Sir....I am afraid your justification or explanation seems rather incoherent. No one here supports violence, inefficiency, corruption, greed and all that. You get dizzy about the talk about our history? That's interesting! People like you make it sound like it happened hundreds of years ago, although we still pay for the mistakes in 1971 and afterwards. More curiously, you ask, citizens of which country talk about liberation, independence, so often? Well, I consider myself pretty well-traveled, and I can assure you, every person that I have met in different countries or who are from countries I have never been to, do talk about liberation, independence even though it happened hundreds of years ago. Even in the
You over-simplify the complex path of our democracy by stating that people elected Jamaat, hence it is a sign of healthy democracy. But you should state that Jamaat et. al. got elected because they received indemnity from Bangabandhu, they got into the political arena because of Ziaur Rahman, they flourished under the patronage of Ershad, and resurfaced in the first Khaleda govt. Our scumbag politicians have paved Jamaat's way for re-election, and when people went to the voting booth, the alternatives were non-existent.
I never told anyone how they should vote. You should stop misinterpreting my comments. Perhaps, it is time for you to wake up and read my comments carefully. I said that if a group of "independent" people choose to vote for those very people who actively worked against their independence, then this group neither deserves a democracy, nor do they deserve independence. I stand by my statement.
You are right. I am not a psychologist, nor do I pretend to be one. But I find it laughable when you, out of all people, criticize me for "condemning those who had different opinion about liberation". Goes to show that you neither understand how ironic your own statement is, nor do you comprehend that the state of being liberated is not an "opinion". It is an existential question, and those who oppose others right to exist, others right to be liberated, are worthy of total condemnation. If someone tells you tomorrow that you cannot roam freely, talk freely, or practice your beliefs, in
What flabbergasts me over and over again about your comments is that WHEN, exactly when, did I or anyone advocate for mob justice for the Jamaat group? Have we not always demanded lawful prosecution of the war criminals? Where do you find these random ideas that we are advocating for their lynching?! Albeit not a bad idea, we do have respect for the law and we abide by them.
It's an asinine question to ask how long I want to shed tears for 1971! The answer is, as long as it takes to make our independence worth the fight. It is not a bygone occurrence that has no relevance in our current lives. What we did, and what was done to us during 1971 and afterwards have tremendous socio-political and economic consequences in BD, which obviously does not register with you or people like you. They would be happy to close the chapter on 1971. But little do you understand that it is not about the war of independence that we are talking about, it is the principles and the ideals that we fought for, it is about the sacrifices that we (including you) made, it is about what does a free and independent Bangladesh mean for us and our successors. Honestly, you don't get that point? All these seem rather sentimental nonsense to you?
It's interesting that you give the example of the Jewish community, who remember and are reminded of the holocaust every day; although for many of my Jewish friends it is a memory of their grandparents. So, why is it a terrible thing that we remember and reminded of our Bengali holocaust once a week, and remember what our independence means to us? You see the inherent contradiction in your own statement? What makes you think that Jews are the only group that work hard, and that we, Bangladeshis don't? You must be completely out of touch with the common people in
I am sorry to hear about the losses of your family, and whether you choose to talk about it or not are your prerogative. I don't carry my faith and my patriotism in my sleeves either, although I too come from a very well known family of freedom-fighters. I choose not to talk about my family, but I would never shy away from talking about our independence....our common bond that ties us, regardless of our differences. If you think that talking about your independence is a false pretense, I am afraid, you've got it all wrong!
You want to know about new projects in BD? How about starting one? Economic possibilities? Let's talk about our monetary and fiscal policies, shall we? Our socio-economic prosperity "going forward"? Let's talk about social policies that have bankrupted us, and how we can root out elements that are contrary to the secular principles of our constitution. Let's talk about law and order, constitution, enforcement of laws, foreign relations, growing unrest, double-digit inflation, unemployment, environmental disasters. For the last seven or eight years, I think I have wrote enough about these subjects here at Alochona. So far, I am yet to hear any of those forward looking ideas from you, except for sniping, vile remarks about people who talk about independence and
Cheers,
Cyrus
From: maqsud omaba <maqsudo@hotmail.com>
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 6:37:13 AM
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism
re: cyrus
-----------
I never support violence, Baktreeta-baji, corruption, in-efficiency, greed and political-morons.
I am not a chamcha of jamaat.
