Banner Advertiser

Thursday, February 3, 2011

RE: [ALOCHONA] Re: Naming Dhaka as" Mujib Nagar"



can you please throw some more lights...how a sane, dignified person...can get crazy to

name so many places , after her father?

What quality of LOVE and SENTIMENT is that?
There are so many other ways to show respect. 


khoda hafez







To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: emanur@rahman.com
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 18:37:47 +0000
Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: Naming Dhaka as" Mujib Nagar"



I don't think this is bringing in religion. Rather its a very a logical extrapolation of the way that many regard Bangabandhu. It demonstrates how ridiculous and perhaps dangerous this concept is. It has allowed many to sanitise, rationalise, obscure and generally brush under the carpet responsibility for the malaise that is our country today. It allows us to settle for less.

Yes, the majority of Bangladeshis are Muslim.

Ergo the majority of Bangladeshis should be offended by this worship and the immorality and corruption it breeds and feeds.

Joy Bangla...?
Emanur Rahman | m. +447734567561 | e. emanur@rahman.com

From: shafiq013@yahoo.com
Sender: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:54:22 -0000
To: <alochona@yahoogroups.com>
ReplyTo: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: Naming Dhaka as" Mujib Nagar"

Mr. Eman

You frustration is understood. May be you are sour for some personal reasons. However, may I request you, very humbly, don't drag in religion in your discussion, at the least in this way. Not only it shows your disrespect to religion of Islam but also indicates you have nothing much to say. Even if you are not a Muslim (though your name suggests you are), please show your respect to the religion of the majority in Bangladesh. You may hate Awami League or Sheikh Mujib for some (may be) valid reasons. You have every right to express your viewpoint but it is really a shame to bring-in religion in this way.    

Shafiq Ahmad


--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, "Emanur Rahman" <emanur@...> wrote:
>
> I agree although the Buriganga with its effluence and waste may be the most appropriate choice.
>
> I also propose that "Bismillah..." be removed from the constitution and replaced with "bismilbangabandu.....".
>
> To seal the deal, all references to the Prophet should be removed from a new and official BAL version of the Quran as neither he nor the Almighty had any contribution to the glorious independence war, you know the Bangabandhu v Pakistan war where one man single handedly defeated an entire army.
>
> Joy Bangla!
>
> Emanur Rahman | m. +447734567561 | e. emanur@...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sajjad Hossain shossain456@...
> Sender: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 18:29:17
> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Reply-To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Naming Dhaka as" Mujib Nagar"
>
> In order to pay our indebtedness to Father of the Nation, Bangabondhu Sheikh
> Mujibur Rahman I propose to change the name of Dhaka to "Mujib Nagar"
> and "Bay of Bengal" to "Bay of Bangabondhu".
>
> Any comments from the Alochoks?
>
> SH
> Toronto
>




__._,_.___


[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] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak



Obviously you will not like Shefik Rehman or his sense of humour or anything he writes as he has committed a grievous crime ! His crime is that he has been 'immodest' about two of your most beloved entities - 'Awami League' and 'India' !! I can empathize.  
 


To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: farida_majid@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:23:55 -0500
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak

 
              It is a pity that  for all his admiration for Art Buchwald, Shafik Rehman has learned nothing from that great columnist. Buchwald rarely wrote anything as long-winded, unfocused and pointless as this. The same old anti-India/anti-AL blabbering trying to be sleek and a wannabe wikileak!
.
               Shafik's attempt at sense of humor or political satire has always been pathetic. He fails to see that humor must accompany truth in order to give us a flash of clarity and reality in the midst of confusion and hazy understanding. That is why Socrates used humor in Plato's dialogues. In political satires there should also be a genuine love of people.  The moral outrage expressed by the superb satirical essay "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) is ultimately about his heart crying out for the plight of the people of Ireland caused by the cruel policies of English landlords.

                Here is Shafik Rehman insulting the huge mass of people in Bangladesh who voted in the Dec. 2008 which is pretty humorless and in bad taste. Not a speck of respect or even a mention of the large turnouts at each voting center.  Nothing but vitriol against India and AL again:

Comment: It was generally understood that Awami League had won the
last election (December 2008) with the help of General Moeen and
India. But, it was unknown how much support was given by US to Awami
League.

               I don't think Art Buchwald ever wrote anything that insulted the voting public of the United States.

                 Farida Majid

To:
From: bd_mailer@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 18:23:58 -0800
Subject: [ALOCHONA] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak

 
From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak

Shafik Rehman

On 28 November 2010, website Wikileaks and its five international
associates, namely, The New York Times, The Guardian, EI Pais, Der
Spiegel and Le Monde, began to publish serially "Secret US Diplomatic
Cables". Worldwide repercussions followed and world politics looked a
bit different. The US government was embarrassed. Information
published by Wikileaks were considered to be true.

On the contrary, transcript of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's
telephone conversation with Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina
published on 16 January 2011, has raised doubts about its credibility.
Photocopies of this transcript (in English) have been circulating. Two
English newspapers, an English weekly and a Bengali newspaper
published abridged version of the transcript. But, the question
remained, is this transcript, which may be termed Hillaryleak true?
Not just Awami League supporters have dismissed it as untrue, but some
BNP supporters have expressed doubts as well. So, is Hillaryleak true?

Before going into that, I would like to mention about Art Buchwald who
was the top satirist of the last six decades. In 1925, he was born in
an Austrian-Hungarian Jewish family in New York. His father was a
tailor and very poor. Buchwald was sent to an orphanage. After some
years, Buchwald returned home. At 17, he left home and joined the US
Army. During World War II he was at the Pacific. After the war, he
chose journalism as his profession. He left US and went to Paris.
There he joined as an editorial staff of the European version of The
New York Herald Tribune. Since then he became highly popular by
writing humorous but sharp, satirical yet humanitarian, analytical yet
easy reading socio-political columns. In 1962 Buchwald returned to US.
Tribune Media Syndicate began publishing Buchwald's column in 550
newspapers simultaneously on both sides of the Atlantic. Buchwald's
column became an institution. For readers with sense of humour and
political consciousness, Buchwald's column became a must read. In 1982
Buchwald was awarded Pulitzer Prize.

I was introduced to Buchwald's writings in early '80s. In 1979, I
returned to Dhaka from London and felt the absence of good newspaper
in Bangladesh. We had to depend on BBC World Service radio for
international news. At that time I began to read International Herald
Tribune and was deeply attracted to Buchwald's column. I noticed, he
was the only columnist who could write by mixing fictitious dialogue
with facts. Of course, not all his writings were of this type. But,
often he wrote fictitious dialogue based satirical columns. It is now
said, after Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) who wrote Gulliver's Travels,
Art Buchwald was the topmost political satirist.

