Banner Advertiser

Friday, September 30, 2011

[ALOCHONA] Dizzytal Bangladesh



Cost of living almost double in 5 yrs

The cost of living in Bangladeshhas increased by 82.59 per cent over the last five years from, according toBangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS).In relation, the income hasincreased by 59.38 per cent over the same period showing an unusual disparitybetween income and expenditure.This disparity has made the fixedincome group's living extremely unmanageable, experts opined.

According to the Household Incomeand Expenditure Survey- 2010 of Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), the costof living in 2010 (national level)  wasestimated at Tk 11,200 which was Tk 6,134 in 2005, showing an increase of 82.59per cent expenditure.

Contrarily, the average monthlyincome (national level) in 2010 was estimated at Tk 11,480 which was Tk 7,203 in2005 that shows an income growth of 59.38 percent.However, in rural and urbanlevels, the average monthly expenditure was estimated at Tk 9,612 and Tk 15,531respectively in 2010.    

The price hike of essentials,lack of efficient market policy and high inflation rate have pushed up theliving expenditure, experts further opined.The recent hike in fuel pricewill further strike the middle and lower income groups of people hard, theysaid, adding that increasing trend of inflation this year foretell that thecost of living would be strikingly high.  

On point to point basis, theinflation rate during last August was 11.29 per cent which was 10.17 in Junethis year.

According to market study reportof Consumers' Association of Bangladesh (CAB), the prices of rice haveincreased 21.13 per cent, prices of edible oil 7.95 per cent, prices of fishes18.65 per cent, prices of spices 41.24 per cent, and prices of sugar increased35.77 per cent in 2010 than those of previous year.

In addition, the house rentincreased 5.99 per cent, water and electric prices 4.97 and 6.48 percentrespectively in 2010.

In comparison to 2009, the livingcost in 2010 have increased 16.10 per cent, said the CAB report, adding that ithas been increasing around 12 per cent per year since last couple of years.

Compared to 2010, prices of ricehave increased 12.05 per cent, edible oil 34 per cent, onion 23 per cent andsugar 26 percent in 2011, reveals the Trading Corporation of Bangladesh (TCB).

Meanwhile, according to a reportpublished by Oxfam, an international NGO, the prices of imported essentialshave increased 10 to 25 per cent more than the price increased in internationalmarket. As a result, about 70 per cent earning of the people are being spent onconsumption purposes, it noted.

Professor Dr Mostafizur Rahman,executive director of the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CDP), has termed the highinflation rate as the main cause behind the increase of cost of living. He saidthe sufferings of the fixed-income people have multiplied since they have tomanage their expenses with the limited income.

According to the presentsituation, people have to depend on their savings to manage expenses. If theirincome does not increase in concurrence with expenses, the situation would bemore adverse, he added.

"The recent fuel price hikewill push inflation rate to rise. If government does not invest the moneyaccrued from the subsidy given in energy sector, people's life would be furthermiserable," said Prof. Mostafiz.

Meanwhile, experts predict thatliving expenditure have increased alarmingly in 2011 since prices of almost allessentials increased steeply this year. The transportation fare has alsoincreased several times in a single year ensued by increase in fuel price.They also predict that thenational saving would be adversely hampered due to the huge gap between theincome and expenditure.

According to the BangladeshEconomic Review (2011), the national savings in 2009-10 fiscal was 30.02 percentof GDP while during the FY 2010-11, the savings reduced to 28.40 percent ofGDP.  

http://thenewnationbd.com/newsdetails.aspx?newsid=18670



__._,_.___


[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] BSF claims only 7 killed this year; BGB, others count at least 27



Killing of Bangladeshis on Border: BGB, rights bodies contradict BSF claim

BSF chief claims only 7 killed this year; BGB, others count at least 27



In contrast to counts in Bangladesh, the director general of Indian Border Security Force yesterday claimed BSF personnel have killed only seven Bangladeshis along the border so far this year.Border Guard Bangladesh puts the number at 27 and rights group Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) at 29.

