Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

[ALOCHONA] 10 Ways We Are Being Tracked, Traced, and Databased



10 Ways We Are Being Tracked, Traced, and Databased

Are technological advances infringing on our right to privacy? 
 

The war on terror is a worldwide endeavor that has spurred massive investment into the global surveillance industry - which now seems to be becoming a war on "liberty and privacy."  Given all of the new monitoring technology being implemented, the uproar over warrantless wiretaps now seems moot.  High-tech, first-world countries  are being tracked, traced, and databased, literally around every corner.  Governments, aided by private companies, are gathering a mountain of information on average citizens who so far seem willing to trade liberty for supposed security.  Here are just some of the ways the matrix of data is being collected:
  • Internet -- Internet browsers are recording your every move forming detailed cookies on your activities.  The NSA has been exposed as having cookies on their site that don't expire until 2035.  Major search engines know where you surfed last summer, and online purchases are databased, supposedly for advertising and customer service uses.  IP addresses are collected and even made public.  Controversial websites can be flagged internally by government sites, as well as re-routing all traffic to block sites the government wants to censor. It has now been fully admitted that social networks provide NO privacy to users, while technologies for real-time social network monitoring are already being used.  The Cybersecurity Act attempts to legalize the collection and exploitation of your personal information.  Apple's iPhone also has browsing data recorded and stored.  All of this despite the overwhelming opposition to cybersurveillance by citizens.
  • RFID  -- Forget your credit cards which are meticulously tracked, or the membership cards for things so insignificant as movie rentals which require your SSN.  Everyone has Costco, CVS, grocery-chain cards, and a wallet or purse full of many more.  RFID  "proximity cards" take tracking to a new level in uses ranging from loyalty cards, student ID, physical access, and computer network access.  Latest developments include an RFID powder developed by Hitachi, for which the multitude of uses are endless -- perhaps including tracking hard currency so we can't even keep cash undetected. (Also see microchips below).
  • Traffic cameras -- License plate recognition has been used to remotely automate duties of the traffic police in the United States, but have been proven to have dual use in England such as to mark activists under the Terrorism Act.  Perhaps the most common use will be to raise money and shore up budget deficits via traffic violations, but uses may descend to such "Big Brother" tactics as monitors telling pedestrians not to litter as talking cameras already do in the UK.
  • Computer cameras and microphones -- The fact that laptops -- contributed by taxpayers -- spied on public school children (at home) is outrageous.  Years ago Google began officially to use computer "audio fingerprinting" for advertising uses.  They have admitted to working with the NSA, the premier surveillance network in the world.  Private communications companies already have been exposed routing communications to the NSA.  Now, keyword tools -- typed and spoken -- link to the global security matrix.
  • Public sound surveillance -- This technology has come a long way from only being able to detect gunshots in public areas, to now listening in to whispers for dangerous "keywords." This technology has been launched in Europe to "monitor conversations" to detect "verbal aggression" in public places.  Sound Intelligence is the manufacturer of technology to analyze speech, and their website touts how it can easily be integrated into other systems. 
  • Biometrics -- The most popular biometric authentication scheme employed for the last few years has been Iris Recognition. The main applications are entry control, ATMs and Government programs. Recently, network companies and governments have utilized biometric authentication including fingerprint analysis, iris recognition, voice recognition, or combinations of these for use in National identification cards.
  • Microchips -- Microsoft's HealthVault and VeriMed partnership is to create RFID implantable microchips.  Microchips for tracking our precious pets is becoming commonplace and serves to condition us to accept putting them in our children in the future.  The FDA has already approved this technology for humans and is marketing it as a medical miracle, again for our safety.
  • Facial recognition -- Anonymity in public is over.  Admittedly used at Obama's campaign events, sporting events, and most recently at the G8/G20 protests in Canada. This technology is also harvesting data from Facebook images and surely will be tied into the street "traffic" cameras.
All of this is leading to Predictive Behavior Technology -- It is not enough to have logged and charted where we have been; the surveillance state wants to know where we are going through psychological profiling.  It's been marketed for such uses as blocking hackers.  Things seem to have advanced to a point where a truly scientific Orwellian world is at hand.  It is estimated that computers know to a 93% accuracy where you will be, before you make your first move.   Nanotech is slated to play a big role in going even further as scientists are using nanoparticles to directly influence behavior and decision making.   

Many of us are asking:  What would someone do with all of this information to keep us tracked, traced, and databased?  It seems the designers have no regard for the right to privacy and desire to become the Controllers of us all.



__._,_.___


[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] Chatra League



Chatra League
 
 
 
 
 
 


__._,_.___


[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] CPD on economy, IMF, Indian loans etc



CPD on economy, IMF, Indian loans 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] U.S. courts Pakistan's top general, with little result



U.S. courts Pakistan's top general, with little result

By Karin Brulliard and Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, January 1, 2011

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - Countless U.S. officials in recent years have lectured and listened to Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, the man many view as the most powerful in Pakistan. They have drunk tea and played golf with him, feted him and flown with him in helicopters.

But they have yet to persuade him to undertake what the Obama administration's recent strategy review concluded is a key to success in the Afghan war - the elimination of havens inside Pakistan where the Taliban plots and stages attacks on coalition troops in Afghanistan.

Kayani, who as Pakistan's army chief has more direct say over the country's security strategy than its president or prime minister, has resisted personal appeals from President Obama, U.S. military commanders and senior diplomats. Recent U.S. intelligence estimates have concluded that he is unlikely to change his mind anytime soon. Despite the entreaties, officials say, Kayani doesn't trust U.S. motivations and is hedging his bets in case the American strategy for Afghanistan fails.

In many ways, Kayani is the personification of the vexing problem posed by Pakistan. Like the influential military establishment he represents, he views Afghanistan on a timeline stretching far beyond the U.S. withdrawal, which is slated to begin this summer. While the Obama administration sees the insurgents as an enemy force to be defeated as quickly and directly as possible, Pakistan has long regarded them as useful proxies in protecting its western flank from inroads by India, its historical adversary.

"Kayani wants to talk about the end state in South Asia," said one of several Obama administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the sensitive relationship. U.S. generals, the official said, "want to talk about the next drone attacks."

