Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

[ALOCHONA] To Dr Dipu Moni from Pir Habibur Rahman



 To Dr Dipu Moni from Pir Habibur Rahman



http://www.bd-pratidin.com/?view=details&type=gold&data=Games&pub_no=401&cat_id=1&menu_id=1&news_type_id=1&index=2


__._,_.___


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




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

RE: [ALOCHONA] 'History will mark you as traitors'--biased propaganda of persons who do not represent people of Bangladesh



This is a totally biased propaganda. 1972 constitution was passed by people who were not elected for making the Constitution of Bangladesh. It was also not put to any referendum. It is apparent that the influence of India was then paramount. Secularism was never spirit of Bangladesh struggle.

The persons who have signed are well-known for their opposing anything Islamic. They serve whom, this is a big question?

Shah Abdul Hannan

 


From: alochona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:alochona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Isha Khan
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 8:55 AM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: [ALOCHONA] 'History will mark you as traitors'

 

 

'History will mark you as traitors'

Dhaka, June 6 (bdnews24.com) — Bangladesh will become a communal, fundamentalist and failed state like Pakistan if the spirit of the 1972's constitution is foiled, a citizen's platform has said.

"And if it happens, parliament will be held responsible," said a press release on Monday from the Ekattorer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee (Committee for Elimination of Killers and Collaborators of 1971). "If you [the government] take part in this evil, history will forever mark you as traitors," the organisation said in the release.

Addressing the MPs, it said, "People voted for the Grand Alliance in the election of 2008 to ensure trial of war criminals and restoration of the four pillars of the 1972 constitution, not to legalise the 5th and 8th Amendments…" The special committee on charter review finalised its report on June 5 with 51-point proposals on the 15th amendment to the constitution.

In its report, the special committee proposed to keep Islam as the religion of state and to retain religion-based politics and 'Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim' in the preamble of the constitution. "Presentation of these proposals in parliament would be a treachery with the ideology and spirit of Bangabandhu and the 1972 constitution," the organisation said in the release. "It will be a hideous example to retain the proposals by disobeying the Supreme Court verdict."

It said, "The former presidents Hussein Muhammad Ershad and late Ziaur Rahman passed the 5th and 8th amendments in order to create a fundamentalist state like Pakistan. It had nothing to do with their love for Islam."

The press release was signed by committee advisors' panel president Prof Kabir Chowdhury, executive committee president justice Golam Rabbani, committee president Shahriar Kabir and general secretary Kazi Mukul. The 5th Amendment added Bismillah to the preamble of the constitution while the 8th introduced Islam as the religion of state.



__._,_.___


[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] Rao-Quayes talks



Rao-Quayes talks

Dhaka, June 7 (bdnews24.com) – An optimistic Indian foreign secretary has touched upon several issues of mutual concern, including some contentious ones.

However, what Nirupama Rao won't discuss now is the Teesta river water sharing issue and the related details.

Despite being pestered by the media at a joint press briefing at the foreign ministry on Tuesday, she refused to disclose the percentage of share Bangladesh would get in the proposed river water deal.

"This is a sensitive issue. I will not discuss the framework or percentage of water share Bangladesh will receive from Teesta river," she said.

Bangladesh foreign secretary Moahmed Mijarul Quayes also attended the press briefing after holding a day-long joint foreign secretary-level consultation meeting.

"Water resources secretaries of both countries held a meeting in Delhi over the sharing of Teesta water, and after a consensus is reached at political level, the issue can be discussed publicly," she said.

"We have to go through a certain process to reach the final solution," she said, adding, "Obviously we are working for an agreement."

Quayes in his introductory remark said there was progress in Teesta water sharing agreement.

REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY

Rao said Delhi had no objection in allowing Nepal and Bhutan to use Indian territory to have trade in Bangladesh.

"India allows Nepal and Bhutanese trucks to enter 200 yards of Bangladesh territory at Banglabandha border," she said.

Quayes said new protocols need to be signed to have comprehensive regional connectivity in place.

"Connectivity is not a bilateral issue, rather a regional issue," he said adding, "We are working on developing mechanism to connect Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Bhutan."

Citing example, he said Bangladesh and India had railway protocol, but to include Nepal, an addendum would be needed in the protocol.

About the transit fees, he said the assessment was being done and after completion of the process, details could be discussed.

INDIAN LINE OF CREDIT

The Indian foreign secretary said Delhi has finalised some projects and the rest would be finalised within couple of months.

"There are some positive developments in procuring buses, railway locomotives, wagons and engines under the Indian line of credit and the rest of the projects will be finalised within a couple of months," she said.

When asked about the conditionality of procuring 85 percent man and material from India under the line of credit, she said, "The issue can be and will be discussed to resolve any dispute."

Quayes said India had already given a signal to move forward for some of the projects and the rest would follow the suit.

MARITIME BOUNDARY DISPUTE

There would be no mineral resources exploration in the disputed blocks in the Bay of Bengal until the matter was resolved, said foreign secretary Quayes.

"There are some overlaps in the disputed blocks and it is needed to reach a generous agreement to settle the issue," he said.

"Bangladesh has opted for arbitration to settle the maritime dispute with India and also negotiate with them to solve the matter amicably," he said.

"When we reach a solution, then Bangladesh and India can explore natural resources in their respective territories," he added.

