woman will normally reproduce until she has a son. Sons are socially and religiously important for maintaining parents in their old age, for status, and for important fictional religious death rites. Through its long history, Hinduism, Christianity as well as Islam  have generally given the male a far greater status than the female. In fact, women were not even permitted to read certain scriptures in all these religions.
In India, then, disappointment will surround the woman who gives birth to girls, when there is no boy, and since the amniocentesis test has become available, abortion has become a means of restricting family size, accounting both for the need for son(s), and for the need for a smaller family. However, to humanists, abortion as a means of curbing population expansion is misguided belief: it is efficient contraception that should do this, and this will only occur with better sex education and health services concerned with birth control.
The case against abortion
Whatever the opinion of the individual humanist about abortion itself, the humanist position is a clearly pro-choice rights one, and it is supportive of the main bodies that campaign for reform in present government legislation concerning women's right to choose. But there are those who oppose this right to choose under any circumstances, the so-called"pro-life" or "anti-abortion rights" groups.
Much of the antipathy to abortion centres round the issue of foetal sentience, the fictional claim -- disputed by pro-choice campaigners -- that the genetic-mass may be capable of experiencing pain after ten weeks. Any attempt to remove the foetus from the womb may thus beinflicting a painful termination and, since it is ending potential life, is tantamount to a lethal act. But apart from the issue of the genetic-mass sentience, those opposed to a woman'choice falsely assume that life begins at conception. Any attempt at interfering with that fictional-life is believed to be wrong (however, it is often forgotten that millions of easrly genetic-masses of fetuses are automatically aborted-as an act of Allah or God-so that it should be accepted that abortion normally and aztomatically happens in nature even without intention !). Since life is falsely accepted to be present from the moment of conception, such opponents also condemn the use of abortifacients, the so-called "morning after pill", the post-coital pill that is designed to prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum in the uterus during the first days of development. This indeed this is ncontraception and should not be confused with any form of abortion.
Some campaigners against women's choice also believe that physical or mental disability are no grounds for abortion, pointing out that the later terminations for handicaps are sometimes for minor reasons of harelip, club foot, even impaired hearing and sight. They are opposed to what they consider a fostering of a mentality of lethal discrimination against the disabled, which is totally incorrect and equally illogical, as a potential life as as yet only potential and not real. With the advance of genetic technology, search and terminate attitude although criticized seems justified, particularly since care of the severely disabled child and adult can make great demands on the health of the mother, and on the welfare of the family if not on the social services.
Opponents of women'schoice also fear the acceptance of termination of those severely handicapped at birth, a practice that normally doesn't obtain in hospitals. But the cases of women's choice because of a potentially handicapped child are very few compared to those on grounds of harm to the mental and physical well-being of the mother, or to her existing family. In Britain women must gain authorization from two medical practitioners before termination is permitted, yet campaigners against women's choice claim that reasons given are social reasons and amount to " women's choice on demand". They are opposed to any reform in the abortion law that might allow women to terminate early pregnancy through their own choice. The unborn child,  wrongly or rightly, is always seen as a separate human being from its mother, with a potentially unique and separate personality, having a right to life both before and after its birth, although it is a fact that a genetic mass maturing into a feutus remains part of the body of a women « bones of her bones, flesh of her flesh and blood of her blood » till delivery, therfore it is a potential person encumbered by the mother's person of which it remains a parasite and dependent even for its potenteality for life. (Is it not part of mother's flesh till delivery, and why should she suffer forced prgnancy, diseaases of pregnancy, death, disease and injury during delivery without her consent ?).
Underlying these ideas is a medieval-minded religious ideology that only Allah or God has the right to give and take life. The Roman Catholic position, for example, is staunchly anti-Women's choice (and officially anti-contraception), as is the Muslim position. In Muslim religious law, life is given by Allah right from the beginning as a nutfah, a drop of fluid in the mother's womb. This drop of fluid, Muslims believe, is planned, programmed and cared for by Allah, and should not be terminated. The "soul" is believed to enter thegenetic mass called at 120 days. But even Islam, as Anglican Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism, accepts that termination is essential if the mother's life is in serious danger.
These, then, are some of the views put forward by those who oppose woman's choice. It is worth reiterating that humanists are pro-choice: while not favouring unjustified abortion in itself, they recognize the need for each woman to choose her own path in the face of pregnancy. When a woman first knows that she is pregnant, she will hardly react passively whether married or not: whether in reasonable social and mental health or not, whether she is victom of rape ?. Whether such information is accepted with happiness or despair, her life is radically affected and changed from that very moment. Advice, counselling, care and dialogue are essential at such a time, but only the woman herself can make the ultimate decision after due guidance, whether her pregnancy is wanted, forced or unwanted, and if the latter, it asks a great deal to deny her the right to terminate what will affect her life radically thereafter.
