Banner Advertiser

Thursday, August 26, 2010

RE: [ALOCHONA] Jesus....the facts




Bible scholar Wilbur Smith remarked about Jesus:

"When he said that He himself would rise again from the dead, the third day after He was crucified, He said something that only a fool would dare say, if He expected longer the devotion of any disciples—unless He was sure He was going to rise. No founder of any world religion known to men ever dared say a thing like that.8

In other words, since Jesus had clearly told his disciples that he would rise again after his death, failure to keep that promise would expose him as a fraud. But we're getting ahead of ourselves. How did Jesus die before he (if he did) rose again?




http://www.y-jesus.com/body_count2.php









__._,_.___


[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] 72% of the youth are apathetic to politics



Survey on the youth of today and their thoughts

72% of the youth are apathetic to politics

PROBE News Magazine recently ran a survey on what the younger generation is thinking about, particularly where politics is concerned. A random survey was run on 100 young persons comprising students of public and private universities as well as young professionals. The respondents were of the 15 to 30-year-old age group, 66 being male and 34 female. Among them, 57 were university students, 31 school and college students and 12 young professionals. Of the university students, eleven were of Dhaka University, 17 of BUET and 29 of various private universities.

The first question was, which topic featured the most in their discussions or adda? 25% of the respondents said studies, 30% said Internet, 20% said computers, 5% said mobiles phones, 2% said fashion, 2% said relationships, 1% said films and 10% said careers.

About politics, 45 of the respondents say they do discuss politics but this does not take up more than 5% of their conversation. The other 55 say they do not discuss politics at all. Among those who discuss politics, 60% of their political discussion is on national politics, 30% on student politics and 10% on international politics.

Interestingly, almost all of the respondents said they did not worry their heads over the escalating price of essentials.

The second question asked them to evaluate the present state of politics in the country. In reply, 28 said it was positive and 72 said it was negative.

As to their knowledge pertaining to the history of Bangladesh, 25 said they had a good concept of history, four said they didn't have a good concept of history and 71 said they had an average idea of history. A total of 63 of the respondents could correctly give the date of birth of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as March 17, 1920; then 25 said 17 March 1921; six said 27 March 1920; and six said they did not know. As for the date of Ziaur Rahman's death, 48 correctly said 30 May 1981; three said 31 May 1982; 10 said 31 May 1982; and three said they did not know.

How many times has Sheikh Hasina been Prime Minister, including this time? 72 correctly said twice, 23 said thrice, five said four times. How many times has Khaleda Zia been Prime Minister? 62 correctly answered thrice, 36 answered twice and two answered once.

Asked whether the national flag of Bangladesh had changed since the independence of the country, 67 correctly answered yes and 33 answered in the negative.

They were asked to identify the national leaders among General Moeen U Ahmed, Moulana Bhasani, AK Fazlul Huq, Tajuddin Ahmed, Kaiser Hamid and Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy. A total of 82 named Moulana Bhasani, 79 AK Fazlul Huq, 83 Tajuddin, 77 Suhrawardy, five Moeen U Ahmed and four Kaiser Hamid.As to where they wanted to settle permanently in the future, at home or abroad, 67 said they wanted to settle in Bangladesh and 33 said abroad.

Apathy to Politics

Today's youth are tomorrow's leaders, but prevailing circumstances can present a rather bleak picture in this regard. The younger generation, that is those under 30 years of age, display a decided apathy towards politics. There is a growing and distinct disinterest in politics among the young. Politics hardly ever features in their daily discussions and adda. In general their conversations veer towards studies, the Internet, computers, mobiles, facebook, relationships, the opposite sex and so on.

"We talk about higher studies, about going abroad and things like that," says Lamiya Jabbar, a law student of a private institution in Dhaka, "We are not very interested in politics."

Why the disinterest in politics? To find this out, PROBE recently ran a survey among young persons, both students and professionals. With exceptions, there was a general negative attitude towards politics. Most of the respondents expressed their frustration and disillusionment with politics and politicians. In fact, 72% of the young people who came under the survey, spoke negatively regarding politics.

These representatives of the younger generation expressed deep love for the country. However, even those among the meritorious students, had a sketchy knowledge of Bangladesh's history.

Very few could give exact dates of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's birth or Ziaur Rahman's death. Not many could say how many times Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia had each been Prime Minister of Bangladesh. Some said Khaleda Zia had been Prime Minister only once, some said Sheikh Hasina had been Prime Minister four times! They were hazy about who the national leaders were. Some seemed to be hearing the names of Moulana Bhasani, Tajuddin Ahmed, Sher-e-Bangla AK Fazlul Huq and Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy for the first time in their lives. Some even contended that former footballer Kaiser Hamid and former Army Chief Moeen U Ahmed were among the national leaders.

Again, 33% of the respondents did not know that the present national flag was the second version of the flag and originally it had the map of the country in the centre.

The younger people who did display interest in politics were of two groups. One was from the public educational institutions like Dhaka University, BUET, Dhaka College, etc. The other group was of the more affluent class who had political inclinations through family ties. But in general, students of the private universities and young professionals did not have interest in politics.

Again, as for those who had interest in politics, the reasons were varied. Among those in the public universities and colleges, the political involvement in many cases was motivated by convenience. Unless one was affiliated to one party or the other, it was hard to get rooms in the halls and other facilities. There was also a matter of power, as student politics is tied up with toll collection, extortion, muscle on the campus and so on. So this involvement in politics is more a nexus of crime and corruption rather than of any ideological base.

