Banner Advertiser

Saturday, November 21, 2009

[ALOCHONA] Weapons Of Mass Desperation



Weapons Of Mass Desperation

Operation Green Hunt, the offensive against Naxals, might blow up in our faces. SHOMA CHAUDHURY examines the tricky and dangerous terrain

image
Enemy worthy? Naxals in Abujmarh. Women suckle babies. The poverty shows
Photo: AP

ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2009, India woke up to the news that the Delhi Police had captured a top Naxal ideologue, 58-year-old Kobad Ghandy – a South Bombay Parsi who had grown up in a giant sea-facing house in Worli, had gone to Doon School, and had studied for a CA in London before returning to India to work with the most destitute of Indian citizens in Maharashtra, before going underground in the 1970s. His wife Anuradha, a sociologist, went underground with him and died of cerebral malaria last year. (Malaria, particularly the lethal falciparium malaria, is a common affliction in the neglected heartland of central India.) Home Minister P Chidambaram called Ghandy the State's "most important Naxal catch."

On the night of September 22, Times Now had a prime time debate on the significance of Ghandy's arrest. The aggressive rhetoric of anchor Arnab Goswami epitomised typical high urban attitudes to Naxal issues. If you happened to watch him anchor the show, several terrifying things would have become evident. Over this past year, the Home Ministry has been planning a major armed offensive against the Naxals, particularly in Chhattisgarh. According to reports, the plan involves stationing around 75,000 troops in the heartland of India — including special CRPF commandos, the ITBP and the BSF. Scattered newspaper accounts have spoken of forces being withdrawn from Jammu and Kashmir and the Northeast; there is also talk of bringing in the feared Rashtriya Rifles — a battalion created specially for counter-insurgency work — and the purchase of bomb trucks, bomb blankets, bomb baskets, and sophisticated new weaponry. Minister Chidambaram has also said that if necessity dictates, he will bring in the special forces of the army.

The decision to launch such a massive armed operation on home ground — due to start this November — should have triggered animated political, civil society and media debate. But Operation Green Hunt — as the offensive is being termed — has been gathering force in almost complete silence. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Home Minister Chidambaram have variously called Naxals — or "Maoists" — "the gravest threat to India's internal security." Perhaps a military offensive against them is the answer, but is it the only answer? Is it the best answer? Will it provide a solution? Who will be impacted by this offensive? What will be its repercussions? Who are we really declaring war on? What are we declaring war on? Are we going into this with eyes wide open? Is there anything we should have learned from the seemingly irreparable psychological mess in Kashmir and the Northeast? These are the questions a democratic society should be asking. One can perhaps understand the well-heeled turning their back on such bleak issues. But with such a significant operation looming on the horizon, what can excuse the complete absence of debate from national political parties?

But silence, perhaps, is only the lesser worry. A few days ago, the government announced an ad blitzkrieg as part of its psychological offensive. "Naxals are nothing but coldblooded murderers" the ad screamed across all major news dailies. The visual showed a series of men, women and children brutally killed by Naxals.

image

On the night of September 22, discussing Kobad Ghandy, Arnab Goswami mouthed the same line. "Terrorist or ideologue?" he intoned, with the moral certitude of a man who has never got off his urban chair to trudge the interiors of the country. "Six thousand innocent Indians have been killed on Mr Ghandy's 'watch,'" he said (as if Kobad Ghandy was some Idi Amin figure presiding over a banana republic), "and yet human rights organisations and NGOs are asking for his release." (Mr Goswami always reserves special scorn for human rights activists, as if they are a uniform sub-species of anti-national humankind, rather than men and women with differing and individual views.) "What about the 12-year-old girl the Naxals killed in Jharkhand?" he thundered. "What about the 15 CPM cadres they killed in Bengal last night?" Every time one of his panelists tried to introduce the larger political context behind Naxalism or a more complex argument, Mr Goswami swatted them down: "The question we are asking is very simple," he said, "is he a terrorist or an ideologue? Is he responsible for violence or not? Can he be blamed for 6,000 dead or not?"

Watching the show was like straying into a child's playroom, watching the grave judgments of infants playing at Good and Evil. As an individual point of view it would have counted for nothing, but as the voice of Times Now, currently deemed the most popular English channel, Mr Goswami's unthinking edit line seems symptomatic of a wider, urban, English-speaking constituency. Coupled with the government ads, it presents the disturbing prospect of a public discourse that is marked by reductive official propaganda on the one side and infantile ignorance and simple-mindedness on the other. We can afford neither.

AT THE heart of the Naxal riddle, there are three primary questions: Who is a Naxal? What is one's position on violence as a tool of struggle? And why is Naxalism on the rise across the country? To understand the first, try a useful metaphor. Imagine fish in water. Naxal leaders are the fish, finite, identifiable (even punishable); the water is the vast, infinite constituency they speak for. And swim in.

image

As Kobad Ghandy proves, a Naxal ideologue, commander or politburo leader can come from any milieu. The disempowered dalits of Andhra Pradesh, the destitute tribals of Chhattisgarh, the middle-class intellectuals of Bengal or the privileged rich of Bombay. These "informed revolutionaries" function at two levels. At a political level, they do not believe in parliamentary democracy (where they see power still concentrated in the hands of the feudal upper class) and their long-term objective is to seize State power for the people through armed struggle. In this, they threaten the sovereignity of the Indian State and many humanist thinkers, including men like K Balagopal of the Human Rights Forum, who was part of brokering peace talks between the government and Naxals in Andhra Pradesh in 2004, believe the State is within its rights to confront them. "The Maoists themselves would not tolerate such a challenge if they came to power," says he. Balagopal is also critical of Naxal leaders creating "liberated zones" where the Indian State cannot function. "If they claim to be the voice of the people, can they pursue a political agenda that injures people — either by their actions or the repercussions they invite? Does the current tribal generation of Chhattisgarh want to sacrifice itself for a utopian future that may never come?"

It is true that in this prolonged ideological war, many Naxal attacks like the horrific one on the Ranibodli police station two years ago and the more recent one in Rajnandgaon embrace brutal tactics and almost fetishise violence. Even if these attacks are against an oppressive and corrupt police, it is a nobrainer to condemn them and say one is opposed to this violence. Or that their perpetrators should be punished.

But like dozens of other intellectuals, Balagopal points out that it is suicidal to focus only on this ideological war or resort to extrajudicial means alone to quell it. Can Naxalism really be wiped out by brute counter force? If that were so, Siddhartha Shankar Ray's crackdown in Bengal in the 70s should have nailed it for all time. But the fact is, while stories of their own coercions are true, Naxal leaders enjoy wide support because they also espouse social-economic causes and empower people that the Indian State has ignored — criminally — for 60 years. Most Naxal cadres, therefore, are not "informed revolutionaries" fighting a conceptual war: they are beleagured tribals and dalits fighting local battles for basic survival and rights. Bela Bhatia, an activist, says she met a mazdoor in Bihar who was part of the cadre. "You can call me a Naxal or whatever you want," he said. "I have picked up the gun to get my three kilos of annaj."