In April 1980, I began writing a weekly column, Jaijaidin, in a
Bengali weekly, Sometimes, I began to follow Buchwald's technique. In
1984, I began editing-publishing weekly Jaijaidin and there I began
writing a weekly political column, called Diner Par Din. Occasionally,
I wrote dialogue based columns. They were popular with the readers,
but disliked by the rulers. Weekly Jaijaidin was banned first in 1985
and then in 1986. One of the reasons was, in Diner Par Din column, I
published a fictitious dialogue between the then president HM Ershad
and his foreign minister. I was sent to exile in London. I realised
how dangerous it could be to write fictitious political dialogue.

I continued to read Art Buchwald's columns and came to the conclusion,
to avoid such dangers, the columnist must have deep knowledge on his
characters, his power of imagination should be strong and maximum
precaution must be taken in this kind of writings. In short, this is a
difficult art to muster.

That is why, although in US and UK there are so many good columnists,
we do not see someone like Art Buchwald who can write imaginary
political dialogue.

And on this logic, I would say, tele-talks published in Hillaryleak
may be true. Had there been a Bangladeshi writer who is capable of
writing such imaginary tele-dialogue, we would have known long before.
Had there been an American or a British columnist who is capable of
writing such imaginary tele-talk, we would have read his columns long
before.

So, the question is why some people are hesitant to accept Hillaryleak as true?

To answer that, we shall have to consider Hillaryleak's contents which
can be broadly divided into seven parts. Now read on.

One: After preliminary exchange of greetings Secretary of State said,
Madame Prime Minister I have been updated by Ambassador-at-Large
Stephen Rapp about his visit to Dhaka. Honestly, at the request of New
Delhi, we sent him there and tried our best to help you better
organise the trial. After listening from Amb. Rapp and our Ambassador
Moriarty, I felt obligated to inform you that both I and President
Obama take the issue of human rights in its proper spirit. It is on
this context, I called you to inform you that United States does not
support the trial in its form and content. Bangladesh has to reform
the whole process in a way so that it doesn't become a conduit of
punishing opposition.

Comment: On 13 January 2011, in a press briefing in Dhaka Ambassador
Rapp said that US attaches importance on a fair and transparent war
crimes trial and on amending the law regarding International War
Crimes Tribunal. So, nothing new came out here. The new information is
Ambassador Rapp was sent to Dhaka at the request of New Delhi.

Two: In reply, Prime Minister said, Madame Secretary, I understand
your concern and I already asked my Law Minister to take note of what
Amb. Rapp suggested. This is a trial we undertook with active support
and assistance of New Delhi. I am sure Indian Ambassador in Washington
DC will brief you further on that.

Comment: It was generally regarded that the Prime Minister had begun
the trial with active support and assistance of New Delhi. So, here
too nothing new has come out. The new information is, the role of
Indian Ambassador in Washington is significant.

Three: Secretary then said, Prime Minister, United States stands for a
certain values and policies which may or may not be the likes of New
Delhi. Of course, we have been attentive to New Delhi's most of the
suggestions but this one I thought I should forewarn you.

Prime Minister replied, Madame Secretary we noted your concerns and
can tell you this much that this was in our manifesto and our people
would like to see the trial should go on.

Comment: There is no new revelation. Hasina has always been saying,
people would like to see this trial to go on.

Four: Secretary then said, absolutely, but that has to be done in a
way so that it is accepted internationally. I am sure, even people who
voted for your party, may not accept the trial in its form and format
which is, to our view, flawed and politically motivated. President
Obama working hard to bring peace to your part of the world, Madame
Prime Minister. Therefore, United States would not allow any action
that may only help some legitimate political forces going underground
to create more problem for you and thereby, for us as well.

Prime Minister replied, I understand. I understand. Don't worry we
will fix it. Don't take it that seriously. We are doing it as we have
to do and there are some culprits who we need to straighten up.

Comment: Recently, US foreign policy has been changing to some extent.
You can understand that when you see Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton is apparently supportive of the Egyptian people who are
demonstrating against President Mubarak. The US does not want
punishing religion-based parties on the pretext of weeding out
terrorists. US now knows, such repressive measures against religion
based political parties may drive party activists into underground and
in this jet age, revengeful terrorists may arrive in US and pursue
terrorism there. So, the US wants politics to remain open where
religion based parties may participate without fear. But note, Prime
Minister said, the matter should not be taken seriously. Can the Prime
Minister say this in public? Of course, she is serious. That is why
all the top leaders of Jamaat are in jail.

Five: Secretary then said, Ambassador Rapp also informed me about your
government's influence on the judiciary and I was told how judiciary
is giving verdict the way you want. This is not good at the end. You
have to be watchful.

Prime Minister replied, thank you, thank you. I always value
suggestion from yourself and President Clinton.

Comment: Everybody knows that the judiciary has been set up. The US
also knows it. That is why secretary is forewarning that such a
judiciary may be bad for the country at the end.

Six: Secretary then said, Madame Prime Minister, let me come to the
core point for which I called you. As you have seen even Washington
Post picked up your treatment to Dr. Yunus and Grameen Bank. I thought
it is about time to tell you how upset we are in Washington DC. I am
personally upset because Dr. Yunus has been a family friend to the
Clintons long before his wining of Nobel Prize. President Clinton is
equally upset. Hope you are aware how hard he worked to see Dr. Yunus
gets this award. I know people may have personal issues, but when it
comes to national icon like Dr. Yunus, I thought Bangladesh shouldn't
demonise country's only Nobel Laureate.

Prime Minister tried to stop her. Madame Secretary, please listen,
please listen …

But Secretary continued, Madame Prime Minister, please let me finish
first. I hope you are aware that President Obama is a big fan of
micro-credit. He is a fan of microfinance since his mother had her
thesis on this subject. So, I am making this call to let you know how
upset both of us — President Obama and I — at your continued effort to
demonise Dr. Yunus.

Prime Minister replied, Madame Secretary, I hope you are aware that it
is not us who brought up this issue. Norway is the first to complain
about Dr. Yunus' misplaced fund. After all, this is our domestic issue
and Madame Secretary we will do it as per our own rules and
regulations.

Comment: It is well known that Dr Yunus has a close relationship with
Clinton family. Also known to some is that Bill Clinton had put his
efforts to secure a Nobel Prize for Dr Yunus. What has now been
revealed by this tele-talk is current President Obama is also a fan of
Dr Yunus and Obama's mother had written a thesis on micro-credit
finance. Note that, Prime Minister blamed Norway's initiative. But she
did not say Norway had investigated and cleared Dr Yunus before
awarding him Nobel Prize. Neither did the Prime Minister say that the
prime drive of the documentary telecast in a Norwegian television was
to criticise the concept of micro-credit. Although, Prime Minister did
not mention these, clearly Secretary was aware of the real position.