As for the affluent class, these young people are often the offspring of ministers and MPs and have seen the perks of power. They aspire to reach those pinnacles of power, ostensibly to be at the helm of affairs in the country, and also because politics means power. It is also a conduit to business. As they say, "It is not what you know, but who you know that counts." So they want to make sure that they not only know the right people in the right places, but that they are the right people in the right places.

"I do aspire to enter politics and have even started visiting my dad's constituency regularly. I want to do something for the people," says the son of an MP, opting for anonymity. Similarly, the daughter of an MP, also on anonymity, says, "Unless educated young people like us enter politics, how can we expect anything in the future for Bangladesh? I will certainly join politics and make a change." Both of these young people, incidentally, are involved in their fathers' businesses.

As for the general negative attitude towards politics, there were a few common reasons behind this. The young people felt that politicians simply served their own interests, were corrupt, were unethical and did not look to the welfare of the people. They did not keep their commitments and had not an iota of patriotism.

A student of Dhaka College Nayeemul Islam says, "Politics is a matter of business now and the main aim of entering politics is to make money." Dhaka University student Amanullah says, "People who we do not consider to be students even, such terrorists, are the ones involved in politics on campus. We are not going to follow them." Bangla College student Shoabiur Rahman says, "These kids enter politics and meet their death. Some are flung off the roof, others are thrown into manholes or simply shot dead. So we have no compunction about staying away from politics."

Interestingly, while there has been a steady exodus of young people from the country for higher studies and immigration, 63% of these respondents say they want to settle permanently in the homeland. But 33% percent say there is no future here so they want to settle abroad.

Concerning the apathy of the young people towards politics, Workers Party President Rashed Khan Menon tells PROBE, "The problem is that they have no role model to follow. Instead of role models there are criminals, terrorists, extortionists and hoodlums. At the root of this is the corruption and failure of the politicians."

Former VP of DUCSU Mahmudur Rahman Manna says, "Politics hasn't been what it should have been and things have got worse. People have lost interest in politics. The DUCSU elections and student union elections of other universities haven't been held for a long time and so things have come to a standstill. Fresh leadership is not evolving."

Loss of faith

Economics Professor of Jahangirnagar University Anu Muhammed does not agree that the younger generation is against politics, nor does he think they are moving away from politics due to an uncertain future. He says, "The younger generation does not accept the politics which they see before them. They see no justification in wasting time behind such politics. But that does not mean their spirit has been crushed. They have taken part in movements over the recent years. So it is not a disinterest in politics, it is a loss of faith in the prevalent politics."

Then there are those whose entire focus is how to get out of the country and settle abroad. "This is shameful for the nation," says Anu Muhammed, "It is all right to go abroad, but to be compelled to go abroad out of a feeling of uncertainty back home, that is a shame. This is the failure of the politicians."

Some feel it is the responsibility of the politicians to wean the younger generation to politics, but that again is where uncertainty enters. Mahmudur Rahman Manna says, "The political parties and political leaders are totally engrossed with themselves. How will they groom up a younger generation of political leaders?"

What else?

So where does the interest of the younger generation lie? They talk over their mobiles, they talk about their mobiles. They discuss the latest innovations in communication, SMS, MMS, facebook, Twitter, online chatting and so on.

When it comes to international affairs, they mostly discuss the Iraq war and Afghanistan.

Then there is the matter of studies, higher education and so on.

"We discuss all sorts of things," says Lamiya Jabbar, "mostly about our future and then random topics naturally crop up – we were even discussing Free Masons just the other day!"

Analysing the trends and preoccupations of the youth, questions loom large on the political future of the country. Who will be the future leaders of the country? The demographic in this context has undergone a radical change. In the past it was the ideological meritorious students who came up to political leadership or in the government mechanism. They were the socio-political and cultural representatives of the country. But who will the mantle of politics fall upon now?

There is the South Asian propensity for dynastic politics and the sons and daughters of prominent political leaders are waiting in the wings. And most of these leaders are businessmen-turned-politicians, not of the old school ideological ilk. Then again there are the machete-wielding wild-eyed hoodlums on campus. They are the present-day political representatives. Is this where our future lies?

A random survey was run on 100 young persons comprising students of public and private universities as well as young professionals. The respondents were of the 15 to 30-year-old age group, 66 being male and 34 female. Among them, 57 were university students, 31 school and college students and 12 young professionals. Of the university students, eleven were of Dhaka University, 17 of BUET and 29 of various private universities.

The first question was, which topic featured the most in their discussions or adda? 25% of the respondents said studies, 30% said Internet, 20% said computers, 5% said mobiles phones, 2% said fashion, 2% said relationships, 1% said films and 10% said careers.

About politics, 45 of the respondents say they do discuss politics but this does not take up more than 5% of their conversation. The other 55 say they do not discuss politics at all. Among those who discuss politics, 60% of their political discussion is on national politics, 30% on student politics and 10% on international politics.

Interestingly, almost all of the respondents said they did not worry their heads over the escalating price of essentials.

The second question asked them to evaluate the present state of politics in the country. In reply, 28 said it was positive and 72 said it was negative.

As to their knowledge pertaining to the history of Bangladesh, 25 said they had a good concept of history, four said they didn't have a good concept of history and 71 said they had an average idea of history. A total of 63 of the respondents could correctly give the date of birth of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as March 17, 1920; then 25 said 17 March 1921; six said 27 March 1920; and six said they did not know. As for the date of Ziaur Rahman's death, 48 correctly said 30 May 1981; three said 31 May 1982; 10 said 31 May 1982; and three said they did not know.