The administration has praised Kayani for operations in 2009 and 2010 against domestic militants in the Swat Valley and in South Waziristan, and has dramatically increased its military and economic assistance to Pakistan. But it has grown frustrated that the general has not launched a ground assault against Afghan Taliban and al-Qaeda sanctuaries in North Waziristan.

Kayani has promised action when he has enough troops available, although he has given no indication of when that might be. Most of Pakistan's half-million-man army remains facing east, toward India.

In recent months, Kayani has sometimes become defiant. When U.S.-Pakistani tensions spiked in September, after two Pakistani soldiers were killed by an Afghanistan-based American helicopter gunship pursuing insurgents on the wrong side of the border, he personally ordered the closure of the main frontier crossing for U.S. military supplies into Afghanistan, according to U.S. and Pakistani officials.

In October, administration officials choreographed a White House meeting for Kayani at which Obama could directly deliver his message of urgency. The army chief heard him out, then provided a 13-page document updating Pakistan's strategic perspective and noting the gap between short-term U.S. concerns and Pakistan's long-term interests, according to U.S. officials.

Kayani reportedly was infuriated by the recent WikiLeaks release of U.S. diplomatic cables, some of which depicted him as far chummier with the Americans and more deeply involved in Pakistani politics than his carefully crafted domestic persona would suggest. In one cable, sent to Washington by the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad last year, he was quoted as discussing with U.S. officials a possible removal of Pakistan's president and his preferred replacement.

On the eve of the cable's publication in November, the normally aloof and soft-spoken general ranted for hours on the subject of irreconcilable U.S.-Pakistan differences in a session with a group of Pakistani journalists.

The two countries' "frames of reference" regarding regional security "can never be the same," he said, according to news accounts. Calling Pakistan America's "most bullied ally," Kayani said that the "real aim of U.S. strategy is to de-nuclearize Pakistan."

The general's suspicions

Kayani was a star student at the U.S. Army's Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., in 1988, writing his master's thesis on "Strengths and Weaknesses of the Afghan Resistance Movement." He was among the last Pakistanis to graduate from the college before the United States cut off military assistance to Islamabad in 1990 in response to Pakistan's suspected nuclear weapons program. Eight years later, both Pakistan and India conducted tests of nuclear devices.

The estrangement lasted until President George W. Bush lifted the sanctions in 2001, less than two weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Kayani is far from alone in the Pakistani military in suspecting that the United States will abandon Pakistan once it has achieved its goals in Afghanistan, and that its goal remains to leave Pakistan defenseless against nuclear-armed India.

Kayani "is one of the most anti-India chiefs Pakistan has ever had," one U.S. official said.

The son of a noncommissioned army officer, Kayani was commissioned as a second lieutenant in 1971. He was chief of military operations during the 2001-02 Pakistan-India crisis. As head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency from 2004 to 2007, he served as a point man for back-channel talks with India initiated by then-President Pervez Musharraf. When Musharraf resigned in 2008, the talks abruptly ended.

The Pakistani military has long been involved in politics, but few believe that the general seeks to lead the nation. "He has stated from the beginning that he has no desire to involve the military in running the country," said Shuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council. But that does not mean Kayani would stand by "if there was a failure of civilian institutions," Nawaz said. "The army would step in."

'Mind-boggling'

Even some Pakistanis see Kayani's India-centric view as dated, self-serving and potentially disastrous as the insurgents the country has harbored increasingly turn on Pakistan itself.

"Nine years into the Afghanistan war, we're fighting various strands of militancy, and we still have an army chief who considers India the major threat," said Cyril Almeida, an editor and columnist at the English-language newspaper Dawn. "That's mind-boggling."

Kayani has cultivated the approval of a strongly anti-American public that opinion polls indicate now holds the military in far higher esteem than it does the weak civilian government of President Asif Ali Zardari. Pakistani officials say the need for public support is a key reason for rebuffing U.S. pleas for an offensive in North Waziristan. In addition to necessitating the transfer of troops from the Indian border, Pakistani military and intelligence officials say such a campaign would incite domestic terrorism and uproot local communities. Residents who left their homes during the South Waziristan offensive more than a year ago have only recently been allowed to begin returning to their villages.

The real power broker

Pakistani democracy activists fault the United States for professing to support Pakistan's civilian government while at the same time bolstering Kayani with frequent high-level visits and giving him a prominent role in strategic talks with Islamabad.

Obama administration officials said in response that while they voice support for Pakistan's weak civilian government at every opportunity, the reality is that the army chief is the one who can produce results.

"We have this policy objective, so who do we talk to?" one official said. "It's increasingly clear that we have to talk to Kayani."

Most of the talking is done by Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In more than 30 face-to-face meetings with Kayani, including 21 visits to Pakistan since late 2007, Mullen has sought to reverse what both sides call a "trust deficit" between the two militaries.

But the patience of other U.S. officials has worn thin. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of the U.S.-led coalition in Afghanistan, has adopted a much tougher attitude toward Kayani than his predecessor, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, had, according to several U.S. officials.

For his part, Kayani complains that he is "always asking Petraeus what is the strategic objective" in Afghanistan, according to a friend, retired air marshal Shahzad Chaudhry.

As the Obama administration struggles to assess the fruits of its investment in Pakistan, some officials said the United States now accepts that pleas and military assistance will not change Kayani's thinking. Mullen and Richard C. Holbrooke, who served as the administration's special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan until his death last month, thought that "getting Kayani to trust us enough" to be honest constituted progress, one official said.

But what Kayani has honestly told them, the official said, is: "I don't trust 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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Fwd: Koko's Singapore partner fined




 
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Subject: Koko's Singapore partner fined
To:


Koko's Singapore partner fined
 
 



__._,_.___


[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] bangladesh history



Attn: Dr. Manik

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

will you have time to write more about how:

1. AL leaders pushed ill-prepared, ill-informed Bangladeshis infront of Pakistani machine guns,
while they were having fun in Kolkata.
2. The betrayal of Sk. Mujib ......look at what he promised before 1971.
3. History of Bangladesh ....1972 - 1975, a playgorund of AL thugs, politicians.