The point is, should the Indian State be declaring armed war on its most despairing people? Is there no other way to empower them and wean them away from the gun and the seduction of the 'informed revolutionary'? When Arnab Goswami evoked the 15 dead CPM members in Bengal last week, he forgot to mention that, according to newspaper reports (since no TV channel bothered to send teams there to find out) a 10,000-strong crowd of tribals had descended on the CPM office which was stockpiling arms in Inayatpur, near Lalgarh. When his panelists tried to draw his attention to this, he scathingly dubbed all 10,000 tribals as Maoists. Should "Operation Green Hunt" then stamp all 10,000 out? And if 10,000 Maoists had attacked an office, is it possible that only 15 people would have died? What is the real truth about the attack on the CPM office last week? And why was the superintendent of police, visiting a day later, unable to find any bodies? And why were the central paramilitary forces stationed there unable to prevent any of it?

image

Lalgarh, in fact, is a textbook case for the Naxal riddle. Over the last six months, mainstream Indian media has been agog about the "Naxal menace" in Lalgarh. But almost no one thought to ask, was the flare up in Lalgarh in May sui generis? Does an entire society become Maoist overnight? Very few bothered to report that the trouble in Lalgarh began after the Maoists attempted an assassination of Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharya earlier this year. In retaliation, the Bengal police rounded up and brutalised scores of innocent tribal boys in neighbouring Lalgarh, who had nothing to do with the attack. After several months of this sort of general, untargeted police oppression, angry and desperate, the tribal community spontaneously organised themselves as a resistance force, fighting the might of the Indian State with nothing more than traditional tools – pick-axes, bows and arrows. A few weeks later, it appears, Kishenji, a Maoist leader from Andhra Pradesh arrived to raise the ante, teaching tactics of struggle, meshing solidarity with guns and advice. The State responded with increased force and brought in paramilitary forces — a dry run for Operation Green Hunt. After several days of heavy fire, ironically using Maoist jargon, the State declared Lalgarh had been "liberated". But, the truth is, it has been on burn ever since. The attack on the CPM office is only the most recent expression of simmering anger in the area.

As Himanshu Kumar, a Gandhian and the only human rights activist on ground zero in faraway Dantewada where Operation Green Hunt is to be launched, says, "We can all be agreed on the premise that Naxalism is a problem, but why are these poor people attracted to a politics that will end in death? Have we created such a heinous system that death is more attractive than the deprivations and humiliations this system doles out? If that is so, why should I defend this system? All that these people want is food, health care, school, clothes and their legitimate right over their land. Yet, instead of weaning them away by strengthening the democratic process, if we are going to run our democracy only on the strength of weapons, I fear we are entering a dangerous and irrepairable state. We are headed for civil war." Men like Himanshu should know. For 17 years, he has functioned like an ICU on the edges of a wounded society, providing education and health care, painstakingly drawing tribals into the electoral and constitutional process. The government, loath to undertake the trouble, has been happy to outsource its functions to him. Yet now, it is deaf to his wisdoms. Worse, it hasn't even consulted him.

WHICH BRINGS us to the element of water in the Naxal metaphor. People who say human rights activists and the questions they raise are antinational, would be surprised to know what men like Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee themselves have had to say earlier about the Naxal riddle. Not to mention a galaxy of judges and constitutionalists.

image

In 2006, the Planning Commission asked an expert committee for a report on development challenges in "extremist affected areas." The committee comprised senior officers like former UP police chief Prakash Singh; former intelligence head, Ajit Doval; senior bureaucrats like B. Bandopadhyay, EAS Sarma, SR Sankaran and BD Sharma; and activists like Bela Bhatia and K Balagopal. The report submitted in October 2008 had some visionary analysis and recommendations.

"The main support for the Naxalite movement," it said, "comes from dalits and adivasi tribals": the element of water: the infinite constituency in which Naxal leaders swim. Dalits and adivasis comprise a staggering one fourth of India's population, yet are disproportionately destitute and low on the Human Development Index scale. Worse, they suffer the most humiliation and indignity: the proverbial insult on injury. The report is an exhaustive anthology of the causes for rural discontent and violence — recording meticulous data and case studies — but at the heart of its argument, it places the "structural violence implicit in our social and economic system" as the key explanation for Naxalite violence. Slamming the neoliberal directional shift in government policies, it urges a "development centric" rather than "security centric" approach to the Naxal problem.

Curiously, three years earlier in 2005, human rights lawyer Kannabiran had written a letter to Dr Manmohan Singh reminding him of his own report as a Planning Commission Member in 1982 and one written by Pranab Mukherjee in 2002 that had come to the same conclusion. As Bela Bhatia says, "With all this insight and understanding already with them, it is completely mystifying why they should go against their own intuition and recommendation and take a security-centric route. Actually," she adds, "it is not mystifying. It only makes the character of the Indian State more clear."

WHO IS A NAXAL? IMAGINE FISH IN WATER. NAXAL LEADERS ARE THE FISH, FINITE, IDENTIFIABLE. WATER IS THEIR INFINITE CONSTITUENCY

This 'character' gets even more depressing when you know that barely a week ago, on 15 September, Arjun Sengupta, former economic adviser to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi also wrote that "Naxalism is a cry that must be heard". Responding to Dr Manmohan Singh's admission that despite the State's best efforts to contain the "Naxal menace", violence was still on the rise, Sengupta wrote powerfully, "It is important to understand why this is so and in what sense Naxalite violence is different from other violent outbursts. Although it has always expressed itself as a breach of law and order with violence, murder, extortion and acts of heinous crimes, it may not be prudent to think of every protest movement of the disaffected people as a simple issue of law and order violation, and calling for its brutal suppression. This form of extremism, indeed, goes beyond law and order, fanning some deep-seated grievance. We must try to resolve those problems first, as otherwise the violence will remain insurmountable."

image

(Way back in 1996, Justice MN Rao of the Andhra Pradesh High Court had also remarked in a judgment, "While left wing extremism is viewed as a problem by the administration, it is increasingly being perceived as a solution to their problems by the alienated masses." Why is this so? That's a question every self-styled jingoistic nationalist must ask themselves.)

As Sengupta reminds the prime minister, he is right to fear that Naxal violence will raise its head again and again, because at its heart is the deeper structural violence that our democratic Republic refuses to address: a violence that forces 77 percent of Indians to live on less than Rs 20 a day while 5 percent enjoy lives that border on obscene excess.