Seven: After this, Secretary said, Madame Prime Minister, I thought I
would not have to go that far. But, unfortunately, I was wrong. I hope
you know as much we know, how your government came to power. Don't
forget that we helped you by congratulating you after the election
terming it as a free and fair. You know Prime Minister, how this
election result was pre-arranged at the behest of our good friends in
New Delhi. We acted the way they suggested us. And please don't forget
that Gen. Moeen, who brought you to power, now in the USA and perhaps,
we now know, more than you could possibly imagine. Prime Minister, I
am not saying that we will disown you so soon. I am just trying to
place issues in the order of history demands it.

At this point, Prime Minister tried to change the subject and said,
Madame Secretary we are aware of your support and assistance. We will
do all we can to keep you happy. Don't worry. We noted your point. Now
let me know when you are coming to visit my country.

Secretary replied, Thanks for the invitations, Madame Prime Minister.
I thank you for your time.

Prime Minister said, Madame Secretary, please bring President Clinton
and your daughter and son in law.

Hilary hangs up on the other side …

Comment: It was generally understood that Awami League had won the
last election (December 2008) with the help of General Moeen and
India. But, it was unknown how much support was given by US to Awami
League.

The two most significant information to emerge from Hillaryleak are:
a. the results of the elections were pre-arranged, and
b. US had supported this.

So, this then was the main points of Hillaryleak. Those who are saying
that this is not reliable are arguing that the full identity of the
source is not known and the language of the Secretary is not
befitting.

First, consider the source. It was published in Facebook on 16 January
2011 at 10:28 am by Hidden Truth. Obviously, people behind Hidden
Truth did not wish to take risks like that of Julian Assange and
refrained from publishing their real identity.

Note the date and time of the publication.

Prime Minister's Press Secretary Abul Kalam Azad in a press statement
said, Secretary had telephoned Prime Minister on Saturday 15 January
2011 at 9:30 am (BST). It was then 8:30 pm in Washington DC on Friday
14 January 2011, After this tele-talk, the transcript was published in
US on Sunday 16 January at 10:28 am Washington DC time. In other
words, in US, people concerned, had 36 hours to take action on Mr
Azad's statement. Clearly, concerned people in US were deeply annoyed
because something quite opposite regarding the tele-talk had been
stated by Mr Azad. He claimed Secretary of State had praised the Prime
Minister and had promised to act jointly on different issues.

Perhaps that is why, someone in US, who was informed and concerned,
disclosed the text of tele-talk in the Facebook.

Regarding the Secretary's language, anybody who had been listening to
her regularly, will know, terms such as, absolutely, honestly,
conduit, demonise, let me come to the core point, are typically hers.
She also called Clinton as President Clinton. Because, once elected
President of US, he is always called President. The Secretary knows
this. She also knows that President Obama's mother had written a
thesis on micro-credit financing. Not many people (American or
Bangladeshi) would have known this.

And, Prime Minister's language is also typically hers. Note that how
she repeats, I understand I understand, thank you thank you, please
listen please listen.

Actually, Bangladeshis already know about the close relationship of
Awami League with India and that India has been assisting the
government on many issues.

Hillaryleak has merely confirmed what was widely known. So, why
hesitate to accept it as true? Why be reluctant to accept that the
2008 election results were pre-arranged?

We should understand that, that is why Sheikh Hasina after returning
from US in November 2008, decided to contest in the December election,
but did hardly do any election campaign. Whilst her rival, BNP
Chairperson criss-crossed some 10,000 km in two weeks, Sheikh Hasina
stayed back in Dhaka conducting video conferencing. Sheikh Hasina knew
strenuous campaign was unnecessary, a pre-arranged win was waiting.

People will judge whether Hillaryleak is true. It is curious that so
far US has not given any rejoinder on this.

However, if Hillaryleak is true, then we must conclude that, December
2008 election did not bring back democracy — conspiracy was
established.

But where does that leave the Election Commission?

Before answering that, let me go back to Art Buchwald. Due to kidney
failure Buchwald died on 17 January 2007 at age 81.

He wrote his own video obituary which was published the next day by
The New York Times. It showed Buchwald smiling and saying, "Hi, I'm
Art Buchwald. I just died".

Perhaps, after the publication of Hillaryleak, the Election Commission
may say, "Hi, we're Election Commission. We just died".

But, does the Election Commission have the honesty and sense of humour
like Art Buchwald?
————————————-
Shafik Rehman is a writer, editor, TV programme presenter, chartered accountant

http://opinion.bdnews24.com/2011/02/02/from-wikileaks-to-hillaryleak/






__._,_.___


[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] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak





" Comment: It was generally understood that Awami League had won the
last election (December 2008) with the help of General Moeen and
India. But, it was unknown how much support was given by US to Awami
League."

..............................  Is it a new/ exciting  news?
all sensible people in Bdesh is aware of this historic development/

then why farida majid is feeling shy about it?

What kind of " shonar Bangla " Hasina has created this time?
oh....and " digital Bangladesh " too....in a country...where 95% people have nothing to do with PC and computing!!!!

Khoda hafez.





To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
From: farida_majid@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:23:55 -0500
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak



              It is a pity that  for all his admiration for Art Buchwald, Shafik Rehman has learned nothing from that great columnist. Buchwald rarely wrote anything as long-winded, unfocused and pointless as this. The same old anti-India/anti-AL blabbering trying to be sleek and a wannabe wikileak!
.
               Shafik's attempt at sense of humor or political satire has always been pathetic. He fails to see that humor must accompany truth in order to give us a flash of clarity and reality in the midst of confusion and hazy understanding. That is why Socrates used humor in Plato's dialogues. In political satires there should also be a genuine love of people.  The moral outrage expressed by the superb satirical essay "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) is ultimately about his heart crying out for the plight of the people of Ireland caused by the cruel policies of English landlords.

                Here is Shafik Rehman insulting the huge mass of people in Bangladesh who voted in the Dec. 2008 which is pretty humorless and in bad taste. Not a speck of respect or even a mention of the large turnouts at each voting center.  Nothing but vitriol against India and AL again:

Comment: It was generally understood that Awami League had won the
last election (December 2008) with the help of General Moeen and
India. But, it was unknown how much support was given by US to Awami
League.

               I don't think Art Buchwald ever wrote anything that insulted the voting public of the United States.

                 Farida Majid

To:
From: bd_mailer@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 18:23:58 -0800
Subject: [ALOCHONA] From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak

 
From Wikileaks to Hillaryleak

Shafik Rehman

On 28 November 2010, website Wikileaks and its five international
associates, namely, The New York Times, The Guardian, EI Pais, Der
Spiegel and Le Monde, began to publish serially "Secret US Diplomatic
Cables". Worldwide repercussions followed and world politics looked a
bit different. The US government was embarrassed. Information
published by Wikileaks were considered to be true.