Re: Creation of Bangladesh

The Significance of the Six-Point Movement and its Impact on Bangladesh's Struggle for Freedom and Self-determination

M. Waheeduzzaman Manik

Introduction:The historic Six-Point movement in 1966 was the turning point in Bangladesh's quest for greater autonomy and self-determination from Pakistan's colonial domination. The six-point demand has been widely credited as the 'charter of freedom' in the history of Bangladesh's struggle for freedom and independence. 

The six-point plan had envisaged, among other things, a full-blown federal form of Government based on the 1940 Lahore Resolution, a parliamentary system of government directly elected by the people on the basis of adult franchise, two separate currencies or two reserve banks for the two wings of Pakistan, and a para-military force for East Pakistan. The spectacular success of the six-point movement in 1966 had prompted the ruling coterie of Pakistan to discredit the organizers of this movement. 

Although Ayub Khan's diabolical regime had used various brutal punitive measures against the proponents, organizers and supporters of the six-point formula, this historic movement had seriously impacted and conditioned the subsequent political development in Pakistan. 

The main purpose of this paper is to assess the significance of the six-point movement and its impact on Bangladesh's struggle for freedom and self-determination. Once the main contents of the six-point plan are summarized, the nature, magnitude, and impact of the six-point movement will be appraised. Aimed at substantiating and validating my own observations about the magnitude and impact of the six-point movement, some scholarly observations will be cited. Finally, some concluding remarks will be made. 

The Six-Point Plan: the Main Elements

Sheikh Mujibur Rhaman, the then General Secretary of the East Pakistan Awami League (EPAL), had personally submitted the six-point program to the subject-matter committee of the All-Party Meeting of the opposition political parties of the then Pakistan in Lahore on February 5, 1966. Based on his "6-Point Formula: Our Right to Live" [March 23, 1966], the chief demands and themes of the historic six-point plan are being summarized as follows: 

Point 1: "The Constitution should provide for a Federation of Pakistan in its true sense on the basis of [1940] Lahore Resolution, and Parliamentary form of Government with supremacy of legislature directly elected on the basis of universal adult franchise." 

Point 2: The Federal Government of Pakistan "shall deal with only two subjects, viz.: defense and Foreign Affairs, and all other residuary subjects shall vest in the federating states." 

Point 3: "Two separate but freely convertible currencies for two wings [of Pakistan] should be introduced;" or if this is not feasible, there should be one currency for the whole country, but effective constitutional provisions should be introduced to stop the flight of capital from East to West Pakistan. Furthermore, a separate Banking Reserve should be established and separate fiscal and monetary policy to be adopted for East Pakistan. 

Point 4: The power of taxation and revenue collection shall be vested in the "federating units and the Federal Centre will have no such power." However, the Federation will be entitled to have a share in the state taxes to meet its expenditures. "The Consolidated Federal Fund shall come out of a levy of certain percentage of all state taxes." 

Point 5: There should be two separate accounts for the foreign exchange earnings of the two wings with clear assurance that "earnings of East Pakistan shall be under the control of East Pakistan Government and that of West Pakistan under the control of West Pakistan Government." And the "foreign exchange requirements of the Federal Government [of Pakistan] should be met by the two wings equally or in a ratio to be fixed. The indigenous products should move free of duty between the two wings." The Constitution should "empower the units [provinces] to establish trade and commercial relations with, set up trade missions in and enter into agreements with foreign countries." 

Point 6: East Pakistan should have a separate "militia" or "para-military" force. 

Immediate Reactions of the Pakistani Political Leaders to the Six-Point Plan

Instead of endorsing Sheikh Mujib's legitimate six-point-based demand for "maximum" provincial autonomy, the mainstream leaders of the so-called opposition parties for establishing democracy in Pakistan were not even willing to include his proposal in the official agenda of the conference for initiating discussion on the merits or demerits of the of the proposed six-point demands. In fact, no West Pakistani political leaders (not even Nawabzada Nasarullah Khan, the President of the then All-Pakistan Awami League) were willing to lend any support to Sheikh Mujib's clarion call for maximum provincial autonomy based on the proposed six-point program. 

It is also really appalling to recapitulate even after forty long years that the non-Awami League delegates from the then East Pakistan did not endorse the six-point demand. Like their West-Pakistani counterparts, Bengali speaking renegades had also smelled an element of "secession" or "disintegration" of Pakistan in the six-point program. In fact, Sheikh Mujib's six-point demand could not be pried out of the "subject-matter committee" of that so-called All-party conference. Rather, the proposed six-point anchored proposal for maximum provincial autonomy had received frontal attacks from the mainstream ruling elite of Pakistan. The veteran West Pakistani political stalwarts, in conjunction with their cohorts from the then East Pakistan, had started a slanderous propaganda campaign against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman --- - the chief architect and proponent of the six-point charter even though most of those instant criticisms of the proposed six-point program were characterized by blatant falsehoods, conjectures, distortions, and innuendoes. Yet Sheikh Mujibur Rahman refused to be blackmailed or intimidated by those critics. 

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Immediate Response to the Critics

In a press conference at Lahore on February 10, 1966, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had pointed out the uselessness and irrelevance of the All-Party Conference. He had clearly articulated that the question of demanding genuine "provincial autonomy" based on the proposed six-point program should not be misconstrued or dismissed as "provincialism." He underscored that the proposed six-point demand was not designed to harm the common people of West Pakistan. 

He had pointed out that the 17-day war between Pakistan and India (1965) made it crystal clear to the "East Pakistanis" that the defense of East Pakistan couldn't be contingent upon the mercy or courtesy of West Pakistan. He reminded the audience that instead of relying on West Pakistan for its own defense-- a distant land located one thousand miles away, East Pakistan should be made self-sufficient for the purpose of defending itself from external aggression. He also made it abundantly clear that his six-point plan for "maximum" provincial autonomy reflected the long-standing demands of the people of East Pakistan. 