How many times has Sheikh Hasina been Prime Minister, including this time? 72 correctly said twice, 23 said thrice, five said four times. How many times has Khaleda Zia been Prime Minister? 62 correctly answered thrice, 36 answered twice and two answered once.

Asked whether the national flag of Bangladesh had changed since the independence of the country, 67 correctly answered yes and 33 answered in the negative.

They were asked to identify the national leaders among General Moeen U Ahmed, Moulana Bhasani, AK Fazlul Huq, Tajuddin Ahmed, Kaiser Hamid and Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy. A total of 82 named Moulana Bhasani, 79 AK Fazlul Huq, 83 Tajuddin, 77 Suhrawardy, five Moeen U Ahmed and four Kaiser Hamid.As to where they wanted to settle permanently in the future, at home or abroad, 67 said they wanted to settle in Bangladesh and 33 said abroad.

Villains are in leadership rather than heroes - Sirajul Islam Chowdhury, Emeritus Professor, Dhaka University

The failure of the politicians is the main cause of disinterest in politics among the younger generation. The post-independence politicians could not offer the youth any ideology. They have been too busy amassing wealth for themselves.

The political leaders have used the youth for their own interests. They have split the younger generation into two, with Awami League on one side and BNP on the other. So whichever party comes to power, their followers dominate on the campuses, in the halls, in business and so on. The present politicians have taught the younger generation how to loot, extort, to make money from admissions and all sorts of crime and corruption. The general students shy away from this. Such politics does not attract them.

Then there is a global emergence of capitalism which teaches the individual to amass wealth and to secure a future for himself or herself. This has become the ideal for the youth of today. They cannot think outside of this. As a result, there is a lack of unity needed for movement, for political consciousness and social awareness.

The universities are also responsible for the present state of affairs. Villains are taking leadership in student politics rather than heroes. Why should the younger generation accept this?

 


__._,_.___


[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] Mossad in America



Mossad in America
 
Israeli intelligence steps up its activity in the U.S. — and gets away with it.



__._,_.___


[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] State power: He grabbed it all




The then chief of army staff, HM Ershad, seized state power overthrowing president Abdus Sattar in a military coup and imposed martial law on March 24, 1982.

Ershad declared himself the chief martial law administrator (CMLA), suspended the constitution -- the supreme law of the land, dissolved the then parliament and the council of ministers appointed by Sattar.

He proclaimed himself commander-in-chief of the armed forces -- a constitutional position always held by an elected president.

The general, who repeatedly pledged allegiance to the constitution soon after the assassination of president Ziaur Rahman, captured power by violating the country's supreme charter and military laws.

On March 24 afternoon, president Sattar, who tried hard to resist the army's ascendancy in the civil administration, was forced to recognise the extra-constitutional takeover and wish them success in an address to the nation.

Sattar, who was elected president on November 15, 1981, left Bangabhaban after the speech clearing the way for the usurpers to consolidate total authority over the executive and the legislature.

CMLA Ershad announced that the martial law regulations, orders and instructions to be made by him would be the country's supreme law and sections of other laws inconsistent with them would be void.

The martial law proclamation became the source of laws. CMLA Ershad started making laws at his will through martial law regulations, orders and ordinances to rule Bangladesh.

In April the same year, Ershad amended the March 24 proclamation and made a regulation, dubbed as mini-constitution, detailing the procedure to rule the country.

Enforcement of the mini-constitution was subject to the martial law proclamation and regulations.

He took nearly two years to set his eye on the office of the president that he had already made subservient to the CMLA.

He had installed Justice Abul Fazal Mohammad Ahsanuddin Choudhury as the president on 27 March 1982.

Ahsanuddin did not have any authority as the martial law proclamation categorically said the president would not exercise any power or perform any function without advice and approval of the CMLA.

Ershad vested the executive power in the CMLA through a regulation on April 11, 1982, paving the way for him to exercise power either directly or through people authorised by him.

The order vested legislative powers in the CMLA. He took the authority to revive the constitution fully or partially. Its enforcement was subject to the martial law proclamation, regulations and orders made by the CMLA.

The general was not satisfied enough with the power and office he had already held. He forced president Ahsanuddin to resign on December 11, 1983 and assumed the office of the president the same day in addition of the post of CMLA.

There was no oath-taking ceremony. Ershad offered a special munajat at Bangabhaban after assuming the office of president. He however administered oath of office to the members of the council of ministers.

They all took oath in the name of Allah to perform duties in line with the March 24 proclamation. Tenure of membership of the council of ministers would depend on the president's wish.

Ershad amended the martial law regulation empowering the president to promulgate ordinances on any matter. An ordinance would have the same effect of a law as an act of parliament.

HOW HE RAN ADMINISTRATION
Before capturing power, Ershad had openly demanded a special role of the army in the civil administration within a democratic constitutional framework.

On November 28, 1981 the day after Sattar had formed a 42-member council of ministers, Ershad sent a statement from the Dhaka army headquarters to editors of national dailies and news agencies to make clear the armed forces' view on the civil administration.

He stated that there must be constitutional provisions to specify military's role in the society. He suggested placing this matter before a presidential committee for in-depth study.

Many politicians and social scientists outright rejected Ershad's proposal that called for changing the constitution's basic structure to incorporate a political role for the military.

President Sattar was reluctant to proceed with the army chief's proposal.

