Banner Advertiser

Friday, December 10, 2010

[ALOCHONA] Re: Low and disorder !



http://www.bd-pratidin.com/?view=details&type=gold&data=News&pub_no=225&cat_id=1&menu_id=1&news_type_id=1&index=0

--- On Thu, 12/9/10, Isha Khan <bd_mailer@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Isha Khan <bd_mailer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Low and disorder !
To:
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 4:46 PM




__._,_.___


[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] Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman on Human rights, trial of war criminals etc



Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman on Human rights, trial of war criminals etc
 
 
 


__._,_.___


[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] Noble Prize for Hasina: Top Ten Reasons



Dear All:
 
Top Ten Reasons Why Sheikh Hasina, Current Prime Minister of Bangladesh deserves to get Noble Prize:
 
No. 10: Daughter of Banga Bandhu cum Banga Shatru and sister of the greatest thug of all time, Sheikh Kamal;
No. 9: A Muslim housewife who was voluntarily detached from her husband for more two decades for political cum personal gains;
No. 8: A physically sound ruler but was sick during prisoner;
No. 7: A generous "mashi" cum "devdasi" who knows how to satisfy "priests" by giving everything in return of verbal blessing;
No. 6: A government chief who arrange marriages for few girls after making thousands of women to widows;
No. 5: A talented leader who never care what to say to her follower or reporter. Even a popular "prime minister" who is protected by foreign body guards;
No. 4: A skilled leader who knows how bring peace by eradicating opponents in democratic ways and a human rights commander who commands to kill innocent people with logi boitha (rowing stick);
No. 3: A mother of an intelligent son who earned Masters degree from Harvard University in one year, where no Masters degree program is designed for one year only;
No. 2: An accomplished inventor of "Digital Bangladesh" for successfully implementing "digital crimes", "digital rapes", "digital violence in campuses", digital econmy slowdown", digitally crushing export industry", "digitally introducing BAKSHAL policies", "digitally finishing people's happiness", "digitally destroying national defense forces", digitally prohibiting citizen's fundmental rights", etc.;
No. 1: Recipient of the highest number of "Doctorate" degrees among all leaders of the world, including Barack Obama (USA); David Cameron (UK), Dmitry Medvedev (Russia), Nicholas Sarkozi (France), Hu Jintao (China), etc. Even, recipient of more Ph.D degrees than any other Noble Prize winner including Dr. Yunus, Dr. Henry Kissinger, Madam Curie, etc.
 
Thanks,
 
Anis Ahmed


__._,_.___


[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] AL's silence on Ershad



AL's silence on Ershad
 
 


__._,_.___


[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] Fw: [Ovimot] Noble Prize for Hasina: Top Ten Reasons



Dear All:
 
Top Ten Reasons Why Sheikh Hasina, Current Prime Minister of Bangladesh deserves to get Noble Prize:
 
No. 10: Daughter of Banga Bandhu cum Banga Shatru and sister of the greatest thug of all time, Sheikh Kamal;
No. 9: A Muslim housewife who was voluntarily detached from her husband for more two decades for political cum personal gains;
No. 8: A physically sound ruler but was sick during prisoner;
No. 7: A generous "mashi" cum "devdasi" who knows how to satisfy "priests" by giving everything in return of verbal blessing;
No. 6: A government chief who arrange marriages for few girls after making thousands of women to widows;
No. 5: A talented leader who never care what to say to her follower or reporter. Even a popular "prime minister" who is protected by foreign body guards;
No. 4: A skilled leader who knows how bring peace by eradicating opponents in democratic ways and a human rights commander who commands to kill innocent people with logi boitha (rowing stick);
No. 3: A mother of an intelligent son who earned Masters degree from Harvard University in one year, where no Masters degree program is designed for one year only;
No. 2: An accomplished inventor of "Digital Bangladesh" for successfully implementing "digital crimes", "digital rapes", "digital violence in campuses", digital econmy slowdown", digitally crushing export industry", "digitally introducing BAKSHAL policies", "digitally finishing people's happiness", "digitally destroying national defense forces", digitally prohibiting citizen's fundmental rights", etc.;
No. 1: Recipient of the highest number of "Doctorate" degrees among all leaders of the world, including Barack Obama (USA); David Cameron (UK), Dmitry Medvedev (Russia), Nicholas Sarkozi (France), Hu Jintao (China), etc. Even, recipient of more Ph.D degrees than any other Noble Prize winner including Dr. Yunus, Dr. Henry Kissinger, Madam Curie, etc.
 
Thanks,
 
Anis Ahmed




__._,_.___


[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] kevin rudd






Rudd admits Afghanistan war grim and bloody

Ben Knight reported this story on Saturday, December 11, 2010 08:03:00




ELIZABETH JACKSON: Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd says that as prime minister he never hid the 'grim reality' of the war in Afghanistan from the Australian people. 

A diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks yesterday quoted Mr Rudd as saying the Afghanistan mission 'scared the hell' out of him.

Mr Rudd is currently on tour of Asia and the Middle East. Overnight, he visited Australian peacekeepers on a military base in Egypt's Sinai Desert where he spoke with our Middle East correspondent, Ben Knight.

BEN KNIGHT: Well, Minister does the Afghanistan War still scare the hell out of you?






__._,_.___


[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] Shah Rukh Khan



wonderful, innovating, thought-provoking comments.


cheers.


khoda hafez.







To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: Ezajur@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 17:05:25 +0000
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Shah Rukh Khan



Here's me making five silly, silly comments of little humour and no value:
1. Now that all the girls in Dhaka have seen Shah Rukh Khan in person I think we can safely say that the argument for transit with India has been safely won.
2. It is fitting that our ruling classes ignore the murders of our working classes by the BSF so that they can wear Indian saris to see Indian superstars. 
3. Dead microphones, hour long delays, stupid presenters and lousy opening acts at the Shahrukh Khan Concert indicate fine progress towards a Digital Bangladesh.
4. The Indians have fully resolved suspicions of their involvement in the BDR massacre of Army officers by sending Shah Rukh to dance at the Army's stadium with free tickets for Army wives.
5. Shah Rukh cleverly calmed Hasina's jealousy of his fame by conveying his respects to her via the audience.
Now to more serious matters. Our MPs want Hasina to get the Nobel Peace Prize
Now - thats real entertainment!
   




__._,_.___


[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] Rat in curry at Rajshahi university



Rat in curry prompts cull at Bangladeshi university

 
File photo of a Bangladeshi farmer with a dead rat Rats are commonly found across Bangladesh

Related stories

University officials in Bangladesh have ordered a major rat extermination drive after rodent meat found its way into chicken curry served to students.

The incident happened at Rajshahi University in western Bangladesh.
 
"One student detected the head of the rat while eating his lunch. That student instantly suffered a stomach upset," a spokesman told the BBC.
Soon after the incident hundreds of angry students staged a demonstration demanding action against the chef.
 
The chef has now been suspended and handed over to police who have been called in to investigate the incident."I told the students to stop eating in the dining hall of the university for two days. A drive to kill the rats in the dining hall is going on," university proctor Chowdhury Mohammad Zakaria told the BBC.
 
"It is a very unfortunate event and some 300 angry students gathered and protested against the unhygienic condition of food served in the university's dining hall. "I must say that if I found rat meat in my food, I also would not be able to control my temper."
 