MANMHOAN'S VISIT

The Indian foreign secretary refused to specify the date of visit of Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh to Bangladesh.

"It will be highly unprofessional if I tell the date. It will be disclosed through proper diplomatic channel," she said.

When asked about the outcome of the visit, she said it would be difficult to say about the result.

"Some historic agreements will be signed during the visit," she said without any elaboration of the deals.

"Both governments are working together to make it a good visit," she added.

Quayes said foreign offices of both countries were in touch and had regular follow-up meetings.

BORDER KILLINGS

Rao said Border Security Force (BSF) and Border Guard of Bangladesh (BGB) would together stop border killings.

"There is a plan to use non-lethal weapons in the border area," she said adding, "We are against any violence and curfew could be imposed at the borders."

LAND BOUNDARY DISPUTE

Officials of both countries are working hard to settle land boundary disputes, she informed.

"Joint Boundary Working Group had had its fourth meeting in Delhi in November and the outcome of the meeting was welcomed," she said.

When asked if the decision on the dispute would be announced during Manmohan's visit, she said, "I am eternally optimistic."

SECURITY COOPERATION

Both countries had agreed on cooperating in security issues to eliminate threats to peace and prosperity of the people, the visiting official said.

"The challenges are similar in nature for both countries," she observed.

Quayes said both countries agreed not to allow domestic and foreign elements to use their territories to disturb peace in the region.

CONSULTATION MEETINGS

Quayes said the consultation meeting was not a formal one but very crucial for strengthening relationship between the countries.

"We have reaffirmed our commitment for further expansion of our bilateral relationship and pursue the issues primarily detailed in joint communiqué declared during the visit of prime minister Sheikh Hasina to New Delhi in January last year," he said.

Rao said sky was the limit for cooperation and new areas would be explored to cement the ties between the two countries.
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?cid=2&id=197815&hb=1

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

Remarks by Foreign Secretary Rao at the Joint Press meet in Dhaka

June 07, 2011


At the outset, I would like to thank the Government of Bangladesh and my counterpart His Excellency Mijarul Quayes for the invitation and excellent hospitality extended to the Indian delegation and arrangements made for the Foreign Office Consultations. It is always delightful to visit Dhaka.

2. We have had very comprehensive consultations earlier today covering a range of issues of mutual interest and bilateral cooperation. The talks were marked by great warmth and cordiality reflecting the close ties and friendship between the two countries.

3. The Joint Communique signed by PM Dr Manmohan Singh and Her Excellency Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina during her landmark visit to India in January last year has outlined the roadmap for the relationship between India and Bangladesh. Both sides have made considerable progress in implementation of the Joint Communiqué since the visit. Implementation of projects under the $ 1 billion LOC from India has been high priority for both sides. We have just conveyed our concurrence for a number of projects under the LOC in Railway infrastructure and the purchase of buses for the city of Dhaka. These can be implemented immediately. India is committed to implementation of far-reaching decisions taken by the leaders of both countries.

4. Our cooperation in the power sector, including grid connectivity, supply of upto 500 MW of power from India, including 250 MW of power at a preferential rate and Bangladesh request for setting up of a high technology joint venture thermal power plant of 1320 MW capacity is progressing well. During the visit of Minister for Commerce and Industry of India in April this year, the annual duty free quota for export of Bangladeshi garments to India has been raised from 8 to 10 million pieces. Cooperation to upgrade BSTI is progressing well. Both sides are working on several projects to improve trade infrastructure and connectivity. A new LCS at Fulbari-Banglabandha was opened in January and the Government of India has now undertaken to set up five ICPs and the foundation stone of the ICP at Agartala was laid by the Home Minister Shri P. Chidambaram in May. Border Haats in Meghalaya are expected to be inaugurated soon.

5. There has been regular exchange of business delegations. This has resulted in several joint venture agreements being concluded for export oriented manufacturing activities in Bangladesh. Indeed, we are happy to note that Bangladesh exports to India have, according to our figures, increased by 52% in the first nine months of 2010-11. I am sure that Indian investments in Bangladesh will provide employment and also generate export potential, including to India.

6. We have made substantial forward movement in respect of both water and land boundary issues. The Joint Boundary Working Group (JBWG) meeting was held in November 2010, and the Bangladesh Water Resources Secretary held talks in Delhi yesterday. Both sides are discussing interim water sharing of Teesta and Feni rivers. The work on river bank protection and embankment construction along the common rivers is progressing and the dredging of the Ichhamati River along the 20 km common stretch is nearing completion.

7. The joint Inaugural Ceremonies of the 150th Birth Anniversary of Rabindranath Tagore in both our capitals were very impressive. Several events are planned for the whole year.

8. India attaches the highest importance to its relations with Bangladesh and seeks a deeper and stronger partnership. The historic bonds between India and Bangladesh are deep rooted and peoples on both sides want mutual prosperity and cooperation.

9. Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh is looking forward to his visit to Bangladesh at the invitation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to take forward the mutually beneficial cooperation agreed by the two Prime Ministers in January 2010.

10. I am looking forward to calling on Her Excellency Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina right after this interaction. Yesterday, I had very productive interaction with H.E. Dr. Mashiur Rahman and H.E. Prof. Gowher Rizvi, Advisers to Prime Minister. I shall also call on Foreign Minister Dr. Dipu Moni later today.