Ershad divided the country into five zones to enforce martial law after seizing power.

He appointed military officials as deputy chief martial law administrators, zonal martial law administrators, sub-zonal martial law administrators, and district martial law administrators to rule the country.

He regulated posting and transfer of the military officials engaged in the civil administration by issuing martial law regulations from time to time.

Military personnel were given civil posts while civil servants at all levels became accountable to them. Committees and martial law teams were formed at several levels to probe the affairs of civil agencies and institutions to keep them under control.

STATE OF JUDICIARY
The Supreme Court ceased to derive any power from the constitution that was suspended following the March 24 proclamation.

People's fundamental rights were suspended. They were not allowed to go to the court seeking remedy against violation of any right.

Through an amendment to the martial law proclamation, Ershad seized the power to make appointments to constitutional posts of the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court, the chief election commissioner and Commission members, comptroller and auditor general, the chairman and members of the Public Service Commission.

A person appointed to any constitutional post would have to take oath to perform duties with honesty in accordance with the March 24 martial law proclamation.

In January every year, the Supreme Court was to submit an annual statement to the CMLA giving the number of cases instituted or filed and disposed of by its all divisions in the preceding year.

The CMLA held the authority to remove the chief justice on grounds of incapability to function.

The martial law tribunals constituted to hold trials of various offences became superior to other courts.

According to the martial law regulations, the law declared by the Appellate Division would have bindings on the High Court Division while the law declared by either division would have bindings on all courts, other than martial law tribunals.

QUEST FOR LEGITIMACY
Ershad, who overthrew an elected government and suspended the constitution, finally tried to give legitimacy to his regime.

The regime held a public referendum on March 21, 1985. It claimed Ershad obtained 94.14 percent "yes votes" in favour of his rule in the referendum with a voter turnout of 72 percent.

Ershad endeavoured to proceed with his scheme of holding a presidential election.

But the Awami League-led eight party alliance, the BNP-backed seven party alliance and the left-leaning five party alliance forced Ershad to go for a third Jatiya Sangsad election before the presidential election.

The third parliamentary election was held on May 7, 1986 and the government sponsored Jatiya Party won majority in the poll widely criticised for electoral irregularities.

In August 1986, Ershad stepped down as chief of army staff and joined the Jatiya Party formally.

Ershad contested the presidential election as JP candidate in October, 1986. He emerged victorious from the poll boycotted by all major political parties.

INDEMNITY
Ershad summoned the second session of the third parliament on November 10, 1986 after being elected president. He started reviving the constitution in phases from 1985 exercising his power as CMLA.

The total revival of the constitution came on November 10, 1986 when martial law was withdrawn by a proclamation. Parliament passed the constitution's seventh amendment act, ratifying the March 24 proclamation and validating all orders and actions made under the proclamations, regulations and orders.

The amendment also precluded the court's jurisdiction from reviewing any action of the military regime.
 
 
 


__._,_.___


[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: [ALOCHONA] Fwd: Chinese Special Forces cut off Siliguri corridor: 2012



Indian Defence Review is the mirror image of Pakistan's Defence Journal. Both are run by the hawks and defense professional of each side to justify defense expenditures and security industry. This is just scare mongering to justify arms procurement. If China were to invade India or vice versa it would trigger a near world war. It would mean the total destruction of their long term goals and their desires to regain their position in the world which they lost in the 17th century.

 

This is a blatent attempt by the arch-communalist Zoglul to incite unnecessary division, paranoia and scare mongering. I hope sensible readers will keep that in mind when reading the Zoglul's posts.

 




 

-----Original Message-----
From: Isha Khan
Sent: Aug 22, 2010 10:18 PM
To: Undisclosed recipients@null, null@null, sentto-1111040-17490-1282803124-rkhundkar00=gsm.uci.edu@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Fwd: Chinese Special Forces cut off Siliguri corridor: 2012

 

------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Zoglul Husain
Ref: Chinese Special Forces cut off Siliguri corridor: 2012 
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/2010/07/chinese-special-forces-cut-off-siliguri-corridor-2012.html
 
Comment by Zoglul Husain
 
London 22 August 2010. Referring to the above article from Indian Defence Review Vol 25.2 Apr-Jun 2010. It is an important article to read. It reveals one of India's game plans for a war in 2012 against what it calls the China-Pakistan axis. It has great implications for Bangladesh too. 

It depicts the scenario that in 2011 the West would leave Afghanistan, and then Pakistan would establish control over Afghanistan, and a Sino-Pak sabotage within India will follow in 2012 with the aim of dismembering India. It would be in 2012, as, according to the analysis, after that year Pakistan may not exist as a state. India, as a habit, always vilifies China and Pakistan and glorifies itself. According to India, the states Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka are failed or failing states and so, according to them, India should rescue these states with the help of the West and India would do that out of magnanimity! India in reality is neither democratic, nor secular, nor socialist, as claimed by their constitution. Indeed, about 70% of Indian population are untouchables (Dalits) and semi-untouchables (Semi-Dalits), while majority of Muslims in there are very poor and are treated as semi-Dalits.   
 
However, the Indian defence review is suggesting that, in the above scenario, it would be likely that China would  "para-drop a division of its Special Forces inside the Siliguri Corridor (Chicken's neck) to sever the Northeast"In the event, India may use Nuke first and also may try to block Chinese ships in the Indian ocean. It has not analysed what China and Pakistan would do then, or before then.
 