Structural violence: that's an imaginative vacuum. For most urban Indians, the lives of tribals and dalits has no meaning, no face, no flesh. Our books no longer write of it, our films no longer evoke it, our journalists no longer cover it. It's not just the poverty; it's bumping into a face of the Indian State you have never seen before: brutal, illegal, rapine, pimped out to serve the interests of a few. Unless one travels into the silent smoky hole in the heart of this country — the remote jungles of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh; the desolate corners of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar and Rajasthan, one cannot feel the dread of this question: How will Operation Green Hunt solve this? You might stealth-march a mythic army of COBRA commandoes into this imaginative vacuum, but how will that dissolve the "two categories of human beings" our nation has created? Operation Green Hunt may kill several hundred 'informed revolutionaries' and several thousand of the despairing poor who have taken up arms, but how will it address the birth of new anger — anger born out of bombing an old wound?

THE DISCOURSE ON NAXALS IS MARKED BY PROPAGANDA ON ONE SIDE AND INFANTILE IGNORANCE AND SIMPLEMINDEDNESS ON THE OTHER

As anthropologist and historian Ram Guha says, "It's like a house with three rooms. One room was already on fire. Instead of dousing that, you willfully set fire to another room, then bulldoze the whole structure down."

image

ONE OF the key architects of Operation Green Hunt, Home secretary Gopal Pillai sits in a giant office in powerful North Block. At first meeting, he doesn't seem the average cynic you expect Indian bureaucrats to be. An amiable, thoughtful man, he says he's seen long years of service in the Northeast and knows what a security-centric approach can do to a people, how it can trigger a world of smoke and mirrors where nothing is what it seems and everyone is chasing someone's shadow. He seems open and ready to listen. More, he is full of surprisingly honest admissions: Manipur is a society in collective depression, he says. Yes, raising the Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh (which human rights activists have been crying hoarse about) was wrong; yes, the Naxals have often taken up causes and done work that the government should have. But, he adds, their violent disruptions are a real deterrence for governance. You have no argument with that.

According to him, then, Operation Green Hunt is being planned as a kind of "area domination". "We want to take back control of the land; but we will only fire if we are fired against," says he. "Lalgarh is the model; we want no collateral damage. Our real success will be in restoring civil administration in this area. PDS, mobile medical vans, stronger police chowkis, schools – that's our goal." You feel eager to believe him.

MANMOHAN SINGH AND PRANAB MUKHERJEE HAVE BOTH HEADED REPORTS URGING DEVELOPMENT CENTRIC APPROACHES TO NAXALISM

Part of the problem of administering the tribal villages in the jungles of Chhattisgarh is that they are lonely and farflung; also few in the district or political administration know the tribal languages. Operation Green Hunt has been long in the planning. Battalions of CRPF men and para-military forces across the country are being given crash courses for the impending operation. The Centre has sanctioned 20 new schools in jungle warfare; invited crores worth of bids for military equipment. Is there a similar hot-foot programme for training, sensitising and incentivising the civil administration? you ask. Has he invited civil society activists in the region for their inputs? Mr Pillai has a sudden shocked moment of self-recognition. No, he admits, and scribbles "training" and "dialogue" on a yellow notepad.

There is a month to go before Operation Green Hunt is launched. A familiar despair sprouts: the gap between stated intention and action. And miles of paper and good advice gathering dust in the Planning Commission.

image

TODAY, THE biggest riddle for anybody concerned about a just and equal world is the dilemma of violence as a tool of political struggle. When the government shows such poor intention, when it is completely deaf to peaceful people's movements like the Bhopal gas victims', or the tribal resistance to bauxite mining in Niyamgirhi, or the Narmada Andolan, is one justified in asking the poor to defang themselves, unless one is willing to step out of one's comfort zone and share their lives of helpless status quo?

Should one distinguish between Naxal violence and spontaneous rural violence? Yet, in a democratic society, how can violence of any kind be condoned? Where does that leave democratic practice?

Despite these internal tussles, contrary to what Arnab Goswami asserts, almost the entire human rights community is agreed that not only is Naxal violence to be condemned, but subdued. Increased and international access to weaponry has led to escalating violence. As Prakash Singh, a widely respected retired police chief, says, "The Naxals used to move in dalams [cells] of 20. That's gone up to a 100. They have sophisticated weapons and their attacks have become more brutal. We have to show that such armed insurrection will not be tolerated."

NAXALS ARE OFTEN GUILTY OF BRUTAL VIOLENCE. THEIR STRUGGLE TO SEIZE STATE POWER THREATENS INDIA'S SOVEREIGNTY

The disagreements arise over strategy and efficacy. A top security expert who wishes not to be named but is generally considered a hawk, for instance, has serious doubts over Operation Green Hunt. Ironically, he voices the anxiety of a wide range of human rights activists. "To attempt this kind of an action by police forces against your own land and people is a dangerous trap," says he. "We usually reserve such operations for hostile territory. The police is supposed to go after particular individuals – say, Ram Lal, a criminal. But in an operation of this kind, you don't even know who Ram Lal is, it is very difficult to know who he is or get accurate intelligence on his movements. You might end up killing Ram Lal's relatives or his whole village. And if you don't hold inquests, you'll never know who you killed."

Kashmir and the Northeast are bleeding, painful reminders: once paramilitary forces or the army moves in, you can never really withdraw. No bureaucrat or military strategist or powerful minister can control the vicious logic of paranoia, fake killings, genuine mistakes and revenge that sets in. When friend and family can be an informer, everyone is an enemy.

Already, this helpless cycle has started to turn in Chhattisgarh. Last week, in the first of its assaults, a company of 100 COBRA commandos set off to destroy an alleged Naxal arms factory in Chintagufa area. They were caught in Naxal fire. Seven COBRAs were killed. In turn, they claimed to have killed nine Naxals (whose bodies they say they have) and many more they claim the Naxals dragged away. The government has tried to pass this off as a big triumph. But the deadly smoke and mirrors game has already begun. Villagers claim the COBRAs made no kills and had dragged innocents out of villages to tot some up, among them an old man and woman. Chhattisgarh DGP Vishwaranjan does not help matters by refusing to answer questions: "I don't have any details," he says. An odd answer for a DGP. Plus, there's the wound of six COBRAs dead in the first sortee.

As Operation Green Hunt kicks into top gear, all these problems will magnify. The hallucinations of the impregnable forest. Extremists who disappear, leaving villagers to bear the brunt of the commandos' ire. Paranoia within and without, revenge and, as in the Salwa Judum, innocent tribals caught between the fury of the Naxals and the fury of the State.

TODAY, THE BIGGEST RIDDLE FOR ANYONE CONCERNED ABOUT A JUST WORLD IS THE DILEMMA OF VIOLENCE AS A TOOL OF POLITICAL STRUGGLE

Pressure will create equal and opposite counter pressure. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh can't seem to grasp this simple physical equation. The impact of the Salwa Judum was to drive more tribals into the arms of Naxals. Operation Green Hunt promises to set the place on fire. When Binayak Sen spoke against the Salwa Judum, he was jailed. Now, when Himanshu Kumar is warning about impending civil war, no one is listening.

image

"Not commandos. Send in health workers and schoolteachers protected by the CRPF," pleads he. "Show the tribals hope and they will choose life over death." But the weight of his voice does not sway even a mote of dust in the corridors of the Home Ministry.