BSF Director General Raman Srivastava, however, assured his Bangladesh counterpart of bringing down the number to zero.He was briefing journalists at the BGB headquarters at Pilkhana in Dhaka at the end of a six-day conference between the two border forces.

A top BGB official termed "unrealistic" the number given by the BSF chief."Till September this year, 27 Bangladeshi civilians have been killed and 17 injured by BSF," the official told The Daily Star, requesting anonymity.

According to ASK, 13 of the 29 killed by BSF men in January-September were physically tortured. During the period, 53 other Bangladeshis were wounded by the border force.

Odhikar, another human rights group, said BSF killed 27 Bangladeshis between January and August this year. The number was 74 last year and 98 the previous year, according to a report prepared by the group.

But the BSF chief said 32 Bangladeshi nationals were killed in 2010 and 55 in 2009.According to BGB sources, the numbers are 60 and 67. "Incidents of killing in border areas are decreasing gradually. We assure you that incidents of border killing will be lessened to zero as we want friendly relations,"

Srivastava told the briefing.
Replying to a query, he said, "What you call border killings are not killings, those are deaths. And we're also sorry for that."BSF personnel have stopped using bullets at maximum level. Non-lethal weapons are being used now."He added that some killings are the result of self-defence on the part of BSF.

Expressing concern over the increasing number of incidents of cutting barbed wire fence on the border, he said, "Incidents of fence cutting occurred at 333 places in 2008, 556 places in 2009, 924 places in 2010 and at 637 places till September this year." Meeting sources said India submitted separate lists of the Indian terrorists, smugglers and currency counterfeiters active in Bangladesh.

Maj Gen Anwar Hussain, director general of BGB, assured his Indian counterpart that his force will not let criminals use Bangladesh land.Both the chiefs said they agreed to launch a joint border management after October 31 in line with an agreement signed during Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram's visit to Dhaka in July this year.The joint management is aimed at resolving all outstanding border issues including combating cross-border crimes and enhancing quality of border management as well as to ensure cross-border security.

The BGB chief said his personnel do not shoot anyone in border areas; they rather arrest and hand over the suspects to BSF. "BGB abides by all international rules, and we want BSF to do the same," said Anwar.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=204696

http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/frontpage/35238.html



__._,_.___


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




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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Fwd: Sylhet-Jaflong road march



------ Forwarded message ----------

From: Zoglul Husain <zoglul@hotmail.co.uk>
Date: Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 6:20 AM
Subject: Sylhet-Jaflong road march




Slogans of resistance in Sylhet against Indian hegemonism
Road march from Sylhet to Jaflong border to protect land
 
March attended by:
• Mahmudur Rahman • Shamsher Mobin Chowdhury Abdul Hye Sikder
M Ilias Ali Dildar Hossain Selim and many other eminent persons
 
(Please click to read the following Amar Desh report, 1 October 2011)
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/10/01/108931 
 
 



__._,_.___


[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] Peace model....



Peace model....



http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/10/01/108916



__._,_.___


[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: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?



May I add a little to the tafsir I just made!  In the 'holy quotation' above Allah also says, language is the real foundation of any ummah, disproving the suggestions of mullahs like Hannan who would like to let religion have prime importance.  He should be sent as an emissary to the middle east  to make an Islamic community of twenty two nations before it fragments even further.

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
  In the Holy Quran, Allah says in the Surah Ibrahim;

And We have sent no Messenger
        save with the tongue of his people,
                that he might make all clear to them;
then God leads astray whomsoever He will,
and He guides whomsoever He will;
and He is the All-mighty, the All-wise. S. 14:4 Arberry

When Allah says, 'we' have sent messengers to people of every language, he insists that he is not the lone god and anybody preaching in Arabic is not sent for people speaking other languages.  These 'illiterate mullahs' don't even read their own scriptures, and their interpretations are also unacceptable.  That's why Prince Darah Shuko wrote, "Paradise is there/ where no mullah exists-// Where the noise of his discussions and debate is not heard.//  May the world be free from the noise of mulla,// And none should pay any heed to his decrees!// In the city where a mulla resides,/ No wise man ever stays//" [Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol.5(1), p.168]  One may also find the reference in 'Sources of Indian Tradition(2nd ed.), vol.1, edited and revised by Ainslie T. Embree, p. 473.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:31 PM, qar <qrahman@aim.com> wrote:
 