11. I thank you for your presence.

Dhaka
June 07, 2011

http://meaindia.nic.in/mystart.php?id=530117725



__._,_.___


[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] New Yorker - The Double Game

Annals of Diplomacy
The Double Game
The unintended consequences of American funding in Pakistan.
by Lawrence Wright
May 16, 2011 .
New Yorker
www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/16/110516fa_fact_wright#ixzz1OeP0teE5

It's the end of the Second World War, and the United States is deciding what to do about two immense, poor, densely populated countries in Asia. America chooses one of the countries, becoming its benefactor. Over the decades, it pours billions of dollars into that country's economy, training and equipping its military and its intelligence services. The stated goal is to create a reliable ally with strong institutions and a modern, vigorous democracy. The other country, meanwhile, is spurned because it forges alliances with America's enemies.

The country not chosen was India, which "tilted" toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Pakistan became America's protégé, firmly supporting its fight to contain Communism. The benefits that Pakistan accrued from this relationship were quickly apparent: in the nineteen-sixties, its economy was an exemplar. India, by contrast, was a byword for basket case. Fifty years then went by. What was the result of this social experiment?

India has become the state that we tried to create in Pakistan. It is a rising economic star, militarily powerful and democratic, and it shares American interests. Pakistan, however, is one of the most anti-American countries in the world, and a covert sponsor of terrorism. Politically and economically, it verges on being a failed state. And, despite Pakistani avowals to the contrary, America's worst enemy, Osama bin Laden, had been hiding there for years—in strikingly comfortable circumstances—before U.S. commandos finally tracked him down and killed him, on May 2nd.

American aid is hardly the only factor that led these two countries to such disparate outcomes. But, at this pivotal moment, it would be a mistake not to examine the degree to which U.S. dollars have undermined our strategic relationship with Pakistan—and created monstrous contradictions within Pakistan itself.

American money began flowing into Pakistan in 1954, when a mutual defense agreement was signed. During the next decade, nearly two and a half billion dollars in economic assistance, and seven hundred million in military aid, went to Pakistan. After the 1965 Pakistan-India war began, the U.S. essentially withdrew aid to both countries. Gradually, U.S. economic aid was restored, but the Pakistani military was kept on probation.

Those civilian-aid programs were largely successful. Christine Fair, a specialist on South Asia at the Center for Peace and Security Studies, at Georgetown University, notes that the original model for economic assistance was "demand driven"—local groups or governments proposed projects and applied for grants. Aid usually came in the form of matching funds, so that grantees had a stake in the projects. Moreover, American specialists presided over the disbursement of these funds and served as managers. "That was effective," Fair says. "But we haven't done it for decades."

Then, in 1979, U.S. intelligence discovered that Pakistan was secretly building a uranium-enrichment facility in response to India's nuclear-weapons program. That April, the military dictator of Pakistan, General Mohammed Zia-ul-Haq, hanged the civilian President he had expelled from office, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto; he then cancelled elections. U.S. aid came to a halt. At the same time, Zia began giving support to an Islamist organization, Jamaat-e-Islami, the forerunner of many more radical groups to come. In November, a mob of Jamaat followers, inflamed by a rumor that the U.S. and Israel were behind an attack on the Grand Mosque, in Mecca, burned the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad to the ground, killing two Americans and two Pakistani employees. The American romance with Pakistan was over, but the marriage was just about to begin.


from the issuecartoon banke-mail this.The very next month, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. President Jimmy Carter, in a panic, offered Zia four hundred million dollars in economic and military aid. Zia rejected the offer, calling it "peanuts"—the term often arises in Pakistani critiques of American aid, but it must have rankled the peanut farmer in the White House. Zia was smart to hold out. Under Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan, U.S. aid nearly quintupled: about three billion dollars in economic assistance and two billion in military aid. The Reagan Administration also provided three billion dollars to Afghan jihadis. These funds went through the sticky hands of the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate, the spy branch of the Pakistani Army. Starting in 1987, the I.S.I. was headed by General Hamid Gul, a cunning and bitterly anti-American figure. The I.S.I. became so glutted with power and money that it formed a "state within a state," in the words of Benazir Bhutto, who became Pakistan's Prime Minister in 1988. She eventually fired Gul, fearing that he was engineering a coup.

Milton Bearden, a former C.I.A. station chief in Pakistan, once described Gul to me as having a "rococo" personality. In 2004, I visited Gul—a short man with a rigid, military posture and raptor-like features—at his villa in Rawalpindi. He proudly asked his servant to bring me an orange from his private grove. I asked Gul why, during the Afghan jihad, he had favored Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, one of the seven warlords who had been designated to receive American assistance in the fight against the Soviets. Hekmatyar was the most brutal member of the group, but, crucially, he was a Pashtun, like Gul. As I ate the orange, Gul offered a more principled rationale for his choice: "I went to each of the seven, you see, and I asked them, 'I know you are the strongest, but who is No. 2?' " He formed a tight, smug smile. "They all said Hekmatyar."

Later, Gul helped oversee the creation of the Taliban, reportedly using mainly Saudi money. The I.S.I. openly supported the Taliban until September 11, 2001. Since then, the Pakistani government has disavowed the group, but it is widely believed that it still provides Taliban leaders with safe harbor in Quetta, where they stage jihad against Western forces in Afghanistan.