On the contrary, transcript of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's
telephone conversation with Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina
published on 16 January 2011, has raised doubts about its credibility.
Photocopies of this transcript (in English) have been circulating. Two
English newspapers, an English weekly and a Bengali newspaper
published abridged version of the transcript. But, the question
remained, is this transcript, which may be termed Hillaryleak true?
Not just Awami League supporters have dismissed it as untrue, but some
BNP supporters have expressed doubts as well. So, is Hillaryleak true?

Before going into that, I would like to mention about Art Buchwald who
was the top satirist of the last six decades. In 1925, he was born in
an Austrian-Hungarian Jewish family in New York. His father was a
tailor and very poor. Buchwald was sent to an orphanage. After some
years, Buchwald returned home. At 17, he left home and joined the US
Army. During World War II he was at the Pacific. After the war, he
chose journalism as his profession. He left US and went to Paris.
There he joined as an editorial staff of the European version of The
New York Herald Tribune. Since then he became highly popular by
writing humorous but sharp, satirical yet humanitarian, analytical yet
easy reading socio-political columns. In 1962 Buchwald returned to US.
Tribune Media Syndicate began publishing Buchwald's column in 550
newspapers simultaneously on both sides of the Atlantic. Buchwald's
column became an institution. For readers with sense of humour and
political consciousness, Buchwald's column became a must read. In 1982
Buchwald was awarded Pulitzer Prize.

I was introduced to Buchwald's writings in early '80s. In 1979, I
returned to Dhaka from London and felt the absence of good newspaper
in Bangladesh. We had to depend on BBC World Service radio for
international news. At that time I began to read International Herald
Tribune and was deeply attracted to Buchwald's column. I noticed, he
was the only columnist who could write by mixing fictitious dialogue
with facts. Of course, not all his writings were of this type. But,
often he wrote fictitious dialogue based satirical columns. It is now
said, after Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) who wrote Gulliver's Travels,
Art Buchwald was the topmost political satirist.

In April 1980, I began writing a weekly column, Jaijaidin, in a
Bengali weekly, Sometimes, I began to follow Buchwald's technique. In
1984, I began editing-publishing weekly Jaijaidin and there I began
writing a weekly political column, called Diner Par Din. Occasionally,
I wrote dialogue based columns. They were popular with the readers,
but disliked by the rulers. Weekly Jaijaidin was banned first in 1985
and then in 1986. One of the reasons was, in Diner Par Din column, I
published a fictitious dialogue between the then president HM Ershad
and his foreign minister. I was sent to exile in London. I realised
how dangerous it could be to write fictitious political dialogue.

I continued to read Art Buchwald's columns and came to the conclusion,
to avoid such dangers, the columnist must have deep knowledge on his
characters, his power of imagination should be strong and maximum
precaution must be taken in this kind of writings. In short, this is a
difficult art to muster.

That is why, although in US and UK there are so many good columnists,
we do not see someone like Art Buchwald who can write imaginary
political dialogue.

And on this logic, I would say, tele-talks published in Hillaryleak
may be true. Had there been a Bangladeshi writer who is capable of
writing such imaginary tele-dialogue, we would have known long before.
Had there been an American or a British columnist who is capable of
writing such imaginary tele-talk, we would have read his columns long
before.

So, the question is why some people are hesitant to accept Hillaryleak as true?

To answer that, we shall have to consider Hillaryleak's contents which
can be broadly divided into seven parts. Now read on.

One: After preliminary exchange of greetings Secretary of State said,
Madame Prime Minister I have been updated by Ambassador-at-Large
Stephen Rapp about his visit to Dhaka. Honestly, at the request of New
Delhi, we sent him there and tried our best to help you better
organise the trial. After listening from Amb. Rapp and our Ambassador
Moriarty, I felt obligated to inform you that both I and President
Obama take the issue of human rights in its proper spirit. It is on
this context, I called you to inform you that United States does not
support the trial in its form and content. Bangladesh has to reform
the whole process in a way so that it doesn't become a conduit of
punishing opposition.

Comment: On 13 January 2011, in a press briefing in Dhaka Ambassador
Rapp said that US attaches importance on a fair and transparent war
crimes trial and on amending the law regarding International War
Crimes Tribunal. So, nothing new came out here. The new information is
Ambassador Rapp was sent to Dhaka at the request of New Delhi.

Two: In reply, Prime Minister said, Madame Secretary, I understand
your concern and I already asked my Law Minister to take note of what
Amb. Rapp suggested. This is a trial we undertook with active support
and assistance of New Delhi. I am sure Indian Ambassador in Washington
DC will brief you further on that.

Comment: It was generally regarded that the Prime Minister had begun
the trial with active support and assistance of New Delhi. So, here
too nothing new has come out. The new information is, the role of
Indian Ambassador in Washington is significant.

Three: Secretary then said, Prime Minister, United States stands for a
certain values and policies which may or may not be the likes of New
Delhi. Of course, we have been attentive to New Delhi's most of the
suggestions but this one I thought I should forewarn you.

Prime Minister replied, Madame Secretary we noted your concerns and
can tell you this much that this was in our manifesto and our people
would like to see the trial should go on.

Comment: There is no new revelation. Hasina has always been saying,
people would like to see this trial to go on.

Four: Secretary then said, absolutely, but that has to be done in a
way so that it is accepted internationally. I am sure, even people who
voted for your party, may not accept the trial in its form and format
which is, to our view, flawed and politically motivated. President
Obama working hard to bring peace to your part of the world, Madame
Prime Minister. Therefore, United States would not allow any action
that may only help some legitimate political forces going underground
to create more problem for you and thereby, for us as well.

Prime Minister replied, I understand. I understand. Don't worry we
will fix it. Don't take it that seriously. We are doing it as we have
to do and there are some culprits who we need to straighten up.

Comment: Recently, US foreign policy has been changing to some extent.
You can understand that when you see Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton is apparently supportive of the Egyptian people who are
demonstrating against President Mubarak. The US does not want
punishing religion-based parties on the pretext of weeding out
terrorists. US now knows, such repressive measures against religion
based political parties may drive party activists into underground and
in this jet age, revengeful terrorists may arrive in US and pursue
terrorism there. So, the US wants politics to remain open where
religion based parties may participate without fear. But note, Prime
Minister said, the matter should not be taken seriously. Can the Prime
Minister say this in public? Of course, she is serious. That is why
all the top leaders of Jamaat are in jail.

Five: Secretary then said, Ambassador Rapp also informed me about your
government's influence on the judiciary and I was told how judiciary
is giving verdict the way you want. This is not good at the end. You
have to be watchful.