It is written, Islam is exclusively for the people who speak Arabic

>>>>>>>> I am afraid, I am hearing this for the first time. If this was the case why did prophet Muhammad (PBUH) sent people to preach Islam to all corners of the world? In fact religions BEFORE Islam came to specific communities BUT Islam came for ALL of humanities. This is what I understand about Islam. 

Having said that, I am always up for learning new things. Therefore, kindly share the SOURCE of your statement. Where in Islam says it came for Arabs only? Appreciate your earliest attention!!

Religion is nothing more than a conspiracy of the priesthood

>>>>>>>>>> That was the complaint about religions BEFORE Islam ( Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc). Islam does not give much power to priesthood. 

The almighty God has not even revealed the correct structure of the universe to the proponents of religion


>>>>>>>> This is a popular argument about the Bible (OT AND NT). Not about Islam. I would encourage you to be a little more original. Anyone can cut and paste, can you back up your statements (With sources from religious scriptures)? 

Take care!! ;-)


-----Original Message-----
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Sep 29, 2011 1:05 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
I would like to add that those people who want others to believe that religion is the strongest bond of nationhood has not studied religious literature properly.  It is written, Islam is exclusively for the people who speak ArabicReligion is nothing more than a conspiracy of the priesthood.  They survive and thrive on the tithes extracted from their followers.  The almighty God has not even revealed the correct structure of the universe to the proponents of religion.  One twenty inch telescope revealed more to Galileo than all the angels did to the prophets.

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels, wrote a savant named Samuel Johnson.


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 5:48 AM, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
 
Mr Shubimol Chakrabarty, yes, religion is the strongest bond of nationhood  compared to other bonds .Mr Jinnah said that Muslim majority areas should form independent state and Hindu majority areas of subcontinent should form another state and in both states  minorities would remain there with all human rights.
Shah Abdul Hannan

From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of subimal chakrabarty
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:17 AM

To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
Pretty funny! What kind of statement is this? 
What about the bondage between Muslims and Hindus of Bangladesh? Is it "thin"? Do they belong to "Bangladeshi jati"? 
Do Hindus of West Bengal and Muslims of West Bengal belong to "Indian jati"? Is it "thin" or "thick"? 
I think the purpose of Mr. Hannan's statement is to fish in the troubled waters. He is thinking more in terms of religious divide. This reminds me of Jinnah's Two-Nation Theory. Mr. Hannan seems to be talking in the same line. According to Jinnah all the Indian Hindus constituted one nation and all the Indian Muslims constituted another nation. He forgot about other religious groups.
Pretty funny!  
Mr. Hannan should recognize that religion is only one element (it may even be absent) in the structure of a nation. Hindu majority India and Hindu majority Nepal did not form one nation. All the Christian dominated countries in Europe did not form one nation. 
 
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
There is no Bangalee Jati as there is no Gujrati jati or Bihari jati or punjabi Jati  Bond of unity of bangla speaking Muslims of Bangladesh and Banglaspeaking Hindus of West bengal is very thin.They belong to Bangladeshi jati or Indian jati respectively. For becoming jati you require much stronger bond.
 
Shah Abdul hannan
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:44 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
 
I do not know if there is a perfect English translation for the Bengali word "Jati." As a Jati - we are Bangalee, irrespective of our religious affiliations, castes, and creeds. Bangalee-Jati is our secular cultural identity. The Bangalee-Jatiotabad consists of certain secular characteristics, such as, we celebrate Pahela-Boishakh, Bashata-Baran, Ekushe-February (February 21st), etc. etc. with cultural, and ritualistic activities. There are other festivities and practices, which used to be celebrated widely, irrespective of religious affiliations, but now mainly scattered fashion. They are Poush-Sangcranti, celebrated with varieties of Cakes (Pithas), Chaitra-Sangcranti, celebrated with cultural activities and fairs, Maghi-Purnima, etc. etc.  Bangalee-Jatiotabad, being above and beyond our religious characteristics, is the glue that can unite the majority under a true secular platform.
 