Nor have they mentioned that it is because of the vulnerability of the Siliguri corridor that India has offered Bangladesh $1 bn loan to build road and rail transit corridor through Bangladesh. One of the conditions of carrying Indian cargos is that whenever Indian cargo would be carried on Bangladesh roads, no Bangladeshi vehicles would be allowed on those roads.    

 

We need to analyse this transit-corridor project. As, according to reports, India is frantically preparing for war in two fronts against China and Pakistan, it is going to use the transit-corridor, road-links and train-links, for military transport and general military purposes, as their Siliguri corridor is very vulnerable. This means, India will establish territorial control over Bangladesh in their military preparation against two fronts, China and Pakistan, and also in their internal conflicts with the ULFA freedom fighters and the Maoists. 

 

Mujib conceded to them river transit, Moeen U conceded air transit and Hasina conceded transit through road, rail, sea-ports, river-port, connectivity etc., which are programmed to be implemented soon. According to Hasina's plan, our soil and our govt support would be used in favour of India and against China, Pakistan, Nepal, Tibet, Sikkim, Bhutan, ULFA freedom fighters, Maoists, etc. It would also mean that we would lose our independence and sovereignty to India. We must, therefore, oppose the transit-corridor project of $1 bn. There must be demos etc. on the proposed routes. People must build barricades and develop political resistance to stop the project. We must politically fight for the annulment of Hasina's agreements with India. All patriots across the spectrum must unite and build political resistance. 

 
Writer: Zoglul Husain
Email: zoglul@hotmail.co.uk

Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:06:58 +0600
Subject: Chinese Special Forces cut off Siliguri corridor: 2012
From: bdmailer@gmail.com


Chinese Special Forces cut off Siliguri corridor: 2012
 
India has the potential to be to Asia, what America is to the world – a symbol of hope, liberty and freedom.
 
Closed societies like China or Pakistan do not fit the bill. Due to authoritarian regimes in Beijing and Islamabad, in times to come they will remain preoccupied with growing internal societal turmoil. Therefore, they will naturally tend to threaten democratic India, militarily and with the help of their irregular forces to divert attention from the brewing internal storm. Particularly true, as on one hand, the Indian democracy negates their authoritarian philosophy, and on the other, the Union is perceived as a soft target to be conquered or cause rupture.
 
But technology driven 21st century cannot be China's century in Asia as is being touted by its proxy Pakistan or the Chinese themselves. Simply as these are very brittle, regressive and perpetually paranoid societies that cannot sustain such enlarged influence as they get into an over reach. While the People's Liberation Army, the largest in the world consists of 3.5 million soldiers to project power; Beijing employs whopping twenty-one million to police the dissent internally!
 
Military threat from such dictatorial regimes will increase to free societies as the western democracies retreat from Asia. There already exists a severe trust deficit between China and the small countries in the region.
 
Possibly India is the only country in Asia that boasts of the potential to occupy the strategic high ground gradually being vacated by the retreating western forces, provided it develops offensive orientation at the political level. Unlike China, its soft power increasingly impacts on Asia. The young demographic profile will continue to propel Indian economy to greater heights at least till end of the year 2050. China's ageing profile shows trends that it will, first grow old then rich, unlike Japan, which grew rich then old. India if governed fairly well, will grow rich and then old like Japan.
 
India's multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-religious society is the melting pot in Asia that benefits from rich diversity and open society. However, it is not as fortunate to be situated geographically in a safe haven like America, which is surrounded by nations with similar values.
 
THE HISTORICAL THREAT
 
Historically, the direction of demographic flow for centuries saw invasions from Central Asia to capture Delhi. Every fifty to hundred years, the subcontinent due to the genius of natives tends to generate wealth. From time immemorial this attracted hordes of invaders from Central Asia. Delhi Durbar was unable to defend itself as it neglected its military. Time and again, the rulers in Delhi were subjugated, as their incompetence in wielding the military was pathological.
 
  map
Once again India is generating vast wealth. Once again it refuses to defend it!
Despite historical lessons of defeat at the hands of marauding armies, Delhi Durbar's incompetence and ignorance in equipping the excellent military machine inherited from the British is again on display. Today the danger of disruption to the Union is much higher than in the previous centuries. Worse, the lack of offensive orientation in political thinking degrades the ability of the military to defend the Union from the extraordinary threat developing on its borders.
The level of danger continues to creep north from "orange" to "red" on our land borders primarily on two counts. First, as a deception plan Pakistan on its birth, professed to be secular, while in reality the leaders wanted a purely Islamic state. As a result the minority Hindu population of more than thirteen percent in a population of 76 million in 1947 got reduced to barely two percent even as the population of Pakistan increased in 2004 to 156 million. After refusing to share power with the Bengalis in the East and breaking up their country, the Pakistani Sunnis not satisfied with this calibrated purge, now want to eliminate the Shias and expel the Ahmadiyas from Islam.
In its devious journey towards fundamentalist Islam, it also wants to lock the women folk inside their homes under Taliban diktat, thus negating fifty percent of its population. This dangerous religious philosophy based on extreme form of imported Wahabi Islam is intolerant of worldview of others, wields nuclear weapons, nurtures a Talibanised army that runs a large irregular guerrilla force solely motivated by Islamic fundamentalism, and partners China. The ideology of Pakistan is in direct confrontation with the values cherished by India.
Worse, Pakistan's financial bankruptcy exacerbates the internal instability. This in turn provides cheap human resource, to be used as cannon fodder, by the Jihad Factory run by the ISI. One feeds on the other. Islamic fundamentalism occupies Pakistan's political space that in turn negates Indian influence, which wisely extended up to Afghanistan during British rule. It was the British Indian Army that kept a check on the repeat of a history of invasions from Central Asia.
Ironically, instead of consolidating and integrating Kashmir, pacifist New Delhi is permitting the birth of a similar pocket of influence with extreme philosophy in the valley that will come back to haunt India in the near future.