It was not immediately clear whether the rat meat was mixed with chicken curry intentionally. In September 2009, a farmer was crowned Bangladesh's champion rat catcher after leading a team which he said killed more than 80,000 rodents in a month.
 
Mokhairul Islam was awarded a colour television at a ceremony attended by 500 farmers and officials in Dhaka. The University of Rajshahi is one of the largest universities in the country and the largest in the northern region of Bangladesh.
 



__._,_.___


[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] trial of razakars




Fresh vow to try war criminals by any means

16-point declaration read out at convention of sector commanders
The Daily Star
The national convention of Sector Commanders Forum (SCF) was held on Friday in the capital with a vow to put the war criminals on trial by any means so justice can prevail in the society.




what kept these people busy, ( with a big mouth )......in the past few years!!!!
Why razakars were not sent to court in 1972.......and we are still shouting about JUSTICE in 2010!!!

khoda hafez.


__._,_.___


[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] HRW - Trigger Happy "grave abuses by India’s Border Security Force (BSF) against both Bangladeshi and Indian nationals on the Frontier

Complete report downloadable at @ http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2010/12/09/trigger-happy-0

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH has released an 81-page report that documents the situation on the border region, where both Bangladesh and India have deployed border guards to prevent infiltration, trafficking, and smuggling. They found numerous cases of indiscriminate use of force, arbitrary detention, torture, and killings by the security force, without adequate investigation or punishment. The report is based on over 100 interviews with victims, witnesses, human rights defenders, journalists, and Border Security Force and Bangladesh Rifles' (BDR) members. You can read the report here and download it here (.pdf). Given below are the report summary and recommendations.


Summary
This report documents a pattern of grave abuses by India's Border Security Force (BSF) against both Bangladeshi and Indian nationals in the border area along India's 2,000 kilometer long international fontier with Bangladesh in West Bengal state. The abuses include cases of indiscriminate killing and torture.

Most of the abuses documented in this report are related to efforts by the Indian government to deal with cross-border smuggling, particularly cattle-rustling. However, as this report shows, the abusive methods used by the BSF are disproportionate to the problems that the Indian government faces on its eastern border. Numerous ordinary Indian and Bangladeshi citizens resident in the border area end up as the victims of BSF abuses, which range from verbal abuse and intimidation to torture, beatings, and killings. Furthermore, because of the near total absence of effective accountability mechanisms for abuses carried out by members of the BSF, even the most serious abuses by border guards go unpunished. This sends a clear message that the Indian government finds such abuses acceptable.

The border area between India and Bangladesh is heavily populated and acutely poor. Many farmers on both sides of the border have also lost their farms and livelihoods to river erosion. Illegal cross-border activities, such as cattle-rustling, and trafficking in persons and narcotics, have flourished. In several of the cases documented in this report, victims were beaten up or killed while smuggling cattle across the border at night. Others were tortured or killed merely on suspicion of being involved in cattle-rustling. Children, reportedly employed by smugglers to reduce the risk of detection, are among the victims whose cases are documented below.

Several survivors and eyewitnesses of attacks allege that the BSF engaged in indiscriminate shooting without warning. Seventeen-year-old Bangladeshi Shyamol Karmokar sneaked into India to visit relatives. On January 26, 2010, he decided to return to Bangladesh with the assistance of cattle-rustlers. Mohammad Zahid, who had agreed to bring Shyamol back to Bangladesh, said that they were detected by the BSF close to the border. Instead of attempting to arrest them, BSF officers immediately opened fire. Shyamol was killed.

Torture is also rife. On January 25, 2010, Motiar Rahman, a Bangladeshi national strayed across the border while cutting grass, a common mistake since there are no clear markers. According to Motiar Rahman, he was captured by two BSF soldiers:

They blindfolded me and took me to the BSF camp. I thought that the BSF were going to kill me. After reaching the camp, the BSF personnel removed the blindfold and tied me to a tree. They left me there for over 15 hours, until 11 p.m. at night. Then they gave me some food.But once I had had finished my meal, the BSF started torturing me. I was beaten severely with a bamboo stick on my back and feet by the same soldier who brought me the food. I was kicked several times and as a result started bleeding from my penis. Another soldier started beating me on my head with a bamboo stick. This went on for at least 45 minutes… The BSF men jumped on my chest, and kicked me on my head and face with their boots.

Indian villagers residing in the border areas also accuse the BSF of not just indiscriminate shooting, but unprovoked beatings. Indian national Halima Bibi said her 12-year-old daughter was slapped and beaten by three BSF personnel on September 5, 2009 outside their home close to the border with Bangladesh. When Halima Bibi protested, she was verbally abused with sexual insults.

Nirsingha Mondal, from India's Murshidabad district, said that on May 10, 2009, he had gone out as usual in the morning to collect firewood for cooking. He was dragged into a nearby BSF camp by two soldiers, who beat him up and accused him of stealing flowers from their garden.

The Indian government says it is seeking to contain the smuggling and mass economic migration from Bangladesh. In recent years, India has also alleged that separatist militants in its northeastern states find sanctuary in Bangladesh and cross into India to perpetrate terrorist attacks. However few of those killed by the BSF have ever been shown to have been involved in terrorism. In an effort to secure the border the Indian government is constructing a large 3,200 kilometer fence. But in densely populated areas of the border, where land is cultivated right up to the international boundary, the border fence is already exacerbating the problems faced by residents of the border areas.

The BSF justifies the killing of suspected smugglers by claiming that they were evading arrest, or that its personnel had to fire in self-defense. But suspicion of a crime or evasion of arrest cannot alone justify the use of lethal force. In fact, even India's domestic laws which allow "all means necessary" in case a person attempts to use force to resist arrest, specifically forbid causing the death of a person who is not accused of an offense punishable by death or a life term.

In all the cases we investigated, the alleged criminals were either unarmed or armed with only sickles, sticks, and knives, which suggest that in shooting victims, the border guards are likely to have used excessive force. In a number of cases, the victims were shot in the back, suggesting that they were running away. In others, injuries indicate the person was shot at close range, with witnesses often alleging that the person was tortured and killed in BSF custody. Other victims appear to have fallen victim to bullets because they were too close to the border.

When someone is killed during a BSF operation, the BSF is required to file a report with the police. In such cases the BSF usually justifies the killing by accusing the victim of obstructing a public servant while performing his duties, unlawful assembly, or attempted murder. In none of the cases investigated by Human Rights Watch did the BSF show that it had recovered lethal weapons or explosives that could pose an imminent threat of death or serious injury that might justify killings in self-defense.

The Bangladeshi authorities have repeatedly complained about the rampant killing of its nationals by the BSF, as have human rights groups in both countries. Odhikar has documented cases of nearly a 1000 Bangladeshi nationals that have been killed by BSF over the last decade. Describing the BSF as "trigger happy," Bangladesh Home Minister, Sahara Khatun, said in May 2010 that she would again ask New Delhi to stop these incidents.

Despite these strong comments from Khatun, the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), which is responsible for guarding the border from the Bangladeshi side and reports to the Bangladeshi Home Ministry, often fails to defend the rights of Bangladeshi citizens. The BDR is deployed to contain the smuggling of weapons, explosives, and narcotic substances including Phensedyl, a cough syrup that is banned in Bangladesh, but commonly used as a recreational drug. However, the Indian border authorities complain that their Bangladeshi counterparts do not do enough to prevent illegal cross-border smuggling.