Closest English word for 'Jatiotabad' is Nationalism; I know it does not completely express the full meaning of the term Jatiotabad, as we mean. That's where the confusion comes from. Bangalee-Jatiotabad or Bengali-Nationalism is not a state entity. But, state has to allow free exercise of those secular rights and characteristics, and state has to nourish it to flourish. Non-Bangalees have their own secular Jatiotabad, and they should be allowed to exercise them freely also.
 
If I have misconception, please let me know.
 
I appreciate all your comments. Thanks.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sat, 9/24/11, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2011, 7:01 PM
 
"-------------and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural."----Dr. Jiten Roy
 
Let us take an example to examine Dr. Roy's comment. Nationality of Indians is Indian which indicates that their nationality is Indian. No problem with that. But which group of people constitutes the majority and what is this majority group's culture? Are these the people in the Hindi belt? Obviously not. Even being an Indian by nationality, a Bengali or an Assamese is a Bengali or an Assamese. Even within the subset of Bengal ( West Bengal ), we cannot force a Gorkha to identify himself as a Bengali. If the Gorkhas are culturally, linguistically, and historically distinct from Bengalis, why should we force them to call themselves Bengalis?  
 
"There is no issue of fairness in nationalism."---Dr. Jiten Roy
 
It will be quite unfair to force a Chakma to call himself a Bengali as this very word reflects language, culture, and history. Politically he is a "citizen of Bangladesh " but culturally a Chakma. The majority has no right to force a Chakma to accept a Bengali's cultural identity. This is not only unfair, this is coercive also.
 
"There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh ."----Dr. Jien Roy
 
I agree. Pakistani regimes tried to redefine Bengalis in East Pakistan as Pakistanis. That was a political game with India . But what is going on now? I would expect some elaboration. Regards.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
Everybody is missing my point. I am simply asking - what is our cultural identity, not our religious identity or nationality? 
 
Nationality and nationalism are two different things. Nationality is citizenship, and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural. There is no issue of fairness in nationalism. There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh .
 
Jiten Roy --- On Thu, 9/22/11, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 10:29 PM
 
Bangladesh is a political entity, as opposed to a cultural one. May be, Najrul Islam's Bangla Desh and Ravindranath's Sonar Bangla were cultural, and those included more than the political entity of Bangladesh ; they also excluded at least the Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is a part of today's political Bangladesh .
 
Citizenship (nationality) is not cultural. I wish the secular politicians and intellectuals of  Bangladesh did not start this non-sense of Bangalee nationalism in 1971-72. It was wrong to ask the CHT people to call themselves Bangalees. Again, Bangalee nationalism was not really the spirit of all movements during 1947-71, and should not have been unless if we wanted to merge with West Bengal and allowed CHT to secede from us. Fairness, respect and dignity for Bangla and the Bangalees should not be considered the same as Bangalee nationalism. Bangalee nationalism would have demanded a separate nation for the Bangalees, even if the western Pakistanis treated the Bangalees with due respect. Our real spirit was no nationalism; it was fairness, respect and dignity for us.
 
Citizenship for anyone who seeks it? It is not done anywhere in the world. All countries have their laws to govern how a non-citizen would be given citizenship.
 