On his return from Lahore to Dhaka on February 11, 1966, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had provided further clarification on his six-point demands in a press conference. He explained why he had disassociated himself from the All-Party conference in Lahore. He had clearly stated that the delegates from East Pakistan Awami League (EPAL) had rejected not only the proposals passed by the All-Party Conference but also severed all ties with the disgruntled leaders of this so-called conference of the opposition parties. He said that it was not at all possible for him or his party to "betray the genuine interests" of the aggrieved and deprived people of East Pakistan. He emphasized that the immediate adoption and implementation of his six-point demand "will be conducive to foster durable relationship between two provinces of Pakistan." 

In a press conference on February 14, 1966, he reiterated that the "the question of autonomy appears to be more important for East Pakistan after the 17-day war between Pakistan and India. The time is ripe for making East Pakistan self-sufficient in all respects." 

Reaction of Ayub Khan's Dictatorial Regime to the Six-Point Plan

Immediately after the provincial autonomy plan based on the six-point formula was unveiled by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at the Lahore conference of opposition political parties in early February, 1966, the military autocracy of the self-declared Field Marshal Ayub Khan was quick to denounce it as a separatist or secessionist move. Aimed at browbeating the dedicated champions of greater provincial autonomy, Ayub Khan, the autocratic President of the then Islamic Republic of Pakistan, had started discrediting both the message and the messenger of the six-point program. 

Appearing in the final session of the Pakistan (Convention) Muslim League in Dhaka on March 21,1966 (of course being fully attired in the army General's khaki uniform with full display of all of his regalia and medallions), the self-declared President of the then Pakistan had condemned the six-point based plan for maximum provincial autonomy in the harshest possible terms. Characterizing the six-point formula for provincial autonomy as a demand for "greater sovereign Bengal," Ayub Khan had claimed that such a plan would put the "Bengali Muslims" under the permanent domination of the "caste Hindus" of neighboring West Bengal. 

Comparing the "prevailing situation" in Pakistan [as of March, 1966] with the volatile situation that had existed in the USA before the outbreak of a prolonged Civil War in early 1860s, the self-serving President of Pakistan also arrogated himself by saying that the nation might have to face a "civil war" if such were forced upon "him" by the "secessionists." He had even threatened the "autonomists" and "secessionists" with "dire consequences" if they failed to shun the idea of six-point based movement for provincial autonomy. He had also the audacity to underscore that the "language of weapons" would be ruthlessly employed for exterminating the "secessionist elements from Pakistan." 

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the flamboyant Foreign Minister of Pakistan, had openly challenged Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to a public debate on the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed six-point plan at Paltan Maidan in Dhaka. To the chagrin of the Ayub regime, Tajuddin Ahmed, number 2 person in the then Awami League, took up the challenge on behalf of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Unfortunately, it was Z.A. Bhutto who did not show up for debate! Abdul Monem Khan, the then infamous Governor of East Pakistan, had publicly stated that "as long as I remain Governor of this province (East Pakistan), I would see to it that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman remains in jail."

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Launches the Six-Point Movement

In response to such false accusations and vile threats, a fearless Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was quick to respond. In a mammoth public gathering at Paltan Maidan, he thundered: "No amount of naked threats can deviate the deprived Bangalees from their demand for provincial autonomy based on their six-point demands." The greatest champion of Bangalees' rights for self-determination, along with top leaders of the Awami League, kept on addressing numerous public meetings in the nooks and corners of the then East Pakistan. Without wasting a moment, the entire Awami League and the East Pakistan Students' League (EPSL), its student front, were geared toward mobilizing and motivating the general masses in favor of demanding self-government and autonomy based on the six-point program. 

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had presented not only the bold proposal for "maximum provincial autonomy" but he also launched a viable mass movement (which he himself led till he was put in jail on May 9, 1966) for popularizing and mobilizing support for the six-point program. After proposing his historic six-point program, he had actually invested all of his energies and resources in disseminating the fundamental message of "maximum autonomy" for East Pakistan. He started articulating both the rationale and justification for proposing "maximum provincial autonomy" based on his six-point plan. However, before launching a full-fledged mass movement for realizing his six-point demands, Sheikh Mujib had initiated some strategic intra-party measures. The Council Session of the East Pakistan Awami League (EPAL) met on March 18, 19, 20, 1966, and that council session had also restructured the working Committee of the party. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Tajuddin Ahmed were unanimously elected the President and General Secretary respectively of the newly revamped Awami League. The proposed six-point program was also unanimously endorsed by that historic council session for realizing maximum provincial autonomy for the then East Pakistan. 

To the dismay of Pakistan's ruling coterie, the six-point program had generated a great deal of enthusiasm among the people of the then East Pakistan. As noted by Dr. Talukder Maniruzzaman: "To say that this [six-point] programme evoked tremendous enthusiasm among the people of East Bengal would be an understatement. Encouraged by overwhelming popular support, Sheikh Mujib convened a meeting of the EPAL Council [March 18-20, 1966] at which his [Six-Point] programme was unanimously approved and he was elected President of the [Awami League] party. With a phalanx of organizers from the Student's League, Sheikh Mujib then launched a vigorous campaign. For about three months (from mid-February to mid-May), the urban centers of East Bengal seemed to be in the grip of a 'mass revolution,' prompting the Central Government to arrest Sheikh Mujib and his chief lieutenants (Tajuddin Ahmed, Khandokar Mustaq Ahmed, Mansoor Ali, Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury, and others) under the [infamous] Defense of Pakistan Rules and put down a complete general strike in Dacca (June 7, 1966) by killing 13 participating strikers" [Talukder Maniruzzaman, The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath, UPL, 1988. P. 25]. 

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's demand for "maximum autonomy" based on his six-point formula seems to have shaken the foundation of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The six-point plan had exposed the fact that the real intention of Pakistan's ruling elite was to "strengthen" the Punjabi-Mohajir dominated Central Government. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman repeatedly said in several public meetings that that the people of Pakistan had always desired a "strong Pakistan," not a "strong Central Government." The entire ruling establishment of Pakistan was alarmed, and obviously, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the chief proponent of the six-point program, had become the main target of negative publicity. He had to endure various virulent forms of harassment, intimidation, and fraudulent cases. 