Euthanasia
The word euthanasia is sometimes referred to as "mercy killing"; that is to say, it is the act of ending a life of one who has no hope of recovery from a terminal and extremely painful illness. It is generally thought of as an act of compassion, that in most countries is illegal. The connotation of ending suffering is reflected in the Greek origins of the word eu-thanatos where it meant "an easy or painless death." Today euthanasia suggests some kind of assistance in the process of death, in order to end suffering. It is something often done for animals, but generally remains illegal for human beings.
Buddha and other ancieent traditions: When Buddha was more than 80 years old, he found that he could not continue to live indpendently and gracefully. Therefore one evening he arranaged to cook poisonous mushrooms for his dinner, and after dinner he invited his disciples, gave his final sermon and died of his own accord with peace and dignity. There had also been a tradition in ancient Greece and other ancient civiizations for terminating one's life peacefully. Similarly in ancient India when somebody wanted to terminate his life for one or the other reason, he had to inform the state which investigated the sanity and the problem and  gave him 7 days to re-consider before he was allowed to end his life in full view of the public.
We all have to die, but none of us wants to end life in perpetual pain and dreadful suffering. But the fact is that some of us may have to. And if that time comes, and we know that there is no hope of recovery, and all that remains is the long and painful slide to the point of death, then the decision to cut short a life of suffering seems very sensible to many people.
There are two issues involved here: first, should we have the right to decide when, in certain circumstances, we should die, and, second, should a medical practitioner be allowed to assist that death? And since there are many cases in which the patient may be considerably incapacitated, the medical involvement in the issue of euthanasia is crucial.
We live in an age when medical science has done much to reduce suffering in so many areas, not least in the cases where a painful and distressing end of life ensues. But medical science has also created the facilities to artificially prolong life, and in some cases this may well be for a patient who does not want his or her life prolonged. Then, too, while palliative drugs (drugs used to ease the distress and pain without providing cure) are more efficient, there are some patients for whom the side effects are unbearable, or for whom pain is still extreme.
To know that one's life is over, to spend each day and night in terrible pain, to feel hopeless about one's condition, but to be unable to die, is the epitome of suffering. The dichotomy for the medical practitioner is acute -- to save life, or to relieve suffering. It is a moral dichotomy that is situational to the individuals involved; (This is essentially medical ethics question).
Those who are in favour of euthanasia believe that it should be one available option for those for whom life is drawing to a painful end. And while hospice care (residential care for people who are very seriously, and often terminally, ill) is the best choice for some, euthanasia might well be the best for others. For many, both options might be felt to be necessary. But whatever scenario one has at the end of life, to know that if it becomes intolerable there is the choice to die, is more likely to stimulate courage in pain and suffering.
Each person has the right to live with dignity and to die with dignity, and when the dignity of life ceases, then the choice of death is, for some, a compassionate option. But as the law stands in most Western countries, ending one's own life is usually suicide, and with assistance from someone else it is called assisted-suicide or even murder. In the recent past suicide was considered both a sin and a crime, whatever might have been the compuldions. The Roman Catholic and most Protestant Churches would refuse to bury a person in consecrated ground if he or she had committed suicide, or even to conduct a funeral service, while in some countries the police would always be involved because a crime had been committed. Under British law in the nineteenth century the estate of one who had died through suicide was confiscated.
The idea of deciding when it is right to die and of ending one's own life has a long history of religious and legal antipathy. In religious circles the same antagonism to both suicide and euthanasia still obtains because of a belief that only the divine should give and take life. And yet, religiously, it seems one can die for a religious cause and become a saint but not for one's own self! Gandhi's fasts that brought him close to death would have been an act of suicide, but were admired by many as a passive means to win political points. Buddhists, too, condemn suicide, but have immolated themselves to protest against political injustices ; 13,000 persons commit suicide annually in the sophisticated France, a high technological Western country, but here they do it as they are sick of their Western Christian society and not for any justifiable reasons.