In 1990, President George H. W. Bush cut off military aid to Pakistan. Ostensibly, this was in response to Pakistan's pursuit of nuclear weapons, but it's also true that, after the Soviets were pushed out of Afghanistan, in the late eighties, the U.S. lost interest in Pakistan. U.S. assistance, directed almost entirely toward food and counter-narcotics efforts, fell to forty-five million dollars a year, and declined further after 1998, when Pakistan began testing nuclear weapons.

After the September 11th attacks, Pakistan abruptly became America's key ally in the "war on terror." Under President George W. Bush, the U.S. gave billions of dollars to Pakistan, most of it in unrestricted funds, to combat terrorism. Pervez Musharraf, who served as President between 1999 and 2008, now admits that during his tenure he diverted many of those billions to arm Pakistan against its hobgoblin enemy, India. "Whoever wishes to be angry, let them be angry—why should we bother?" Musharraf said in an interview on the Pakistani television channel Express News. "We have to maintain our security." Since Musharraf left office, there has been little indication that U.S. aid—$4.5 billion in 2010, one of the largest amounts ever given to a foreign country—is being more properly spent.

The main beneficiary of U.S. money, the Pakistani military, has never won a war, but, according to "Military Inc.," by Ayesha Siddiqa, it has done very well in its investments: hotels, real estate, shopping malls. Such entrepreneurship, however corrupt, fills a gap, as Pakistan's economy is now almost entirely dependent on American taxpayers. In a country of a hundred and eighty million people, fewer than two million citizens pay taxes, and Pakistan's leaders are doing little to change the situation. In Karachi, the financial capital, the government recently inaugurated a program to appoint eunuchs as tax collectors. Eunuchs are considered relentless scolds in South Asia, and the threat of being hounded by one is somehow supposed to take the place of audits.

In 2008, Pakistan's government made the dramatic announcement that it was placing the I.S.I. under the control of its Interior Ministry—a restructuring that was revoked within hours by inflamed military leaders, who effectively vetoed the government. That November, Lashkar-e-Taiba, a terrorist organization that has reportedly received backing from the I.S.I. to wage jihad in Kashmir, carried out attacks on tourists in Mumbai. According to American indictments, an I.S.I. officer directed the surveillance of suitable targets. Those sites included the Taj and Oberoi hotels, the train station, the Leopold Café, and the Chabad House, a Lubavitch outpost run by an American rabbi and his pregnant wife. According to Sebastian Rotella, who has written extensively for ProPublica about the attack, "They were going out of their way to kill Americans." At the hotels, the attackers sorted through passports, looking for American and British citizens. In the end, a hundred and sixty-six people were killed, but only six were Americans. The Pakistani government denied any involvement, although it eventually conceded that the attacks had been planned in Pakistan.

Ali Soufan, a former F.B.I. special agent who interrogated many of the Al Qaeda members captured in Pakistan, told me that "the majority of them said that Lashkar-e-Taiba had given them shelter." After the battle of Tora Bora, he added, the Al Qaeda members who fled to Pakistan—including top leaders—were greeted by Lashkar operatives and taken to safe houses. Some Pakistanis worry that Lashkar may become the new Al Qaeda.

In 2009, Senators Richard Lugar and John Kerry, recognizing that American military aid had given the Army and the I.S.I. disproportionate power in Pakistan, helped pass legislation in Congress sanctioning seven and a half billion dollars in civilian assistance, to be disbursed over a period of five years. Pakistan's Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, apparently at the direction of the military, flew to Washington, and insisted that his country would not be micromanaged. So far, less than a hundred and eighty million dollars of that money has been spent, because the civilian projects require oversight and checks on corruption. The Pakistani military, meanwhile, submits expense claims every month to the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad; according to a report in the Guardian, receipts are not provided—or requested.

One day in March, 2004, when I was in Peshawar, in northern Pakistan, a firefight broke out in the tribal areas nearby. The newspapers said the Army was fighting Al Qaeda, and had surrounded Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's deputy. Zawahiri escaped, but the troops captured a number of Al Qaeda fighters, including Zawahiri's son Ahmed. The next day, a newspaper bore the headline "AHMED'S TALKING!" Yet Zawahiri doesn't have a son named Ahmed. After that day, nothing more was said about Ahmed, but I kept puzzling over that tricked-up episode. I began to wonder, What would happen if the Pakistani military actually captured or killed Al Qaeda's top leaders? The great flow of dollars would stop, just as it had in Afghanistan after the Soviets limped away. I realized that, despite all the suffering the war on terror had brought to Pakistan, the military was addicted to the money it generated. The Pakistani Army and the I.S.I. were in the looking-for-bin-Laden business, and if they found him they'd be out of business.

A number of investigative reports have suggested that the I.S.I. diverted American money designated for fighting terrorism to the Taliban. According to a 2007 document released by WikiLeaks, U.S. military interrogators at Guantánamo implicitly acknowledged this problem when they placed the I.S.I. on an internal list of "terrorist and terrorist-support entities."