THE THREAT FROM NORTH

Second, to add to the woes of New Delhi, a bigger threat in addition to the existing one is posed by communist China. While too much 'god' motivates Pakistan, China pretends to be a 'godless' state. Unlike nations that boast of an army, in Pakistan the army owns the state. On the other hand, in China the People's Liberation Army is loyal to the Chinese Communist Party and not the state. Dissent in both is a 'no-no' in varying degrees. Both, Pakistan and China, unlike India are paranoid about open societies. Thus, Beijing and Islamabad share commonality of purpose and together direct their energies to upstage India in international forums, on the borders and by fomenting internal dissent. In a unique 'jointmanship,' Islamabad clandestinely transfers sensitive defence technology it receives from the west to Beijing on 'barter basis' as there is ban on transfer to China!
The concurrent rise of China and India pits them against each other, as they compete for the same resources, but one with an authoritarian regime that is scared of Dalai Lama and Google, and the other with a free society that revels in religion, Dalai Lama and Google.
Threat from China was evident from its maps in 1946. Mao with the help of these maps described Tibet as the palm of a hand with its five fingers – Ladakh, Sikkim, Nepal, Bhutan and NEFA as Chinese territories that needed to be liberated. Tibet was liberated by force while New Delhi slept. Nepal found India's refusal to defend Tibet as a sign of an unreliable ally and thought it prudent to open communications with Beijing.
Today India stands encircled by China.

THE THREAT PERCEPTION

To be supreme in Asia, and impelled by the necessity to divert the attention from the growing internal turmoil, Beijing is likely to design a limited but visible military victory in a joint strategy with Islamabad. Pakistan under severe threat of fragmentation would be more than a willing ally.
With Afghanistan being abandoned by the West, beginning July 2011, Islamabad will craft a strategy to take over Kabul with the help of Islamic fundamentalist groups. The irony is that in the aftermath of the exit of the West; Taliban will occupy the Parliament being built by India in Kabul and connive disruption from there of the Indian Union. These groups will not target the West immediately since the latter retains the ability to re-intervene once inaction is deemed as 'suicidal'. The Taliban will initially concentrate on unraveling a soft target like India in concert with Beijing -Islamabad -Kabul or Chinese Communists- Pakistan Army- Irregular Forces axis.
The physical threat to India will materialize in 2012, after the exit of the American forces from Afghanistan. Earlier India had to contend with a single threat from its West/Central Asia. Now another threat posed from the North under a joint strategy between China and Pakistan has emerged.
The developing scenario suggests that henceforth GHQ Rawalpindi will further orchestrate provocation against India to regain lost ground in J&K by way of rallies in PoK or Lahore and through military machinations on our borders. It will provide fillip to terrorist attacks, export of fake currency, inserting terrorists in India through Nepal, activation of sleeper cells, and raising controversy on non-issues like water. Beijing while talking ambiguously up to 2012 buildup will continue to support the Maoists in Nepal and step up training and funding to Maoist in India. The intensity of Cyber War will meanwhile increase.
In nutshell, the objective will be to keep India off balance.

THE STRATEGY

By 2012, to unravel India, Beijing is likely to para-drop a division of its Special Forces inside the Siliguri Corridor to sever the Northeast. There will be simultaneous attacks in other parts of the border and linkup with the Special Forces holding the Siliguri Corridor will be effected. All these will take place under the nuclear overhang. In concert Islamabad will activate the second front to unhook Kashmir by making offensive moves across the IB in the plains and the desert to divide Indian reaction capability. Meanwhile the fifth columnists supporting these external forces will unleash mayhem inside.
Two key question for New Delhi:
  1. Will India go nuclear if its territorial integrity is threatened? France's stated policy is that it will use the nuclear option, if Germany is attacked. Germany is not likely to face a nuclear adversary, yet France will use nuclear option if it is attacked. India faces threat from two nuclear powers in its vicinity. Will India shift its stated position of second strike to first strike, if the territorial integrity of the Union is under threat?
  2. Will New Delhi have the gumption to order the Navy to retaliate and stop the flow of cargo in the Indian Ocean being freighted to China? Or will it order the Air Force to conduct offensive and decisive strategic strikes inside Tibet?
New Delhi requires to develop offensive orientation in its thinking for the answers to be in affirmative. India has produced more than its share of great thinkers in civil affairs. However, being a pacifist society, it does not boast of a single military thinker of repute. Therefore, we should not hesitate to import knowledge from the best military thinkers to create an assertive society, just in the same way, as we need to import the best defence technologies to set up the most modern defence industry hub that ensures expansion of democratic space in Asia.
The ideal opportunity for China to dismember India is between 2011 and 2014 on multiple counts. First, to divert attention from the growing dissent within. Second, beyond this period, Pakistan as a fragmented nation may not exist to support the Chinese. Third, the change of generation by 2015 will witness an assertive India. Fourth, the new Indian assertiveness will ensure rapid modernization of the Armed Forces with robust military capabilities. Last but not the least, given the fact it does not pose threat to any country, India will create strong international alliances. It is in a unique position and gets along well with the West, as well as countries like Russia and others. In fact, the international opinion will decisively tilt in favour of India if it shrewdly deals the powerful geo-economic card held in the arsenal.
The answer to the outlined nightmare stares India on its face.India simply needs to take out the cost-benefit ratio from the game plan of the opponent by rapidly acquiring the requisite military muscle that outguns and outclasses the adversary. War is akin to business. If there is no cost-benefit ratio, it cannot be imposed! Such assertive actions will also naturally propel India in Asia as the most influential player and arrest the slide of retreating democracies.
Bharat Verma, Editor Indian Defence Review and author of the book Fault Lines and Indian Armed Forces.
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/2010/07/chinese-special-forces-cut-off-siliguri-corridor-2012.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] The Venerable, Vulnerable Taxi Drivers of New York by Amitava Kumar