THERE IS one final silent piece in the escalating Naxal violence that has gripped the country: neo-liberal land grab and tribal rights. It is no coincidence that a majority of the Naxal leadership today is from Andhra Pradesh. According to journalist N Venugopal, the roots of this go back to the Telengana Movement of 1946-51, which was abruptly withdrawn by the Communist Party. In the Andhra Second Five-Year Plan (1956), 60 lakh acres of surplus land was identified. Yet by the time the Land Ceiling Act was passed in 1973, and enough concessions had been made to rich landowners, the State said only 17 lakh acres of surplus land was available, and it distributed only four. Land, livelihood and liberation was the clarion call then. Still driven by that unfulfilled aspiration, most leaders today are from the families of the '46 – '51 movement.

'THIS OPERATION IS A DANGEROUS TRAP,' SAYS A SECURITY HAWK. 'YOU ARE LOOKING FOR RAM LAL, YOU'LL END UP KILLING HIS RELATIVES'

EAS Sarma, former Commissioner of Tribal Welfare and former secretary, Expenditure and Economic Affairs, unlocks the real heart of the matter. "I am totally against violence of any kind and a firm believer in democratic process," says he. "But Left extremism is a secondary issue. How many tribals even know there is a government? Their only experience of the State is the police, contractors, and real estate goons. Besides, the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution grants tribals complete rights over their traditional land and forests and prohibits private companies from mining on their land. This constitutional schedule was upheld by the Samatha judgement of the Supreme Court (1997). If successive governments lived by the spirit of the Constitution and this judgment, tribal discontent would automatically recede."

Mr Sarma is probably right. Human rights activists have long argued that the real intention of the Salwa Judum in Chhattisgarh was to capture tribal land — brimming-rich with minerals — and hand it over to private companies. The fact that 600 tribal villages have been evacuated in the last few years gives credence to this theory. If tribals no longer live on that land, the inconvenient Fifth Schedule of the Constitution will not apply.

Given that the Supreme Court directed that the Salwa Judum was to be dismantled, perhaps, Operation Green Hunt is the second lap. In any case, whether for ill-intention, poor execution, or unplanned collateral damage, there is much to fear in the impending operation.

In the meantime, we would all do well to read the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution.

WRITER'S EMAIL
shoma@tehelka.com


From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 39, Dated October 03, 2009



__._,_.___


[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] Progressing Bangladesh towards an Information Society



Nokia-BEI Roundtable on Progressing Bangladesh towards an Information Society

 

The joint Nokia‐BEI Roundtable took place on October 18th 2009 at the

Sheraton Garden, Dhaka. Speakers and analysts gathered to discuss

strategies for the growth of the information technology (IT) sector in

Bangladesh.

 

The government should ensure equitable access to new communication

technologies to both rural and urban areas simultaneously, speakers said.

President of BEI, Mr. Farooq Sobhan began the address by explaining how

we can promote the continued growth of our IT industries and our

information infrastructure so that all segments of our society can share the

benefits of the Information Age. This is particularly crucial in the

Bangladesh context, where many citizens still are not connected by

telephone or computer.

 

"It is essential that the government commits to the goal of developing a

truly inclusive and equitable national and global infrastructure," said

Farooq Sobhan, president of Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI).

"Global infrastructure must reach rural people as well as urban, poor as

well as wealthy, and those in developing and developed nations," said Mr.

Sobhan. "Industry leaders and the government must work together to

ensure equitable growth."

 

The discussion mainly focused on one of the present government's election

pledges to create a Digital Bangladesh by 2021.Dr Jamilur Reza Choudhury, vice chancellor of BRAC University, presented a keynote paper. Information Minister Abul Kalam Azad was present as the chief guest. Choudhury said the whole country should be covered by information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure."The government should start implementing a plan of action in line with the ICT policy‐2009 as soon as possible," he said.

 

he information minister urged ICT entrepreneurs to come forward with

private partnership programme (PPP) ideas to disseminate new

communication technology to the mass at affordable costs.

"New entrepreneurship is needed to resolve the existing ICT sector

problems," the minister said, adding that there is no alternative to

developing the ICT sector to ensure good governance.

 

Prem Chand, general manager of Nokia Emerging Asia, Bangladesh, said

there is no alternative to mobile internet. Bangladesh's internet

penetration rate is only 0.3 percent, the lowest among Asian countries.

"Introducing new communication technology through fiber optic cables

makes no economic sense in the present technology growing market,"

Prem said, adding that mobile internet can narrow the digital divide.

According to him, 50 percent users prefer access to the internet on their

mobiles.

 

Habibullah N Karim, president of Bangladesh Association of Software and

Information Service, and Munir Hasan, former consultant of Access to

Information Programme, Prime Minister's Office, also spoke.

 

Economic Contribution of IT

Mr. Farooq Sobhan said that the transition to a hightech economy is

occurring, not just domestically, but also globally. Ten years ago noone

would have believed that today we would have streaming technologies, IP

telephony, a wireless revolution, or electronic books. These new

technologies and applications contribute significantly to our economic

growth. Even in the face of recent economic turmoil, the Asian region has

experienced impressive growth in its IT sector.
 

Equitable Growth

Speakers agreed that the private sector provides the energy, the initiative,

the entrepreneurial spirit, the innovation, and the investment that is fueling

this economic, technological, cultural, and social revolution.

Mr. Sobhan articulated that the role that governments should and must

play in "realizing the visions" for the new information economies. Among

these key roles, governments should ensure equitable access to new

technologies; provide a framework for investment, growth, and

competition; open markets to international competition; and create an

educated workforce that is able to meet the job demands of a digital

economy.

 

He emphasized that it is essential that governments commit themselves to

the goal of developing a truly inclusive and equitable national and global

infrastructure. Expanding our global information infrastructure is critical,

not only because of business imperatives, but also because it will help us

meet basic societal needs. New technologies are connecting those who

previously had no link to the global economy or to other societies.

 

These technologies are also bringing medical, educational, and economic

services within the reach of people who never before had access to such

information. A new project in Malaysia, for example, is connecting seven

hospitals so they can engage in joint consultation, diagnosis, and

treatment. A small hospital in a rural village, which lacks specialized

expertise can now contact medical specialists in Kuala Lumpur. New

technologies are even helping farmers improve their crop yields through

new precision farming techniques, combining the Internet, computers, and

the Global Positioning System.

 

Mr. Sobhan continued that Industry and government must work together

to ensure that such growth is equitable. The global infrastructure must

reach rural people as well as urban, poor as well as wealthy, and those in

developing as well as developed nations.
 

Private Investment and Competition

Mr. Sobhan said that the promises of information technology fulfilled if

citizens have affordable access to new technologies. And that leads to the

second important role for governments: providing a framework suitable for

investment, growth, and competition. We believe that affordable access

will be possible only through competition and a regulatory environment

that supports users and consumers, not national champions. In the

telecommunications sector, we have already seen the fruits of this

approach complexes to attract foreign investors and promote domestic

investment. Competition among these private entities should continue to

improve services and lower prices for Bangladesh.
 