In October, 2009, I went to Washington to attend a daylong conference on "Al Qaeda and Its Allies." (The event was sponsored by the New America Foundation and by the Center on Law and Security, at N.Y.U.'s law school, where I am a fellow.) The final panel discussion was devoted to Pakistan. Major General Mahmud Ali Durrani, a former Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S., spoke of the importance of having America and Pakistan united in their military strategy, especially in South Waziristan, which he called "the epicenter of militancy." The halfhearted efforts of the Pakistani Army to oppose its radical protégés there had created a ferocious backlash. The Taliban attacked I.S.I. offices and began taking over parts of Pakistani territory, including the Swat Valley, which is less than a hundred miles from Islamabad. Just two weeks before the conference, a group of Taliban fighters attacked the military headquarters in Rawalpindi, a mile from where General Durrani lives. The I.S.I. had lost control of its creation.

Durrani made a plea for the U.S. to continue its partnership with Pakistan. "Trust us, developing Pakistan's capacity to fight terrorism will pay rich dividends," he said. "I do not want to sound ungrateful, but what had been supplied over the last five years, in terms of hardware, is almost peanuts." When I had the opportunity to ask a question, I pointed out that, since 9/11, the U.S. had given eleven billion dollars to Pakistan, the bulk of it in military aid, much of which was misappropriated to buy weapons to defend against India. If Pakistan didn't have the equipment to fight insurgents and terrorists in the tribal areas, was that really America's fault? And if American aid to Pakistan—especially military assistance—had done more harm than good, shouldn't it be drastically reduced?

Another retired general on the podium, Talat Masood, responded that the losses Pakistan had suffered in the "so-called war on terror" amounted to more than forty billion dollars. "So please don't harp on the eleven billion," he said.

Pakistan has indeed suffered for its official alliance with the U.S. In 2006, there were six suicide bombings in the country; the next year there were fifty-six, with six hundred and forty people killed. Last year, twelve hundred people were murdered by suicide bombers. More than three thousand Pakistani soldiers and officers have been killed in the war, including eighty-five members of the I.S.I. Yet many of these wounds have been self-inflicted, for the military and the I.S.I. created and nurtured the very groups—such as the Taliban—that have turned against the Pakistani state. And the money used to fund these radical organizations came largely from American taxpayers.

Many foreign-policy experts maintain that America cannot, at this juncture, cut off military aid to Pakistan—even if elements of the I.S.I. turn out to have harbored bin Laden. There are two prongs to this argument. One is that America needs Pakistan's support in order to defeat the Taliban. If the U.S. withdraws aid, it is argued, Pakistan might insist that we can no longer fly drones over tribal areas. But Pakistan has covertly supported the drone program for years, in return for the U.S.'s targeting of Taliban forces that it cannot vanquish on its own. Without U.S. aid, the Pakistani military will need drone assistance more than ever.

The more pressing concern is that radical Islamists will somehow get their hands on a nuclear bomb, either through covert means or by actually coming to power. "The military is playing on this fear," a Pakistani reporter, Pir Zubair Shah, told me.

As much as half of the money the U.S. gave to the I.S.I. to fight the Soviets was diverted to build nuclear weapons. The father of Pakistan's bomb, A. Q. Khan, later sold plans and nuclear equipment to Libya, North Korea, and Iran. A month before 9/11, Pakistani nuclear scientists even opened a secret dialogue with Al Qaeda. The government of Pakistan has denied knowledge of what Khan and his associates were doing.

In February, 2009, the Pakistani government announced that it had "dismantled the nuclear black market network." There is no way of knowing if this is true. Neither the U.S. nor the International Atomic Energy Agency has been allowed to interview Khan. According to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, the "current status of Pakistan's nuclear export network is unclear." Meanwhile, American policymakers have been paralyzed by Pakistan's nuclear capability. They have repeatedly expressed the worry that, if Pakistan is alienated, its nuclear secrets and materials might get into the wrong hands. But that has already happened.

Not only has American military aid been wasted, misused, and turned against us; it may well have undermined the Pakistani military, which has feasted on huge donations but is far weaker than its nemesis, the Indian military. If the measure of our aid is the gratitude of the Pakistani people and the loyalty of their government, then it has clearly been a failure. Last year, a Pew Research Center survey found that half of Pakistanis believe that the U.S. gives little or no assistance at all. Even the Finance Minister, Hafiz Shaikh, said last month that it was "largely a myth" that the U.S. had given tens of billions of dollars to Pakistan. And if the measure of our aid is Pakistan's internal security, the program has fallen short in that respect as well. Pakistan is endangered not by India, as the government believes, but by the very radical movements that the military helped create to act as terrorist proxies.

Eliminating, or sharply reducing, military aid to Pakistan would have consequences, but they may not be the ones we fear. Diminishing the power of the military class would open up more room for civilian rule. Many Pakistanis are in favor of less U.S. aid; their slogan is "trade not aid." In particular, Pakistani businessmen have long sought U.S. tax breaks for their textiles, which American manufacturers have resisted. Such a move would empower the civilian middle class. India would no doubt welcome a reduction in military aid to Pakistan, and the U.S. could use this as leverage to pressure India to allow the Kashmiris to vote on their future, which would very likely be a vote for independence. These two actions might do far more to enhance Pakistan's stability, and to insure its friendship, than the billions of dollars that America now pays like a ransom.

