Banner Advertiser

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

[mukto-mona] Re: Moslims renouncing Islam

On this floating planet of ours, matter turned into a strange form -- it stood up and started walking! But does that mean we will have to believe in a god?

Religious gods simply do not have the depth and breadth to cope with the modern ego. It is, therefore, fading away. Lament you not, muslim intellectuals! Rejoice, new ones are on the way>

-Tistarbahe


--- In mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com, S Turkman <turkman@...> wrote:
>
> If you are right then, the question is, how come more Moslims are renouncing Islam than Non Moslims converting?
>  
>  *  According to a Mollaa on Al Jazirah T V, 4 million Moslims are converting to Christianity every year.
> *  In Former Communist Countries tens of millions have renounced Islam since 1992 and some Mosques are now being closed-down since nobody goes there anymore.  
>  
> A lot of Moslims are scared to renounce Islam because they can be assassinated by Moslim Extremists otherwise, there would be a lot more of such people.
>
> Ex-Muslims Demand Right to Renounce Islamic Faith
>
>  
>
>
> Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Are Ehsan Jami's methods promoting religious tolerance in the Netherlands?
>
> Controversially, 9/11 was chosen as the date to sign the "European Declaration for Tolerance." It aims to draw attention to what the former Muslims see as the lack of freedom of religion within Islam.
>  
>
>
> Former Muslims from several European countries signed the declaration in the Hague on the sixth anniversary of the terror attacks in the United States Tuesday. Other signatories included many well-known Dutch politicians, authors and journalists.
>  
> The date of the declaration, Sept.11, was symbolically chosen in order to condemn the terror and intolerance perpetuated by radical Islamic militants, though critics argue that choosing the date unfairly links Islam to terrorism.
>  
> The ex-Muslim committees from the Netherlands, Britain, Germany and the Scandinavian countries wanted to draw attention to what they refer to as the "lack of freedom of religion within Islamic culture."
>  
> Ex-Muslim, Ehsan Jami, an Iranian-born Dutchman, launched the initiative to sign the Declaration of Tolerance. Jami, 22, a Labour Party member of the city council in a district near The Hague, has been attacked for his views three times.
>  
> "There are five sharia schools in Islam which say if you leave Islam you must be killed," Jami, 22, told Reuters in an interview.
>   
> Muslims are not allowed to renounce their faith, according to a strict interpretation of Islam and those who do are subject to imprisonment or death in some Muslim countries.
>  
> Ex-Muslims reignite divisive debate over Islam
>  
> The movement of Muslim apostate committees, which was spearheaded earlier this year by Jami and Mina Ahadi, an Iranian living in Germany, has reignited a divisive debate about Islam and has put the lives of such self-declared "ex-Muslims" in danger.
> In Germany, Ahadi also lives under heavy police protection.
>  
> Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift:  Mina Ahadi, head of German committee of ex-Muslims, which has 400 members
> In highly publicized interviews, Jami's blunt attacks on Islam has offended many Dutch Muslims and commentators have drawn comparisons between the local politician and the rhetoric of right-wing politician Geert Wilders, who has called for complete ban of the Quran.
>  
> Jami has referred to the Muslim prophet Mohammed as "criminal," compared Islam to fascism and Nazism, and explained that he decided to launch the committee of former Muslims to call attention to "persistent taboos" about renouncing the Islamic faith.  
>  
> Divided support for ex-Muslim group
>  
> Initially, the Labour Party did not support Jami and his committee, and the Dutch Vice-Prime Minister Wouter Bos told the news daily Volkskrant he did not approve of such a committee that "offends Muslims and their faith."
>  
> But the Dutch public rallied around Jami, putting pressure on Jacques Tichelaar, Labour's parliamentary leader to sign a declaration of support for the ex-Muslim committee.
>  
> However, Han Noten, who is the Dutch senate's Labour faction leader, criticized his party's stance.
>  
> In a commentary for Wednesday's NRC Handelsbad newspaper, he said the Committee of Ex-Muslims was "oversimplifying reality" and that Jami's methods succeeded in "polarizing society."
>  
> "Signing the declaration on September 11 can only be interpreted as a provocation," Noten added. "It suggests… that former Muslims are innocent and Muslims are guilty."
>  
> The right to renounce the Islamic faith
>  
> Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift:  Theo van Gogh, a filmmaker who criticized Islam was murdered in Amsterdam in 2004
> Jami's "Committee of Ex-Muslims" wants imams and Muslims to recognize fellow Muslims' religious rights, including the right leave the faith.
>  
> "We are breaking the taboo that comes with renouncing Islam, but also taking a stand for reason, universal rights and values and secularism," said a declaration signed by Jami, Ahadi of the German chapter, and their British counterpart Maryam Namazie, who is also of Iranian origin.
>    
> Ahadi, who belongs to the German group called "Wir haben abgeschworen," meaning "We have renounced," said it was significant that the three leaders were from Iran, since they had all witnessed the political repression under the Islamic Republic firsthand.
>  
> There are some 400 committee members in Germany, including non-Muslim Germans, according to Ahadi. The British council of ex-Muslims has around 70 members, and Jami's committee has only two official members.
>  
> "We have received hundreds of support e-mails and that's what counts," Jami told the AFP news agency. "We're more of a movement."
> www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2779524,00.html
>
>
> --- On Tue, 7/7/09, AbuSayeed Rahman <abusayeedr@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I must appreciate the person/persons who could convince/convert three great Guys
> like SKM, Saif Devdas and Mohammad Asghar  !!!!
>  
> They talk in same line and in same tune.
> (are they financed by the same source??)
> I do not know their 'religion' but their writings/postings all indicate that they are
> on the 'Crusade' against Islam  !!
>  
> I am just wondering what benefit they are getting from their sponsors  !
>  
> Is that benefit worthy enough to sacrifice the life here after ???
>  
> If someone doesn't believe in the life here after, then it is OK.
>  
> But if they  believe, then on what basis they are ready to sacrifice that ??
>  
> The standing of 'Islam' will never be dented by their effort.
>  
>  
> Dr Abu Sayeed
>
>
> Khurram
>
> --- On Tue, 7/7/09, SAIF Davdas <islam1234@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> #yiv2080632649 #yiv334800655 .hmmessage P
> {
> margin:0px;padding:0px;}
> #yiv2080632649 #yiv334800655 {
> font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
>
>  
> Dear Modern Day Apostle of Allah>
>  
> WoW! What a Big Time--Big-Bang answer to This Quranic Big-Bang Theory! O' all the Truth-Seekers of the World, let us all commit ourselves to the Art of Truth Telling---to Tell the Truth Like it is---Look for the Truth---Live for the Truth, Search for the Truth, and Speak nothing but the Truth--Even if you find Allah is standing in the way of Truth---Remove Him from the path! We have nothing to fear, nobody to fear, and we intend to Shame the Devil by telling the Truth. If we must pay the ultimate price to tell the Truth--So be it! No more lies! No more self-deception!  By the way, The Nobel Laureate, Professor Abdus Salam warned the Muslims not to rely too much on the Quran's Big Bang Theory, for, what will happen 50 years from now, if Big Bang Theory is proven false? 
>  
> SaifDevdas
> islam1234@...
>


------------------------------------

****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

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

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

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

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

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

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

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[mukto-mona] Misinterpreted Verses and Hadiths about Violence - by Jamal Badawi



Misinterpreted Verses and Hadiths about Violence
by Jamal Badawi

Question
What is the best argument in trying to convert a Born-Again Christian to Islam?
Answer
I personally prefer the term "revert" as it connotes returning back to the pure innate nature of believing in the one true universal God. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) indicated that each child is born "Muslim", so when a person accepts Islam, he or she actually reverts to the true natural innate faith. Many of the born again Christians are sincere people who are trying to find meaning in life and pursue spiritual fulfillment. Some of them were involved in negative behavior and so how religiosity changed their life for the better.