I get dizzy, when people talk about " liberation war, anti-libaration- force, Freedom-fighting" ....234 times a year.
Citizens of which country....talk about liberation, independence. ..so often?
And then...nourish corruption and in-efficiency to the extreme.!
Havn't Bangladeshi citizens elected Jamaat -members( war criminals??) as MP? If you can't respect any MP, ask few wise-men...
what kind of confused person you are.....as far as democracy is concerned!
You want to tell other people whom to vote and whom to elect.....it is time for you to wake up.
By condemning people, who had different opinion about " liberation-war" , you will not achieve much.
I do know quite a bit about all the atrocities, committed by some Bangldeshis ( and Pakistanis) in 1971. They should be punished,
according to law, not according to revengeful-emotion.
We should talk less about democracy/liberatio n and contribute more to the community.
You may have read few pages from psychology books, but unfortunately, your comments about my profile is not accurate.
For how long YOU want to shed tears for atrocities of 1971?!
When you will leave such sad experience behind you and move forward?
Jews don't talk ONLY about atrocities done to them, they ALSO work hard and nourish/ practise progress, sincerity,
dedication, community-building.
And reasonable Bdeshi will talk about liberation war ONCE a year and utilize his energy/ time for positive, contructive projects for
himself and for the country.
Our house was burnt by biharis, my brother is a FF.....one of the first to undertake mission in Dhaka.....
but I seldom talk about that...I prefer to know about new projects in Bdesh, new economic possibilities invloving ordinary
people, new development in Bdesh.
Shouldn't YOU do take 1 more step....forward, not backward.
Best wishes.
Khoda hafez.
To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com
From: thoughtocrat@ yahoo.com
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:05:18 -0800
Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism
It is obvious to me that you have neither seen nor believe in the mountain of pictures, video footage, eye witnesses who have witnessed the "anti-liberation forces" and their atrocities. People who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, sir, and denying the Bengali holocaust is ignorant and vile.
From: maqsud omaba <maqsudo@hotmail. com>
To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 2:32:46 AM
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism
re: isha khan
------------ --
1 thing has always confused me....we say/ demand that....we beleive in democracy... but we do not want to accept elected MP...if he/she belongs to
Jamaat??!! And we criticize them non-stop, often without any valid reason.What kind of hippocracy is that!
Someone may not have supported AL leadership and the method of our liberation process, with the help of Indians.
what is the problem with that?
That was his/her personal philosophy. attitude. Why we cant accept it...if we beleive in democratic process??
Isn't it true..without any supporting documents... .that people with a big mouth,in 2008, ...talking about " anti- liberation forces "
etc.....are basically just CHAPA BAJ, striving for cheap attention and upgrading their social status? Do they actually contribute anything.... to the poor... hungry...
sick...helpless people?
My experience has been that ...people shouting against Jamaat , usually are very ordinary, half-educated, shallow, chaotic,
disorganized, hollow people.
What has been your experience?
Best wishes.
Khoda hafez.
dr. maqsud omar
To: shahin72@gmail. com; mbimunshi@gmail. com; zoglul@hotmail. co.uk; rehman.mohammad@ gmail.com; mahmudurart@ yahoo.com; farhadmazhar@ hotmail.com; premlaliguras@ hotmail.com; dhakamails@yahoogro ups.com; khabor@yahoogroups. com; alochona@yahoogroup s.com; bdresearchers@ yahoogroups. com; bangla-vision@ yahoogroups. com; mouchakaydheel@ yahoo.com; odhora@yahoogroups. com; dahuk@yahoogroups. com; history_islam@ yahoogroups. com
From: bd_mailer@yahoo. com
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:14:27 -0800
Subject: [ALOCHONA] What is Wrong with Fundamentalism
| What is Wrong with Fundamentalism Abid Bahar Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? The answer is both yes and no. First, what is fundamentalism? It is the official practice of the basic principles of a religion and very importantly, as the dominant religion, imposing them to control the politics of a country. When that happens in a multi religious country, the rights of minorities are violated. Fundamenta lists do it with their claim of ownership of the country and by implication, see the other religious groups as foreigners. So primarily, it is a question of intolerance associated with fundamentalism. Is fundamentalism a problem only in Islam? Let me start by saying that contrary to Western propaganda, fundamentalist movement is there in every religion. It is even present in its most dangerous manifestations in Buddhist countries such as in Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka and in Cambodia, the latter even carried out a genocide against minorities. These are Theravada fundamentalist Buddhist countries. Here the innocent looking monks are very much active in politics even in the destruction of religious sites of other religions, namely, Muslim and Christian. In India and