Banner Advertiser

Sunday, November 27, 2011

RE: [ALOCHONA] Tipaimukh issue is to go to World Court



E ki kotha shuni aj monthorar mukhe !!!
 
As per the earlier posts of Alochok Farida Majid, the Tipaimukh Dam was a myth created by anti-Indians and India had no apparent plans to build the dam. It is pleasing to note that she has taken a pragmatic view of the situation.    
 

From: farida_majid@hotmail.com
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:29:32 -0500
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Tipaimukh issue is to go to World Court

 
Did you see this?


India has been misbehaving  over water issues. I suspect things will get worse over time as they are becoming victims of own mismanagement of water. There is no water recyling, while water tables are falling. There is some pitiful effort at water conservation;but,  huge scale up is needed.




__._,_.___


[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] Slicing Dhaka....



Slicing Dhaka....



http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=211985
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=211838



__._,_.___


[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] The Dilemma of National Anthem



The Dilemma of National Anthem

Mohammad Abdullah

Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru has written two poems almost at the same time in the early part of the last century that are now adopted as National Anthems by India in 1947 and by Bangladesh in 1972.

During 1947 J. L. Nehru was the instrumental to adopt Bishwa-Kob-Raj-Guru's British tabedar-giri (to remain as puppet) poem as the National Anthem of modern land-piece of India. He was able to manage this poem as the National Anthem by his own will by applying a sort of imposition on the population who were vastly illiterate, and did not know what the National Anthem meant for a liberated country.

At that time Pakistan had no National Anthem and began searching a writer to frame a National Anthem. After utmost search Hafeez Jullendhari was able to give a poem written primarily in Persian was adopted as Pakistan's National Anthem toward the end of Liaquat Ali Khan's days. Immediately this poem was put to the instrumental form with the help of the American composers in 1951 which is still used by Pakistan on official occasions. The National Anthem of Pakistan is never understood by any Pakistani even now because of its Persian origin.

Thus, a Greek song has become the National Anthem of Pakistan for which any Pakistani does Baak-baakum even today. Invariably a bunch of foolish idiotic people live in that country who knows only regional domination by muscle without proper education. The upper chamber is practically some what vacant for them.

Buddhimaan J. L. Nehru adopted Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's poem because of personal reasons. He was very much passionate, like his father Motilal Nehru, toward Rabindranath Tagore. Thus, J. L. Nehru felt that his daughter must be educated by this super human. Encircling all personal issues became national matter for J. L. Nehru.

Therefore, he did not hesitate to choose a puppet song as the National Anthem of modern India. At that time he was also busy to give a constitution for the newly independent country by adopting British Parliamentary democratic platform in a perennial caste-oriented land. Though Mohammed Iqbal's poem was on the table yet Nehru inclined toward Tagore's puppet song.

Moreover Iqbal's poem was already in the bastard language URDU, a sort of cousin to the bastardized HINDI. There must be a different taste for Nehru between the two poems as he finalized selecting Tagore's poem. Needless to say that Iqbal was a revered personality to Nehru as they discussed the issue of Pakistan after coming out of the Jail in 1934. By that time Iqbal already made a statement about framing Pakistan.

As Nehru claimed that Iqbal never envisioned Pakistan but it came out of the pressure from the extremist group of the Muslims League while Iqbal served as the President of the same party. Though Nehru and Iqbal politically agreed to see undivided British India but some how Nehru did not adopt Iqbal's poem as the National Anthem. This disagreement truly does not justify whether Iqbal actually denied his confession on the creation of Pakistan to Nehru. Shortly thereafter in 1938 Iqbal died.

Many political figures knew very well that Mohammed Ali Jinnah never had congenial relationship with Mohammed Iqbal. It was Jinnah who was the instrumental with the help of Liaquat Ali Khan to overthrow Iqbal from the President position of the Muslim League after both came back from U.K. with afresh plan. By 1933 Jinnah joined Muslim League out of frustration with Nehru-Gandhi-Patel gang.