Our role as Muslim is to share the truth as we believe in it and understand it in kindness and love without undue pressure and to be patience and pray for them to have even greater fulfillment and greater understanding about our common creator.

Question
How to rightly interpret the following verses in the Qur'an:
(a) Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians, - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. (2:62) Is this verse still applies to Christians and Jews who live today or only those who lived prior to Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) lifetime. Some consider this verse being abrogated by other verse(s) in the Qur'an.
(b) And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers." (3:81-85) How to interpret the word 'Islam' in this verse correctly? If a Christian or a Jew or even a Hindu believes in the oneness of God, will that be acceptable to Allah.
Answer
This verse must be understood in the light of other verses in the Qur'an dealing with the same topic. It is clear in the Qur'an that rejecting beliefs in any prophet is tantamount to rejecting belief in all of them. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) to Muslims is the last, final and universal messenger to all humankind. As such rejecting belief in him and in the divine revelations or word of God given to him is tantamount to rejecting all of the prophets. Therefore, this verse maybe referring to those who followed their prophet prior to the mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). In fact, these people who followed the unadulterated message of their prophet are in effect "fellow Muslims", literally those who sought peace through submission to God.

But this argument, however, is only on the theological level; it has nothing to do with the kind and just treatment of any person or any other faith community who coexist peacefully with Muslims. This might be similar to the truth claims made by fellow Christians who believe that trinity is the "theological truth" for them. Our duty as Muslims is to express our belief without animosity and let God judge all on the Day of Judgment.

As for the verse 3:81-85, it seems to be categorical and as such the word Islam may be interpreted legitimately in more than one way. It could mean generic Islam, literally achieving peace through submission to God, which applies to any follower of any legitimate prophet throughout history. Secondly, even if it refers to accepting Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), then it is up to Allah, not us, to accept or reject those rejected Islam. This means that we are not allowed as Muslims to mistreat them in any way as the one who accepts or rejects is Allah and not us.

Question
How should we deal with verse 9:5, which seems to be in conflict with verse 2:256 "la ikraha fi deen"?
Answer
This ayah has been frequently quoted out of its textual and historical context.
  • The ayah has nothing to do with compulsion in religion.
  • It deals with mushrikeen which means idolatrous people who have nothing with Jews and Christians (see 98:1) which means a clear distinction between mushrikeen and People of the Book.
  • The ayah does not even include all idolatrous people nor idolatrous Arabs at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) since it excludes those idolatrous Arabs who did not engage in murder and hostilities against Muslims. See for example verse 4 in Chapter 9.
  • The reason for fighting those idolatrous Arabs is not because they rejected Islam but because they broke the treaty of Hudaybiya and murdered innocent people. In fact the reason for fighting is given in verse 10 and 13, which shows that fighting them was because of their aggression and not because of their rejection of Islam. As far as the ending of verse 5, "that if they repent, establish prayer and paid the poor-due, then leave them alone", this does not mean that they must accept Islam to be left alone but it seems to indicate that since their aggression was promoted in the first place by hateful and irrational aggressive hate of the message of Islam that if they willingly accept Islam then the reason for their aggression will be voided not that it is a condition or stopping the war against them. Resorting to war and battlefield in Islam is only allowed to repel aggression or severe oppression. That simply gives another option for them, either to stop aggression and remain idolatrous or to willingly accept Islam and become brethren in faith.
There is absolutely no contradiction between the two verses you mentioned.

Question
Is there a special context for understanding many of the verses in Surah Al-Tawba which deal with war in Islam, like for example verses (9:5) and verse (9:123)? Is Surah Al-Tawba a "special case", as it's the only Surah in the Qur'an which does not start with "Bism Allah Al-Rahman Al-Rahim"?
Answer
The answer to 9:5 was already given in this session, please refer to previous answers. As for Surah 9, ayah 123, this must be understood in the light of a rule in Tafsir known as the general which is meant to refer to the specific, which has many examples in the Qur'an. This ayah for sure falls in that category, meaning that this does not apply to all non-Muslim neighbors all the time or under all circumstances. The historical context was that early Muslims were surrounded by style and even aggressive neighbors, some were "People of the Book", others were idolatrous Arabs while others were pre-Islamic Persians. History recorded instances where some of them engaged not only in intimidation and threats against Muslims but also inciting murder and engaging actually in murderous acts. As such it was a matter of physical security of the emerging of the young Muslim community who had to abort the surrounding dangers through legitimate pre-emptive strikes.

Another evidence or proof that this is limited to that situation or similar ones that may arise is that the general rule in dealing with non-Muslim neighbors, individuals or states has been explicitly stated in the Qur'an (Surah 60, verse 8 and 9) which indicates that those who peacefully coexist with Muslims are entitled to just and kind treatment.

Surah at-Tawbah is not a special case, it is not the only chapter that deals with the regulations of the legitimate warfare (to repel oppression or aggression). The fact that it does not begin with basmallah is explained better by referring to the statement made by Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him. For details, please listen to Islamic Teachings, under the Qur'an/preservation, which is available on Islamonline.net.

Question
Surah Bara'a (immunity) is the last surah revealed to the prophet [pbuh] and many of its verses seem to abrogate almost everything that went before in the Qur'an in terms of war and the relationship with Christians, Jews and pagans. I find this confusing. Can you please explain?
Answer
There is no evidence whatsoever of the abrogation of the Qur'anic verses dealing with freedom of religion or the kind and just treatment of those who peacefully co-exist with Muslims such as Chapter 2, verse 256, and Chapter 60, verse 8 and 9 or Chapter 29, verse 46, and Chapter 16, verse 125. Surah 9 deals with a situation of aggression and oppression of Muslims and the two categories of verses are both applicable in their particular contexts; none of them abrogates the other. Please see the previous answer about some verses in the same Surah such as 5, 123.

Question
Some people say that Islam is a religion of peace and war and not only peace and that war is part of Aqeeda in Islam. What do you think?
Answer
I believe that Islam is ultimately the religion of peace. Islam is defined as peace through submission to God. It is one of the names and attributes of Allah. It is the name of Paradise and it is the common greeting of all Muslims. The Qur'an describes the mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as mercy to the worlds (21: 107). However, in order to maintain the state of peace it is necessary sometimes to resort the use of force to stop the aggressors and oppressors who disturb the peace sought by the masses. As such, peace is the ultimate objective (in this life and in the life to come) and war is the exception as the last resort to achieve and maintain the state of peace.