Pakistan minority rights were being denied by the fundamentalists claiming as in India as the Rama Raja, or Pakistan as a Muslim country. Given the right mood, we see that the manifestation of fundamentalist outbeak can take place anywhere. We see this even in India, a country officially calls itself secular. In India, before 1992, the most unpopular party, BJP could only win two seats in the parliament. But in 1992 it took up the issue of Babri Mosque and claimed that it was the birth place of Rama, a Hindu God. But surprisingly Rama was not a historic figure. However, the claim by the BJP satisfied the Hindu majority and on the open day light Hindu fundamentalists marched to the Mosque site and destroyed the Mosque. About 10,000 people were killed in the carnage. Instead of putting the criminal leader Advani in jail, in Indian democracy this fundamentalist leader formed the government and became the Home minister; shaming a country claims itself as the world's biggest democracy. This is an issue of using religion in politics. The worst part of fundamentalism is to display anger toward its enemy and its attack of civilian sites. In 2001 some alledgly fundamentalist followers of Osama bin Laden attacked the World Trade Centre buildings in New York city killing approximately 3000 innocent people which led to the release of huge anger among American people and leadership led by Protestant fundamentalist leader George W. Bush. Bush identified himself as the Christian zionist found an excuse to attack Iraq and even before attacked Afganistan causing the death of approximately a million people. Are the terrorists of the trade centre true Muslims? Most Muslims believe no. Is George who led an illegal war in Iraq a true Christian, the answer would be no. Therefore, the problem with fundamentalism is its show of anger and retalliation against its perceived enemy and its use of violence in the name of God. In India the attack on Babri Mosque followed counter attacks in bombay and more counter attacks are going on in almost all the Indian cities. Here Hindus are killing Muslims and Christians and Muslim killing innocent Hindus. Only lately, some Pakistani fundamentalists entered India and attacked Bombay, killing close to two hundred innocent people and injuring many others. In addition to the above, the biggest problem with most fundamentalist movements is, it does not allow diversification; it resists change. It demands a society to remain stagnant. It resists the growth in art, music, business, women's rights and in the other areas. It forces human spirit to die down. Fundamentalist movements in certain religions discurages women to not work outside their homes, thus allowing half of the population and the country to remain backward. It has been a lingering problem in Muslim countries thus helping the countries to stagnate allowing more powerful countries to attack them. This is very much a problem in Muslim countries. The deadly fundamentalist movements in Muslim countries, however, seem contrary to what the Prophet of Islam advised to his followers and said: "For knowledge even go to China." Education is essential for every Muslim man and woman." Contrary to the Talibans, in the days of the Prophet, Muslim man and women could pray together. Khadija, the wife of the Prophet was a business woman. Ibn Rusd, who was opposed by the fundamentalists of Cordova to be the chief advisor to the Caliph, but his ideas were known to have helped in the European Renaissance. Thus, he was recognized as one of the masters of European Renaissance. Strangely though, the Taliban's primitive practices in the rapidly changing economies of our time made Islam laughable to the humanity that is responding to the demands of global change. Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? Yes, it is against change. It is against development, against human rights. It is against development because the fundamentalist leaders interpretation finds change to be wrong. As opposed to this, human history shows that change is the most unchanging thing in the world. Is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? Yes, because it brings religion into politics. It kills innocent people. Finally, is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? We can also say no, but only if religion remaines the personal belief of its followers as the sufis in Islam do. Sufis are very religious people but stay away from politics. There is nothing wrong in being religious, to observe the basic tenents of one's religion such as doing salat, fasting, going for hajj etc. Fundamentalism in that sense is not wrong. Then, is there anything wrong with fundamentalism? The answer is both yes and no. Bangladesh to develop has to resist both the forces of Fascism and fundamentalism; because both preches violence. These two are as if like the same body of a poisonous two headed snake. They take every opportunity to kill their prey only to get to power. What is at stake is to help save innocent lives from these angry primitives justifying their killings in the name of God and with the holy book in their hands reciting the lines of their choice and the Fascist leaders violating the rule of law, resort to control the country by controlling the streets.
|
__._,_.___
[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
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
__,_._,___