I would not ask Awami League to revive the so-called Bangalee nationalism (citizenship), rather I would ask them to respect all peoples of the land with respect; much like I would not ask them to call all Bangladeshis Muslims, much like I would not ask all Indians to be known as Hindus, much like I would not desire all cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups of the United States to be called Christians or English.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] HAVOC CREATED BY JAMATI'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Bain's comments tells me that, in my last sarcastic comments, I did not clarify my points enough; hence confusions.
I was looking for a cultural identity for the people of Bangladesh . I explored 3 conventional identities (Bangalee, Bangladeshi, and Moderate Muslim), which have been used in the past to represent the people of Bangladesh . But, none of them seemed to encompass all people. As a result, the identity crisis still remains, and we do not know who we are.
After Bangladesh was born, our cultural identity (Jatiota) was Bangalee, and our nationality was also Banglalee. Ershad changed our nationality to Bangladeshi. The motive was to include all the people of Bangladesh , so he told us at that time. Was it really the motive? If that was true – all non-Bangalee Biharis should have been citizen by now, and Father Tim, the former Principal of Notre Dame College, would have been citizen already. If you say that our nationality is Bangladeshi - then we should grant citizenship to any permanent resident of Bangladesh , if they seek one.
In my view, it was done purposefully to defuse pre-independence secular mindset, and neutralize the Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit, the spirit of independence movement. As you know, Quranic verses and state religion (Islam) were also introduced in the secular constitution right around that time.
Dr. Bain, Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit has been the driving force behind all movements in the East Pakistan since the language movement in 1952. Even though Sheikh Mujib was not seeking independence at the beginning, but his movement was fueled by the Bangali-Jatiotabadi spirit. This is the spirit that still can unite the mjority in Bangladesh . That's why - I have been asking Awami League to revive that spirit for their sake.
 
Thanks for your comments. Love to hear from you. Don't be a stranger.
 
Jiten Roy --- 






__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




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: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?



  In the Holy Quran, Allah says in the Surah Ibrahim;

And We have sent no Messenger
        save with the tongue of his people,
                that he might make all clear to them;
then God leads astray whomsoever He will,
and He guides whomsoever He will;
and He is the All-mighty, the All-wise. S. 14:4 Arberry

When Allah says, 'we' have sent messengers to people of every language, he insists that he is not the lone god and anybody preaching in Arabic is not sent for people speaking other languages.  These 'illiterate mullahs' don't even read their own scriptures, and their interpretations are also unacceptable.  That's why Prince Darah Shuko wrote, "Paradise is there/ where no mullah exists-// Where the noise of his discussions and debate is not heard.//  May the world be free from the noise of mulla,// And none should pay any heed to his decrees!// In the city where a mulla resides,/ No wise man ever stays//" [Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol.5(1), p.168]  One may also find the reference in 'Sources of Indian Tradition(2nd ed.), vol.1, edited and revised by Ainslie T. Embree, p. 473.

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:31 PM, qar <qrahman@aim.com> wrote:
 

It is written, Islam is exclusively for the people who speak Arabic

>>>>>>>> I am afraid, I am hearing this for the first time. If this was the case why did prophet Muhammad (PBUH) sent people to preach Islam to all corners of the world? In fact religions BEFORE Islam came to specific communities BUT Islam came for ALL of humanities. This is what I understand about Islam. 

Having said that, I am always up for learning new things. Therefore, kindly share the SOURCE of your statement. Where in Islam says it came for Arabs only? Appreciate your earliest attention!!

Religion is nothing more than a conspiracy of the priesthood

>>>>>>>>>> That was the complaint about religions BEFORE Islam ( Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc). Islam does not give much power to priesthood. 

The almighty God has not even revealed the correct structure of the universe to the proponents of religion


>>>>>>>> This is a popular argument about the Bible (OT AND NT). Not about Islam. I would encourage you to be a little more original. Anyone can cut and paste, can you back up your statements (With sources from religious scriptures)? 

Take care!! ;-)


-----Original Message-----
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Sep 29, 2011 1:05 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
I would like to add that those people who want others to believe that religion is the strongest bond of nationhood has not studied religious literature properly.  It is written, Islam is exclusively for the people who speak ArabicReligion is nothing more than a conspiracy of the priesthood.  They survive and thrive on the tithes extracted from their followers.  The almighty God has not even revealed the correct structure of the universe to the proponents of religion.  One twenty inch telescope revealed more to Galileo than all the angels did to the prophets.

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
Nationalism is the last refuge of scoundrels, wrote a savant named Samuel Johnson.