Moble Banking, Private Investment and Competition

Speakers discussed that just recently on the 6th of October the Bangladesh

Central Bank has given permission to a private limited company , allowing

the transfer of funds through mobile phones from one individual to another

via a mobile phone or through the internet.

 

While the applications of such technologies has been very successful in

Kenya and the Philippines, the government should make the processes for

obtaining such important licenses more transparent and give everyone a

level playing field instead of choosing an arbitrary private company in order

to reduce transaction for the common man.

 

By far the most successful example of mobile money is MPESA, launched in

2007 by Safaricom of Kenya. It now has nearly 7m users—not bad for a

country of 38m people, 18.3m of whom have mobile phones. MPESA first

became popular as a way for young, male urban migrants to send money

back to their families in the countryside. It is now used to pay for

everything from school fees (no need to queue up at the bank every month

to hand over a wad of bills) to taxis (drivers like it because they are carrying

around less cash). Similar schemes are popular in the Philippines and South

Africa.

 

Conclusion

Speakers and analysts agreed that the information technology potential of

Bangladesh was mostly untapped. Great strides can be made in all sectors

in Bangladesh if internet and information can be more evenly distributed to

the masses through the help of mobile devices rather than computers. It

was agreed that permeation of important pieces of information at critical

time, facilitated through the use of mobile devices, would result in

significant benefits to the economy.



__._,_.___


[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: [notun_bangladesh] Stop killings by BSF, Khaleda asks



Ayubi Bhai
 
You are right that we ave place our heroic BDR in it's old from icking out the HINDU STAANI agents those have implanted by the present pro.... government.
 
I am sure given te same facility n further right training these "BONGO  SHARDUL" will raor as in the past n will force the BESTIAL SECURITY FORCE(bsf)  to chew their own balls as in the past.
 
Faruque Alamgir
On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Salahuddin Ayubi <s_ayubi786@yahoo.com> wrote:
Appeals or request will not help. Our BDR has to get into the act.
                        Ayubi

From: Md. Aminul Islam <aminul_islam_raj@yahoo.com>
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com; notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com; Bangla Zindabad <Bangladesh-Zindabad@yahoogroups.com>; Sonar Bangladesh <sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com>; bangla vision <bangla-vision@yahoogroups.com>; wideminds <WideMinds@yahoogroups.com>; vinnomot <vinnomot@yahoogroups.com>; Dhaka Mails <dhakamails@yahoogroups.com>; alochona <alochona@yahoogroups.com>; ayubi_s786@yahoo.com; faruquealamgir@gmail.com
Sent: Sun, November 15, 2009 10:51:37 AM
Subject: [notun_bangladesh] Stop killings by BSF, Khaleda asks

 

Newstaday on 15/11/09

Stop killings by BSF, Khaleda asks Rao


BNP chairperson and Leader of the Opposition Khaleda Zia Saturday said her party is committed to maintaining friendly relations with India but stressed resolving the unsettled issues between Bangladesh and the neighboring country through the ongoing consultation, reports UNB.
The former Prime Minister expressed concern over the killing of innocent and unarmed Bangladeshi people, including the recent killing of a baby, in the border areas by the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) troops.
She made the observations when the visiting Indian Foreign Secretary, Nirupama Rao, paid a courtesy call on the opposition leader at her Gulshan office.
After the meeting BNP chairperson' 's Foreign Affairs Adviser Shamsher Mobin Chowdhury told reporters that Begum Zia told the Indian emissary that decision over various outstanding issues would have to be taken in a win-win way so that both the countries get benefited.
In this regard, Khaleda said, "India as a big country and will have to come up with a broad mind. As a result, the friendly relations will further be enhanced."
Regarding the killings by BSF, Khaleda told the top India official that she hopes that the Indian government will take appropriate steps to stop such killings.
The former Prime Minister recalled her bilateral meeting with Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh in New Delhi in 2006 when she was Prime Minister. At the time, Begum Zia had apprised Dr Manmohan of Bangladesh'' s concern over India''s plan to construct Tipaimukh dam on the common river Borak. And she had also hoped that India would not take any step that harms Bangladesh'' s interests.
Begum Zia also mentioned her recent letter sent to the Indian premier over the Tipaimukh-dam issue and suggested carrying out technical assessment of the possible adverse impacts on Bangladesh.
Responding to Khaleda''s observations about the killings by BSF, the Indian Foreign Secretary was quoted as saying that "the Indian government always carries out investigation into the border incidents."
About Tipaimukh dam, Nirupama said Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh "would not do anything which goes against Bangladesh'' s interest".
On the wide trade gap between Bangladesh and India, the BNP chairperson told her that there is ample scope for import of goods by India from Bangladesh, which would help enhance the economy of Bangladesh as well as improve the bilateral ties.
Replying to a question Shamsher Mobin Chowdhury said, "The matter of transit was not discussed in the meeting."
The Leader of the Opposition, Khaleda Zia, conveyed greetings through the FS to the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, and ruling Congress party president Sonia Gandhi.
The meeting that lasted 45 minutes from 6:30 pm was held "in a friendly atmosphere", the reporters were told.
BNP secretary-general Khandaker Delwar Hossain and Indian High Commissioner in Dhaka Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty were also present at the meeting






__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___

RE: [khabor.com] FW: [Mukto-Mona] Re: General Zia was in the thick of 1975 killings in Dhaka



Dear sirs,

 

Assalamu Alaikum.General Zia did nothing on 15th Auguast. There is no proof.Even the case in which Bangladesh Supreme Court has given judgment , there is no mention of Zia,.As Maudud Ahmad has said the judgment shows that Zia had no role.

 

Zia saved the country from falling back to Awami League’s BAKSHAL rule, one party dictatorship and also re-asserted the Islamic identity of the nation.

 

No other nation or group other than Bangladesh Army was involved. All other things are just Awami propaganda.

 

Shah Abdul Hannan

 

-----Original Message-----
From: khabor@yahoogroups.com [mailto:khabor@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of kaljatri@emailme.net
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 1:02 AM
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [khabor.com] FW: [Mukto-Mona] Re: General Zia was in the thick of 1975 killings in Dhaka

 

 


WRT: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/52503

> The agents of Pakistan had already infiltrated into the army and
> started conspiring to kill the nascent democratic process brought
> on under the civilian political rule. The killers got support from
> the conspirator of all times named Gen. Ziaur Rahman.