In researching this report, the Bangladeshi human rights organization Odhikar and Human Rights Watch interviewed several BDR officials about Bangladeshi victims. In most cases, if the BSF presented evidence of smuggling, the BDR did not complain about Bangladeshi nationals being killed. For instance, with respect to the killing of Shyamol Karmokar, the BDR Camp Commander at Wahedpur border, Subedar Sirajul Islam, said that while his death was "unfortunate and sad," the BSF had opened fire believing him to be a cattle trader because he was with a group of rustlers. "Thus there was nothing wrong with the fact that the BSF has shot him."

In March 2010, BDR chief Maj. Gen. Mainul Islam, explaining that there was a history of "people and cattle trafficking during darkness," said of the killings: "We should not be worried about such incidents…. We have discussed the matter and will ensure that no innocent people will be killed." During an official visit to Bangladesh in September 2010, Raman Srivastava, Director General of the BSF, responded to Bandgladesh's complaints that the BSF were killing "innocent, unarmed" Bangladeshi civilians by saying: "We fire at criminals who violate the border norms. The deaths have occurred in Indian territory and mostly during night, so how can they be innocent?"

These comments suggest that officials of both governments believe that it is legal to use lethal force against those suspected of being engaged in smuggling or other illegal activities. This amounts to a de facto shoot-to-kill policy for smugglers, and violates both national and international standards on the right to life and the presumption of innocence which are applicable in India and Bangladesh.

The BDR raises serious concerns with the BSF only when cases of indiscriminate firing lead to the death of villagers not involved in smuggling. For instance, on March 13, 2009, a BSF trooper got into an argument with a boy fishing in a lake, barely 20 meters from the international border. According to eyewitnesses, when the altercation became heated, the soldier opened fire, hitting two boys who were grazing their buffaloes nearby. Thirteen-year-old Abdur Rakib was shot in the chest and died instantly. Mohammad Omar Faruq, 15, was injured and later described the indiscriminate firing. A flag meeting was held between the BDR and the BSF the next day to discuss the incident. The BSF initially tried to insist that the victims were illegal cattle traders, but the BDR personnel presented witness accounts countering this version. Some villagers who were present during the flag meeting said that the BSF eventually apologized and promised that the soldier responsible would be punished. It is not clear if any disciplinary action was taken.

Members of the BSF are described by local residents as unsympathetic, aggressive, and violent. This may be explained by the fact that many are deployed to the region after difficult and tense tours of duty on the India-Pakistan border in Kashmir. Human Rights Watch researchers witnessed BSF troopers shouting at villagers, calling them names, and often making them wait for hours as each person was searched and signed as they crossed BSF outposts, to reach their fields or homes which adjoin the border.

To prevent the accidental shooting of villagers, an informal curfew is imposed on both sides of the border at night. But the restriction of movement after dark causes numerous difficulties. In India, the BSF patrols are deployed in posts a few kilometers inside Indian territory. They restrict access to areas beyond the outposts, effectively cutting people off from their farms or markets. To prevent infiltration by Bangladeshi nationals, the BSF require residents to surrender their identity or citizenship cards when they cross the border outposts and to claim them on return. Mithoo Sheikh, a young man in Murshidabad, said that there are long queues as the BSF checks each identity:

Sometimes by the time we get to the field it is noon. And we have stop work by 4 p.m. because they stop us from returning after dark. The BSF does not understand cultivation problems. We cannot water our fields at noon. Sometimes we only get water at night, but they will not let us remain in the field. If we disobey, we get beatings or they file false charges… We are treated as outsiders in our country.

The police are unwilling to lodge complaints against the BSF. When Tutan Sheikh, an Indian national, complained to the police that he and his brothers were subjected to unprovoked beatings by the BSF, he was told by the police officer on duty that the BSF trooper had committed no crime since the BSF was there to "beat the people." In another case, after Indian national Noor Hossain was killed by the BSF, police told family members who wanted to lodge a complaint: "Why do you bother? What will happen to the BSF? Nothing can happen to the BSF. The BSF will say that the … border area is under their control."

The Indian NGO Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), one of Human Rights Watch's partners in researching this report, has repeatedly approached the courts, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the National Minorities Commission, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as well as the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, to hold abusers accountable. None of the cases raised have been brought to a satisfactory conclusion. According to Kirity Roy, who heads MASUM, "As the de facto complainant, we were never summoned to appear or depose before any inquiry conducted by the BSF. However, we are aware that in some cases, family members or victims did appear before the BSF court of inquiry." No verdicts were made public.

According to the Bangladeshi authorities, India has never provided details of any BSF personnel who have been prosecuted for human rights violations. Until India ends its legal protection of security forces and civilian officials implicated in criminal offenses, a culture of impunity will prevail and abuses will continue.

The BSF, which has a long record of severe human rights abuses and members of India's other security forces, are exempt from criminal prosecution unless specific approval is granted by the Indian government to undertake a prosecution in a particular case. This legally sanctioned impunity is even included in a new bill to prohibit torture under consideration in the Indian parliament. The bill, as presently drafted, will require approval from the central or a state government for a court to have jurisdiction over an offense committed by a public servant.

BSF personnel are in theory liable to be produced before an internal court for making false accusations, or for "disgraceful conduct of a cruel, indecent or unnatural kind." Although the BSF claims that these courts are routinely used to prosecute those that commit crimes or violate the Border Security Force Act, there are no publicly known cases in which a BSF member was convicted of a crime for a human rights abuse at the India-Bangladesh border. It is time for the Indian government, which claims to follow the rule of law and respect basic rights, to take strong steps to end abuses and hold those responsible to account.

Key Recommendations
The Indian government should publicly order the Border Security Force (BSF) and other security forces to abide by the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. This requires officials to apply, as far as possible, non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms. Even in self-defense, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life. International law also requires security forces to give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, and sufficient time to surrender.

Given the continuing failure of the BSF's internal justice system to prosecute its own members for human rights abuses, personnel of all ranks implicated in serious rights abuses should be investigated by civilian authorities and prosecuted in civilian courts. In cases of abuses against Indian and Bangladeshi nationals, the police must register complaints filed against the BSF. Guidelines as laid down by the National Human Rights Commission to investigate all cases of deaths in armed encounters should be applied to the BSF.

The Indian government should establish an independent and impartial commission of inquiry into serious violations of international human rights law by the BSF. The government should invite both Indian and Bangladeshi nationals to submit evidence and bring complaints to such a commission. The inquiry should be time bound and transparent, and should have the ability to provide protection to witnesses.

The Indian government should repeal all legal provisions that require approval of the executive branch for prosecutions against members of the security forces to proceed, including in article 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Similar provisions in the Indian Prevention of Torture Bill currently in front of the Indian parliament should be deleted. Such provisions provide effective immunity to the security forces and violate the principles of equality under the law enshrined in both the Indian Constitution and international law.

The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations should inform the Indian government that those BSF personnel responsible for human rights violations should be excluded from peacekeeping duties.