Original Message-----
>From: amkumar@vassar.edu
>Sent: Aug 26, 2010 11:13 AM
>To: Robin Khundkar
>Subject: Re:
>
>Boss - I have a piece on Vanity Fair.com on the stabbing of the Bangla taxi-driver. Please circulate.
>Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

The Venerable, Vulnerable Taxi Drivers of New York
by Amitava Kumar
August 26, 2010
VANITY FAIR
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2010/08/the-venerable-vulnerable-taxi-drivers-of-new-york.html

Amitava Kumar is the author of A Foreigner Carrying in the Crook of His Arm A Tiny Bomb published this month by Duke University Press.

Each employed immigrant has his or her place of work. It is only the taxi driver, forever moving on wheels, who occupies no fixed space. He represents the immigrant condition. And yet, there is no one more adept than him at mapping our streets and cities. He is not an alien. The cabbie has made familiar, though not without faltering, nor without arduous, repeated labor, all that was strange and forbidding. Perhaps amongst us he is most American.

This is the hour of the immigrant worker—after the milkman and just before the dustman. I read that in a book somewhere and imagined a pink dawn at the end of an empty city street, as in a picture postcard and already belonging to the past.

But the present looks different. It accommodates throngs of patient maids, hidden restaurant workers, and, at all hours of the day and night, in their pale blue uniforms, armies of quiet hospital staff.

It is always the taxi driver who, in the bright yellow cab, is the most visible of them all. He is also the most vulnerable. The U.S. Department of Labor reports taxi drivers to be thirty times more likely to be killed on the job than other workers.

On August 24 in New York City, around 6 p.m., a driver named Ahmed H. Sharif picked up a fare at East 24th Street and Second Avenue. The passenger was 21-year-old Michael Enright, who asked the cabbie a question that has now been heard around the world: "Are you a Muslim?" When the driver said yes, the passenger first greeted him in Arabic and then said, "Consider this a checkpoint." Enright pulled out a knife and, in the words of an assistant district attorney, slashed the cabbie's "neck open halfway across his throat." Sharif managed to lock his attacker in the car, but he soon escaped. Enright was later arrested; both he and his victim were taken to the same hospital.

Later, Sharif released a statement via the New York Taxi Workers Alliance: "I feel very sad. I have been here more than 25 years. I have been driving a taxi more than 15 years. All my four kids were born here. I never feel this hopeless and insecure before," said Mr. Sharif. "Right now, the public sentiment is very serious (because of the Ground Zero Mosque debate). All drivers should be more careful."

We might wish to make allowance for the role of the N.Y.T.W.A. in injecting the correct dose of political context, as in the critical parenthetical insertion in the remark quoted above; nevertheless, an event like this, especially in New York City, cannot be insulated from the vicious rhetoric that has swirled around us in recent weeks. The blogosphere is already alight with accusations that Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich have blood on their hands.

Tempting as it may be to repeat this analysis, I don't wish to discount another factor: the sense of power, and even the false intimacy with the Other, that Enright would have experienced in Afghanistan. His behavior inside the cab also goes to show how embedded he is in the narrative of the U.S. military adventure. Are only Palin and Gingrich to be blamed for it?

Several years ago, I spent a summer in New York City with taxi drivers. These were men from the Indian subcontinent, trying to find a footing in this country. This is what I remember most about their life. Each day, they would pick up their vehicle after paying for the daily lease. It would cost a little over $100 at that time. The cabbie was also responsible for the cost of gas. In an eight-, or ten-, or most likely, twelve-hour shift, there was first a mountain to cross. This was the payment that the driver had already made for the lease on the cab and gas. It was possible, on a bad day, that the cabbie would actually lose money. Hours passed, the men drove in desperation, stopping after several hours, if at all, for a quick meal at a Punjabi dhaba on the East side. You drove hard, searched on the streets for a passenger, tried to get a larger tip when you were asked to help make a meeting on time, and this didn't prevent you from getting a $200 ticket.

I'd be riding shotgun and on occasion try to engage a passenger in conversation. The people I saw in the backseat were polite sometimes, hard-headed pragmatists most of the time, and, every now and then, unbelievably mean and contemptuous assholes. What amazed me most was the way in which the taxi drivers retained their equanimity: I wondered what motivated their behavior, whether it was professionalism of a sort, or powerlessness, or a mixture of greed and need.

A decade later, I was sitting in my home, drinking coffee in the morning, when I saw a letter in the newspaper. It described a trip made by the letter-writer from La Guardia Airport to her home in the Bronx. As I read it, my heart was touched with a certain sweetness. I was recalling my time with my cabbie friends in New York City but I was also touched by the letter-writer's sensitivity to not only the work the cabbie was doing but also his precious, fragmented life:

As we moved slowly through the traffic, I heard a woman's voice in the front seat of the cab. The driver told me that he had recently returned from Pakistan, where he had gotten married, and this was his bride calling from Pakistan on his cellphone. He said he was doing the paperwork so that she could come here in about six months.