  Pakistani agents infiltrated Baksali supported army in 1975 ??
  What a
  ridiculous claim. No scholarly article/book has ever made such a
  funny claim. The BD army in 1975 was very much a pro-Bangladeshi
  force who had played the leading role in the war of liberation
  against the Paki army. The officers who killed Mujib and toppled
  Baksali regime were all active freedom fighters with missionary
  zeal, unlike many AL leaders who were enjoying the sensuous
  pleasures in Kolkata the entire time during the liberation
  struggle). These army officers were all against Pakistani Gov. and
  supportive of liberation war. They staked their life for it. Why
  would they suddenly become Paki lovers in 1975? Doe it make sense?
  It makes sense for them to become anti Mujib/Baksal. They were not
  anti-AL even. They installed an AL gov. headed by Balist Moshtaque
  comprising majority of then then AL parliament members

  The reason they turned against Mujib and Baksal is manyfold. But
  none of those manyfold reasons had anything to do with
  infiltration by Pakistani elements. The manyfold reasons have all
  been well documented by many scholarly writings by professional
  journalists and intellectuals/historians. In a nutshell the reason
  were the rampant corruption by AL/Baksal, the undemocratic
  measures widely adopted by Mujib to silence/torture opposition and
  keep his power through using Rakkhi Bahini and other private
  armies (like Lal Bahini, Awami Shechchha Shebok Bahini etc). There
  was widespread public resentment against the Mujib regime from
  1974 onwards. So much so that ASM Rob could declare "Mujib, we
  will peel your skin and make shoes out of it" to the thunderous
  applause of hundreds of thousands attending his rally in Paltan.
  Adding fuel to fire was the insulting of some army officers by
  some AL hooligans and Mujib's siding with the hooligans. None of
  these had anything to do with Pakistani elements. As I said the
  army  majors who fought against Pakistan in 1971 had no reason to
  suddenly become Pakistan lovers in 1975. In fact majors Farook and
  Rashid were very much nationalists then as they were during 1971
  and totally opposed to the idea of reverting to one Pakistan. On
  page 87 of Anthony Mascarenhas' "Bangladesh: A legacy of Blood"
  Mascarenhas mentions that if Moshtaq had dared to unite BD with
  Pakistan (There were rumours to that effect at that time) then "he
  would have been immediately killed by Majors Farook and Rashid,
  both staunch nationalists"

  Zia was no Paki lover either, nor had any reason to be either. Zia
  mentioned to Mascarenhas that he had been 'extremely suspicious
  about Moshtaq hobnobbing with Pakistanis' (mentioned on page 88 of
  Legacy of Blood).

  The fact is they had every reason to become anti Mujib in 1975,
  not pro pakistan. Anti Mujib does not mean Pro-Pak, a simple logic
  that does not get through the skull of Awamists, just like
  criticising Islam does not mean being pro-Christian/pro-American/
  Pro-India, a logic that does not get through the thick skull of
  Islamists. In fact by diverting the blame to fictitious Pro-paki
  elements the Awamist try to deflect the attention away from their
  own misdeeds that led to the revolution and subsequent killing
  in 1975.

>"conspiring to kill the nascent democratic process brought on
> under the civilian political rule"
>

 ??? What a joke. It is pathetic how unabashedly one can make such a
  remark. It was Baksal who killed democracy. Does democracy mean
  installing a one party rule? Does democracy mean banning all
  newspapers except four that toes the official line? Does democracy
  mean raising private militia to suppress political opposition.
  Maybe thats what Awamists define as democracy. Just like the
  Islamists declare an Islamic state as the true form of democracy
  to them, the Awamists/Balists equate AL/Baksal rule as democracy.
  Any other option is undemocratic to Awamists just as it is to
  Islamists.

  "The killers got support from the conspirator of all times named
  Gen. Ziaur Rahman."??

  Another unsubstantiated claim by the Awamists. If by supporting
  means "not preventing the killing of Mujib" then not just Gen Zia,
  then the entire nation, including the majority of the then AL
  parliament members who joined the "killers" supported Mushtaq
  government can be said to have supported the killers. None did
  anything to protest/prevent the killing of Mujib. The ONLY person
  who laid down his life to protect Mujib was an army officer who
  was not even a freedom fighter, made no attempt to escape Pakistan
  in 1971 and was repatriated after independence. He was Colonel
  Jamil. He was just doing his duty as professional army offcier
  assigned to protect the presdient.

  Gen Zia did not do anything pro-active to support the killers nor
  did he do anything to stop them. But in no way did he offer
  support to the killers. In fact in Mascarenhas' Legacy of Blood on
  page 51 Mascarenhas mentions that Gen Zia was one among major
  Farook's hit list of army officers potentially offering resistance
  to their missions thus may have to be eliminated. Mascarenhas
  mentions on page 91 that Farook and Rashid had even considered
  arresting Zia along with Khaled Mosharraf.

  The responsibilty for stopping the majors from their mission lied
  not on Zia, but on Army Chief Gen Shafiullah, a veteran freedom
  fighter and AL's pick at that time. Even he must have felt so
  disgusted with AL/Baksal not to have risked going against the tide
  of Baksal Hotao operation. The entire events of 1975 had nothing
  to do with Pro-Pak or pro- anything. Most people who welcomed the
  elimination of Mujib were not pro-Pak, they were anti Mujib (Mujib
  as known b/w 1972-75). Many of them were Mujib lovers up until
  1973. There was no need or reason for Mujib killers to be Pro-Pak.
  Mujib had already offered Bhutto a red carpet reception, got
  Pakistan's recognition of BD, and wooed the Islamic countires for
  joining OIC, which he did. And Pakistan then was ruled by Bhutto's
  PPP party, Bhutto was an atheist and PPP was clearly soft towards
  socialist ideas. So what's there for the killers to be pro Pak
  unless they wer also very much an admirer of Bhutto, they
  obviously were not. The unpleasant bitter pill of truth that
  Awamists would not rather have people know is that there was
  exchanging of sweets after the news of Mujib's death. Majority
  were heaving a sigh of relief. A general sense of relief was felt
  among the mass. The only feeling of fear and uncertaintly that the
  Awamist is referring to was in fact a fear of reverting to status
  quo through some counter coup, or of a civil war between the
  supporters of AL and the new regime, which did not happen at all.
  The BAL/Baksal supporters simply had no moral courage to fight
  back knowing full well what kind of misdeeds they had committed
  between 1972-75 and the level of public resentment/disenchantment
  against them. There is no need to have been alive and witnessed it
  first hand to see that. If the valiant freedom fighters and the
  people fought against the Pak military and laid down 3 million (an
  exaggeration but touted by Awamists, even if it was hundreds of
  thousands still a huge sacrifice) then if the killing of Mujib was
  unpopular with the people and was actually committed by Pro-paki
  elements, then there would surely would have been a similar mass
  movement against it. If popular uprising could defeat a formidable
  and unified Pak army with all their military machine and numbers,
  such a mass movement surely could have defeated a handful of
  junior officers with six antiquated tanks (The bulk of the army
  navy air force were not even under the command of those four
  majors). That in itself proves the lack of popular outcry against
  the killing of Mujib and against the end of Baksal. It is the
  condoning and tacit support by the masses for which the 1975
  revolt and killing met with no resistance. Anyone with a
  common sense can put two and two together and come to that
  conclusion.