The Government of India and Bangladesh should agree upon the request of the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, and arbitrary executions to visit the country, pending since 2000 for India and since 2006 for Bangladesh. The Special Rapporteur should also include in his program, visits the border areas between India and Bangladesh.

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

[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] Shah Rukh Khan



Here's me making five silly, silly comments of little humour and no value:

1. Now that all the girls in Dhaka have seen Shah Rukh Khan in person I think we can safely say that the argument for transit with India has been safely won.

2. It is fitting that our ruling classes ignore the murders of our working classes by the BSF so that they can wear Indian saris to see Indian superstars. 

3. Dead microphones, hour long delays, stupid presenters and lousy opening acts at the Shahrukh Khan Concert indicate fine progress towards a Digital Bangladesh.

4. The Indians have fully resolved suspicions of their involvement in the BDR massacre of Army officers by sending Shah Rukh to dance at the Army's stadium with free tickets for Army wives.

5. Shah Rukh cleverly calmed Hasina's jealousy of his fame by conveying his respects to her via the audience.

Now to more serious matters. Our MPs want Hasina to get the Nobel Peace Prize

Now - thats real entertainment!

   



__._,_.___


[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: The Yunus Saga



You are wrong.

You simply question the myth of Yunus and then point to articles by others. I did not read them because I know they will be sincere and well crafted. It is I who said Grameen Bank must be taken to task for sucides and sufferings of borrowers. I expect Yunus to invite criticism and defend himself. So, I have no issue with your initial mail and would not have commented on it. Except that you phrased your sentence, accidentally perhaps, intentionally more likely, to mitigate the latest rubbish coming from your Hasina's mouth. 

Now look at my gaseousness. I made perhaps 20 separate points and you have not replied, even remotely, to a single one. Pathetic. I can be wrong. But I am taking each of your comments word by word. You are not addressing a single comment of mine.

And, true to form, you are at it again. While Hasina is at the root of all this week's melee you can only talk about 'changing the machinery of government'. Not a whisper about Hasina. This is what makes you actually and evidently disingenuous and insincere. You think you are a change agent but you are an agent of the staus quo.  

The myth of Yunus needs to be busted baby. But the myth that Hasina is the right person to lead our country needs to be busted ten times as much. So please proceed with analystical criticism of Yunus. But if you use it as a platform to indicate Hasina's sanity you'll find no quarter while within my view.

Alochona is the same as any other forum in any other media nowadays. Neutrals complain about the government which happens to be AL. And BNP supporters are handed ammunition on a plate. And pro AL commentators, across the board, have lost a lot of heart in recent months.

I read Jaffor Ullah's piece below. This is your evidence? It's crap I can deal with before brushing my teeth in the morning. Send me his mail and I'll argue publicly with him. Because I know what he had for breakfast. Thats why, in what you think is winning argument, he refers to no statistics, no documents, no cases, no investigations, no evidence and no substance. Thats right Farida. Read it again. This man's biases and preferences and loyalties are painted all over his piece. He is a Hasinite - just like you - who thinks he is clever enough to hide his agenda if he doesn't mention AL.    

He is a fool who thinks that real change can come as long as Hasina is PM, Blackjackets distribute favours and Chatra League fights on the streets. He is a fool who thinks Sheikh Mujib wants such things today even whilst enlightened by proximity to Allah and ennobled by eternal salvation.

You people don't have a clue about real change. I am taking you head on. Do the same but don't think 'Gaseous' and 'My oh my' count as argument. Not when you don't have the ability to condemn the Prime Minister's public farting. 

Yeah. Jaffor Ullah. Pompous coward. Send me his mail.

Farida, our country can never change as long as people like you, who should know better, do not address the number one problem in Bangladesh. What's that? Grameen?  

Ezajur Rahman

Kuwait

 

 