Liaquat Ali Khan was able to convince Jinnah to return to British India to provide leadership toward framing Pakistan. By 1929 PAKISTAN was a known word to both Jinnah and Liaquat from Choudhury Rehmat Ali. The ouster of Iqbal from Muslim League was enjoyed by Nehru although politically he expressed solidarity with him. Nehru became time serving hypocrite.

It is quite mystery why Nehru inclined toward the puppet poem of Tagore that pleased George V when visited British India in 1911. As soon as this poem was adopted as the National Anthem of modern India, Pakistan sent a strong protest to Nehru Administration. It noted that the poem is compatible as the National Anthem for India because it simply does not comply with the national integrity of Pakistan.

Invariably, till today, it interferes with Pakistan's geographical integrity and a series of protests were made by Pakistan since 1949. In fact the 1949 "No War Pact" offered by Nehru Administration after the occupation of Kashmir by both countries was rejected by Liaquat Administration because of this primary issue. Pakistan could not trust India for No War Pact as apprehended violation and disrespect. Last time known protest sent to India by Pakistan was during the Ziaul Huq's regime. India always remained either cool or overlooked as a part of Hindu habit.

When the Hindu habit spreads in the mind of the administration then it simply does not know what is wrong and what is right as the administration becomes deaf and dumb. Therefore, intelligent Nehru became very much silent on this matter. Disrespecting this issue had always resulted bitter relationship between the two countries. Often, though correct, democratic India does not listen to the legitimate complaints as they have a general tendency to disrespect the neighboring countries.

Legend says that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto discussed the issue of Indian National Anthem with Indira Gandhi during the Simla Meeting. Since Pakistan was under severe pressure from inside problems with 93,000 surrendered Army the National Anthem issue got faded in 1973. However, Indira Gandhi remembered this matter at a later date. During her second time entering in the Prime Minister's office following the election of December 1980, Indira Gandhi brought the subject of changing National Anthem in the Parliament.

Despite strong support of Indira Gandhi discussion eventually failed to replace the Anthem. Majority of the Parliament did not favor Iqbal's poem. This process has established the validity of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's poem as the National Anthem. At that time Ziaul Huq regime sent the protest note to India.

The Indian Hindu dominated Parliament agreed that the Nobel Laureate's puppet poem was very healthy. They also ignored the issue of interference with Pakistan's geographical integrity. Even at that time many Parliament members vowed to capture Sind (or Sindh or Sindhu) from Pakistan per desire of Nathuram Godse. Readers may know that Nathuram Godse made an open desire for his ashes to be drowned in the Indus River.

Thus, his ashes will be carried generation to generation until it is placed in the flow of the Indus River. This means Nathuram Godse told before his execution on November 15, 1949 to overrun Pakistan and wipe out from the map by capturing, and then merging with Hindu dominated India. Only then his ashes could be placed in the flow of the River Indus.

Nathuram Godse's opinion became very important while the issue came for the change of National Anthem of India in 1981. Indira Gandhi silently supported this sentiment and remained quiet although she favored Iqbal's poem as India's National Anthem. Being a student of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru how Indira inclined toward Iqbals' poem is a mystery. In 1981 she ordered to scribe Iqbal's poem in Hindi and made public for better communication with the people about the song. Since this attempt was failed it is unlikely that India will ever think about respecting neighbor's sentiment concerning the same National Anthem intact.

As long as the controversial National Anthem is in place Pakistan's former Prime Ministers (at least two of them) since 1973 noted that there is no way to have normal relations with India while the National Anthem is in place.

Rabindranath Tagore is not the National Poet of India. Many Indians consider him as a controversial character. It is amazing that Ghalib is favored than Tagore. India is not willing to diffuse problems with the neighbors. Rather it keeps alive all the problems and tries to ignore the underlying issues. In this context the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 may be mentioned.