In fact, the Qur'an describes fighting as "a hated act" (Chapter 2: 206) and Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) hated that a person would call himself harb (war) whereas peace has always been praised and never referred to as a hated act. Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) also exhorted his followers not to be anxious to engage in fighting and to pray for peace and security. The Qur'an in more than one place emphases that imminent battles were averted such as the incident of the trench and the victorious return to Makkah without engaging in battle. It should be stated that war, the hated act, is only a necessary means (in some circumstances) to an end which peace, but not the other way round.

Question
Prophet said: "I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah…?" How can this meet with the verse in the Qur'an: "there is no compulsion in religion"?
Answer
It is impossible to interpret that hadith to mean all people as this understanding clearly contradicts numerous verses in the Qur'an including, "there is no compulsion in religion". The hadith apparently refers to the Makkan chiefs who broke the treaty of Hudaybiya then fled after the opening of Makkah and conspired with others to initiate the battle of Hunain. When they were defeated they fled again. Such people were guilty of what we call today "war crimes" and murder of innocent people. While they deserve to be fought against they were given a magnanimous option that if they willingly wish to accept Islam that their previous transgression or crimes will be forgiven and their life and property will be safeguarded. In any case, it is an option, not force, it is a positive and constructive option to reconcile their hearts and assure them if they accept Islam willingly that they will not be punished for their previous atrocities.

Another aspect that confirms this understanding is that the use of the term "hatta" in the hadith does not necessarily mean that it is a condition for them to be safe and it could mean in this broad textual context that the reason for Muslims being permitted to fight against aggression or oppression is to safeguard their religious freedom and those of others. So the ultimate objective of averting war may be realized more effectively if the religious enmity on the part the enemy is removed and the most effective way of removing it will occur if they see the light and open their hearts to the truth.

Question
It will be funny to say that Islam is peaceful and that it does not preach violence. Muhammad stated clearly that he loves war and that fighting is a means of making livelihood in Islam; he said: "my rizq (sustenance or provision) has been made under the shade of my armor?
Answer
  • There is no agreement on the authenticity of this hadith among specialists in hadith sciences. Among those who questioned its authenticity are Ibn Hajar in "Taghliq at-Ta'leeq" and also Adh-Dhahabi in "Mizan Al-'tidal.
  • Secondly, that disputed hadith is contrary to what Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) said about not being anxious to engage in the battlefield and to pray for peace and security instead.
  • If indeed the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) loved war or fought for "sustenance" he would have had a great opportunity to achieve these goals when he entered Makkah victoriously and unopposed. Instead he declared a general amnesty and ordered no plunder which showed that his mission was that of guidance and mercy and not war, destruction or plunder.
  • If we studied honestly and objectively the life of the Prophet from authentic and unbiased sources we will find that he never engaged in the battlefield nor did he approve of battles other than to repel aggression, including legitimate pre-emptive strike against pending attack, or to stop aggression or persecution.
  • It is known that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) lived in a very simple and self-imposed simplicity like any poor person lived. When he died he owned virtuously nothing. Even on his deathbed he insisted that whatever money he had must be given to the poor. This is the total documented broad picture which stands in utter contrast to selectively quoting a disputed text that is out of sync with multitude of verses in the Qur'an as well as sayings of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).
Please read my article for greater detail:
http://www.islamonline.net/english/Contemporary/2005/04/Article01.shtml

Question
How can you explain the verse: "Kill them wherever you find them..."? And also the verse "Fight them till there is no more Fitna (oppression...)"? Also in the Sunnah, we have the well-know Hadith of the Prophet that goes as thus: "I'm ordered to fight people till they testify to the oneness of Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah..." Don't you think that these texts show that Islam sees that "sword" alone is the tool of making people embrace Islam? Don't you agree with me that these texts and other fall into the hand of extremist people like Al-Qaeda and so on?
Answer
The problem here is quoting one part of this verse (2:191) because the remaining part says "and drive them away from wherever they drove you away, for oppression is worse than killing." Therefore, this verse does not give a license to kill even idolatrous Arabs who are meant in this verse but only those who committed aggression and oppression against Muslims by driving them from their homes and towns without justification. So it is a case of legitimate fight against severe oppression which the Qur'an describes as "worse than killing". The same verse also continues to prohibit Muslims from fighting near the Sacred House unless the enemies fight against them first.

If you continue in the same section, you will find that the next verse indicates that if the oppressors desist from fighting and aggression, then Allah is indeed Forgiving and Merciful. The following verse clearly states that the reason for fighting is "to stop oppression especially that the common oppression at that time which took the form intimidation, torture to death or murder of those who chose Islam. This is why the verse says: "until persecution is no more and the choice of religion is between the person and God". The same verse continues to say that if they desist (i.e. from oppression) then there should be no more hostility except against the oppressors. As to the hadith you mentioned, please refer to the other answers in the same session for explanation.

Question
What are the examples of those verses and ahadith that are wrongly misinterpreted in your opinion? I suppose also that by violence you are suggesting "terror" as defined by the West, isn't it? If that is the case what are the rules of engagement in Islam if someone or an enemy brings war, violence or terror right in your doorstep?
Answer
For examples, please see my paper on Islam on that link: http://www.islamonline.net/english/Contemporary/2005/04/Article01.shtml In the absence of any comprehensive internationally accepted definition of terrorism, it may be defined as "any indiscriminate act of violence committed against the innocent by individuals, groups or states whether the victims and/or culprits are Muslims, Christians, Jews or any other faith community. As to the rules of warfare, when necessary, they are explicit to avoid hurting non-combatant. The Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade hurting women who are not fighting, children, elderly, clergy, and other unarmed civilians. He also forbade killing an injured person in mistreating prisoners or destroying livestock or trees or what we call today the infrastructure of cities inhabited by the enemy.

Question
My question is regarding the 'official Ulama' in many Muslim countries and especially the 9/11 events who seems to be deviating from the true teaching of Islam. They usually justify whatever being done or endorse policies of the ruling regime (Even if it is not Islamic at all!). I am so disgusted with these ulama when they will justify that the current leaders in most Muslim countries is "ulil Amri' and it is an obligation for every citizens to follow them! To cite the case of those in the Middle east and Gulf States where these leaders are clearly tools of the West and selling Muslim and Islamic interest for the sake of clinging to their power and rule. And at the same time, jailing many true ulama whom that have spoken up against these tyrrant regimes. Need your sincere comment.
Answer
Justifying wrong aggression or tyranny by any person is unjustified and I exhort all my Muslim brothers and sisters whether common people or scholars or rulers for that matter to fear Allah SWT and develop the quality of taqwa and to realize that one day all people will stand equally before the creator to be questioned about their words and actions. We pray for all as nobody is above advice and nobody can claim they have no need for exhortation and prayers of their brethren.