--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid <farida_majid@...> wrote:
>
>
> My oh my! What a gaseous outburst! Ejazur, your brain at the knees is far more developed than mine. I am a Neandarthal when it comes to knee-jerk reaction to perfectly well-written articles I posted that were packed with relevant facts and informed opinions from reliable authorities. {I think one article was originally posted by bd_mailer].
>
> I wanted people to take a closer look at the Grameenism syndrome and the 'hoopla' about microcredit. We need to seriously check the myth of "poverty-reduction" claims made by Younus. The articles provided enough facts and pertinent information, but you chose to stick to the myth.
>
> Of course I want change in the Structure of the Govt. --that is where the machinery of the endemic corruption is operative. My campaign for democratic local governance remains uncompromising no matter which Party is in the Administration. Even in the early days of Grameen when I admired the idea, I wrote in an article (1993), "A bank, no matter how innovative. is not a substitute for good governance."
>
> But I do resent you attacking me by quoting a fragment of my sentence. My whole sentence read:
>
> Why is suddenly all this venom against PM Hasina for accusing Grameen
> for being a cruel and unforgiving moneylender, something that is the
> buzz in all corners of the world?
>
> You took this disngenuous path to convey the idea that unless one follows the Alochona practice of condemning Hasina and BAAAAAAAAAAAL on every post one deserves condemnation. You really think Hasina or any other Prime Minister should not show any concern whether Younus evaded payng tax to the Bangladesh Govt. Why should a statement from Norad reflect what tax he paid or did not pay to the Bangladesh Govt.?
>
> Please read Jaffor's piece posted on News From Bangladesh:
>
>
> The predicament of Grameen Bank does not bode well for Dr. Yunus
>
>
>
> Wednesday December 08 2010 21:02:30 PM BDT
>
>
> By A.H. Jaffor Ullah, USA
>
>
>
>
>
> I first met Dr. Muhammad Yunus
> in April 1971 in Dayton, Ohio when he was a struggling pedagogue in a
> small college in eastern Indiana and I was a lowly graduate student in
> Cincinnati, Ohio. The military crackdown of Yahya regime on the wee
> hours of March 26, 1971 had greatly disturbed a few of us in America;
> therefore, a hastily arranged meeting was called by Prof. Aminul Islam
> of Wright State University in Dayton. There were only 6-7 participants
> in that meeting and Dr. Yunus was one of them. My take on Dr. Yunus was
> that he was very over ambitious. He told us that he would like to be
> the ambassador of Bangladesh in Sweden when Pakistanis will be booted
> out by our freedom fighters. Hearing this quip I laughed because Dr.
> Yunus was hardly in his early thirties at the time. They don't appoint a
> young man as an ambassador lest the position loses its gravitas.
>
>
>
> Dr. Yunus returned to Bangladesh in the seventies to take up an academic
> position in Chittagong and there he started his great experiment with
> micro credit and what a remarkable journey he charted for himself and
> for Bangladesh.
>
>
>
> In the early1980s CBS 60 Minutes – a news magazine – did a segment on
> Dr. Yunus and the newly founded Grameen Bank, which catapulted him to
> western world in a big way. He gave a glowing report on the success of
> his bank to change the lives of many women in Chittagong, a port town in
> southeastern Bangladesh. There was no independent audit or
> verification to the Bank's financial statement or Dr. Yunus's
> exaggerated claim that micro-lending could be a panacea for hapless
> women in rural areas of Bangladesh.
>
>
>
> Dr. Yunus is always very crafty with his words when he talks about the
> success of his micro-lending practice in rural Bangladesh. He tied the
> operation of Grameen Bank with poverty alleviation especially for
> womenfolk. This was the selling point. The gullible western press fell
> for the bait and they glorified both Dr. Yunus and Grameen Bank while
> giving glowing encomiums to his brainchild – the bank for the poor.
> Nowhere was mentioned the exorbitant finance charge that pale the
> interest rate levied by Kabuliwalas (the Kabuli men from Afghanistan
> were roving moneylenders of Bengal during British Raj) or the Mahajons
> (traditional Hindu moneylender).
>
>
>
> By 1990s Dr. Yunus had morphed into a towering figure allover the world.
> When he talked everyone listened. The western press had various
> monikers for him. They lovingly called him "the banker for poor folks."
> While the adulation and encomiums poured in, many economists in
> Bangladesh were puzzled about Grameen Bank. Is it a commercial
> financial institution? You bet. But many people erroneously thought it
> was an NGO solely devoted to poverty alleviation and in particular for
> womenfolk. I never thought Dr. Yunus clarified this issue for once and
> all. This dual identity of Grameen Bank had served Dr. Yunus rather
> well. For, he never allowed any outside auditors to examine the Bank's
> book. Why so? Because Grameen Bank was not exactly a commercial bank.
> That is the impression one gets when Dr. Yunus glowingly talked about
> the noble goals of the bank for poor. Also, he helped created Grameen
> Foundation allover the globe. The foundation did the fund raising in
> the West but we never fully understood whether Grameen Bank had
> benefited from the donations collected by the foundation.
>
>
>
> Lately, I have learned that Grameen Bank and its employees had never
> paid a dime to Bangladesh treasury as income tax. Dr. Yunus became a
> smart businessman while trying to be a social engineer as he always
> maintained that he started Grameen Bank to uplift the financial lot of
> indigent womenfolk in Bangladesh. He used this mantra over and over
> again to Grameen Bank become the nation's number one cellphone company.
> Bangladesh's Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, has quipped in December
> 2010 that while she was the PM during 1996 through 2001 Dr. Yunus
> convinced her that his company should get the license to operate a
> mobile phone business because this would empower womenfolk of
> Bangladesh. A very convincing argument one might say. Dr. Yunus
> precisely knew that he could sell almost anything to the nation (read
> government) provided he invokes the mantra of poverty alleviation. Who
> could in the right frame of mind argue with Dr. Yunus about his various
> enterprises that were involved in uplifting the lot of indigent
> womenfolk?
>
>
>
> During 1996 the world experienced a severe downturn in global economy
> that affected the Asian countries too alongside with the western nation.
> The Grameen Bank was in liquidity crisis then. Luckily, help was
> underway from Scandinavian nations. About 100 million dollar grant was
> given to Grameen Bank – a very successful commercial bank as touted by
> Dr. Yunus throughout 1990s. This did not chime in with what Dr. Yunus
> had always said about the success of Grameen Bank. Now bizarre
> revelation had filled the media. This is true that when the grant money
> was given to Grameen Bank (read Dr. Yunus) by the donor nation, the
> money did not go to Grameen Bank but it was deposited to another entity
> by the name Grameen Kalyan created single-handedly by Dr. Yunus. This is
> a serious breach of terms and conditions imposed by Swedish authorities
> who made the grant. Dr. Yunus may say that all the grant money was
> deposited to Grameen Kalyan and this may be true but this is a fact that
> the contract was breached. How come an erudite economist did not see
> it? Dr. Yunus's detractors have said this was done to avoid taxes due
> to Bangladesh Treasury.
>
>
>
> The Bangladesh Bank is now actively examining all the documents
> pertaining to this grant given by Swedish authorities in 1996. Dr.
> Yunus thinks no irregularity will be unearthed and that will vindicate
> his name. There is an intense media interest in this developing story
> and trust me there will be fallout from this investigation which is
> being done by Bangladesh Bank.
>
>
>
> I read in the media that when Swedish authority found it out about the
> irregularity done by Grameen Bank right after the grant money was handed
> out to Dr. Yunus, they questioned Dr. Yunus. In return Dr. Yunus wrote
> a letter to Norwegian authorities begging them not to disclose the
> irregularity to anyone in Bangladesh. The inquiry was hushed up.
> However, in this day of WikiLeaks the news of Dr. Yunus's crafty move
> resurfaced again. Had this story surfaced in 1996, this would have
> squished any hope for getting the Noble Peace Prize in October 2006.
>
>
>
> Dr. Yunus and his Bank are under microscope now and this does not bode
> well for him and Grameen Bank. The news of tyranny done by Grameen
> Bank's agent allover Bangladesh to the Bank's clients who could not come
> up with interest payment is everywhere in the Internet and print media.
> The fact that Grameen Bank could not even make a dent in poverty
> alleviation will be established for once and all. Someone had
> euphemistically said that Grameen Bank is a "Death Trap" for indigents
> who borrowed some paltry sum from them.
>
>
>
> The axiom that says you cannot fool all the people all the time will be
> established again now that a full-scale probing is underway by
> Bangladesh Bank.
>
>
>
> -------------------------
>
>
>
> Dr. A.H. Jaffor Ullah, a researcher and columnist, writes from New Orleans, USA
>
> E Mail : jhankar@...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> From: Ezajur@...
> Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 10:16:41 +0000
> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: The Yunus Saga
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Farida
>