Within the I.S.I., there is a secret organization known as the S Wing, which is largely composed of supposedly retired military and I.S.I. officers. "It doesn't exist on paper," a source close to the I.S.I. told me. The S Wing handles relations with radical elements. "If something happens, then they have deniability," the source explained. If any group within the Pakistani military helped hide bin Laden, it was likely S Wing.

Eight days before Osama bin Laden was killed, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the head of the Pakistani Army, went to the Kakul military academy in Abbottabad, less than a mile from the villa where bin Laden was living. "General Kayani told the cadets, 'We have broken the backbone of the militants,' " Pir Zubair Shah, the reporter, told me. "But the backbone was right there." Perhaps with a touch of theatre, Hamid Gul, the former I.S.I. chief, publicly expressed wonder that bin Laden was living in a city with three army regiments, less than a mile from an élite military academy, in a house that appeared to have been built expressly to protect him. Aside from the military, Gul told the Associated Press, "there is the local police, the Intelligence Bureau, Military Intelligence, the I.S.I. They all had a presence there." ♦

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/16/110516fa_fact_wright#ixzz1OeP0teE5


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

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

RE: [ALOCHONA] Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!



Wow! Couching personal  political opinion with limited knoledge.
 


From: farida_majid@hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 19:26:55 -0400
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!

 

Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!

 

                     Farida Majid

 

           Sentimental objection against removal of "bismillah"s  placement in the Constitution of Bangladesh has begun just as I apprehended.  This is a familiar trick reminiscent of Hitler's campaign rhetoric stoking popular racial and ethnic sentiments in 1930s Germany. Later the Catholic Church of Austria used religious sentiments to persecute the Jews and oust them from Vienna. The lesson to be learned is that the word of God, when politically manipulated, can bring massive human destruction. The Genocide of 1971 is scorched in our memory.

 

         When I raised the issue of illegally placed "bismillah" above the Preamble of the Constitution of Bangladesh in the internet forums, I got angry responses. Accused of being anti-Islam and a paid servant of Zionist masters, I was asked: "Why "Bismillah" is a problem for you?"

 

          'Bismillah' is not a problem for me.  It is a constant and trusted companion. Besides using it in prayers, I love saying it at the commencement of any good work, and I love writing it.  Give me a minute or two, and any old pen, and even without practice, I will write 'bismillah' in Arabic in passable Nashtaliq calligraphic style.

 

          I do have a problem though with a thing called Martial Law. There is no such thing called 'Martial Law' in the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.  'Bismillah' should not be put above the Preamble of the nation's Constitution by an unlawful usurper of civilian power who called himself Chief Martial Law Administrator.   The use of 'bismillah' for such crass political purpose behind the clout of illegal Martial Law by a Proclamation Order in 1977, thereby betraying the trust of 150 million people should surely count as the most shocking and egregious blasphemy! It is pure kufri!

 

          See the Holy Qur'an for a strong interdiction against invoking Allah's name in an unlawful act like this in Sura Hud (11: 18):

 

 Waman athlamu mimmani iftara AAala Allahi kathiban ola-ika yuAAradhoona AAala rabbihim wayaqoolu al-ashhadu haola-i allatheena kathaboo AAala rabbihim ala laAAnatu Allahi AAala alththalimeena

 

And who (is) more unjust/oppressive than who fabricated/cut and split on God lies/denials/falsifications? Those, they are being displayed/exhibited/shown on (to) their Lord, and the witnesses/testifiers (the angels) say: "Those (are) those who lied/denied/falsified upon their Lord." Is not God's curse/torture on the unjust/oppressors?  …11:18

 

           Anything that bears the sign of preference for one particular religion, be it the religion of a large number of natives, is debris from the illegal acts of constitutional vandalism. Surely it is blasphemous to use the hallowed name of Allah as a mark to legitimize such an act of unjust vandalism. By upholding the welcome repeal of the Fifth Amendment, Act 1979, the Supreme Court has fulfilled the duty of the judiciary in the service of preserving and defending the Constitution of Bangladesh. Now it seems that a Parliamentary process should be put in place to remove this heinous blasphemy and restore the sanctity of the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.

 

            Independence from the British rule, and then from Pakistan's oppression, must mean freedom from the dreadful colonial practice of categorization of people and computation of demography by the professed faith of a person or a group.  Counting people by their religions means everyone is forced into a pre-selected classification that ignores other principles of grouping. We must stop the practice of depicting majority/minority on the basis of religion alone.

 

           The Parliament should do its part to fulfill the obligation of preserving and protecting the Constitution that represents our valiant fight for independence from a false statehood (Pakistan) whose existential basis was this weird notion of computation of people by their religion.  Pakistan was a disasterous experiment in a bad idea!  The birth of Bangladesh in 1971 proved conclusively that Muslim Bengalis do not need a separate state as Muslims only and no one else.  They can live with people of other religions and ethnicity as they have happily and prosperously done so for centuries.

 

                                                                                                                               ©2011, Farida Majid

 

 




__._,_.___


[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] 'History will mark you as traitors'



I guess  that would make the majority of the common people traitors. That is a pretty drastic statement.
 


To:
From: bdmailer@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 08:54:45 +0600
Subject: [ALOCHONA] 'History will mark you as traitors'

 
'History will mark you as traitors'

Dhaka, June 6 (bdnews24.com) — Bangladesh will become a communal, fundamentalist and failed state like Pakistan if the spirit of the 1972's constitution is foiled, a citizen's platform has said.