India was the first country to recognize Mao-Zhe-Dong's arrival in China in 1949. Since then India built Hindi-Chiney Bhai-Bhai relations until late 1950s. Meanwhile Chinese leaders visited India on several occasions including Premier Chou-En-Lai and bilateral cultural teams. At least Monoj Bose coined two volumes from the bilateral cultural exchanges.

The Chinese leadership had asked to resolve the border dispute which was created by the British in 1849 by annexing a land piece near Kashmir. It was merged with the British Indian administration centered in Calcutta. This was done by the British for their easiness of ruling from one central capital.

After 1949 the Chinese went back to the history and referred to Nehru about the British created problem. Nehru morally agreed each time the Chinese leaders talked about, and promised to look into the matter. China tried to resolve the matter diplomatically until June 1962 with their last effort. They sent notes after notes to resolve the issue which was totally ignored and deliberately overlooked by J. L. Nehru as he was influenced by the as usual "tricky Hindu habit." It may be noted that once Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto mentioned about Nehru as a pure secular and perfect political person as long as no parallel non-Hindu (preferably a Muslim) applicant does not show up for a job position. This means Nehru always inclined for the Hindu applicant if he found two exactly identically qualified applicants having one being Muslim. Under any circumstances Nehru never selected a Muslim if he had an alternative despite having requisite qualifications. Similar observation was made by Nehru's intimate friend Abul Kalam Azad.

The tricky Hindu habit was finally foiled in October 1962 when the Chinese Army captured the disputed land and began marching toward New Delhi. When they were about some 125 miles away from New Delhi at that time Bertrand Russell sent a telegram to Chou-En-Lai requesting him to stop further marching.

At this request the Chinese Army returned to the demarcation line where they should have been with the disputed land. Since then China occupies that land piece and piece prevails though India deliberately shows the map of India containing that land piece which is now under Chinese rule. Invariably this battle was an education for India as they needed such a neighbor to resolve all the underlying problems. Thus, India does not raise head in front of the legal demand of the Chinese. Today large number of Indians does not know the exact reason for the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962.

The Nehru Administration kept the exact reason under hiding to the common people. Thus, nearly every Indian knows that the Chinese are treacherous people and they can stab at the back in the name of friendship. Exactly this was taught by the Nehru Administration to the Indians. The same ideology exists even today within India. Modern Indian leaders know that China deliberately captured their soil. But the Indians never go back to the history and tell their people that they have done mistake by dishonoring promises after promises during the bilateral talks both in New Delhi as well as in Peking.

Some day India needs some sort of education, presumably again, so that they give up controversial National Anthem. It is predicted by many individuals that the day is not far ahead that modern India will split up into pieces based on regionalism and languages. At that time this National Anthem will drown in the Indian Ocean. India has time to reconsider their National Anthem to resolve all underlying problems with their neighbor Pakistan if "peace" is the common goal for the Indians.

The National Anthem of Bangladesh was adopted in early 1972 by unilateral decision of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There was no debate or discussion about it in the Parliament. Of course the Parliament members then were elected for the Pakistan National Assembly as well as for the former Province of East Pakistan. All India Radio (Aakash Baani) proposed it only one time and Mujib adopted it right away.

Mujib was a very obedient fellow to the top Indian portfolio holders of his time such as Indira Gandhi, Durga Prasad Dhar, Purshottam Narayan Haksar, and many others. D. P. Dhar was a real driver for Mujib until his demise. P. N. Haksar got the job for doing the same until Mujib was alive. Aakash Baani declared devaluation of the Bangladesh currency (succeeding from Pakistani currency) by 58% through single promulgation on 16th December 1971 in their 8:00 p.m. regular Bengali news. The news prior to that at 7:45 p.m. was in Oriya language but gave no indication of the devaluation of the Bangladesh currency or the new National Anthem of Bangladesh.