Prime Minister replied, thank you, thank you. I always value
suggestion from yourself and President Clinton.

Comment: Everybody knows that the judiciary has been set up. The US
also knows it. That is why secretary is forewarning that such a
judiciary may be bad for the country at the end.

Six: Secretary then said, Madame Prime Minister, let me come to the
core point for which I called you. As you have seen even Washington
Post picked up your treatment to Dr. Yunus and Grameen Bank. I thought
it is about time to tell you how upset we are in Washington DC. I am
personally upset because Dr. Yunus has been a family friend to the
Clintons long before his wining of Nobel Prize. President Clinton is
equally upset. Hope you are aware how hard he worked to see Dr. Yunus
gets this award. I know people may have personal issues, but when it
comes to national icon like Dr. Yunus, I thought Bangladesh shouldn't
demonise country's only Nobel Laureate.

Prime Minister tried to stop her. Madame Secretary, please listen,
please listen …

But Secretary continued, Madame Prime Minister, please let me finish
first. I hope you are aware that President Obama is a big fan of
micro-credit. He is a fan of microfinance since his mother had her
thesis on this subject. So, I am making this call to let you know how
upset both of us — President Obama and I — at your continued effort to
demonise Dr. Yunus.

Prime Minister replied, Madame Secretary, I hope you are aware that it
is not us who brought up this issue. Norway is the first to complain
about Dr. Yunus' misplaced fund. After all, this is our domestic issue
and Madame Secretary we will do it as per our own rules and
regulations.

Comment: It is well known that Dr Yunus has a close relationship with
Clinton family. Also known to some is that Bill Clinton had put his
efforts to secure a Nobel Prize for Dr Yunus. What has now been
revealed by this tele-talk is current President Obama is also a fan of
Dr Yunus and Obama's mother had written a thesis on micro-credit
finance. Note that, Prime Minister blamed Norway's initiative. But she
did not say Norway had investigated and cleared Dr Yunus before
awarding him Nobel Prize. Neither did the Prime Minister say that the
prime drive of the documentary telecast in a Norwegian television was
to criticise the concept of micro-credit. Although, Prime Minister did
not mention these, clearly Secretary was aware of the real position.

Seven: After this, Secretary said, Madame Prime Minister, I thought I
would not have to go that far. But, unfortunately, I was wrong. I hope
you know as much we know, how your government came to power. Don't
forget that we helped you by congratulating you after the election
terming it as a free and fair. You know Prime Minister, how this
election result was pre-arranged at the behest of our good friends in
New Delhi. We acted the way they suggested us. And please don't forget
that Gen. Moeen, who brought you to power, now in the USA and perhaps,
we now know, more than you could possibly imagine. Prime Minister, I
am not saying that we will disown you so soon. I am just trying to
place issues in the order of history demands it.

At this point, Prime Minister tried to change the subject and said,
Madame Secretary we are aware of your support and assistance. We will
do all we can to keep you happy. Don't worry. We noted your point. Now
let me know when you are coming to visit my country.

Secretary replied, Thanks for the invitations, Madame Prime Minister.
I thank you for your time.

Prime Minister said, Madame Secretary, please bring President Clinton
and your daughter and son in law.

Hilary hangs up on the other side …

Comment: It was generally understood that Awami League had won the
last election (December 2008) with the help of General Moeen and
India. But, it was unknown how much support was given by US to Awami
League.

The two most significant information to emerge from Hillaryleak are:
a. the results of the elections were pre-arranged, and
b. US had supported this.

So, this then was the main points of Hillaryleak. Those who are saying
that this is not reliable are arguing that the full identity of the
source is not known and the language of the Secretary is not
befitting.

First, consider the source. It was published in Facebook on 16 January
2011 at 10:28 am by Hidden Truth. Obviously, people behind Hidden
Truth did not wish to take risks like that of Julian Assange and
refrained from publishing their real identity.

Note the date and time of the publication.

Prime Minister's Press Secretary Abul Kalam Azad in a press statement
said, Secretary had telephoned Prime Minister on Saturday 15 January
2011 at 9:30 am (BST). It was then 8:30 pm in Washington DC on Friday
14 January 2011, After this tele-talk, the transcript was published in
US on Sunday 16 January at 10:28 am Washington DC time. In other
words, in US, people concerned, had 36 hours to take action on Mr
Azad's statement. Clearly, concerned people in US were deeply annoyed
because something quite opposite regarding the tele-talk had been
stated by Mr Azad. He claimed Secretary of State had praised the Prime
Minister and had promised to act jointly on different issues.

Perhaps that is why, someone in US, who was informed and concerned,
disclosed the text of tele-talk in the Facebook.

Regarding the Secretary's language, anybody who had been listening to
her regularly, will know, terms such as, absolutely, honestly,
conduit, demonise, let me come to the core point, are typically hers.
She also called Clinton as President Clinton. Because, once elected
President of US, he is always called President. The Secretary knows
this. She also knows that President Obama's mother had written a
thesis on micro-credit financing. Not many people (American or
Bangladeshi) would have known this.

And, Prime Minister's language is also typically hers. Note that how
she repeats, I understand I understand, thank you thank you, please
listen please listen.

Actually, Bangladeshis already know about the close relationship of
Awami League with India and that India has been assisting the
government on many issues.

Hillaryleak has merely confirmed what was widely known. So, why
hesitate to accept it as true? Why be reluctant to accept that the
2008 election results were pre-arranged?

We should understand that, that is why Sheikh Hasina after returning
from US in November 2008, decided to contest in the December election,
but did hardly do any election campaign. Whilst her rival, BNP
Chairperson criss-crossed some 10,000 km in two weeks, Sheikh Hasina
stayed back in Dhaka conducting video conferencing. Sheikh Hasina knew
strenuous campaign was unnecessary, a pre-arranged win was waiting.

People will judge whether Hillaryleak is true. It is curious that so
far US has not given any rejoinder on this.

However, if Hillaryleak is true, then we must conclude that, December
2008 election did not bring back democracy — conspiracy was
established.

But where does that leave the Election Commission?

Before answering that, let me go back to Art Buchwald. Due to kidney
failure Buchwald died on 17 January 2007 at age 81.

He wrote his own video obituary which was published the next day by
The New York Times. It showed Buchwald smiling and saying, "Hi, I'm
Art Buchwald. I just died".

Perhaps, after the publication of Hillaryleak, the Election Commission
may say, "Hi, we're Election Commission. We just died".

But, does the Election Commission have the honesty and sense of humour
like Art Buchwald?
————————————-
Shafik Rehman is a writer, editor, TV programme presenter, chartered accountant

http://opinion.bdnews24.com/2011/02/02/from-wikileaks-to-hillaryleak/







__._,_.___


[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: Raped girl whipped to death



So bizarre opinion but NOT surprising at all from supporters of fatwabaz like NetZero Mohiuddin, Death of an innocent minor rape victim was not enough for them, she needed much severe punishment therefore now they have to prove it's the girls fault and fatwa stands correct. THEY HAVE TO PUT STIGMA ON INNCOENT DEAD GIRL TO JUSTIFY FATWA, shame on you!