> I don't think any such discussion has arrived at any definitive conclusion. Grameen has distributed more than 6 billion dollars to over 6 million borrowers. Are you saying that no less than 6 million people have been driven further into poverty because of Grameen Bank? Are you standing with Hashishana and saying that there is not one example of success amongst these millions of borrowers?
>
> Look. Some borrowers are indeed driven to destitution and some commit suicide. Investigations are needed in these cases. And suicides should be draw the continuous attention of every agency in the land. But of course this is Bangladesh – what's another suicide? It is not as if would ever take the AL to account for the persecution of a young girl by any of its cadres.
>
> I say neo this and geo that is a crock of hoopla. The fact is NGOs and microcredit have flourished in Bangladesh like nowhere else and this is because of the failure of every government since our birth to radically, and properly, tackle the needs of huge sections of our people. It is the failure of our governments that has turned our nation into the destination of choice for any NGO. We are NGO dependent not because of some international conspiracy but because of our own historically and culturally embedded penchant for stupidity.
>
> Why all this sudden venom against Hasina over this issue?
>
> Good grief! Of all the issues in all the land, over which to show your hand, you choose this episode?! It drives me nuts why people aren't open about which party they support. Obviously it's to avoid awkward questions. But then, when they do voice their support their logic is so
> poor, so compromised, so self serving that its just as well they talk about everything except their own party and their own nethri.
>
> Let us be clear. There is nothing sudden about this venom against Hasina. It was there from the beginning, it is always palpable and it is grounded in logic, good taste and the trauma that comes from knowing that our nation deserves far better.
>
> Hasina is a bitter, jealous and petty old bat. The values which you hold dearest are sound and I dare not challenge them blindly. But these same values are embodied in the personages of the Finance Minister and the Education Minister and their like. Your values are ill served by the personages of the Home Minister, the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister. For that matter even the Agriculture Minister. When you get the courage to confess publicly to this you will finally serve both the nation and the Awami League to the best of your abilities and render the opposition meaningless. .
>
> You don't mind Hasina slapping down her Foreign Minister in public for suggesting that maybe nothing illegal was done. You don't mind Hasina smirking, goading and insulting Dr Yunus on the national stage. You don't mind her tone, choice of words, manner and attitude, though she has
> offended many people, including many of your own friends who support AL. You don't mind that she displays jealousy and pettiness towards Dr Yunus. You don't mind that Hasina doesn't require an investigation into the tax affairs of any of her supporters. You don't mind that she said on the national stage that Dr Yunus is just another example of a Bangladeshi trickster. You don't mind that Grameen has flourished under each of her governments. You don't mind that she speaks about millions of suffering borrowers but has done bugger all about it in each of her two terms. You don't mind that Hasina has done more than anyone to ensure this regrettable incident reaches the international stage even before a single minute of investigation has commenced. You don't mind that Hasina demonstrated visible pleasure and vindictiveness at Dr Yunus' embarassment. You don't mind that Hasina was outraged that Dr Yunus, as is his right, dared to enter politics.
>
> Have you noticed the lack of commentary and observation, across all sectors, which praises the leadership and personality of Hasina? The eunuchs who grovellingly sprinkle 'Manonio Prodahan Monthri' on their drivel don't count.
>
> In fact you don't mind anything as long as your own pet concerns are served. Now that the Norwegians have themselves, within days of the story breaking, put this matter to rest, you won't flinch an inch. Bongobondhu's daughter was of course right and you will go onto maintain radio silence on her follies and the crimes of her minions. Oh yeah! And it won't even cross your mind to criticise her for not taking any action over Grameen over the next 3 years.
>
> Your claim that the world is abuzz with concerns about the veracity of Dr Yunus and microcredit is easily matched with the claim that the world is abuzz with new accolades for Dr Yunus, new adventures in microcredit abroad and new efforts to improve the effectiveness of microcredit.
>
> Many are the learned, articulate and well fashioned Bangladeshis who engage the complex issues of this wide world, with great minds and great people, espousing the loftiest ideals and the deepest logic. But when it comes to the land they love best, when it comes to the people they love best, they deposit all their intelligence at the border, and descend into babbling hypocrites. It is often not ill intentioned. It's something to do with a complex weave of helplessness and hopelessness.
>
> Let's hear it again. I have all the time in the world to try and hold your newly exposed fair hand. Let's hear it - 'The Transaction'. Say it again 'The Transaction'. Oooh! Sounds like a Tom Cruise thriller. Oooh! We're so scared of this big bad transaction! Any other transactions you might have concerns about during the term of this government. No? Oh you are so sweet.
>
> I'm a clown, I'm an idiot, I'm illiterate, I'm a pink bottomed monkey.
>
> But baby, even then, I'm far, far, far superior to the Prime Minister of your choice.
>
> Ezajur Rahman
>
> Kuwait
>
>
>
>
> --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid farida_majid@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > Not too long ago we had a discussion on microcredit and how it is really an extension of neoliberal capitalism in the guise of NGO that does more harm to the poor by sucking their money and globalising it.
> >
> > Why is suddenly all this venom against PM Hasina for accusing Grameen for being a cruel and unforgiving moneylender, something that is the buzz in all corners of the world? Any sitting Govt. should express concern over tax evasion when such a large sum is transfered from a Bank and into a Trust/Kalyan in a questionable transaction.
> >
> > Please have another look at the article from Himal Magazine as you sing the praise of "Noble" Younus:
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > As you read this imp. article on Grameenism keep in mind the The [George] Soros Syndrome.
> >
> > Excerpt from "The Soros Syndrome" by Alexander Cockburn:
> >
> > In other words, foundations, nonprofits, NGOs—call them what you will—can on occasion perform nobly, but overall their increasing power moves in step with the temper of our times: privatization of political action, directly overseen and manipulated by the rich and their executives. The tradition of voluntarism is extinguished by the professional, very well-paid do-good bureaucracy.
> >
> > I'm still not sure why Ralph Nader, in his vast 2008 novel Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us, embraced the proposition embodied in the title (unless the whole exercise was an extended foray into irony). As an international class, the superrich are emphatically not interested in saving us, beyond advocating reforms required to stave off serious social unrest.
> >
> > For many decades the superrich in this country thought that the major threat to social stability lay in overpopulation and the unhealthy gene pool of the poor. Their endowments and NGOs addressed themselves diligently to these questions, by means of enforced sterilization, exclusion of Slavs and Jews from America's shores and other expedients, advanced by the leading liberals of the day.
> >
> > More recently, "globalization" and "sustainability" have become necessary mantras, and foolish is the grant applicant who does not flourish both words. NGOs endowed by the rich are instinctively hostile to radical social change, at least in any terms that a left-winger of the 1950s or '60s would understand. The US environmental movement is now strategically supervised and thus neutered as a radical force by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the lead dispenser of patronage and money.
> >
> > Refect upon "patroange" and its desirability when you stave off attempts to make any structural change to the govt.
> >
> > Farida
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 02:08:08 -0700
> > Subject: MUST READ: The dangers of Grameenism & microcredit
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.himalmag.com/The-danger-of-Grameenism_nw4752.html
> >
> >
> >
> > The danger of Grameenism
> > October 2010By: Patrick Bond
> > HIMAL MAGAZINE
> >
> > Far from being a panacea for fighting rural poverty, microcredit can impose additional burdens on the rural poor, without markedly improving their socio-economic condition. (Also below, Khorshed Alam on why microcredit initiatives inspired by Mohammad Yunus's vision and implemented by Grameen Bank and other NGOs have not gone nearly as well in Bangladesh as has been publicised worldwide.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > For years, the example of microcredit in Bangladesh has been touted as a model of how the rural poor can lift themselves out of poverty. This widely held perception was boosted in 2006, when Mohammad Yunus and Grameen Bank, the microfinance institution he set up, jointly received the Nobel Peace Prize. In Southasia in particular, and the world in general, microcredit has become a gospel of sorts, with Yunus as its prophet.