"And if it happens, parliament will be held responsible," said a press release on Monday from the Ekattorer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee (Committee for Elimination of Killers and Collaborators of 1971). "If you [the government] take part in this evil, history will forever mark you as traitors," the organisation said in the release.

Addressing the MPs, it said, "People voted for the Grand Alliance in the election of 2008 to ensure trial of war criminals and restoration of the four pillars of the 1972 constitution, not to legalise the 5th and 8th Amendments…" The special committee on charter review finalised its report on June 5 with 51-point proposals on the 15th amendment to the constitution.

In its report, the special committee proposed to keep Islam as the religion of state and to retain religion-based politics and 'Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim' in the preamble of the constitution. "Presentation of these proposals in parliament would be a treachery with the ideology and spirit of Bangabandhu and the 1972 constitution," the organisation said in the release. "It will be a hideous example to retain the proposals by disobeying the Supreme Court verdict."

It said, "The former presidents Hussein Muhammad Ershad and late Ziaur Rahman passed the 5th and 8th amendments in order to create a fundamentalist state like Pakistan. It had nothing to do with their love for Islam."

The press release was signed by committee advisors' panel president Prof Kabir Chowdhury, executive committee president justice Golam Rabbani, committee president Shahriar Kabir and general secretary Kazi Mukul. The 5th Amendment added Bismillah to the preamble of the constitution while the 8th introduced Islam as the religion of state.




__._,_.___


[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] Funny - Reform in Saudi Arabia



This counts as reform in Saudi Arabia!

 

 

Lingerie shop jobs: Immediate response to order demanded

File photo shows the Nayomi boutique at Basateen Mall in Jeddah, probably the first of its kind to hire a Saudi woman sales clerk in a shop that allows men and women to enter. (AN photo)

By DIANA AL-JASSEM

ARAB NEWS

Published: Jun 7, 2011


http://arabnews.com/saudiarabia/article449657.ece

 

 

JEDDAH: Saudi businesswomen have called for quick implementation of the decision to hire women in lingerie stores, before the decision evanesces again.

 

Earlier this week, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah ordered officials to set measures that only allow Saudi women to work at lingerie shops within a month. The step was welcomed by officials and businesswomen.

 

Many years have passed since the Labor Ministry requested lingerie shops to replace male salesmen with women, but there has been no response from officials. After a large number of campaigns and discussions, the ministry issued the decision in 2005, but it was never implemented.

 

"We immediately started hiring female staff during the year 2005. Initially, it seemed to be a good step. However, the number of customers decreased considerably, because only women were allowed to enter our shops," said Sarah Bin Sahal, area retail manager for the Nayomi lingerie chain, which still operates more than six "women-only" shops.

 

Later on, they established five more stores that received only families. "Only women or couples are allowed in. The number of customers increased, as women felt free to deal with women sale clerks without any embarrassment," she said. In 2005, the ministry asked lingerie shops to begin moving toward women-only staff, giving them a two-year deadline that has lapsed.

 

Bin Sahal added: "Four years later, only a few shops attempted to adhere to the ministry's noncompulsory order, as shop owners are more likely to hire men in order to increase the number of customers. We now need a quick movement and accurate deadline. We also request cooperation from businessmen and shop owners."

 

Reem Asaad, economic writer and member of the Saudi Economic Association, launched a campaign to boycott lingerie stores managed by male staff.

 

She spoke to Arab News about the importance of implementing this decision with a concrete deadline.

 

"Issuing the decision is an important step, but we need to see the implementation. Since 2005 we have heard the decision, but nothing has happened," she said.

 

Reem added, "I think it is not enough to hire saleswomen in lingerie stores. Management, accounting, and customer service are other fields in which women should be equal to men."

 

According to Reem, the decision called for hiring women in stores including those selling perfumes, makeup, clothes, and children-care products.

 

Fatima Qaroub, a Saudi woman who started a campaign titled "Enough With Embarrassment," confirmed that many Saudi women joined the campaign after they had experienced an embarrassing situation with salesmen in lingerie stores. "A large number of supporters joined the campaign and we had more than 5,500 members on our Facebook page," she said. Qaroub called for the necessity of putting a deadline for the implementation of the decision, or it will die again.

 

"Women in the Kingdom have suffered enough embarrassment when they want to buy lingerie. They have to respond to males about questions regarding the size, description and colors of the lingerie they are looking for," said Qaroub.

 

Qaroub's campaign has reached official bodies, and all of them have been supportive since the year 2005.   "We visited religious authorities, municipality, and the ministry to call for our right. Many positive results are apparent everyday, and we are looking to expand women participation's in many other fields," she added.



__._,_.___


[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] Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!



Der alochok,

With due respect, we are giving too much attention to "Bismillah" in front of the constitution. For most Bengalis  this holy words does not prevent us to harm to our constitution and people by "Our" lawmakers. It seems like you are in a crusade in eradicating this word from our constitution. As I mentioned in earlier posts, it is an academic practice and no fundamental change will come by keeping it or taking it out of the book. However this "Token" may divide our people more. I am afraid of that. The nation is polarized today and to take out country to the next phase of development, we need to stay united more than ever before.

All of our past leaders (Some great and some not so great) made monumental errors in the past. Fighting over it will not bring anything back!