Question
How about the hadith that claims "Kill whoever changes his religion."?
(a) If a person changes his religion, is it considered as a profound insult to Allah and to all Muslims but Allah says in the Qur'an "Let there be no compulsion in the religion" (2:256).
(b) What about the status of the hadith. Is it sahih (sound), hadith al-ahad (isolated) or dhaif (weak)?
(c) What if a person changes religion from Christianity to Judaism? Does this hadith still apply to that person?
Please shed some light on this hadith.
Answer
The question of apostasy has been debated among scholars based on their interpretations of some hadiths since the Qur'an does not specify any worldly punishment for it. For example, there was a case at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) where a man came to him in three consecutive days and told him that he wanted to apostate. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never took any action against him, and when the man finally left Madina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) never sent anyone to arrest him, let alone kill him. This hadith appears in more than one version in Sahih Muslim and is authentic.

This is why some scholars distinguished between individual apostasy and apostasy which is accompanied by high treason. For example, one version of a hadith narrated by `A'isha concerning apostasy (and one who left his religion and fought against Muslims). The topic is broad and most Muslims are acquainted only with the only common view and interpretation of these hadiths.

The rule of "no compulsion in religion" which appears in several verses in the Qur'an and is consistent with its message of willing submission to God. These verses are no doubt definitive and explicit. Other texts, in the Qur'an or Sunnah, which are speculative (mutashabih or texts that could be interpreted in more than one way without violating basic rules of interpretation) in meaning must be interpreted or re-interpreted in the light of the definitive.

Question
Since Muslims are entitled the right to defend themselves or at least to maintain some kind of balance of military power, I would like to know what the position of Muslims scholars is with regard with nuclear weapons.
Answer
Experience shows that even in liberal democracies with a developed systems of checks and balances, nuclear weapons were actually used, e.g., in Japan. By its very nature, nuclear weapons indiscriminately kill and maim people and destroy the environment. Therefore, the immorality of using weapons is obvious and is against the Islamic teaching even at the time of war. Some may argue that possessing such weapons may act as deterrent to aggression and prevent being intimated unjustly by those who possess them. However, the real solution to this menace is not the proliferation of such weapons in the name of deterrents but the complete abolition of all stocks of nuclear weapons. There is also a need for the establishment of internationally strict controls against the development of such weapons in the future.

It is the moral responsibility of big powers who possess most of those weapons to give an example for the rest of the world by beginning this process of zero tolerance themselves rather than stockpiling and developing them while trying at the same time to prevent others from developing them. All powers, big or small, must stop stockpiling or developing these genocidal weapons for the sake of true and lasting world peace.


If you feel your question is very important, feel free to contact at EngLivedialogue@islamonline.net and they will try their best to answer your question.
Jamal Badawi, PhD, is a Famous Da'iyah and Member of the European Council for Fatwa and Research
Source: Islamonline Live Dialogue Editing Desk, 10th Sep. 2005, www.islamonline.net


For any personal reply, please reply me bejust.peace@yahoo.com

Thanks a lot for your time.
BeJustPeace
 
N.B.: I never mail any advertisement or spam - so if you get somethine like this from this account, please forgive me as sometimes, people may spam using my ID. Wish you all the best. RESPECT.



__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

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

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

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

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




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] Bangladesh: Monarchy in Making



Bangladesh: Monarchy in Making

 Dr.M.T. Hussain
 
Monarchy Waning Elsewhere but Shaping in Bangladesh
No matter whether the withering tradition and old institution of monarchy building is almost lost in oblivion, Bangladesh has embarked fresh on the lost model. The Bangladesh Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has taken a silly decision on the 6th July 09 and to take effect on and from the day, the government that observed their completion of the six months' 'success story day', as well, in power. The decision approved by the cabinet provided not only life long Special Security Force (SSF) but also in highly fortified big buildings abode in the capital city protection for the Prime Minister herself and for her younger sister Sheikh Rehana being the daughters of the founder in 1971 of Bangladesh Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Huge costs involved in the projects for how many years and for decades or if to end with the two only or to extend later on for other family members, no one knows for sure at this time, would all be met from the public treasury of the impoverished nation. There is, however, already a clamor in the air and street that similar SSF security should also be provided for the opposition leader Khaleda Zia and her family members. Earlier in her first term (1996-2001), Sheikh Hasina did enact such a provision for herself and Rehana that were later on turned down by the next BNP Government in 2002. In 2009, the Hasina government repeated enacting the same immoral act if not apparently illegal decision that has naturally raised many questions now than had been raised in 2001.
 
Advancing and Retarding
As the human civilization grew up and advanced people's thinking as well improved and refined in terms of equality and dignity of human beings. Democracy took root in society that replaced gradually feudalism and particularly the idea of Monarchy. Kings, Maharajas, Emperors, etc. gave way to the idea of democracy, that is, the government of the people by the people and for the people took roots in civilized societies.. Equality of all citizens became the core issue, albeit sustained by inbuilt social norms, values, usages, morality and rule of law based on those basic humane values in society. Bangladesh in the past had all those days of emperors, kings, oppressive feudal lords, etc. The people in the past fought relentlessly against all those old oppressive systems for democracy, equality, and rule of law and for equal dignity of all human beings or citizens in a free society. That is what Bangladesh in 2009 is duly expected to be one..

British Legacy yet Different

It is true that Bangladesh owns the legacy of the British system of parliamentary democracy as if it had been panacea for all social ills. The system had proved hardly been so not for its essence but for the insufficiencies Bangladesh have had inherently built up from within for centuries that essentially differed from the British social milieu. The overall scenario we have been experiencing for decades in the streets and even inside the parliament are nowhere seen the way of anarchy in any mature democracy, much less in Britain. Merit and quality matters in matters of all democratic dispensations and not rowdyism and street fights killing each other in open and in police presence. The economic social justice though is not to be overlooked along with democratic dispensations.
 
None Borrowed Monarchy but Democracy
Many countries have borrowed democratic idea and system from the British. But none did take their Royal system of the hereditary Crown for the system is not only peculiar to the British but also untenably unsuited with any other The other crucial matter of the Crown is that it is only titular head and has no power so far the running of the country is concerned. The Prime Minister's Cabinet in the Westminster Parliament runs the full governance of the country. So far the titular head model adopted in other countries, such head of the State enjoys almost no power just as the Royal Crown of Britain. The Prime Minster enjoys executive power as people's elected representative just only to provide leadership for a fixed term, certain to vacate high position through reversal of popular votes and then to remain equal not unequal to all other common citizens. Any question of enjoyment of extra and inequitable benefits after one leaves office of public interest is foreign to democratic norms and practice.
 
Edward Heath
I recall clearly a press photograph of an incident of 1974 about the just resigned British Prime Minister Edward Heath with a suitcase in hand waiting in front of the 10 Downing Street for a taxi to take him to a friends home for temporary stay until he would have a rented accommodation of his own. He was a bachelor and had no home of his own in London until then.
 
Selflessness
Bangladesh is not of any rich country, much less of the level of Britain. How many of our top leaders in politics could have been of the poor pecuniary level of Edward Heath not having his home in London that I cited of his position in 1974?
 