 

Shame on you Mr. Mohiuddin, Hena's death in the hands of illegitimate fatwabaz did not cross your mind for a second but you made heinous effort to put all the dirt you can find on deceased Hena to paint her as a bad girl is not just condemnable but unpardonable.

Fatwa has NO place in Islam; Fatwa has no place in civilized society. I personally as a Muslim condemn any Fatwa given by any person or persons upon another person or persons.

 

Every Muslim and every human should fight back fatwa and fatwabaz at any cost. Fatwa has no legality in Islam because there is not a single person around the world who has the legal authority to proclaim fatwa. No one has legal or moral right to decree Fatwa NO matter how learned one claimed to be in Islamic jurisprudence. Because in Muslim world there is no single person like Roman Pope who can decree any law that has any binding on any Muslim.

 

I condemn Hena killing, I condemn fatwabaz mullahs, their supporters and those bystanders who could not fight against fatwa and fatwa givers. Bangladesh government must find the killer fatwabaz, their supporters and bring them to justice. Justice must be done and severe punishment must be served to free Hena from stigma Mohiuddin and their supporters put on Hena's dead soul.

 

May Allah rest her in peace and bestow her Janna. May Allah give patience to her bereaved family and strength to Muslim ummah and humanity to fight Fatwa and fatwabaz in Bangladesh and around the world.

 

Muslim world must be free from Fatwa for good.

 

Shamim Chowdhury

Maryland, U.S.A.

--- On Thu, 2/3/11, Mohiuddin Anwar <mohiuddin@netzero.net> wrote:


From: Mohiuddin Anwar <mohiuddin@netzero.net>
Subject: RE: [Alapon] Re: [ALOCHONA] Raped girl whipped to death
To: alapon@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, February 3, 2011, 4:32 PM

 


According to another press report ,the Rapist Mahbub had extra marital relationship with the 14 year old girl who was killed by the Shariah court. Repoirt also said that Mahbub's wife caught both Mahbub and the girl(who is also close relative of Mahbub) in objectionable situation and screamed for neighbours to inteven. If this is true than Mahbub should be killed according to Shariah rule and as the girl is minor she should have receive lesser punishment or just an warning. Islamically, when a married person engage in sexual relationship with an unmarried girl the man should receive capital punishment(stonning to death) and the unmarried girl should not receive capital punishment. Because of her age she should be warned only.
I donot understand why village leaders and Imam gave lesser punishment to the rapis Mahbub.

From: Mahboob Rahman <mahboob64@hotmail.com>
To: <alapon@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Alapon] Re: [ALOCHONA] Raped girl whipped to death
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 20:35:44 +0000

__________________________________________________________
$65/Hr Job - 25 Openings
Part-Time job ($20-$65/hr). Requirements: Home Internet Access
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/4d4b1eee6c8631ac1f6st01duc



__._,_.___


[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] Middle East at a Strategic Crossroads: Threat to US Hegemony?

The Middle East at a Strategic Crossroads: Threat to US Hegemony?

by Nicola Nasser

The Arab world is the beating heart of the overwhelmingly Muslim
Middle East, and the Arab masses are angrily moving for a change in
the status quo, practically dictated by the military, economic or
political hegemony of the United States, which in turn is whipped by
the regional power of the Israeli U.S. strategic ally. But any change
in the regional status quo would place the Middle East at a strategic
crossroads that is not expected to be viewed tolerantly by the U.S. –
Israeli alliance, a fact which expectedly would warn of a fierce
struggle to come. Despite the U.S. rhetorical defense of the
"universal rights" in the region, it is still premature to conclude
that this hegemonic alliance will allow the Arab move for change to
run its course, judging by the historic experiences of the last
century as well as by the containment tactics the United States is now
adopting to defuse whatever strategic changes might be created by the
revolting Arab masses.


The U.S. war on terror has preoccupied U.S. decision makers and
embroiled regional rulers in their preoccupation to overlook the
tinderbox of the double digit unemployment rate among Arab youth,
double and in some cases triple the world average, according to the
most conservative estimates, which under the U.S. – supported
authoritarian regimes has been a ticking time bomb for too long. Now,
the "demographic tsunami to the south of the Mediterranean," as
described by Swedish Foreign Minister, Carl Bildt, has overtaken the
west, but in particular the U.S. – Israeli alliance, by surprise,
sending shock waves across the Middle East, shaking the pillars of
what this alliance has taken for granted as a guaranteed geopolitical
stability reinforced by the Israeli 34 – year old military occupation
of the Palestinian territories, the Syrian Golan Hights and parts of
southern Lebanon and the U.S. invasion then the ongoing occupation of
Iraq. But "the Arab world's Berlin moment" has come and the U.S. –
supported "authoritarian wall has fallen," professor of Middle Eastern
Politics and International Relations at the London School of
Economics, Fawaz Gerges, told Reuters.


Unlike in Tunisia, the U.S. regional strategy cannot afford a
strategic change of regime in a pivotal regional country like Egypt.
U.S. senior officials' appeals for President Hosni Mubarak to respect
the "universal rights" of the Egyptian people and their right in
"peaceful" protests, for reforms that should be "immediately"
undertaken by the ruling regime, and their calls for "restraint" and
non-violence by both the regime and protesters are all smoke-screening
the fact that the United States is siding with what President Barak
Obama hailed as "an ally of ours on a lot of critical issues" and his
spokesman, Robert Gibbs, described as "a strong ally" - - which
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wishfully described his government
as "stable" on Wednesday, despite the roaring demands on the streets
for its change - - at least because "a more representative government
drawn from the diversity of Egypt's political opposition will be much
more inclined to criticize American and Israeli policies," according
to Bruce Riedel, a former long-time CIA officer and a senior fellow of
the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution, on January 29.


The U.S. posturing as neutral, "not taking sides," could appease and
mislead American public opinion, but to Arab and especially to
Egyptian public opinion even neutrality is viewed as hostile and
condemned in the region as a double standard when compared with the
U.S. siding with similar moves for change elsewhere in the world, let
alone that this neutrality contradicts the western highly valued
democratic values at home.