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 5:48 AM, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
 
Mr Shubimol Chakrabarty, yes, religion is the strongest bond of nationhood  compared to other bonds .Mr Jinnah said that Muslim majority areas should form independent state and Hindu majority areas of subcontinent should form another state and in both states  minorities would remain there with all human rights.
Shah Abdul Hannan

From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of subimal chakrabarty
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 7:17 AM

To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
Pretty funny! What kind of statement is this? 
What about the bondage between Muslims and Hindus of Bangladesh? Is it "thin"? Do they belong to "Bangladeshi jati"? 
Do Hindus of West Bengal and Muslims of West Bengal belong to "Indian jati"? Is it "thin" or "thick"? 
I think the purpose of Mr. Hannan's statement is to fish in the troubled waters. He is thinking more in terms of religious divide. This reminds me of Jinnah's Two-Nation Theory. Mr. Hannan seems to be talking in the same line. According to Jinnah all the Indian Hindus constituted one nation and all the Indian Muslims constituted another nation. He forgot about other religious groups.
Pretty funny!  
Mr. Hannan should recognize that religion is only one element (it may even be absent) in the structure of a nation. Hindu majority India and Hindu majority Nepal did not form one nation. All the Christian dominated countries in Europe did not form one nation. 
 
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?

 
There is no Bangalee Jati as there is no Gujrati jati or Bihari jati or punjabi Jati  Bond of unity of bangla speaking Muslims of Bangladesh and Banglaspeaking Hindus of West bengal is very thin.They belong to Bangladeshi jati or Indian jati respectively. For becoming jati you require much stronger bond.
 
Shah Abdul hannan
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:44 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
 
 
I do not know if there is a perfect English translation for the Bengali word "Jati." As a Jati - we are Bangalee, irrespective of our religious affiliations, castes, and creeds. Bangalee-Jati is our secular cultural identity. The Bangalee-Jatiotabad consists of certain secular characteristics, such as, we celebrate Pahela-Boishakh, Bashata-Baran, Ekushe-February (February 21st), etc. etc. with cultural, and ritualistic activities. There are other festivities and practices, which used to be celebrated widely, irrespective of religious affiliations, but now mainly scattered fashion. They are Poush-Sangcranti, celebrated with varieties of Cakes (Pithas), Chaitra-Sangcranti, celebrated with cultural activities and fairs, Maghi-Purnima, etc. etc.  Bangalee-Jatiotabad, being above and beyond our religious characteristics, is the glue that can unite the majority under a true secular platform.
 
Closest English word for 'Jatiotabad' is Nationalism; I know it does not completely express the full meaning of the term Jatiotabad, as we mean. That's where the confusion comes from. Bangalee-Jatiotabad or Bengali-Nationalism is not a state entity. But, state has to allow free exercise of those secular rights and characteristics, and state has to nourish it to flourish. Non-Bangalees have their own secular Jatiotabad, and they should be allowed to exercise them freely also.
 
If I have misconception, please let me know.
 
I appreciate all your comments. Thanks.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sat, 9/24/11, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Saturday, September 24, 2011, 7:01 PM
 
"-------------and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural."----Dr. Jiten Roy
 
Let us take an example to examine Dr. Roy's comment. Nationality of Indians is Indian which indicates that their nationality is Indian. No problem with that. But which group of people constitutes the majority and what is this majority group's culture? Are these the people in the Hindi belt? Obviously not. Even being an Indian by nationality, a Bengali or an Assamese is a Bengali or an Assamese. Even within the subset of Bengal ( West Bengal ), we cannot force a Gorkha to identify himself as a Bengali. If the Gorkhas are culturally, linguistically, and historically distinct from Bengalis, why should we force them to call themselves Bengalis?  
 
"There is no issue of fairness in nationalism."---Dr. Jiten Roy
 
It will be quite unfair to force a Chakma to call himself a Bengali as this very word reflects language, culture, and history. Politically he is a "citizen of Bangladesh " but culturally a Chakma. The majority has no right to force a Chakma to accept a Bengali's cultural identity. This is not only unfair, this is coercive also.
 