Permanent Residents of the West
None of Hasina's and Rehana's sons and daughters lives in Bangladesh; they have all homes in the USA, Britain and Canada. Hasina owns the late Dr Wazed's well protected big home at Dhanmondi, apart from the famous Dhanmondi 32. Further security could be added there in both homes, if she leaves office of the P.M. What the need for other secured home? Rehana, a British citizen, has at least one home at Harrow, a posh area in England close to London.
 
Every Citizen Must have Full Security
When one urges for the SSF level security for particular person/s one must as well be careful to note for security of all citizens irrespective of position and status for that is constitutional rights of every citizen of a free country to have. No specific life is more precious than any other humble being. As each and every human life is sacred, the State has the bounden duty to protect lives of each and sundry that Bangladesh is criminally lacking in this obligatory act as we see lives taken in unnatural ways not only in the cities but also all over the country each day in and each day out.
 



__._,_.___


[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] Baseless Tainting of Historical Facts



                

Baseless Tainting of Historical Facts

 

M.T. Hussain

The 21st June Verdict

That a division bench of the Bangladesh High Court passed a judgment on the 21st June (09) in re-fixing up a fact that is exclusively of the by gone days record of history of Bangladesh not known to be authentically challenged before in about four decades but occasionally by some loose talks of no importance. The bench is commendable for the pertinent fact that the case was settled just only in two months period after filing the petition in the backdrop of the well known facts that many more important and thousands of other more crucial cases have been remaining pending in the same system not for months or years but for decades without even coming in to the cause list!

 

Re-fixation of facts after 38 years

Despite the prerogative of the 'independence' of judiciary that we all should feel proud of, it is difficult to appreciate that a bench of the High Court must fix by itself fact of past history! Possibly more curious and astonishingly amazing was the part of the dictate that ordered that all relevant past records in the matter not conforming to the verdict must be forfeited from the market for sale, distribution channel, etc. and even removed from the archives of Bangladesh! One has to ponder seriously and probe into depth if such verdict of any court unreasonably interfering, arbitrarily re-fixing and passing order for deleting facts of past history inside the country but certainly not outside the geographical border are there in any civilized country professing and practicing open democracy in the state systems. And as such the verdict is undoubtedly certain to be challenged in the higher judiciary by some sensible and patriotic persons/ forces.      

 

The Two Actors of 1971

Political leader Sheikh Mujib and Army man Zia for whom the verdict was given had been two important actors well acknowledged in the 1971 independence movement of Bangladesh. There were not and should not have been any rivalry in respect of their roles in 1971. They played roles not exactly the same but qualitatively different and yet supplementary and complementary to each other. Zia being a army person had been straight forward, rebelled against his own army men (Pakistan Army Command), overpowered them and took the stand that neither of his comrades (Bengali) dared to take arms in hand in actual fight in war fronts nor any political leader including Mujib who though prompted and inspired the people politically as a mass leader. Thus it was very logical and reasonable that in there life time in 1970s and early 1980s there had been little known rivalries, much less antagonism between the two giants. It rather turned a matter of curiosity that the next generation of both the genres have picked up the controversy after three decades in some points and issues that are of little material utility but almost useless so far as the nation faces many critical and rather life and death issues. One must wonder if some over enthusiasts of the ruling party thus by picking up the rather settled issue in somewhat childish way and imposing certain verdict on the nation that is only certain to create more chaos and instability in the country not for any tangible benefit of the country but for ulterior design and evil gains of the big neighbor, in particular.

 

The Major and the Big Wigs

In1971 Zia had been a Pakistan Army young serving major, but Mujib then a quite mature and elected political leader of the largest part of the independent Muslim State of Pakistan, what was then known as East Pakistan (historic East Bengal). Mujib's rise to leadership owed primarily in the 1970 general election to alleged disparity between the two geographically isolated and the two regions separated 1000 miles away from each other. In fact, the general election results though had the semblance of unity of the two wings of Pakistan under the LFO (Legal Framework Order, 1970), two different parties won landslides in the two wings, the Pakistan People's Party in West Pakistan and the Awami League in East Pakistan giving rise of two leaders Z A Bhutto in the West and Sheikh Mujib in the East. The Martial Law President of the Federal Pakistan fell in dilemma of the two leaders, apparently, in acrimony for power at the center in Islamabad. The war of words between the two pitched each day high and higher for ascending to the power, despite the fact that power ascendancy at the center was no issue in the LFO.

 

The LFO

The LFO had just only provided for framing an acceptable and durable Constitution for Federal Pakistan in a limited period of 120 days following publication of the results of the 1970 general election, failing to do the only job the Assembly would automatically dissolve itself. 

 

Flouting the LFO

How come that though the election was conducted under the provisions of the LFO for the only purpose of framing the Constitution, the Awami League leader Mujib, in particular, whether in open concert with the PPP scheming leader Bhutto and in likely connivance with Pakistan's well known 'number one enemy', India, started to orchestrate for forcible power capture particularly in East Pakistan/ Bangladesh having had little or no care for the whole country that our worthy forefathers in 1940s willfully and democratically through fair polls created and established in high price of sacrifices in properties, wealth and lives lost in millions. Even so, people in East Pakistan seemed to prefer hand-over power of East Pakistan to Mujib, particularly, in midst of the marathon negotiations that went on between the Military President (Federal) Yahya, Mujib and Bhutto in Dhaka between the 15th to the 24th March 1971.

 

Many people had this expectation for the fact that as many wished on the 7th March public speech of Mujib at the then Ramna Race Course that he would declare UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence of East Pakistan), but he did not do so except made a utterly confusing political rhetoric, EBARER SANGRM AMADER MUKTIR SANGRM, EBARER SANGRAM SWADHINATAR SANGRAM. Let me put on record here again that I myself then at my mid thirties teaching in a Government College in Dhaka (Dacca) was present there with deep interest and exclusively to listen from the horse's mouth that the UDI would come out from his person but I heard nothing so to my wonder, amazement and also a bet lost for UDI to one of my Awami League friend and a provincial M..P., now late Safar Ali Mia Engineer, a financier of Mujib.

 

My own Recalling of Early 1971

The day of 25th March, so far as I could recall now after 38 years, had been a day of rumors and tense. I had waited at my 11 Holy Cross College Road Farm Gate IDE office until about 11 at night when I drove off on my self driven new car FIAT 600 D (Dhaka Ka 2906) bought from USA scholarship money savings to my official residence 5/G polytechnic Senior Staff Quarters, Tejgaon Industrial Area, had late dinner and went on to sleep as usual but with some anxiety. Soon we all woke up with five young children, my wife and myself and two younger dependants in midst of heavy sounds of shelling and fire flying over my residence top 4th floor.  I got all lying on floor and watched with awe and fear what was going on at that dead of 25th March past mid night. Shelling over my residence, a flat of block of 32 flats soon stopped. But there were similar sounds heard and fires seen from many other places. Thus passed the 25th March night.