On Friday night, Obama called for "a meaningful dialogue between the
(Egyptian) government and its citizens," who insist on staying on the
streets until the regime, and not only its government, is changed and
Mubarak leaves. On January 28, Vice President Joe Biden told PBS
NewsHour that Mubarak should not step down. When asked whether time
had come for Mubarak to go, he said: "No. I think the time has come
for President Mubarak to begin to move – to be more responsive to some
.. of the needs of the people out there." Nothing would be more clear
– cut, but nothing would be more counterproductive to both Egyptian
and American interests on the background of footages on the screens of
satellite TV stations showing protesters condemning Mubarak as a "U.S.
agent" or showing live bullets or "made in U.S.A." tear gas canisters,
reported by ABC News, which were used against them.


It seems the en masse Arab popular protests in Egypt that no party in
the opposition could claim to be the leader are confusing the senior
officials of the Obama administration who "have no idea of exactly who
these street protesters are, whether the protesters are simply a mob
force incapable of organized political action and rule, or if more
sinister groups hover in the shadows, waiting to grab power and turn
Egypt into an anti-Western, anti-Israeli bastion." in the words of the
U.S. commentator Lesli e H. Gelb, the former New York Times columnist
and senior government official.


The U.S. confusion is illustrated by the stark contradiction between
the realities on the ground in Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan,
Lebanon and Yemen and, for instance, what the U.S. Assistant Secretary
of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Filtman, told Josh Rogin of
Foreign Policy: "What happened in Tunisia strikes me as uniquely
Tunisian. That the events that took place here over the past few weeks
derive from particularly Tunisian grievances, from Tunisian
circumstances by the Tunisian people." How farthest cut off from
reality a senior U.S. official could be! "The White House will have to
be forgiven for not knowing whether to ride the tiger or help put him
back in a cage," Gelb wrote.


White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, said the U.S., in view of
the protests, will "review" its two – billion annual assistance to
Egypt. This "threat" is understood among Arab and Egyptian audiences
as targeted not against Mubarak to pressure him on reforms, but
against whatever anti – U.S regime might succeed him.


Arab en masse protests, especially in Egypt, are cornering the United
States in a bind, tortured between maintaining "an ally" and
respecting his people's "universal rights" in expressing their
"legitimate grievances," according to Obama. What message would the
United States be sending to the majority of Arab allied or friendly
rulers if it opts to dump the most prominent among them? Would AIPAC
and other American Jewish and Zionist lobbyists allow their government
to facilitate the ousting of the 30 –year old guarantor of the
Egyptian peace treaty with Israel? It's almost a forgone conclusion
that Obama's decision is already made to once again give priority to
the stability of U.S. "vital interests" in Middle East while in public
giving lip service to Americans' most cherished democratic values.


This translates into a naïve American recipe for preserving the status
quo by some cosmetic reforms. But "Those who stick to the status quo
may be able to hold back the full impact of their countries' problems
for a little while, but not forever," Clinton warned in Qatar on
January 13, otherwise, she added, the foundations of their rule will
be "sinking into the sand," but she did not announce the fears of her
country that the pillars of the U.S. hegemony would be then crumbling
too, anti – Americanism exacerbated and in turn fueling the only
alternative to democracy in the Arab Middle East, i.e. terrorism.
Egyptian former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency,
Mohamed ElBaradei, whom some of the protesters have chosen to head a
delegation to represent them on Sunday and who is seen as a potential
presidential challenger to Mubarak, warned in Newsweek before his
return to Egypt last week, that it was too late to believe reforms
were still possible under the 82- year-old Mubarak, who has held
"imperial power" for three decades and presides over a legislature
that is a "mockery."


Similarly, Israel was taken by surprise. On Tuesday, January 25, the
Egyptian popular tsunami flooded the streets of Cairo on the Police
Day. The coincidence was highly symbolic. The U.S. – supported police
state was unable to honor its police and within a few days police
simply "disappeared," army was called in to protect vital state and
public property while protection of private property and safety was
left to the "popular committees," which sprang up of nowhere. On the
same day, the new chief of the Israeli Military Intelligence, Maj.
Gen. Aviv Kochavi, was telling the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense
Committee that the Egyptian President's rule was not under threat, his
regime was stable and Mubarak was able to rein in the protests. In no
time Kochavi was proven wrong. Ordering his government's spokepersons
to shut up on Egypt and, like Obama, holding urgent and high level
meetings with his senior security and intelligence officials, Israeli
Prime Minister sent a clear and brief message on January 30: Israel
will "ensure" that peace with Egypt "will continue to exist."


The Egyptian shock waves have already hit Israel and the Israeli
possible reactions are potentially the most dangerous. "An Egyptian
government that is less cooperative with Israel .. could make Israel
more prone to unpredictable unilateral actions, creating greater
instability throughout the region," warned Jonathan Alterman, director
of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies. Israeli mainstream media is already crying
wolf. "If Mubarak is toppled then Israel will be totally isolated in
the region," said Alon Liel, a former director-general of the Israeli
Foreign Ministry and a former ambassador to Turkey. "Without Egypt,
Israel will be left with no friends in Mideast," a story in Haaretz
was headlined. Similarly, "Israel left all alone," Itamar Eichner
headlined his column in the Yadioth Ahronot online. The Egypt – Gaza
Strip borders is now under Israeli spotlight. The Egyptian army which
was called into cities west of the Suez Canal could not deploy in
Sinai east of it, especially on those borders, restricted by none
other than the peace treaty with Israel; the Egyptian security vacuum
in the last few days was no evident more than in Sinai. The statement
by the Hamas government on January 29 that the borders between Egypt
and the Israeli besieged Gaza Strip, already declared an "enemy
entity" by Israel, were unilaterally and "fully under control" was not
good news in Tel Aviv. Hence the Israeli media reports about a
possible Israeli reoccupation of the Gaza – Egypt borders.


On the surface, the Arab world representing the status quo is no less
confused and undecided; its heart is with the Egyptian regime, but,
like its U.S. ally, it has to speak with tongues. Example: "The Saudi
government and people stands with the Egyptian government and people,"
the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) quoted Saudi King Abdullah as telling
President Mubarak in a phone call; earlier the king told U.S.
President Obama there should be no bargaining about Egypt's stability
and the security of its people, according to SPA. In view of the U.S.,
Arab and Israeli thinly veiled determination to save the moment in
Egypt, it was a forgone conclusion that Mubarak will cling to power,
thus setting the stage either for a long battle of instability with
his own people that for sure will deplete the country's meager
resources or cutting this battle short by a bloody crackdown that
would make the repression which created the present people's uprising
look like a mercy.