Instead of fairly addressing the legitimate grievances and demands of the neglected eastern province of Pakistan, the power elite took a deliberate decision to suppress the quest for maximum provincial autonomy through the use of colonial types of repressive methods and procedures. The ruling coterie of Pakistan was not at all interested in dealing or negotiating with the Awami League on the issue of provincial autonomy even though Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had publicly stated that he was willing to negotiate his six-point plan with anyone in good faith provided a meaningful autonomy was ensured for East Pakistan. Yet the oligarchy of Pakistan started using repressive tactics to suppress the six-point movement. As noted by Dr. Md. Abdul Wadud Bhuyain, "the Ayub regime's policy towards the six-point demand of the AL was one of total suppression. It showed once again that the [Ayub] regime failed to respond to the political demand" [Md. Abdul Wadud Bhuyain, Emergence of Bangladesh & Role of Awami League, New Delhi: Vikas Publishing, 1982, p. 104]. 

Indeed, the six-point movement had generated spontaneous mass enthusiasm throughout East Pakistan. The entire nation was galvanized throughout February-March-April-May-June, 1966. In retaliation, the Government had intensified its policy of repression and persecution against Sheikh Mujib and his followers. For example, while Sheikh Mujib was touring various districts in April 1966 to enlist mass support in favor of his six-point program, he was arrested in almost all important places on flimsy and fraudulent charges. Dr. Anisuzzaman, a distinguished literary figure of Bangladesh, has summarized the nature of the repressive measures which Sheikh Mujib had to confront and endure for launching the historic six-point plan at a critical juncture of our history: "During that period [from the middle of February through May 9, 1966], there was hardly any place where Sheikh Mujib was not arrested [on false charges] for addressing public meetings. Today in Jessore, tomorrow in Khulna, day after tomorrow in Rajshahi. And on the following days in Sylhet, Mymensingh, and Chittagong. Once he was released on bail in one place, he rushed to another place. He had no time to waste. The only time wasted was in the process of posting bail for his release. Arrested once again. Being released once again, and then immediately move to another place (to address the public meetings)." (Freehand translation is mine). [Anisuzzaman, "Bangabandhu in the Context of History," in Mreetoonjoyee Mujib (Immortal Mujib), Dhaka; Bangabandhu Parishad, 1995, pp.11-12]. 

Throughout the month of May 1966, the Central Government of Pakistan, of course in full collaboration with Abdul Monem Khan, Ayub Khan's handpicked Governor of East Pakistan had enthusiastically cracked down on all senior most leaders of the Awami League. The arrestees under the Defence of Pakistan Rules included, among others, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Tajuddin Ahmed, Syed Nazrul Islam, Khondokar Moshtaque Ahmed, M. Mansoor Ali, and AHM Kamruzzaman. However, the governmental crackdown on the top leaders of the Awami League couldn't dampen the spirit of the organizers and supporters of the six-point movement. 

It was on June 7, 1966 when a full-blown hartal was observed in support of the six-point program throughout the urban centers of the then East Pakistan. In defiance of various oppressive and repressive measures of the autocratic Government of Pakistan, people from walks of life had lent their spontaneous support to this hartal. Obviously, it was a mass response to governmental repressive measures and state sponsored violence since the middle of February 1966 when the historic six-point movement was launched. . Several dozen men were shot dead during hartal on June 7, 1966. Hundreds of participants of the movement were injured. Thousands of Awami League leaders. (Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the most volatile and articulate champion of "maximum autonomy" for the then East Pakistan was already put in jail on May 9, 1966) and student workers were put behind bars without any trial. Hulias (warrants of arrest) were issued on hundreds of Awami League workers and student leaders. The Daily Ittefaq, the most popular Bangla newspaper of the then eastern province of Pakistan, was shut down, its press was confiscated, and its editor, Tofazzal Hossain (Manik Mia), was put in jail. Yet the repressive police forces could not halt the march of the six-point anchored provincial autonomy movement. It was significant that the secondary leaders of the Awami League had organized a very successful general strike on June 7, 1966 all over the province. The mass participation in the general strike on June 7 in support of the six-point plan for provincial autonomy was a clear indication of a perceptible shift in the Bengali mood.

Impact and Implications of the Six-Point Movement

The imprisonment of Sheikh Mujib and other top Awami Leaguers in 1966 could not diminish the mass support for the six-point demand. In fact, Pakistan's ruling elite's policy of suppression of all forms of political freedoms and dissents had miserably failed to halt the march of the six-point movement. Rather, the use of police violence against the organizers and participants of the six-point movement had prompted and motivated the general population of the then East Pakistan to render their full support for the demand of maximum provincial autonomy. Dr. Talukder Maniruzzaman, one of the distinguished political scientists of Bangladesh, has noted the immediate impact of the governmental repressive measures during the six-point movement on Sheikh Mujib's popularity in the following words: "As one might have expected, Sheikh Mujib's arrest in 1966 only served to enhance his popularity, to the point where he became the veritable symbol of Bengali nationalism" [Talukder Maniruzzaman, The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath, UPL, 1988, p. 23].

In his seminal assessment of the role of the Awami League in the political development of Pakistan, Dr. M. Rashiduzzaman succinctly summarized the significance and impact of the six-point movement: "The impact of the six-point demand of the Awami League was felt far and wide. The central government [of Pakistan] dubbed it as a demand for the separation of the Eastern Wing from the rest of the country, and launched a propaganda campaign, which called for a strong central government and decried the autonomists. On June 7, 1966, there was a province-wide hartal (strike) in East Pakistan sponsored by the Awami League to press the demands embodied in the six-point program. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, along with several lieutenants, were again put into the prison. [Sheikh Mujib was put in jail in early May, 1966]. The government also blamed 'foreign interests' in the agitation led by the six-pointers.. ----- After about a year, several East Pakistani civil servants and military officers were arrested on the charge that they had conspired to separate the East Wing by violent means in collusion with India. Eventually, the so-called 'Agartala Conspiracy case' was initiated against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and 31 others for alleged high treason." (M. Rashiduzzaman,"The Awami League in the Political Development of Pakistan," Asian Survey, Vol. 10, No. 7, JULY, 1970; pp. 574-587]. In the same article, Dr. Rashiduzzaman also observed about the impact of the six-point movement on the 11-point charter of the 1969 student-mass movement: "For all practical purposes, the eleven-point student program was an expanded version of the Awami League's six- point demand for autonomy." 