 

The next morning we knew rumors about resistances at places like the EPR (BDR), Rajarbagh police Lines, etc. Apart from these fearful fights people knew only about a political action program of Hartal call by the Sheikh on the 27th March. But rumors were in air that the Sheikh had been arrested before midnight on the 25th March that was soon confirmed from various foreign media sources. While the people were in utter confusion in the absence of the Sheikh in leadership, many of us in Dhaka knew that in the absence of the Sheikh, and in overcoming the confusion as to what the people to do, an unknown Major of the East Bengal Regiment of the Pakistan Army had declared independence of Bangladesh on the 26th March and also assumed himself the Presidency of independent Bangladesh based at Kalurghat Radio station near Chittagong, 200 away from the capital city Dhaka.

 

The next day, on the 27th March, we knew that on insistence of some of Zia's close colleagues, nothing of any whatsoever indication from Mujib, there was no scope of any for the two had nothing of any prior contact much less knowledge of each other, he amended the announcement in inclusion of Mujib's name for more acceptability to the people in the declaration of independence. These are the versions we knew in Dhaka, authenticated by many later on, one like National Professor Syed Ali Ahsan, etc. as also writer and researcher Masudul Haq painstakingly recorded relevant facts in his books Bangladesher Swadhinata RAW O CIA er Bhumika and Swadhiatar Ghoshosna Myth O Dalil. It may not be irrelevant to mention here that Mujib did not only stick to his street program for Hartal on the 27th March that he asked Tajuddin to enforce in his rhetoric SANGRAM CHALIYE JAO, but also repeatedly asked Dr Kamal until late at the 25th night (10:30 P..M.) if the much sought for lone telephone call from Yahya Khan had come or not. Kamal is still alive, and if not for anything else but to put record of history straight he should honestly open his mouth about Mujib's nod of the UDI before he was taken to custody by the federal army men just before midnight of the 25th March.

 

These chains of duly recorded and authenticated facts should suffice to prove that Mujib did never made UDI of Bangladesh. Neither did he give any consent to any one much less to what some 76 M.P.s (35 according to Barrister Maudud) did on the 10th April (did in fact on the 17th but backdated 10th April, again according to Maudud) in Kolkata and in Delhi. One must reason dispassionately that they had no authority either for they had not been elected to frame any Constitution of Bangladesh so far as the December 1970 election mandated by the LFO was concerned, because, they were meant to frame the Constitution of the Federation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

 

Mujib's Allergy about Secession

That any such UDI would have been secession that Mujib had all along decried and condemned not only after the election of 1970 but also on many occasions before during the Awami League's 6 Point propaganda rhetoric. That must speak clearly of his mind as to do nothing of the sort of Unilateral Declaration of Independence of Bangladesh (UDI).

 

Major Zia's Rebellion

It is true that some special coterie acting from within and without in the vacuum of leadership between 25th and 26th March circulated some statement said to be given by the Sheikh for UDI that never got authenticated, much less believed by even averagely intelligent people. What many people, however, listened to and believed that one Major Zia had declared independence of Bangladesh on the 26th and repeated then after wards from the Chittagong Kalurghat based temporary 10 KW transmitter station.

 

Indira's doubt

Even the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi later on, seriously doubted the fact that Mujib had at all make the UDI when she clearly pointed out in meeting with Tajuddin, Moustaque etc. soon after the 25th March in Delhi stating that no General could surrender to the enemy immediately after declaring war for independence. In fact, Mujib had been young Muslim League cadre and fighter for establishing Pakistan in his Islamia College student days in Kolkata (Calcutta) in 1940s. Though he later on dissociated from the Muslim League, albeit, not before founding of Pakistan but two years after in June 1949 and joined Maolana Bhashani and Suhrawrdy in the Awami Muslim League, not for doing any harm to Pakistan but for working as a formal opposition party to build up still stronger Pakistan that he reiterated even after Bhashani's exit from the Awami League and Suhrawardy's demise in 1963.

 

Indira's skepticism thus about UDI by Mujib was not without any basis. This is not to say though that there were no seriously committed others in the second line of leadership who wished by all means to effect secession, dismember Pakistan and secure independence of Bangladesh. That is why the Mujibnagar based Exile Government Prime Minister Tajuddin had to face humiliation in the hand of Mujib in independent Bangladesh. Professor late Aftab Ahmad from his own first hand knowledge asserted that Mujib had rebuked Tajuddin right at the Tejgaon Airport Tarmac on the 10th January 1972 just on arrival to Dhaka from captivity in Pakistan for dismembering Pakistan (having had Indian armed help).

 

One may recall the fact that Mujib, in his three and a half years rule of Bangladesh (1972-Mid August 1975), did never make any time for even an hour to visit the renowned Mujibnagar (named in honor of his name in his absence by the devotees), the first capital of the Bangladesh Government in Exile! Why?

 

A.K. Brohi's assessment about Mujib

I wonder if I could end up the item to insist further from other document that the Sheikh even at the height of his trying times of life and death in trial for 'treason' in mid 1971 in Islamabad stood for one and unity of the Federation of Pakistan including both of the East and West Pakistan that his Chief lawyer A.K Brohi, a well known person of the highest integrity not only in Pakistan but also elsewhere, in the case left document in London that very fortunately I had occasion to get to know personally being then in the city. Brohi's dying declaration published in a fortnightly on the 25th September 1987 in London stated the relevant facts as follows:

 

'Mujibur Rahman was being tried on the charge that he had been working for the secession of East Pakistan and according to Brohi he had absolutely denied the accusation. Brohi also personally believed that this was a true defence plea. Later on when India attacked East Pakistan, again, according to Brohi.Mujibur Rahman, offered to appear on the TV and appeal to the people of East Pakistan against Indian attack. He passed on the offer to the martial law administrator, Gen Yahya Khan. Apparently the offer was ignored.' (Impact International, p.19).

 

Other Facts in Authentic Documents

Shall I mention some other recorded facts for others to ponder about from a document published recently about Mujib's trial that noted that though the trial ended conferring death sentence to Mujib for treason in August, 1971 the President Yahya did never care to sign the paper of the sentence even if he had been in   office for further five months duration until late December 1971 (See, Kamal Matin Uddin, Tragedy of Errors, p.235). Was it without any internal reason?  One may have some inquisitive look into another document by Sarder Muhammad Chaudhury that provided some elaboration of continuing close relations of Yahya and Mujib from late 1969 (See, The Ultimate Crime, pp.98-99). President Yahya's public declaration of the name of Mujib as the 'Future Prime Minister of Pakistan' could hardly be without any prior understanding. People as well knew from the very beginning that Yahya and Mujib would share central power following the election respectively as the President and the Prime Minister.

 

It may not also be out of place to cite from American Professor and historian Stanley Wolpert from his well researched work Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan wherein Mujib had been quoted verbatim from the tape recorded version of talks between Mujib and Bhutto in late December 1971 to early January 1972 just before President Bhutto set him free on the 8th January and sent him to London on his free choice to go to, then to Dhaka via Delhi. Some relevant verbatim of Mujib recorded therein are as follows:

 

'… I told you it will be confederation. This is also between you and me…You leave it to me, .. absolutely leave it to me. Trust me….My idea was we will live together and we will rule this country. You know the occupation (Indian) army is there…' (P.175)

 

Mujib termed the Indian MITRA BAHINI as the Occupation Force

That Mujib considered the Indian army of 1971 fighting for independence of Bangladesh as the occupation army mentioned to Dr. Henry Kissinger in a meeting in late October 1974 in Dhaka (See, US State Department declassified document published recently and also reprinted in the weekly Holiday, Dhaka, March 06, 2009). How come that Mujib blasted the Indian Amry's intervention in 1971 war with disgust so much so as to call them 'occupation army', whereas, the official position had been known as the Indian MITRA BAHINI or allied friendly army!