Nicola Nasser is a veteran Arab journalist based in Bir Zeit, West
Bank of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23021


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

[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] People revolt to protect Arial Beel

People revolt to protect Arial Beel


The opposition BNP has given call for a countrywide hartal on February
7 to protest the case filed against the party chairperson and leader
of the Opposition Begum Khaleda Zia as a provocateur of the Arial Beel
uprising.
In the face of violent protest from local people against
construction of an international airport in Arial Beel of Munshiganj,
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on Wednesday said that no airport will be
built there against the will of the local people.
The case filed by president of Munshganj district Awami League (AL)
named Begum Zia as number one accused of the bloody incident in which
one policeman died, in addition to serious injuries to many policemen
and local people including photo journalists who went there to cover
the public protest.
The government's plan to construct the airport on cropland there
aggravated the situation in the ground. Any attempt to pass blame on
the opposition at this point may only backfire, critics say. Pointing
to last week's incident at Arial Beel they said it appears the
government is only adding to its own problems instead of working with
patience to keep the county's political landscape peaceful and
business friendly.
As is the case, the ruling party always accuses the opposition of
creating issues that aims at bringing destabilisation. But the latest
development shows that it is the government which itself is
destabilising by taking up controversial projects and wrong moves.
The case against Kheleda Zia as a lead accused for her so-called
role in instigating the Arial Beel people to break into revolt may
thus give BNP a new political weapon to beat the government.

MP Azim silenced in JS
As BNP is abstaining from Jatiya Sangsad (JS) sessions, the lone
opposition MP in the house Fazlul Azim, an independent lawmaker from
Noakhali, last week was silenced by deputy speaker Shawkat Ali as he
tried to speak on the bloody incident.
The ruling AL is using its brute majority not only to take
repressive step against the opposition but also in taking up
controversial projects. But it may ultimately hit back if they do not
exercise power properly from now onwards.
BNP and many other socio-political bodies have already condemned
the case against Khaleda Zia as a new provocation to the opposition.
Party leaders said local people at Arial Beel in the Srinagar Upazila
in Munshiganj joined the uprising to protect their land.
The government is planning to build a new airport there on their land.
News reports said people had spontaneously staged the protest in
which BNP chairperson or her party had no involvement. Even Jatiya
Party chairman and a member of ruling coalition HM Ershad has termed
it as a 'spontaneous uprising.' People believe that implicating Begum
Zia in the case is a condemnable act, it should not be part of
political culture. BNP leaders staged countrywide demonstration last
week and demanded immediate rescinding of the case.
As news broke out of the case in which Begum Zia has been
implicated along with three thousand co-accused persons for taking
part in the bloody incident, party workers and leaders took to the
street. Noisy demonstration last week spread fears in the street,
prompting police action and arrests.
Following the Arial Beel incident last week police have also filed
two other cases each with five to six thousand persons. Consequently,
male population in most villages is on the run while women have been
forced to come out to protect homes and property. It is only creating
distance between the government and local electorate.
At the centre of the agitation is a mega project to build a new
airport at Arial Beel area to be named after Sheikh Mujibur Rahman,
the father of the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
Under the project the government plans to acquire a total of 25,000
acres of land. People got panicked on the scale of the land
acquisition plan as local officials took up visible steps at field
level to start acquiring the land.
People of Arial Beel area from at least two dozen villages showed
their anger two weeks ago blocking the Dhaka-Mawa highway in Srinagar.
A violent fight ensued that time between police and local people to
continue over several hours bringing traffic movement through the
highway to a complete halt. Later on when a caravan of buses attempted
to move towards the city with the protestors on board it was stopped
and dispersed in the outskirt of Dhaka city.
However, a section of the protestors were able to sneak into the
city but they were at first booted out from the Muktangan public rally
point and later from in front of the Press Club by police as they
tried to speak out their case.
Frightened local people also held a human chain and demonstrated on
the highway early last month to start agitation against the airport
project to prompt police action to turn the protest action into a
bloody confrontation. However, a section of local Awami League
activists came out opposing the protest only to turn it into a bloody
incident.

HSJIA's capacity underutilised
Khaleda Zia criticised the government last week at a press
conference for police action on the mob saying Arial Beel airport
project is not at all necessary when the utilisation capacity of
Hazrat Shah Jalal International Airport (HSJIA) now stands only at 27
per cent. She asked the government better to expand the existing
airports and try to improve the level of their utilization. Such
projects may have been developed to serve corporate interest, he
suggested.
The ruling AL said last week's bloody uprising at Arial Beel was
BNP chairperson product. She had not only instigated local people by
denouncing the airport project, AL said, but also passed secret
instruction to that end.
While experts are at a loss to find the justification of the new
airport project when the country has so many other urgent projects,
the government is bent upon implementing it as the inspiration has
come from the head of the government. People wonder what is the haste
here, where is a feasibility report, and moreover, if the airport to
be built in a wetland would be able to sustain the heavy load impact.
This is a prime land good for crop cultivation. Why the government
is not moving with expert advice, experts wonder.
But the government is blaming critics such as BNP and other experts
for politically exploiting the issue and contributing to creating
tension and hostilities in the country. Moreover, BNP is out to
destabilize the country by prompting such turmoils in order to derail
the war crime trial, ruling party leaders said.
Even if it is not possible at Arial Beel, it would build it
elsewhere, they said at a time when criticism from all quarters is
pouring against the new airport project.
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/front.html#01


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

[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] HC rebukes AL leader over forced begging

HC rebukes AL leader over forced begging

The High Court has reprimanded a leader of Awami League for speaking
to the media on an under-investigation matter like forcing children
into begging.

Haji Sulaiman Matbar, Awami League leader of Kamrangirchar on the
outskirts of Dhaka, was rebuked by the bench of justices A H M
Shamsuddin Chowdhury and Sheikh Mohammad Zakir Hossain when he
appeared before it on Thursday responding to a court summon.

The court said: "One cannot be spared for wearing Mujib coat."

Black coats worn by Awami League leaders, as independence architect
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman did, is called Mujib coat.

Matbar, a suspect of abducting and forcing a seven-year-old boy,
Niamul, into begging, held a press conference on Jan 26 where he
claimed that he had no connection with the crime.

The boy, having several wounds on his body, including one on the
genital, was rescued from Kamrangirchar area a year back.

The bench said: "There is no use of the attempts to divert the
incident… None can do this, whatever powerful they may be. The court
is the most powerful."

The court, however, forgave Matbar when his lawyer, Awami League
presidium member Yusuf Hossain Humayun, sought unconditional apology
on his behalf.

Following newspaper reports on Niamul, the same court issued a suo
moto rule on Jan 2 on the government and police asking them to
implement the provisions of Dhaka Metropolitan Police Ordinance
regarding street begging.

It also asked the government to explain why a directive should not be
issued to stop forced panhandling through mutilation.

The High Court on Jan 9 also ordered immediate legal action against
sub-inspector Nurul Alam of Kamrangirchar police and asked the
director general of Dhaka Medical College to form a medical board to
ensure proper treatment of Niamul.

On Jan 14, Omar Faruq, the alleged ringleader behind forced begging,
was arrested by Rapid Action Battalion.

http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=186402&cid=2


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

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