> >
> > Consider this outlandish claim, made by Yunus as he got started in the late 1970s: `Poverty will be eradicated in a generation. Our children will have to go to a `poverty museum' to see what all the fuss was about.' According to Milford Bateman, a senior research fellow at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) in London who is one of the world's experts on Grameen and microcredit, the reason this rhetoric resonated with international donors during the era of neoliberal globalisation, was that `they love the non-state, self-help, fiscally-responsible and individual entrepreneurship angles.'
> >
> > Grameen's origins are sourced to a discussion Yunus had with Sufiya Begum, a young mother who, he recalled, `was making a stool made of bamboo. She gets five taka from a business person to buy the bamboo and sells to him for five and a half taka, earning half a taka as her income for the day. She will never own five taka herself and her life will always be steeped into poverty. How about giving her a credit for five taka that she uses to buy the bamboo, sell her product in free market, earn a better profit and slowly pay back the loan?' Describing Begum and the first 42 borrowers in Jobra village in Bangladesh, Yunus waxed eloquent: `Even those who seemingly have no conceptual thought, no ability to think of yesterday or tomorrow, are in fact quite intelligent and expert at the art of survival. Credit is the key that unlocks their humanity.'
> >
> > But what is the current situation in Jobra? Says Bateman, `It's still trapped in deep poverty, and now debt. And what is the response from Grameen Bank? All research in the village is now banned!' As for Begum, says Bateman, `she actually died in abject poverty in 1998 after all her many tiny income-generating projects came to nothing.' The reason, Bateman argues, is simple: `It turns out that as more and more `poverty-push' micro-enterprises were crowded into the same local economic space, the returns on each micro-enterprise began to fall dramatically. Starting a new trading business or a basket-making operation or driving a rickshaw required few skills and only a tiny amount of capital, but such a project generated very little income indeed because everyone else was pretty much already doing exactly the same things in order to survive.'
> >
> > Contrary to the carefully cultivated media image, Yunus is not contributing to peace or social justice. In fact, he is an extreme neoliberal ideologue. To quote his philosophy, as expressed in his 1998 autobiography, Banker to the Poor,
> >
> > I believe that `government', as we know it today, should pull out of most things except for law enforcement and justice, national defense and foreign policy, and let the private sector, a `Grameenized private sector', a social-consciousness-driven private sector, take over their other functions.
> > At the time as he wrote those words, governments across the world, especially in the United States, were pulling back from regulating financial markets. In 1999, for example, Larry Summers (then US Treasury secretary and now President Barack Obama's overall economics tsar) set the stage for the crash of financial-market instruments known as derivatives, by refusing to regulate them as he had been advised.
> >
> > The resulting financial crisis, peaking in 2008, should have changed Yunus's tune. After all, the catalysing event in 2007 was the rising default rate on a rash of `subprime mortgage' loans given to low-income US borrowers. These are the equivalent of Grameen's loans to very poor Bangladeshis, except that Yunus did not go so far as the US lenders in allowing them to be securitised with overvalued real estate.
> >
> > Yunus has long argued that `credit is a fundamental human right', not just a privilege for those with access to bank accounts and formal employment. But reflect on this matter and you quickly realise how inappropriate it is to compare bank debt – a liability that can be crushing to so many who do not survive the rigours of neoliberal markets - with crucial political and civil liberties, health care, water, nutrition, education, environment, housing and the other rights guaranteed in the constitutions of countries around the world.
> >
> > Microcredit mantras
> > By early 2009, as the financial crisis tightened its grip on the world, Yunus had apparently backed away from his long-held posture. At that time, he told India's MicroFinance Focus magazine the very opposite of what he had been saying: `If somebody wants to do microcredit – fine. I wouldn't say this is something everybody should have' (emphasis added). Indeed, the predatory way that credit was introduced to vulnerable US communities in recent years means that Yunus must now distinguish his Grameen Bank's strategy of `real' microcredit from microcredit `which has a different motivation'. As Yunus told MicroFinance Focus, `Whenever something gets popular, there are people who take advantage of that and misuse it.'
> >
> > To be sure, Yunus also unveiled a more radical edge in that interview, interpreting the crisis in the following terms. `The root causes are the wrong structure, the capitalism structure that we have,' he said. `We have to redesign the structure we are operating in. Wrong, unsustainable lifestyle.' Fair enough. But in the next breath, Yunus was back to neoliberalism, arguing that state microfinance regulation `should be promotional, a cheerleader.'
> >
> > For Yunus, regulators are apparently anathema, especially if they clamp down on what are, quite frankly, high-risk banking practices, such as hiding bad debts. As the Wall Street Journal conceded in late 2001, a fifth of the Grameen Bank's loans were more than a year past their due date: `Grameen would be showing steep losses if the bank followed the accounting practices recommended by institutions that help finance microlenders through low-interest loans and private investments.' A typical financial sleight-of-hand resorted to by Grameen is to reschedule short-term loans that are unpaid after as long as two years; thus, instead of writing them off, it lets borrowers accumulate interest through new loans simply to keep alive the fiction of repayments on the old loans. Not even extreme pressure techniques – such as removing tin roofs from delinquent women's houses, according to the Journal report – improved repayment rates in the most crucial areas, where Grameen had earlier won its global reputation among neoliberals who consider credit and entrepreneurship as central prerequisites for development.
> >
> > By the early 2000s, even the huckster-rich microfinance industry had felt betrayed by Yunus' tricks. `Grameen Bank had been at best lax, and more likely at worst, deceptive in reporting its financial performance,' wrote leading microfinance promoter J D Von Pischke of the World Bank in reaction to the Journal's revelations. `Most of us in the trade probably had long suspected that something was fishy.' Agreed Ross Croulet of the African Development Bank, `I myself have been suspicious for a long time about the true situation of Grameen so often disguised by Dr Yunus's global stellar status.'
> > Several years earlier, Yunus was weaned off the bulk of his international donor support, reportedly USD 5 million a year, which until then had reduced the interest rate he needed to charge borrowers and still make a profit. Grameen had allegedly become `sustainable' and self-financing, with costs to be fully borne by borrowers.
> >
> > To his credit, Yunus had also battled backward patriarchal and religious attitudes in Bangladesh, and his hard work extended credit to millions of people. Today there are around 20,000 Grameen staffers servicing 6.6 million borrowers in 45,000 Bangladeshi villages, lending an average of USD 160 per borrower (about USD 100 million/month in new credits), without collateral, an impressive accomplishment by any standards. The secret to such high turnover was that poor women were typically arranged in groups of five: two got the first tranche of credit, leaving the other three as `chasers' to pressure repayment, so that they could in turn get the next loans.
> >
> > At a time of new competitors, adverse weather conditions (especially the 1998 floods) and a backlash by borrowers who used the collective power of non-payment, Grameen imposed dramatic increases in the price of repaying loans. That Grameen was gaining leverage over women – instead of giving them economic liberation – is a familiar accusation. In 1995, New Internationalist magazine probed Yunus about the 16 `resolutions' he required his borrowers to accept, including `smaller families'. When New Internationalist suggested this `smacked of population control', Yunus replied, `No, it is very easy to convince people to have fewer children. Now that the women are earners, having more children means losing money.' The long history of forced sterilisation in the Third World is often justified in such narrow economic terms.
> >
> > In the same spirit of commodifying everything, Yunus set up a relationship with the biotechnology giant Monsanto to promote biotech and agrochemical products in 1998, which, New Internationalist reported, `was cancelled due to public pressure.' As Sarah Blackstock reported in the same magazine the following year: `Away from their homes, husbands and the NGOs that disburse credit to them, the women feel safe to say the unmentionable in Bangladesh – microcredit isn't all it's cracked up to be … What has really sold microcredit is Yunus's seductive oratorical skill.' But that skill, Blackstock explains, allows Yunus and leading imitators
> >
> >
> >
> > to ascribe poverty to a lack of inspiration and depoliticise it by refusing to look at its causes. Microcredit propagators are always the first to advocate that poor people need to be able to help themselves. The kind of microcredit they promote isn't really about gaining control, but ensuring the key beneficiaries of global capitalism aren't forced to take any responsibility for poverty.