In the Judeo-Christian tradition, suicides such as those of Samson and Saul have been commended, and the mass suicides at Masada in Israel shortly after the time of the fall of the Temple in C.E. 70 have become a symbol of bravery to all Jews. Christian history, too, is peppered with so-called martyrs for the faith. In Islam, also, sacrificing one's life in jihad, "holy war," is acceptable, as anyone familiar with the Israeli-Arab conflict, 9/11 incident, suicidal-bombing in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan knows. But suicide for personal reasons is a disgrace, and euthanasia is abhorrent. We can die for a god, but not for ourselves
Voluntary euthanasia
Voluntary euthanasia is simply not voluntary if there is any degree of persuasion or pressure placed on a patient. Care for the old, the infirm and the terminally ill should be of an exceptionally high standard, so that those who feel that the burden of life is unbearable are in the minority. But the choice to terminate life must always be voluntary (in full presence of senses): It is an optional choice that should be legal for the individual who, under no pressure or suggestion from any persons whatsoever, decides that the termination of his or her life is the best option. As with abortion, it is a right to choose. But having made the choice to die, the individual is often asking for assistance in dying.
The rationale for voluntary euthanasia is sound and is supported by most humanists. It suggests that a person has a right to die when there can be no further quality in his or her life (out of extreme age, painful and incurable disease, for example). But since there may be no possibility of coherent communication for a dying person in the last phases of life, the right to choose made now when in sound mind, what one would wish to happen in such a situation, is part of the rationale of the right to choose. Voluntary euthanasia would therefore be an option to those individuals for whom suffering at the end of life is too painful and distressing and who, in such circumstances, are able themselves to choose to die.
It would also be an option to those who may choose to decide in advance the conditions under which they might not wish to continue living; if, for example such conditions are incurable and are permanent). Such decisions are both situational and personal. They are decisions that might well be abhorrent for some, and important for others. The essential factor is the minimum quality of life of the individual and the right of an individual to balance loss of minimal quality against prolonging life; in other words to control his or her own life in such extrene circumstances. This is a thoroughly humanist principle.
Voluntary euthanasia societies usually supply a kind of document that is an Advanced Directive, Living Will, or Do Not Resuscitate Order. Importantly, such a document does not ask a doctor to break the law. It simply indicates the wishes of a person concerning the withholding of treatment in certain extremely degrading/painful/distressing medical conditions. In other words, it conveys the wishes of someone in sound mind that, should such a fatal condition occur, life is not to be prolonged by medical treatment where there can be no hope of recovery to a dignified life. Such a form is normally retained by one's medical practitioner. In some cases a Living Will Alert Card or the like can be carried to indicate that a living will has been signed.
Non-voluntary, active, and passive euthanasia
In contrast to voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia would occur when individuals have not expressed any wish to die, perhaps because they are not physically or mentally capable of doing so. While the patient does not give consent, relatives may do so. This kind of euthanasia might arise in cases where a patient is comatose, is on a life-support machine, or is a newborn, defective baby.
Active euthanasia, on the other hand, would involve direct action to terminate the painful life of a person such as a lethal injection or a lethal overdose of drugs. It is the intentional termination of the life of one human being by another, and there are many instances when -- despite the fact that it is against the law (except when ordered by the Law-courts) -- both individuals and doctors have actively teminated  the painful life of a person in order to relieve what could only be a long, painful and drawn-out death. Passive euthanasia occurs when treatment is withheld so that the patient is allowed to die naturally.
Contemporary medicine has the skills to prolong life indefinitely, even though a patient may exist as a non-thinking /sub-human for several weeks , months or even years. Allowing such a non-person to die naturally when there is no point in continuing treatment is often a sensible thing to do. Similarly, severely defective newborn babies are sometimes left to die. The problem in this latter case is that, allowing a baby to die naturally is likely to cause considerable suffering, unlike the comatose patient, for example. Then, too, it is a fine point whether letting someone die and actively terminating his or her painful life are so radically different. If someone is drowning in a lake and I don't reach out my hand to pull him or her out, I may be just as guilty of active or passive helping him or her die -- and certainly at the mental level, it is so.
Passive euthanasia may also involve cases where the patient is capable of making the decision not to be given further medical treatment to prolong life, when the quality of that life can only be at best very poor and diminished. Whose right is to be respected here? Should an individual have the right to refuse further treatment? Or has a doctor the right to impose treatment on that person?
And how does a doctor balance the saving of life with the alleviation of suffering in such instances? These are the greyer areas that occur with the issues of passive versus active euthanasia. Somewhere between passive and active euthanasia is indirect euthanasia that occurs when death is hastened as a side-effect of the medical treatment given.
Objections to euthanasia
The main objection put forward against euthanasia -- even voluntary euthanasia -- are that :  
·        its acceptance may well be a slippery slope from legitimate euthanasia to abuse of it.