I could hear her voice and his as they began to sing a duet. He would sing a line from the cab creeping along in the traffic not far from Yankee Stadium, and she would sing a line in response from Pakistan. I could not understand the language of their song, but he told me she was thinking of him so much that she could not sleep.


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

[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/

[ALOCHONA] Breaking News...Ershad's military regime illegal



 
Breaking News...Ershad's military regime illegal

"Dhaka, Aug 26 (bdnews24.com)—In a landmark verdict, the High Court has declared illegal the Seventh Amendment to the constitution that had legalised the autocratic regime of military strongman Hussein Muhammad Ershad.

The bench of justices A H M Shamsuddin Chowdhury and Sheikh Mohammad Zakir Hossain handed down its ruling on Thursday."

Please go to the following link for detail information:

http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=3&id=171753&hb=2 


__._,_.___


[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] How Workers Protesting in the Streets of Dhaka Hurts the U.S. Economy



How Workers Protesting in the Streets of Dhaka Hurts the U.S. Economy

 
Bangladeshi police use batons to disperse protesters in Dhaka, Bangladesh on July 30, 2010. Thousands of garment workers rampaged through central Dhaka and clashed with police to protest what they consider an inadequate increase in the minimum wage rate.

Bangladesh is more than a day away by plane, on a different continent, on the other side of the globe. Why should Americans care that Bangladeshi workers are taking to the streets in violent protest over their low wages? Why should we care about the persecution of labor leaders in Bangladesh? Beyond fundamental human rights considerations, we should care because ensuring "just jobs"—jobs commensurate with decent wages, labor rights, and good working conditions in developing countries such as Bangladesh—is in the hard-nosed economic self-interest of the United States.

This is why the House International Worker Rights Caucus, led by Reps. Phil Hare (D-IL) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) wrote a letter to six major companies calling on them to take a stand against the recent persecution of labor leaders in Bangladesh. The six companies—JC Penny, Wal-Mart, SEARS/Kmart, VF Corporation, Cintas Corporation, and H&M—are major purchasers of apparel from factory owners in Bangladesh. These companies must take a stand against the arrest of these labor leaders, but Congress also should continue to forge ahead forcefully in seeking to improve the lives of workers in Bangladesh and elsewhere in the developing world.

Bangladesh has some of the lowest paid garment workers in Asia (see Figure 1). Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina called the country's minimum wage "not only insufficient but also inhuman" before she raised it to $43 per month, which was lower than the $75 that workers were demanding. When the government's increase failed to meet worker's expectations for a raise that would offset the fluctuations in commodity prices, enraged workers took to the streets. The authorities responded by arresting several labor leaders, including two from the Bangladesh Center for Worker Solidarity, a well-respected and leading labor rights nongovernmental organization in Dhaka, on dubious charges of instigating violence.

wage comparison

U.S. companies purchasing apparel in Bangladesh have an opportunity to help rectify this situation. U.S. industries, and those in other developed countries, are intrinsically linked to networks of workers and suppliers in the developing world. U.S. companies are major purchasers of garments made in the developing world and can be highly effective in ensuring that suppliers treat their workers fairly. After all, the share of wages in the cost of production is fairly low so that companies can afford to pay more to ensure that suppliers pay workers a decent wage without a significant reduction in their bottom line profits.

Then there are the many disadvantages that labor unrest causes U.S. companies operating in Bangladesh and other developing countries like it. Political instability can make it difficult for companies to operate. There is also the negative publicity for companies associated with labor exploitation and poor working conditions. Companies can make it clear to their suppliers that the persecution of labor rights advocates will adversely affect their dealings. And they can contact the Bangladeshi government to express their concern over the plight of the labor leaders. This is what the letter from the House International Worker Rights Caucus calls on them to do.

But Congress shouldn't stop at sending a letter on this occasion alone. There are significant long-term economic advantages for the United States to ensure that workers in the developing world have access to just jobs. Rising living standards in the developing world means new potential markets for our own products and services because consumers there can afford to buy more of our exports. Better labor standards also help level the playing field in markets worldwide.

What's more, when workers are adequately compensated and protected, they are less likely to protest trade and economic integration that can serve as important engines of global economic growth. And finally, rising living standards and just jobs in the developing world help promote political stability and decrease the susceptibility to violence, terrorism, and crime.

This is why Congress should ensure that labor and just jobs are given due attention in all legislation related to foreign assistance reform. In addition, strong labor provisions should be part of all our trade agreements, and Congress should be vigilant in ensuring that trading partners are taking tangible steps to enforce labor provisions in trade agreements. Congress should make sure that our agencies and international institutions are sufficiently funded to build strong labor institutions in developing countries.

Just jobs are not pie-in-the-sky dreams. In a world where rising living standards in other countries coincide with rising living standards in our own, there develops a virtuous circle of economic prosperity—a rising tide lifts all boats. But in a world where economic elites in a country such as Bangladesh exploit workers for their own profit, this restrains standards of living from rising and leads to more social unrest and political instability, which in turn adversely hurts American companies and our economy at large. Which do you think is the preferred alternative?

Sabina Dewan is Associate Director of International Economic Policy at the Center for American Progress.
 


__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___