It is evident from the preceding quotations that the six-point movement had a far reaching effects on the subsequent political development in the then Pakistan. It is widely acknowledged that the six point movement was a catalyst to the fomenting of a sustainable movement against President Ayub Khan and his regime in early 1969. In fact, the origins of both the Agartala Conspiracy Case and the anti-Ayub student-mass movement in 1969 can be traced back to the six-point movement. Aimed at destroying Bangalees' quest for full-blown autonomy and self-determination once and for all, a vile conspiracy was hatched out against Mujibur Rahman, the most articulate champion of greater provincial autonomy. At the behest of Ayub Khan, the Punjabi-Muhajir dominated Central Government of Pakistan had implicated Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the fraudulent Agartala Conspiracy Case. The real agenda of Pakistan's ruling elite was to hang him as a "traitor." In other words, the Government of Pakistan wanted to eliminate Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the ardent defender of the legitimate rights of his people, for maintaining a status quo in the form of colonial rule in East Pakistan. However, an anti-Ayub student-mass movement in late 1968 and early 1969 led to the withdrawal of the so-called Agartala Conspiracy case and the unconditional release of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman from imprisonment. 

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was at best regarded as the top leader of the Awami League when he had launched the six-point movement in early 1966. He was not yet regarded as the "undisputed leader" of all Bengali speaking people of the then East Pakistan. Nor was he called 'Bangabandhu' in 1966. He was not the only political leader of the then East Pakistan who had championed the cause of full provincial autonomy. In fact, there were other top political leaders even within his party with impressive credentials and tested commitment to the pursuit of full autonomy for East Pakistan. There were also more senior political leaders in other political parties, including Maulana Bhasani, who were quite vocal for greater provincial autonomy for East Pakistan. Being disgusted with the colonial brand of exploitation of East Pakistan by West Pakistani ruling coterie, Maulana Bhasani had uttered "goodbye" to West Pakistan more than once --- at least a decade earlier than the historic six-point movement. In fact, Maulana Bhasani was never willing to compromise on the issue of full provincial autonomy for the then East Pakistan. 

Yet Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's fearlessness and relentlessness gave birth to the six-point movement for realizing full provincial autonomy in the early months of 1966. There is no doubt that his relentlessness in starting and sustaining a pragmatic Bengali nationalistic movement that was deliberately geared toward achieving maximum autonomy had clearly distinguished him from other contemporary champions of provincial autonomy. His "fearlessness" also made him the most volatile champion of "full provincial autonomy." Only a courageous leader of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's stature could come up with the six-point plan for accruing full autonomy for East Pakistan at a time when Ayub Khan's brute regime was at its pinnacle after consolidating its grip over the entire power structure of the country. 

The six-point movement had direct bearing on the following momentous events: the making of the infamous Agartala conspiracy case against Shekh Mujib, the volatile student-mass movement of 1969, the withdrawal of the concocted Agartala conspiracy case and the unconditional release of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman from imprisonment on February 22, 1969, the removal of the infamous provincial Governor Monaem Khan, the sudden collapse of Ayub Khan's dictatorship and the rise of Yahya Khan's diabolical regime, the General Elections in 1970 on the basis of adult franchise, the landslide victory of the Awami League in the general elections and the spectacular rise of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the sole spokesperson of the Bengali speaking people of the then Pakistan, the nine-month long liberation war in 1971, and finally the emergence of Bangladesh as an independent nation-state on December 16, 1971. Doubtless, these tumultuous events were milestones in the history of Bangladesh's struggle for freedom and independence. Notwithstanding three decades of rampant distortions of Bangladesh's political history, it is fair to suggest that the six-point movement was the precursor of these momentous events, and the name of the common thread that had firmly connected these milestones was Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. 

Concluding Remarks

There is no doubt that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman would have remained a top Awami League leader even in the absence of a bold provincial autonomy plan in the form of the six-point program. Yet had there been no six-point movement in 1966, there is every doubt if the Agartala Conspiracy Case would have been hatched out against him at that particular time. Had there been no Agartala Conspiracy Case, the student-mass movement of 1969 would not have exclusively focused on his unconditional release from imprisonment. Thus the six-point movement, the Agartala conspiracy case, and the 1969 student-mass movement had provided the much-needed context and momentum for the his emergence as Bangabandhu (Friend of Bengal) Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. From that juncture of our history, he did not have to look backward. The whopping majority of Bengali speaking people of the then East Pakistan had vested their full trust in their Bangabandhu in the general elections of 1970. Therefore, his spectacular success in the historic general elections of 1970 and his emergence as the legitimate sole spokesperson and undisputed leader of his people owe a great deal to his success in the historic six-point movement in 1966. 

The six-point plan had also reflected the legitimate grievances and genuine demands of the people of the then East Pakistan. There is little wonder why the historic six-point movement had garnered so much spontaneous mass support throughout the province. The timing, first for presenting, and then starting a sustainable Bengali nationalist movement for realizing the professed goals of six-point demand was crucially important. The economic and political demands, as stipulated and enumerated under the six-point program, were the frontal assault on the foundation of Pakistan's colonial exploitation and authoritarian modes of governance. 

Dr. M. Waheeduzzaman (Manik) writes from Clarksville, Tennessee, USA where he is a Professor and the Chair of the Department of Public Management at Austin Peay State University. His e-mail address ismwzaman@aol.com or zamanw@apsu.edu

http://bangladesh-web.com/view.php?h...00000000111223




__._,_.___


[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] Suchitra Mitra, the legendary exponent of Rabindra Sangeet died





 Suchitra Mitra


KOLKATA: January3, 2011 - Suchitra Mitra, the legendary exponent of Rabindra Sangeet (Rabindranath Tagore's songs), died in her South Kolkata residence on Monday after a protracted illness. She was 86.