  It is ironic that this Awamist and many others shed crocodile
  tears for Col Taher for being hanged by Zia's military court. Do
  they shed tears for Siraj Sikdar when he was killed by simply
  shooting on his back at Mujib's behest, which later Mujib bragged
  about saying "Kothay aaj Siraj Sikdar?". Taher did the most
  unprofessional thing in the army and he received army punishment
  for that. It was not Zia who used Taher but the other way around.
  It was Taher and the red brigade of Jashod who used Zia's
  popularity in the army to accomplish their red revolution using
  Zia as the front man knowing full well that he (Taher) or the
  Jashod brigade would not command that level of respect or
  acceptibility because of their bloody agenda of mass slaughter of
  entire army officer corps and elite of the society eventually if
  successfull. Zia tactfully managed Taher in turn to save the army
  from such a massacre and anarchy, or stop the massacre from
  further spreading. It is more ironic that Awamists praise Taher
  when in fact Taher and Jashod symbolized anti Mujibism. They would
  also have killed Mujib had thay gotten the opportuine moment.
  (Remenember Rob's declaration of peeling Mujib's skin to make
  shoes out of?) In fact they did not condemn or protest killing of
  Mujib but considered it as the first dirty step done by others so
  they could proceed with their own bloody red scheme, exploiting
  Zia's popularity.

  The rest of the ramblings about Zia's role in August killing is
  the Awamists personal spin on the events in 1971. It shows lack of
  professionalism and objectivity. One can only hope to get the best
  picture of what happened in 1975 and beyond by reading
  professional articles and books, not spin stories by Awami
  bigots,leftist Jashod fanatics or the Islamists. History is
  merciless, it does not necessarily favour one side or the other or
  all.

  - Jamil Asgor




__._,_.___


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

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] Bangladesh/Failed/State

Debdas,
Everytime I read your rant I get the feeling that you have no clue
about BD or our culture.
Stick with what you understand.
-qar

-----Original Message-----
From: SAIF Davdas <islam1234@msn.com>
To: abid <abidbahar@yahoo.com>; abusayeeddr <abusayeedr@yahoo.com>;
afsarbhai <afsar_hossainbd@yahoo.com>; Aftab Kazmi
<aftab_kazmi@hotmail.com>; Ajmol ali <ajmol.ali@treas.state.nj.us>;
Alamgir <malamgir1@aol.com>; Alochana <alochona@yahoogroups.com>;
anis90 <anis90242@yahoo.com>; asghar <msa7011@yahoo.com>; Ashraf
<syguia@aol.com>; avijit <avijit_dev@yahoo.co.in>; baainews@yahoo.com
<baainews@yahoo.com>; banglanari <banglarnari@yahoogroups.com>;
celeti@aol.com <celeti@aol.com>; delwar <delwar98@hotmail.com>; Devdas
sarkar <dsarkar1@hotmail.com>; Farid <akhtergolam@gmail.com>; hannan
<sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>; himu.rozario@comcast.net; iftikhar
<hnhtex99@yahoo.com>; inara_islam@hotmail.com; Isah Khan
<bd_mailer@yahoo.com>; javed <javediqbalkaleem@yahoo.com>; jiban
<imrulalqays@gmail.com>; kamal <kamal4000@yahoo.com>; Khabor
<khabor@yahoogroups.com>; khurshid <mirza.syed@gmail.com>; lal
<lalhgehi@yahoo.com>; mmozumder <mmozumder@doeal.gov>; mramjam
<mramjan@hotmail.com>; Munir <captmunir@gmail.com>; Nizam
<nizam_moer@sky.com>; Nizam <nzh.biman@gmail.com>; onasis
<cdm@dhaka.net>; Rosy <roseplanet@gmail.com>; saifpacific@yahoo.com
<saifpacific@yahoo.com>; Shamim <veirsmill@yahoo.com>;
turkman@sbcglobal.net; ulfat <ukabir@hotmail.com>; wahed
<wahedb@gmail.com>; yousafzai <well.kaleem@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:39:07 -0500
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Bangladesh/Failed/State

 

The tone in the BNP/ Jamaat supported  media outlet coverage of
Bangladesh has increasingly become apocalyptic. Folks, armageddon is
just around the corner. Imam Mehdi is set to return on 12th of April,
2012 to save the Hizbullah faction of BNP from the inferno of their own
making. Talk about  'Desher Bhab-Murti' !! Chickens are  coming home to
roost. The culture of indemnity and impugnity promulgated by the
anti-liberation forces with the massacre of Bongobondhoo and his
family, is finally paying rich dividend. Bongobondhoo's cherished dream
of building the foundation of the nation on the basis of a secular
ideology, has gone up in the smokes.  The proliferation of the Islamic
extremism and fundamentalism has been well documented. It is tearing
the very fabric of the nation apart. Everybody in Bangladesh knows that
the new generation of Bangladeshi militants are more lethal than the
Naxalities in India. The slaves of Allah will go to any length to
impose the 'Nizam-e-Shari-e-Tay Muhammadee' on the nation by any means
necessary. Today eleven officers were removed from the Army—including
two generals for their involvement in the grenade attack on Awami law
maker barrister Taposh. Folks, what is going on here? What else can
describe this convoluted thinking? Imminent demise of Awami led
government is inevitable via another 1/11?  The nation must ask, why
the army officers are  getting involved in the politics of the country?
 If you look around, all the failed states are Muslim states—I ask you
to do some soul searching and some serious self-introspection. Muslim
states have to be propped up by loans to buy the guns from the
infidels---proppedup by money from Kafirlands--- proppedup by borrowing
secondary knowledge from the infidels? Folks let's face it-- it is the
poverty  that causes these states to become failed states. In our case,
we are not only physically and materially poor--but also spiritually
bankrupt. The UBL's ultimately dream is to see one failed state after
another so that he can  impose the will of  Allah to 'save' the mankind
from the world gone mad. I say, now is the time for Allah to show his
courage and generosity and shower his slaves with unearned income i.e.,
oil, gas, and gold---otherwise, they are destined to join the exclusive
fraternitiy of 'failed states'.  
SaifDevdas
islam1234@msn.com


Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign
up now.