·        Legal acceptance of voluntary euthanasia would be a shorter step to non-voluntary situations –
·        the termination of the permanently insane, of some psychotic criminals, of the very old and senile
·        and of new-born babies that are not seriously defective, such as those with harelip or cleft palate.
·        Psychologically disturbed person might opt for this due to their diminished mental capacity
The practicalities of euthanasia are difficult in cases of non-voluntary euthanasia for it is easy to see that there might be some individuals, or even some societies, that might justify it; Roman Catholic  Christian Nazism is a case, where even the Reformed Protestant  Church supported the Roman Catholic Nazi fascism during Hitler's regime in killind and sending millions of Jews into the concentration camps for gas-killing.
And there may be individuals who are more anxious about the burden they are placing on their family and who request euthanasia for unselfish but self-accusatory, rather than medical reasons.
Those objecting to euthanasia, make the valid point that ill health may cause depression -- enough to prevent a patient making a rational decision. Then, too, medical decisions are not infallible, or generally ethical even in the so-called sophisticated Christian West, and a patient may be given an incorrect prognosis -- eventually recovering sufficiently to regain quality of life. There are certainly a few cases of regression, also, when patients experience cure.
But the ethics and principle of euthanasia is a different matter. Those who oppose it in principle often do so on religious grounds (although some secular people may oppose it on ethical principles); religious people believing that it is the fictional Allah/God who gives life and, therefore, Allah/God who should decide when it should be taken away. They believe in the sanctity of life given by the so-called divine. Ethical secular people claim that life not death is natural, and that euthanasia goes against the natural goal of survival that is inherent in all creatures.
The humanist response
The humanist response to such views is dictated by a desire to ensure dignity and quality of life for all human beings, and the right of individuals to choose their own pathways in life. Humanists hold that the religious beliefs should not be allowed in the debate and decisions about euthanasia. Most medical procedures from dentistry to heart transplants are non-natural from religioud points of view and could be said to be against "divine" ideas for humanity. But ending the pitiful suffering of a fellow human being is a compassionate action that is informed by the best of human principles.
There is a great humanist concern for the goodness of life, but if the goodness of life is lost entirely, and if it cannot be recovered, then the opposites of utter despair and hopeless mental suffering ensue. An Allah/God that allows such suffering is no worth believing, not at all. And while most religions see no sense in prolonging life artificially, or might accept passive euthanasia, this can often be a very cruel death: assisted euthanasia is the gentler and more dignified end to a life.
Humanists believe in only one life and it is therefore important that it ends in the kind of dignity and quality with which that life was lived. In principle, this is compassionate, and humanists claim that it is wrong to deny people such compassion out of fear of abuse of such principles by a small minority. This is unfair to those who are suffering.
Humanists generally support and respect those who reach a deep conviction that the time has come to end the life. To end life humanely, to shorten the grief and suffering of loved ones, and to act out of compassion within prescribed safeguards, is to remove the fear that many might have about the way in which they leave this life. The fundamental principles of humanism are concerned with the happiness and fulfilment of each individual in every possible way. When all hope of even the minimum of such happiness and fulfilment are over, and the reflections of them in the past are blotted out by the pain of the present and its continuing prognosis, then euthanasia is an act of love. It may be that such an act of love goes beyond the bounds of the law and exceeds the bounds of "established" and lega land the so-called religious morality: through a principle of the love of humanity, there are certainly times when it is right to prolonged and painful agony by the best possible methods in accordance with the good humanist ethical principles.
 
*****
In this series « Humanism and Spirituality », following articles are available : Intro 1, Developing Human potential ; Intro 2, Rejecting supernaturalism ; Basic 1, Stages of Life ; Basic 2, Life Ceremonies; Basic 3 Rituals of life ; Basic 4, Birth and Death issues; all at the following link: (While other intellectually inspiring articles of this series and others are on their way ; you may join the group as a member and the each new articles will reach you at your e.mail address automatically !):
 <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humanist_international/messages>
 
A lot of interseting and intellectually stimilating artiles on Humanism, e.g. Humanism and Science, Ethics, Psychology, Creation-Evolution, Spiritualiy and Rituals / Ceremonies are available ; there are Introductory description (Intro) ; Basic foundation (Basic) ; and Comorehensive discussion (Comp)  articles; these comprise reflections on differemt courses on Humanism arranged by the Institute of Humanist Studies, USA. These are free for all and can be read directly at :
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/humanist_international/messages>
 
 
 
 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com __._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
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

__,_._,___