 

My Conclusion

In sum I have no hesitation in my mind to state that Mujib had been a Pakistani, not a secessionist, and so he did not make the UDI in 1971 in any form whatsoever. Others had imputed the value to him but having had no authenticity, not even a nod of any kind he had provided.  It was as such unbecoming of the High Court Bench to assign Mujib the label on the basis of pure hearsay and not on concrete evidence and authentic facts.

 

That Mujib did nothing of the UDI that possibly he could do in March 1971 and that in the omission the whole period of 1971 war lacked de jure legitimacy that had no immediate sight of legitimacy for Pakistan did not recognize the independence of Bangladesh that made him to rush on to hold a general election that was nothing of any due in terms of period elapsed after the previous election of 1970, but just only to get the legitimacy and some sort of ease of his own psychological guilt of the omissions of the 1971 episode that he over enthusiastically did passing a legitimizing resolution to power of ascendancy in the new Parliament elected in March 1973 though through mass rigging. Whether the hara-kiri was sufficient enough to make him legitimate in power in the absence of recognition by Pakistan until early 1974 remained another matter of de-jure legal question, if not de-facto one.

 

After all, the post 1971 government of Bangladesh was not in anyway a revolutionary one that could have been so made for the war had been fought by all party combined and not alone by the Awami League. The post 1971 lone party Awami League government was, in fact, the legitimate continuation of the LFO based election of December 1970.

 

Based on the facts at my disposal and the assessment I made above, I am sure that the 21st June verdict given by the honorable High Court Bench fell far short of the authentic historical facts and thus has only dented our pride of the independence of judiciary.

 

http://www.untoldfacts.com/bangladesh/baseless-tainting-of-historical-facts/




__._,_.___


[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] Businessmen for original Silk route,not India connectivity only



 
 
 

Dhaka should only opt for restoration of original Silk Route connecting all countries of the region and also strike a comprehensive deal with New Delhi for allowing port access even under multilateral arrangement, suggest businesspeople.
   

They have insisted that Bangladesh should not be subject to 'mercy' by any big power and must be provided with palpable benefits in exchange for giving India connectivity under the Asian Highway Network.
   

For Bangladesh, the proposed network, a component of 'distorted' ancient Silk Route pushed by global lenders, should in no way be 'India connectivity', the businessmen said with apprehensions that India is set to gain more from connectivity in any form in improving with its own states through Bangladesh territory.
   

According to their suggestion, Bangladesh would be benefited only if Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Thailand and China are duly connected and engaged in the process of connectivity to boost regional trade.
   

'Bangladesh should not fall into mercy of any country. The only option for joining the Asian Highway or the ancient Silk Route is the multilateral framework and it should not be based on a single country,' said Anwarul-Ul-Alam Chowdhury Parvez, a former president of Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association.
   

Abdul Haq, president of Japan-Bangladesh Chamber of Commerce and Industry, recommended that even in joining the multilateral road network, Dhaka should persuade Delhi to come to a comprehensive agreement on trade, investment, water resources, and even security making it precondition for allowing road connectivity.
   

Both of them pointed out that as the proposed Asian Highway Network has offered India an advantageous position in getting connectivity to its north-eastern states — historically considered hinterland of the delta of Bangladesh due to Bay of Bengal —, the Indian authorities have the moral obligation to maximise Bangladesh's interests from the process of regional integration.
   

Only one of the three proposed routes of the Asian Highway Network — Mongla-Jessore-Hatiqumrul-Dhaka-Kachpur-Chittagong-Cox's Bazar-Teknaf-Myanmar border — is designed to connect Myanmar. The others are Benapole-Jessore-Dhaka-Kachpur-Sylhet-Tamabil and Banglabandha-Hatiqumrul-Dhaka-Kachpur-Sylhet-Tamabil.
   

Dwelling on the restoration of the ancient Silk Route, as mentioned in a recent study report of Asian Development Bank Institute, the business leaders maintained that the 13th Silk Route was not the one shown in the design of the new one.
   

The study titled 'Restoring the Asian Silk Route: Toward an Integrated Asia' also mentioned about development of sub-regional transport corridors such as Kakarvitta–Panitanki–Fulbari–Banglabandha road and Akhaura-Agartala rail link.
   

'This is not the ancient Silk Route. Yes it could be extended but should not be dominated by a single country.. Countries like Bangladesh should be benefited from multilateral process,' said Parvez adding that India must also bear the costs of infrastructure building for connectivity.
   

Abdul Haq said Delhi must reciprocate the sentiments in and demands from Dhaka to enhance Bangladesh's trade and investment because Bangladesh is already one of the largest markets of Indian goods.
   

'Since our capacity to negotiate has improved, I think, Bangladesh should properly bargain with this issue and ensure national interests. Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar and China should be made partners in the regional cooperation,' said Zafar Osman, president of Dhaka Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
   

He also stressed the importance of resolving political tensions that hindered trade and economic interests of the peoples of regional countries and focussing on economic issues. 'We have to utilise the potential services that we can offer to reduce balance of payments deficit with India,' he added.
   

The executive director of Centre for Policy Dialogue, Mustafizur Rahman, said on Tuesday that Bangladesh might be benefited from trade services to India, if constraints could be overcome through proper political negotiation. 'Certainly there are pending issues but there are ways to overcome them if the political leadership wants to take a decision taking into account maximum economic interests. It could be made win-win,' he said.

 

http://www.newagebd.com/2009/jul/09/busi.html




__._,_.___


[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] Taslima Nasrin stopped from returning home!



Taslima Nasrin stopped from returning home!

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
 
Internationally known Bangladeshi born feminist writer and self proclaimed atheist Doctor Taslima Nasrin has been living in self exile since 1994 when local radicals gave life threat on her following writings demanding liberation of women from the shackle of social injustice as well as torture.

Nasreen was faced with two years' imprisonment by a Bangladeshi court and an uncertain future. In desperation, she faxed Amnesty International: "I am in grave danger. Fundamentalists are demanding my death. They have declared prize money for my head again. Situation is dangerous now. They could kill me at any moment. Please save me."

Amnesty International answered her call, as did the international writers' group PEN and the Swedish government, which offered her asylum and the Pounds 15,000 Kurt Tucholsky Prize designed to help persecuted writers continue their work in exile.

After leaving Bangladesh towards the end of 1994, Nasrin lived in exile in Western Europe and North America for ten years. Her Bangladeshi passport had been revoked; she was granted citizenship by the Swedish government. She had to wait for six years [1994-1999] to even get a visa to visit India, and never got a Bangladeshi passport to return to the country when her mother, and later her father, were on their deathbeds.