"There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh ."----Dr. Jien Roy
 
I agree. Pakistani regimes tried to redefine Bengalis in East Pakistan as Pakistanis. That was a political game with India . But what is going on now? I would expect some elaboration. Regards.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
 
Everybody is missing my point. I am simply asking - what is our cultural identity, not our religious identity or nationality? 
 
Nationality and nationalism are two different things. Nationality is citizenship, and nationalism is a cultural identity, which reflects majority cultural. There is no issue of fairness in nationalism. There has been an orchestrated attempt to alter our cultural identity (Bangalee) in this region during Pakistani era, and it is still going on in Bangladesh .
 
Jiten Roy --- On Thu, 9/22/11, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: The sprit of Bangalee nationalism?
To: " mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com " < mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com >
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 10:29 PM
 
Bangladesh is a political entity, as opposed to a cultural one. May be, Najrul Islam's Bangla Desh and Ravindranath's Sonar Bangla were cultural, and those included more than the political entity of Bangladesh ; they also excluded at least the Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is a part of today's political Bangladesh .
 
Citizenship (nationality) is not cultural. I wish the secular politicians and intellectuals of  Bangladesh did not start this non-sense of Bangalee nationalism in 1971-72. It was wrong to ask the CHT people to call themselves Bangalees. Again, Bangalee nationalism was not really the spirit of all movements during 1947-71, and should not have been unless if we wanted to merge with West Bengal and allowed CHT to secede from us. Fairness, respect and dignity for Bangla and the Bangalees should not be considered the same as Bangalee nationalism. Bangalee nationalism would have demanded a separate nation for the Bangalees, even if the western Pakistanis treated the Bangalees with due respect. Our real spirit was no nationalism; it was fairness, respect and dignity for us.
 
Citizenship for anyone who seeks it? It is not done anywhere in the world. All countries have their laws to govern how a non-citizen would be given citizenship.
 
I would not ask Awami League to revive the so-called Bangalee nationalism (citizenship), rather I would ask them to respect all peoples of the land with respect; much like I would not ask them to call all Bangladeshis Muslims, much like I would not ask all Indians to be known as Hindus, much like I would not desire all cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups of the United States to be called Christians or English.
 
Well, so long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] HAVOC CREATED BY JAMATI'S !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Bain's comments tells me that, in my last sarcastic comments, I did not clarify my points enough; hence confusions.
I was looking for a cultural identity for the people of Bangladesh . I explored 3 conventional identities (Bangalee, Bangladeshi, and Moderate Muslim), which have been used in the past to represent the people of Bangladesh . But, none of them seemed to encompass all people. As a result, the identity crisis still remains, and we do not know who we are.
After Bangladesh was born, our cultural identity (Jatiota) was Bangalee, and our nationality was also Banglalee. Ershad changed our nationality to Bangladeshi. The motive was to include all the people of Bangladesh , so he told us at that time. Was it really the motive? If that was true – all non-Bangalee Biharis should have been citizen by now, and Father Tim, the former Principal of Notre Dame College, would have been citizen already. If you say that our nationality is Bangladeshi - then we should grant citizenship to any permanent resident of Bangladesh , if they seek one.
In my view, it was done purposefully to defuse pre-independence secular mindset, and neutralize the Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit, the spirit of independence movement. As you know, Quranic verses and state religion (Islam) were also introduced in the secular constitution right around that time.
Dr. Bain, Bangalee-Jatiotabadi spirit has been the driving force behind all movements in the East Pakistan since the language movement in 1952. Even though Sheikh Mujib was not seeking independence at the beginning, but his movement was fueled by the Bangali-Jatiotabadi spirit. This is the spirit that still can unite the mjority in Bangladesh . That's why - I have been asking Awami League to revive that spirit for their sake.
 
Thanks for your comments. Love to hear from you. Don't be a stranger.
 
Jiten Roy --- 





__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




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

__,_._,___