Her death in the 150th birth anniversary year of Tagore, the Nobel laureate, did more than just cast a gloom over the world of culture and art; it marked the end of an era.

Eminent personalities from different walks of life flocked to her residence to pay their last respects on hearing of her passing away.

President Pratibha Patil, in a condolence message from Goa, described Suchitra Mitra as a "renowned exponent of Rabindra Sangeet, a great name in the field of the performing arts, a creative genius and a versatile personality". "Her death will create a void in the world of culture and art", she added.

Suchitra Mitra, through her inimitable renditions of Tagore's songs, had enthralled music lovers worldwide, not just Bengalis or those in the country, Chief Minister, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, said in his condolence message.

"The soul of Tagore's songs was well and deeply manifest in her own style of rendition…I was acquainted with her for a long period….Along with her numerous admirers, students, close relatives and the ordinary people, I too mourn her passing away", he added.

Recipient of the Padma Shri award in 1973, she was also presented the Tagore Hymn Prize in 1945 from the London Tagore Hymn Society, Sangeet Natak Akademi Award in 1986 and several others including the 'Desikottam' conferred on her by the Visva Bharati University. From childhood, Suchitra Mitra cultivated her love for the songs and poetry of Tagore. She was given her first lessons in Rabindra Sangeet by Pankaj Mullick.

Acclaimed as one of the leading exponents and authorities on Rabindra Sangeet, Suchitra Mitra was surrounded by the aura of Rabindranath Tagore and his music from a very early age. Her father, the celebrated litterateur, Saurindra Mohan Mukherjee, was a close associate of the Tagore family of Jorasanko. Suchitra Mitra's natural aptitude in music was recognized by Pankaj Kumar Mullick , who gave her her first lesson in Rabindra Sangeet.

In 1941, Suchitra Mitra received a scholarship to Sangeet Bhavan in Santiniketan, where she had the rare privilege of learning from the greatest names in the world of music - Shrimati Indradevi Chaudhury, Shri Sahntidev Ghosh and Shri Shailajaranjan Mazumdar. Having obtained her Diploma from Santiniketan, Suchitra Mitra returned to Calcutta in 1945. Later in her life, she received her Master Degree in Bengali from Calcutta University. Shrimati Mitra's inherent love and commitment to Tagore's music encourage her to found, Rabitirtha, which today stands out significantly as one of the leading schools of Rabindra Sangeet in the city. Founder and Principal, Suchitra Mitra is still an active figure and inspiration behind this establishment. Shrimati Mitra's dedication, sincerity and comprehension of the subtle nuances underlying Gurudev's songs is that of a 'sadhak'.

Suchitra Mitra's reputation as a successful artiste resulted in her appointment as Lecturer in Rabindra Bharati University, where she held the prestigious office of Head of the Department of Music. In recognition of her creative talents, Suchitra Mitra received a number of awards, amongst them were the Tagore Hymn Prize in 1945 from London. Suchitra was honored with the Padma Shri in 1973 by the Government of India and in 1986 received the Sangit Natak Academy Award, and has the distinction of the recipients of the HMV Golden Disc Award, Shiromoni Puraskar from Asian Paints , Desikottam from Viswa-Bharati, Allauddin Puraskar from the Govt. of West Bengal and accolades apart. Suchitra's greatest achievements has been in her ability to immortalize Tagore's songs both at home and abroad to people of all ages. Invited to the USSR and Hungary, Suchitra Mitra spread the message of Gurudev to the western audience. With the Rabitirtha troupe, she performed Tagore's dance dramas in the USA and Canada. Suchitra Mitra is the author of many books in Bengali on Rabindra Sangeet, and has written a book of poems for children. She has directed her effort towards compiling an Encyclopedia of Tagore's songs for students and researchers. Suchitra Mitra's repertoire and expertise, coupled with her ability to inculcate in others the love of Rabindra Sangeet is unparalleled and establishes her as one of the greatest names in the world of performing arts.

She was conferred D.Litt.degree by Rabindra Bharati University & Burdwan University. She retired in 1984 from Rabindra Bharati as a Professor and the Head of Rabindra Sangeet Department


__._,_.___


[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] Interesting Anecdotes - Pre 1971 Pakistani Army Life by a Retd Brigadier



East Pakistani officers were a special lot in many ways. They shared all the pleasures and pains in the unit like equal comrades in arms, yet there was a strange floating impression that they were different. They were good in studies, generally very sharp and on a short fuse. This impression of disparateness led to a kind of mental distance between our Bengali compatriots and us with no apparent and immediate ill effects.

 

ANALYSIS: Wet bars and abdaars —Mehboob Qadir

Daily Times

Lahore

 

East Pakistani officers were a special lot in many ways. They shared all the pleasures and pain in the unit like equal comrades in arms, yet there was a strange floating impression that they were different. They were good in studies, generally very sharp and on a short fuse

It was 1969 and President Ayub Khan had been shown the door at the presidency by his friend General Yahya Khan after popular demonstrations. Air-conditioners, fridges or freezers were rare in the cantonments and normally seen only in the 'American colony' of Mangla Dam. During the vacation season, an army officer would take over this colony and what a luxury it was. Big fridges, room air-conditioners, American furniture, crockery, cutlery, electrical fittings and even bed linen were provided. One just had to walk in with one's suitcases. Mangla became a sought after posting station in the army.

Elsewhere in the army, most households braved the summers with the help of desert coolers or simple ceiling fans. In 1970, the shah of Iran was to visit Lahore during the summers and the army chief had decided to host a lunch for the royal guest in our mess. Our mess had just been constructed and it was considered fit for the privilege. The only problem was that the dining hall and sitting room were too hot as there were no air-conditioners. Therefore, for the comfort of the shah of Iran, a number of desert coolers were procured through a special grant. Ours was perhaps the only officers' mess in Lahore Cantonment that had this luxury as well as a single air-conditioner in the bar room for a long time afterwards.