In March of 2000, she visited Mumbai to promote a translation of her novel Shodh [translated by Marathi author Ashok Shahane, the book was called Phitam Phat]. Secular groups seized upon the occasion to celebrate freedom of expression, while "Muslim fundamentalist groups, who had threatened to burn her alive."

In 1992, Taslima Nasrin wrote an essay titled "Noshto meyer noshto goddo" [Fallen prose of a fallen girl], 1992.

In 1989 Nasrin began to contribute to the weekly political magazine Khaborer Kagoj, edited by her second husband, Nayeemul Islam Khan [now editor of Dhaka´s leading Bengali language daily newspaper named Amader Shomoy] and published from Dhaka. Her feminist views and anti-religion remarks articles succeeded in drawing broad attention, and she shocked the religious and conservative society of Bangladesh by her progressive comments and suggestions.

In 1992 Nasrin produced two novellas which failed to draw attention. Her breakthrough novel Lajja [Shame] was published in 1993, and attracted wide attention because of its controversial subject matter. In six months' time, it sold 50,000 copies in Bangladesh before being banned.

In 1993, the government of Bangladesh banned Lajja, which contained the graphic description of a rape of a Hindu woman by a Muslim man. Initially written as a thin documentary, Lajja grew into a full length novel as the author later revised it substantially.

Her memoirs are renowned for their candidness, which has led to a number of them being banned in Bangladesh and India. Amar Meyebela [My Girlhood, 2002], the first volume of her memoir, was banned by the Bangladeshi government in 1999 for "reckless comments" against Islam and the prophet Mohammad. Utal Hawa (Wild Wind), the second part of her memoir, was banned by the Bangladesh government in 2002. Ka [Speak up], the third part of her memoir, was banned by the Bangladeshi High Court in 2003. Under pressure from Indian Muslim activists, the book, which was published in West Bengal as Dwikhandita, was banned there also; some 3,000 copies were seized immeidately. The decision to ban the book was criticized by "a host of authors" in West Bengal, but the ban wasn't lifted until 2005. Sei Sob Ondhokar [Those Dark Days], the fourth part of her memoir, was banned by the Bangladesh government in 2004.

Intellectuals both in Bangladesh and West Bengal [in India] reacted to the contents of her novel titled ´KA´ and ´Dwikhandita´ as in both novels, Taslima Nasrin gave narrative descriptions of some writers and progressive people taking sexual advantage on her as well she also narrated her personal feelings on sexual abilities of three of her husbands.

Nasrin has been criticized by writers and intellectuals in both Bangladesh and West Bengal for targeted scandalization. Because of "obnoxious, false and ludicrous" comments in Ka, "written with the 'intention to injure the reputation of the plaintiff'", Syed Shamsul Haq, a top Bangladeshi poet and novelist, filed a defamation suit against Nasrin in 2003. In the book, she mentions that Haq confessed to her that he had had a relationship with his sister-in-law.

A West Bengali poet, Hasmat Jalal, did the same; his suit led to the High Court banning the book, which was published in India as Dwikhondito. Nearly 4 million dollars were claimed in defamation lawsuits against Nasrin by fellow writers in Bangladesh and West Bengal after the publication of Ka/Dwikhandita. Sunil Ganguli, a famous writer, with 24 other intellectuals pressured the West Bengal government to ban Nasrin's book in 2003. There was hate campaign against Taslima even among the writers, because she wrote about her intimate life story divulging her affairs with some men. And because some men happened to be known, so Taslima had to answer why she wrote about known people without their permission and some commented that she did it to earn fame. Taslima defended hersself against all the allegations. She wrote why she dared not to hide her sexual relations, she said that she wrote her life's story, not others'.

Taslima Nasrin treated the whole subject of female oppression in her poetry, which she had by this time started to publish, and the evils of patriarchy were expressed in exceptionally explicit sexual language. In one poem, she depicts a man as a cockroach entering the vagina, in another she muses that "when a man is chasing / you, be warned / That man has syphilis", and in a third, "divorce letter", she writes that husbands "perceive no difference between the whore's and the lover's body".

Criticism is that the ever-provocative Nasreen has staged a rather rococco publicity stunt that has got a little out of hand. One American magazine even dared to call it "a smart career move". By way of evidence, it is pointed out that the death threats were never meant to be taken seriously, that many Bangladeshi intellectuals have chosen to ignore similar death threats against them. Nasreen denies the general point, stressing that "it is not my aim to be a celebrity".

In an interview to Western press, Taslima Nasrin said, prior to going in exile, she spent two months in hiding.

"I could not speak, I could not turn on the light, I could not shower. I just had to lie like a piece of dead wood so no one would know I was there. I only moved at midnight, always under cover: from one house to another, from one shelter to another."

Taslima said, in all, she moved to 15 locations, on average once every other night. " after Islamists gave life threat on her.

But according to one of the reports published in local press, Taslima Nasrin was living at her comfortable apartment at Shantinagar area in Dhaka [named Eastern Housing Apartment] even hours before she left Bangladesh for Stockholm.

Another source in Bangladeshi intelligence claims that, there is no existence of any organization named ´Sahaba Shoinik´ [Sahaba Soldiers] in Bangladesh. "It must have been an imaginary name", said the source.

I have tried to gather minimum information on this organization. But, did not find anything about it, except on the website of Taslima Nasrin and some places, where only the threat issue was mentioned.

Even at the website of UNHCR quoting the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, it is mentioned that, "Information on a group called the Sahaba Soldiers was scarce among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate. The South Asian Women's NETwork [SAWNET] reported that the Sahaba Soldiers bombed the home of Sultana Kamal, a women's rights activist and lawyer in Bangladesh [Oct. 1996]. The same article reported that the Sahaba Soldiers issued a fatwa, or Islamic decree, against author Taslima Nasrin for her position on women's rights in Bangladesh [ibid.].

"Although no reports consulted by the Research Directorate confirm that the Sahaba Soldiers are the same group as the Sahaba Sainik Parishad, or the Council of Soldiers of Islam."

Meanwhile, Bangladeshi foreign minister Dr. Dipu Moni, during a press conference in New York on June 26, 2009 said, "The government has no problem with controversial writer Taslima Nasrin, now living in exile, returning home, but her security issue is to be considered by the home ministry."

Dr. Moshiur Rahman, finance affairs advisor to Bangladeshi Prime Minister and Bangladesh´s permanent representative to United Nations ambassador Ismat Jahan were also present during this press meeting.

Although several Bangladeshi high officials also echoed the opinion of the Bangladeshi foreign minister, according to a report published in vernacular daily Amader Shomoy [which is owned by Taslima Nasrin´s second husband Nayeemul Islam Khan], Bangladeshi missions abroad are continuing to decline renewing the passport of this award winning feminist activist. Recently Taslima Nasrin went to Bangladeshi embassy in United States, which also declined to renew her passport.

Daily Amader Shomoy said, "if the statement of the Bangladeshi foreign minister is true, why country´s missions abroad are refraining from renewing the passport of Taslima Nasrin."
 
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/109101



__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___