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

[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.comYahoo! 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:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
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/

Re: [ALOCHONA] The Saudi-ization/ Radicalization of Islam in the US by Syed Nadeem Ahsan, MD

Dear Alochock,
Do you agree with this article?
I agree with part of it. This author is against some extream ideas and
I see his points. I failed to see what he stood for. Seems like he is
more interested in opposing than standing up for islam.
God gave us freedom to worship Him or to reject HIS faith. Muslims
supposed to follow Quran and Sunnah only. We are not supposed take clue
from Saudi or Canada.
Because fundamentals of Islam are sound. I see in some places this
"Syed" fellow is more focused on opposing than anything. Maybe this is
popular trend for clueless people but this is not Islam.
It seems major Hasan had issues with his lonely life and mistakenly
thought he was doing something noble. He violated direct order of the
noble Quran
(source- 5:32). You should not try to be better Christian than the
pope.
It is a sad situation. We should stand united against this senseless
killing.
This is not the time to blame islam for a frustrated man and poor army
managerment in Texas.
We should take opportunity to study authentic Islam and stand up for
humanity.
-QAR


-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Khundkar <rkhundkar@earthlink.net>
To: Alochona <alochona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:57:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [ALOCHONA] The Saudi-ization/ Radicalization of Islam in the
US by Syed Nadeem Ahsan, MD

 
Major Nidal Hasan and Us.Syed Nadeem Ahsan, MD  The Saudi-ization/
Radicalization of Islam in the US places America and Muslim-Americans
at grave risk. The cover of this week's Time magazine asks; "Is Fort
Hood an aberration or a sign of things to come?" A perfectly reasonable
question given that  a major driving force behind Major Hasan's
psychopathic rampage is his belief system, one that was acquired here
in the US at a mosque that is quite similar to the mosques you and I
might have been attending in our own towns.  Mosques where
indoctrination of Muslims into the ways of the Wahabi is on
going. Speaking at the memorial for the fallen soldiers at Fort  Hood,
President Obama told the crowd of mourners; "No faith justifies these
murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with
favor..." .  This is a silly half-truth at best and a craven,
patronizing lie at worst. But Obama means well when he defends Major
Hasan's god, even when everyone knows that the god of the Wahabis does
indeed encourage slaughter of the innocent.  You need to look no
further than the many thousands dead and dying in Pakistan for an
illustration. Major Hasan is merely the tip of a particularly sinister
iceberg, emblematic in both his bewilderment and actions, of the
worsening disarray that Muslims in the US are falling into.  This
crisis is by and large of the making of the mosques that have the
unique misfortune of being squarely in the clutches of obscurantist
Saudi-begotten mullahs that are often from parts of the world where
Muslims are forever being humiliated by the belligerence of the
Israelis, Israel's surrogate; US foreign policy, and their own
dictatorial governments, and who, through uncontested ownership of the
bully pulpit, are brow-beating hapless American-Muslims into
unquestioned acceptance of a particularly poisonous brand of faith; the
Wahabi-Arab Islam of the sort Major Hasan practices. In 2006, six men
attending the Palmyra mosque in New Jersey were arrested and
subsequently found guilty of planning an attack on US soldiers
stationed at Fort Dix in New Jersey.  Despite this, the leadership of
that mosque has failed to display any worthwhile contrition and has
steadfastly refused to change the tenor of the discourse at that
mosque. Similarly, the mosque in my hometown in New Jersey, built
mostly through the efforts of a Pakistani-American couple few years
ago, has over the last two years been taken over completely by
Saudiized radicals.  The Imam, a young Saudi-indoctrinated zealot takes
every opportunity to torment young children entrusted to his care with
ironclad guarantees of hell if they do such horrible things as go
trick-or-treating on Halloween or even celebrate their own birthdays! 
This man and his fellow guest Imams openly militate for good Muslims to
withdraw from the mainstream.  They demand that Muslims minimize their
interactions with the mushrikeen and follow the Imams' edicts sans
question.  The obscurantist, isolationist mindset they wish to
inculcate amongst American-Muslims is rapidly becoming the predominant
mindset, one that is an obstacle in the way of Muslims becoming fully
engaged citizens of this great nation, like the Jews or Hindus have
become, and one that will lead to the downfall of all Muslims in this
country as more Major Hasans launch suicide missions and fed up
Americans do all they can to restore order. In a recent article titled
"The Saudiisation of Pakistan", Pakistani academic/commentator Pervez
Hoodbhoy wrote: For three decades, deep tectonic forces have been
silently tearing Pakistan away from the Indian subcontinent and driving
it towards the Arabian peninsula. This continental drift is not
physical but cultural, driven by a belief that Pakistan must exchange
its South Asian identity for an Arab-Muslim one. Grain by grain, the
desert sands of Saudi Arabia are replacing the rich soil that had
nurtured a magnificent Muslim culture in India for a thousand years.
This culture produced Mughul architecture, the Taj Mahal, the poetry of
Asadullah Khan Ghalib, and much more. Now a stern, unyielding version
of Islam (Wahhabism) is replacing the kinder, gentler Islam of the
Sufis and saints who had walked on this land for hundreds of years.  A
picture very similar to this is emerging in the US as well, creating
such monstrosities as the 9/11 hijackers (15 out 19 of whom were
Saudis!), Major Hasan and further oppression of Muslim women.  The
Saudi-isation of a once-vibrant Pakistani-American culture too
continues at a relentless pace. Social events are becoming increasingly
segregated and Wahabi proselytizers can be found in numbers even at
completely secular community events such as Pakistan Day
celebrations. Islam's last remaining hope was the Muslims of the West. 
But this hope too is being extinguished by the Saudi-Wahabis that have
completely taken over American mosques -- and more tragically, American
Sunday schools, where little minds are being filled with the kind of
fanaticism that leads to the sort of behaviour Major Hasan exhibited. 
The odds are stacked against those that wish to rescue Muslim
communities from this scourge.  The Saudi-Wahabis are too resourceful
and way too entrenched already for the rescuers to be able to mount a
meaningful revival. Muslims are becoming more marginalized each day and
Muslim children are in increasing danger of being ostracized by the
mainstream. The crisis for Muslim-Americans is compounded by the fact
that their leadership remains in the hands of such  groups as the
Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which supports the Saudi
regime, and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), which is
composed of members of Jamaat e-Islami, a Pakistani fundamentalist
organization that helped to establish the Taliban.  These organizations
are taking advantage of the fact that Americans don't like to interfere
in the religion of other people. But the reality is that Saudi Islam
isn't a religion, it's a politicized radical ideology. And the people
who are being taught this ideology are prime targets for recruitment by
terror organizations.  And the true moderates in the American-Muslim
community are continually losing ground and being made to retreat
further and further from their non-Salafi Sufi/Barelvi antecedents; the
Islam of co-existence and the Islam of being an active part of the
mainstream.  A small ray of hope would appear to be such movements as
the Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC), founded by Tarek Fatah, a
Pakistani-Canadian journalist and the Washington DC-based Center for
Islamic Pluralism (CIP).  Both organizations are looking to counter
Wahabi madness through a belief in a progressive, liberal, pluralistic,
democratic, and secular society where everyone has the freedom of
religion.  It goes without saying that that fanaticism and extremism
within the Muslim community is a major challenge to all of us. We must
stand opposed to the extremists and must present the more humane and
tolerant face of our community to our fellow-countrymen and to the rest
of the Islamic world.  Because if things keep going in the current
direction, all of us, conservative-Muslims, liberal-Muslims,
secular-Muslims, cultural-Muslims, we will all be buried together under
the deluge of American outrage. And we all know our children deserve
better. ------------ --------- ----- The author is an academic
physician working in Philadelphia, PA, and can be reached at
dervaishbaba@hotmail.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.comYahoo! 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:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
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/