> >
> >
> > The big lie
> >
> >
> > Microfinance gimmickry has done huge damage in countries across the globe. In South Africa in 1998, for instance, when the emerging-markets crisis raised interest rates across the developing world, an increase of seven percent, imposed over two weeks as the local currency crashed, drove many South African borrowers and their microlenders into bankruptcy. Ugandan political economist Dani Nabudere has also rebutted `the argument which holds that the rural poor need credit which will enable them to improve their productivity and modernise production.' For Nabudere, this `has to be repudiated for what it is – a big lie.'
> >
> > Inside even the most neoliberal financing agency (and Grameen sponsor), the World Bank, these lessons were by obvious by the early 1990s. Sababathy Thillairajah, an economist, had reviewed the Bank's African peasant credit programmes in 1993, and advised colleagues: `Leave the people alone. When someone comes and asks you for money, the best favour you can give them is to say `no'… We are all learning at the Bank. Earlier we thought that by bringing in money, financial infrastructure and institutions would be built up – which did not occur quickly.'
> >
> > But not long afterwards, Yunus stepped in to help the World Bank with ideological support. When I met Yunus in Johannesburg, not long before South Africa's April 1994 liberation, he vowed he wouldn't take Bank funds. Yet in August 1995, Yunus endorsed the Bank's USD 200 million global line of credit aimed at microfinance for poor women. However, according to ODI's Bateman, the World Bank `insisted on a few changes: the mantra of `full cost recovery', the hard-line belief that the poor must pay the full costs of any program ostensibly designed to help them, and the key methodology is to impose high interest rates and to reward employees as Wall Street-style motivation.'
> >
> > Bateman also remarks on the damage caused to Bangladesh itself by subscribing to the microcredit gospel: `Bangladesh was left behind by neighbouring Asian countries, who all choose to deploy a radically different `development-driven' local financial model: Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand, China, Vietnam.' And the countries that were more reliant on neoliberal microfinance soon hit, Bateman insists, `saturation, with the result of over-indebtedness, `microcredit bubbles', and small business collapse.' Just as dangerous, Yunus's model actually `destroys social capital and solidarity,' says Bateman. It is used up `when repayment is prioritised over development. No technical support is provided, threats are used, assets are seized. And governments use microfinance to cut public spending on the poor and women, who are left to access expensive services from the private sector.' The Yunus phenomenon is, in short, a more pernicious contribution to capitalism than ordinary loan-sharking, because it has been bestowed with such legitimacy.
> >
> > Bateman records extremely high microfinance interest rates `everywhere'. In Bangladesh, for instance, these are around 30 to 40 percent; in Mexico, they go up as high as 80 percent. No wonder that in the most recent formal academic review of microfinance, by economist Dean Karlan of Yale University, `There might be little pockets here and there of people who are made better off, but the average effect is weak, if not nonexistent.'
> >
> > As the Wall Street Journal put it in 2001, `To many, Grameen proves that capitalism can work for the poor as well as the rich.' And yet the record should prove otherwise, just as the subprime financial meltdown has shown the mirage of finance during periods of capitalist crisis.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Reputation and reality
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The latest figures suggest that nearly 70 million people (out of 150 million total) in Bangladesh are still living below the poverty line; of those, about 30 million are considered to live in chronic poverty. Grameen Bank now has around seven million borrowers in Bangladesh, 97 percent of whom are women. Yet after decades of poverty-alleviation programmes what effect has Grameen had in its home country? The microcredit initiatives inspired by Mohammad Yunus's vision and implemented by Grameen Bank and other NGOs have not gone nearly as well in Bangladesh as has been publicised worldwide.
> >
> > To start with, the terms of microcredit in Bangladesh are inflexible and generally far too restrictive – by way of weekly repayment and savings commitments – to allow the borrowers to utilise the newfound credit freely. After all, with a first repayment scheduled for a week after the credit is given, what are the options but petty trading? The effective interest rate stands at 30 to 40 percent, while some suggest it goes upwards of 60 percent in certain situations. Defaulters, therefore, are on the rise, with many being compelled to take out new loans from other sources at even higher interest rates.
> >
> > Worryingly, in the families of some 82 percent of female borrowers, exchange of dowry has increased since their enrolment with Grameen Bank – it seems that micro-borrowing is seen as enabling the families to pay more dowry than otherwise.
> >
> > Only five to 10 percent of Grameen borrowers have showed improvement of their quality of life with the help of microcredit, and those who have done will tend to have other sources of income as well. Fully half of the borrowers who could not improve were able to retain their positions by taking out loans from multiple sources; about 45 percent could not do so at all, and their position deteriorated. Many are thus forced to flee the village and try to find work in an urban area or abroad. It has now become clear that most Grameen borrowers spend their newfound credit for their daily livelihood expenditure, rather than on income-generating initiatives.
> >
> > The main difference between microcredit lenders and feudal moneylenders was that the latter needed collateral. It is true that microcredit has created money flows in rural areas, but also that it created a process through which small-scale landowners can quickly become landless – if one cannot pay back the money at high interest rates, many are forced to sell their land. In cases of failure of timely repayment, instances of seizure by Grameen of tin roofs, pots and pans, and other household goods do take place – amounting to implicit collateral.
> >
> > This does not mean that credit is not useful to the poor and powerless. The problem lies in the approach taken. Poverty is conceptualised extremely narrowly, only in terms of cash income; when in fact it has to do with all aspects of life, involving both basic material needs such as food, clothing and housing; and basic human needs such as human dignity and rights, education, health and equity. It is true that the rural economy today has received some momentum from microcredit. But the questions remain: Why has this link failed to make any significant impact on poverty? Why, despite the purported `success' of microcredit, do people in distress keep migrating to urban centres? Why does a famine-like situation persists in large parts of Bangladesh, particularly in the north? Moreover, why does the number of people under the poverty line keep rising – alongside the rising microcredit?
> >
> > In fact, poverty has its roots and causes, and expanding the credit net without addressing these will never improve any poverty situation. Experience shows that if countries such as Bangladesh rely heavily on microcredit for alleviating poverty, poverty will remain – to keep the microcredit venture alive. Grameen Bank's `wonderful story' of prosperity, solidarity and empowerment has only one problem: it never happened.
> >
> >
> > ~ Khorshed Alam
> >
> > ~ Patrick Bond is a senior professor at the University of KwaZulu-Natal School of Development Studies Centre for Civil Society in Durban, South Africa. Khorshed Alam is executive director of the Alternative Movement for Resources and Freedom Society, based in Dhaka.
> >
> >
> >
> > To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> > From: Ezajur@
> > Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 05:16:54 +0000
> > Subject: [ALOCHONA] The Yunus Saga
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > `The Yunus saga'
> > Courtesy New Age 8/12/10
> >
> > I AGREE with everything Md Mujibul Alam Khan has to say on the `Yunus saga' published in New Age on Monday. However, the Norwegians made it clear that they were not alleging corruption against Yunus. Corruption is alleged against him only by Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League. As it seems, Sheikh Hasina and her leaders can barely contain their glee at this setback for Yunus.
> > Both of Hasina's governments should be held accountable for the errors made by the Grameen Bank. Although the prime minister accuses the Grameen Bank and Yunus of being cruel and fraudulent moneylenders who are responsible for ruining many people's lives, she hasn't done anything about it all these years.
> > Hasina's concern for the image of Bangladesh abroad is laughable, seeing she did as much to hurt it as anyone else over the years. She never initiated an investigation into the corruption and incompetence within her own party and her government.
> > Yunus would bring more honour, good sense and vision to the office than either Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia if he entered politics.
> > Ezajur Rahman
> > Kuwait
> >
>



__._,_.___


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




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

__,_._,___