Just look at two largest "Secular" democracies of today. Both India and the US have major flaws when it comes to protect minority communities. Despite professing their love for secular system minorities in both countries are treated differently and have been treated differently.

Establishing justice for all requires far more attention to details and quiet sacrifices by capable leaders. We do not even have skilled leaders like India or the USA. We have no shotages of challenges ahead of us either. Some of them will require defending our "Free" status in future. We have to protect our culture as well which is under huge assault from many fronts.

Therefore, debating over where to place bismillah or if we ought to remove it may be technically important to purists but NOT a priority. Supplying rice, lentils, oil etc to poor people in our country IS a priority. Tackling crime, extortion, land theft, infrastructure development are major and critical priorities and they require serious focus from our people and leadership.

Lets face some ugly fact about us. As a nation we are not so serious about religion that a word or words will change our bad habits. This word remains a token only to represent faith of overwhelming majority population of this country.

If you do not understand what I am talking about, try removing the words "In God we trust" from US dollar bills. It may require few hundred years for you to even attempt it through political channels.

If you are concern about giving minorities proper rights, we can work unitedly on that issue.

You do write well. But I do not agree with your "Fatwa (Opinion) of "Kufri". Which has a different meaning altogether. We are all for democratic Bangladesh not military dictatorship. But distorting facts about the past will not get anything done today. Even current government did the right thing by keeping "Bismillah" where it was places few decades ago.

Let us learn from past mistakes and work for a better future.


Shalom!





-----Original Message-----
From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tue, Jun 7, 2011 12:33 pm
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!

 
Use of 'bismillah' in the Constitution is Blasphemous!
 
                     Farida Majid
 
           Sentimental objection against removal of "bismillah"s  placement in the Constitution of Bangladesh has begun just as I apprehended.  This is a familiar trick reminiscent of Hitler's campaign rhetoric stoking popular racial and ethnic sentiments in 1930s Germany. Later the Catholic Church of Austria used religious sentiments to persecute the Jews and oust them from Vienna. The lesson to be learned is that the word of God, when politically manipulated, can bring massive human destruction. The Genocide of 1971 is scorched in our memory.
 
         When I raised the issue of illegally placed "bismillah" above the Preamble of the Constitution of Bangladesh in the internet forums, I got angry responses. Accused of being anti-Islam and a paid servant of Zionist masters, I was asked: "Why "Bismillah" is a problem for you?"
 
          'Bismillah' is not a problem for me.  It is a constant and trusted companion. Besides using it in prayers, I love saying it at the commencement of any good work, and I love writing it.  Give me a minute or two, and any old pen, and even without practice, I will write 'bismillah' in Arabic in passable Nashtaliq calligraphic style.
 
          I do have a problem though with a thing called Martial Law. There is no such thing called 'Martial Law' in the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.  'Bismillah' should not be put above the Preamble of the nation's Constitution by an unlawful usurper of civilian power who called himself Chief Martial Law Administrator.   The use of 'bismillah' for such crass political purpose behind the clout of illegal Martial Law by a Proclamation Order in 1977, thereby betraying the trust of 150 million people should surely count as the most shocking and egregious blasphemy! It is pure kufri!
 
          See the Holy Qur'an for a strong interdiction against invoking Allah's name in an unlawful act like this in Sura Hud (11: 18):
 
 Waman athlamu mimmani iftara AAala Allahi kathiban ola-ika yuAAradhoona AAala rabbihim wayaqoolu al-ashhadu haola-i allatheena kathaboo AAala rabbihim ala laAAnatu Allahi AAala alththalimeena
 
And who (is) more unjust/oppressive than who fabricated/cut and split on God lies/denials/falsifications? Those, they are being displayed/exhibited/shown on (to) their Lord, and the witnesses/testifiers (the angels) say: "Those (are) those who lied/denied/falsified upon their Lord." Is not God's curse/torture on the unjust/oppressors?  …11:18
 
           Anything that bears the sign of preference for one particular religion, be it the religion of a large number of natives, is debris from the illegal acts of constitutional vandalism. Surely it is blasphemous to use the hallowed name of Allah as a mark to legitimize such an act of unjust vandalism. By upholding the welcome repeal of the Fifth Amendment, Act 1979, the Supreme Court has fulfilled the duty of the judiciary in the service of preserving and defending the Constitution of Bangladesh. Now it seems that a Parliamentary process should be put in place to remove this heinous blasphemy and restore the sanctity of the Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.
 
            Independence from the British rule, and then from Pakistan's oppression, must mean freedom from the dreadful colonial practice of categorization of people and computation of demography by the professed faith of a person or a group.  Counting people by their religions means everyone is forced into a pre-selected classification that ignores other principles of grouping. We must stop the practice of depicting majority/minority on the basis of religion alone.
 
           The Parliament should do its part to fulfill the obligation of preserving and protecting the Constitution that represents our valiant fight for independence from a false statehood (Pakistan) whose existential basis was this weird notion of computation of people by their religion.  Pakistan was a disasterous experiment in a bad idea!  The birth of Bangladesh in 1971 proved conclusively that Muslim Bengalis do not need a separate state as Muslims only and no one else.  They can live with people of other religions and ethnicity as they have happily and prosperously done so for centuries.
 
                                                                                                                               ©2011, Farida Majid
 
 


__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___