Most mess halls and officers clubs used to have regular wet bars where even in those carefree days only a few used to indulge themselves. A small peg was called chhota and a large one patiala. Many years later, liquor was banned and with that certain familiar sights and social occasions also disappeared from officers' mess halls and army clubs. Officially, liquor, abdaars (barmen) and bars ceased to exist. However, licence holding unit sweepers seemingly became well known as a consequence. An abdaar was required to serve at the bar, but not permitted traditionally to speak about it. As a measure of good grace, he could consume an odd peg gratis and if he was sufficiently experienced, he could decline to serve more drinks depending upon the officers' state of absorption and the time of the night. On the weekends, mess card rooms would fill up with players and heavy cigar smoke. Tables were booked in advance. Playing buddies would gather early in the day and the card playing sessions would invariably last for two nights and a day, with officers barely managing to trundle into the unit's physical training ground in the morning on the first working day. It was a rule strictly followed and enforced that no matter when you sleep at night, an officer is never late on parade in the morning.

Dress code and table etiquettes were religiously enforced in the mess. Mess waiters were not called by name; koi hai — anyone there — was the standard call for service. Mess radio or television could only be switched off or on with the permission of the senior most officer present in the anteroom. Loud guffaws and talk about politics, religion, women and the family affairs of others were strictly forbidden. You were expected to maintain a straight face even if you knew some juicy details.

Like any other garrison, Lahore too was a social mixture of self-conscious Pathan, easygoing Punjabi and slick, Urdu speaking Karachiite officers. There was a sprinkling of live wire East Pakistani officers but very few native Sindhi or Baloch officers and men. Sindhis appeared too earthbound to join the army and the Baloch were too unwilling to give up their personal freedom. Besides, it was possible that a serious recruitment effort was still to be undertaken in these non-traditional recruitment provinces. None seemed to notice this difference as acutely as it was felt many years later, more under political compulsions. We had units with a mixed composition of men from all the provinces. However, ethnic composition of the units was never a cause for worry because by and large a fair system of effort and reward prevailed.

East Pakistani officers were a special lot in many ways. They shared all the pleasures and pains in the unit like equal comrades in arms, yet there was a strange floating impression that they were different. They were good in studies, generally very sharp and on a short fuse. This impression of disparateness led to a kind of mental distance between our Bengali compatriots and us with no apparent and immediate ill effects. Sometimes we felt that they would suddenly go quiet on seeing us approaching. By the time it was 1971, they had become more and more reclusive. They used to look for a separate place to sit and engage in heated but low toned discussions. We did not have any idea about their gradual restlessness or prickliness, nor was it considered good manners to overhear others with an effort. Those who knew what the matter was kept quiet about it or maybe nobody in a position of authority listened to them. A great storm was brewing up, which eventually broke upon the likes of us suddenly and with great fury. I was posted to East Pakistan as a young staff officer in an infantry brigade in Jessore and reported there on November 17, 1971, only to be hit by the full force of this hurricane in the face. Racial hubris, political expediency and lust for the control of state power had blinded our national leadership utterly. We were about to pay a horrible price.

The writer is a retired brigadier of the Pakistan Army. He can be reached at clay.potter@hotmail.com



__._,_.___


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

http://bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=2&id=183438&hb=top

where can we get confidence?
who will inspire us
why heroes are becoming a vilain?

I am shocked

- habib


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

[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] BSF killed 33 and tortured 34 others along south-western border in 2010



BSF killed 33 and tortured 34 others along south-western border in 2010
 
They also abducted eight Bangladeshis and lifted 10 cattle, trespassing 612-kilometer-long frontier of six south-western districts last year.The Indian border guards fired 24 rounds of gunshots along the border without any provocation during the same period, border sources said.
 
Competent sources at border said several hundred people of dozens of villages of Jessore, Satkhira, Jhenaidah, Chuadanga, Kushtia and Meherpur districts were victims of BSF atrocities last year.
 
They were either shot dead or tortured to death or taken to India by BSF after abduction. Besides, hundreds of villagers were beaten, robbed off their cattle, crops and other valuables in the last 12 months.
 
Though on record number of fatalities stood at 67 it could be much higher if taken into account that of abductees, whose fate remained unknown yet.
Among the 33 deceased, 18 were shot dead by intruding BSF forces and the rest were captured and brutally tortured to death.
 
Those shot to death were identified as Alauddin of Goira village of Shorsha upazila and Ansaful of Poira village of Chowgachha upazila of Jessore, Safiqul of Baghadanga village of Moheshpur upazila of Jhenaidah, Sabuj of Malbaria village, Bahar Ali of Loraighat village, Obaidul of Padmapukur village and Akbar of Sejia village of same upazila, Nazrul of Buripota village of Sadar upazila of Meherpur, Shahidur of Kazipur of Gangni, Saiful of Ghona village of Sadar upazila of Satkhira, an unnamed youth of the same village, Shariful of Gangnia village, Amzad of Kalinchi of Shyamnagar, Doyal of Shakra of Devhata, Kobirul of Goalia of Kolaroa, Mansur of Chitolmari of Kushtia district, Delwar of Banglabazar upazila and Moktar of Pragpur village of Daulatpur.
 
Those tortured to death were identified as Abdul Gaffar of Protapnagar village of Ashashuni upazila of Satkhira, Azgar of Sekendera of Devhata upazila, Sirajul and Lenin of Town Sripur, Ajgar of Poranpur of Shyamnagar, Shafikul of Mitolpur of Kaliganj and an unidentified man of Bhomra upazila, Samir and his brother Amir of Gantipara village of Shorsha upazila of Jessore district, Hazrat of Harishchandrapur village, Liton of Balunda, Monir and an unidentified man of Putkhali, Mojnu of Shikri and an unidentified man of Durgapur village of same upazila.
 
BSF troops captured and tortured them to death after intruding into Bangladesh and left their bodies either on No Man`s Land or in frontier villages of Bangladesh.
 
Besides, the Bangladeshi men tortured by BSF have become both physically and mentally handicapped because of inhuman torture.Moreover, the whereabouts of the eight Bangladeshis abducted by BSF in between Jan 1, 2010 to Dec 31 could not be known.
 
BGB held flag meetings with BSF on several occasions, discussed these problems, but the BSF atrocities continued with no sign of abetting.
 



__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___