The Bengali news gave the headline of surrendering Pakistan Army to the Indian Army at the Ramna Race Course Maidan that took place around 4:30 p.m. local (Dacca) time. The news continued with the preference to the National Anthem for the poem of Bishwa-KobiRaj-Guru. Mujib declared this song officially as the National Anthem of Bangladesh in 1972. These wonderful formal decisions of a nascent country came from Aakash Baani in a single news reading from the Mitra Bahini's broadcasting Radio Center known as All India Radio in New Delhi. The Mitra Bahini was the Indian Looting Army (ILA) in Bangladesh during 1971-1972 days.

Exactly this way National Anthem was imposed on the shoulder of the Bangladeshis which Mujib just regularized in a formal manner the first ten lines of the poem, and then incorporated in the constitution. The 58% devaluation of the Bangladesh currency was a blow for the economy that came from the same news. Overall this is the ugly democratic face of the Indian hegemony. Being a diehard supporter of Mujib I pondered for a while and failed to understand the affection of his lieutenants for the new country. Always I questioned about the problem of the leadership that we saw in post liberation period until Mujib came back from the Pakistani custody. Even in the presence of Mujib, I felt that the people of Bangladesh have imported a crocodile by driving away the tiger.

A few political figures made mild remarks about the unilateral finalization of the National Anthem but that was not assertive at all. Many of those figures mentioned about the poems of Dwijendralal Roy, Kazi Nazrul Islam, and Jibonanondo Das. Since then I have been politely surveying the popularity of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's song as National Anthem among all levels of people. I found that so-called certificate holders, regardless, favor the poem as National Anthem and mentions about no alternative.

These people talk about literary value almost outright and bring a Nobel Laureate in the fore front to defend it. Only a few I found expressed unhappiness citing many reasons. The so-called certificate holders or the educated people of Bangladesh had too much difficulty in pronunciation that hardly they could utter each word perfectly with proper accent for the first six lines or so. Only a few could complete the entire National Anthem of ten lines of the poem by breaking the tongue.

Absolutely no labor class or less educated people had any feeling for the selection of the National Anthem. They did not bother about it at all and had no feeling about the song or the type of the song. It appears that the city dwellers probably more aware about the National Anthem than the people living in the country side. In Bangladesh, over 80% people live in the country side. They do not understand the underlying meaning of the song except for the first two lines. Nearly none could utter profoundly the National Anthem as a flow of tongue or obvious practice.

Almost all the common people of Bangladesh do not know about the writer of their National Anthem. Many of them do not know from where the writer came as often compatriots exchange their original district home town or village or thana (police station), etc.

Nearly none could correctly say when exactly the poem was written. No one could ascertain why and when this poem was fabricated by Tagore. Many did not know about the 1905 promulgation of "Lord Curzon" on united Bengal although a visible chunk of the students of the University of Dacca attend "Curzon" Hall. Clearly the song belonged to a special class of people. It cannot be generic or be made generic at all under any circumstance.

Based on observations, the National Anthem of Bangladesh is not popular at all. It is not easy to tame the tongue and align with this poem for the people of Bangladesh. In general, the people of Bangladesh have heavy regional accent that we cannot delete or remove from our daily life. Overall this poem is not "user friendly" regardless of the literal value. The associated music is not dynamic. It cannot be made dynamic as it contains frictional strings and as such the tongue breaks and halts often for the perfection of the pronunciation.

This poem does not reflect the history of Bangladesh. It does not provide any information about our freedom struggle during 1971 and, thus, does not comprise the martyrs of the liberation process or the brutal bloodshed of the masses. The song apparently looks like an artistic goal of a musical fan describing the literary values of the natural scenery observed in some parts of modern West Bengal, particularly in Bolpur or Shantipur or Krishnanagar areas. It does not document the nature or events of Bangladesh or the Bangladeshi people encountering frequent boating, regardless of the rainy season or fertility of the soil. Additionally the writer of this song, Rabindranath Tagore, did not have any connection with Bangladesh.

There is no connection with Bangladesh with his descendents or other distant relatives. He did not envision Bangladesh as a country at any given time when he was alive. In his dictionary there was no BANGLADESH at all. Even he had no spectrum of UNITED BENGAL. Rabindranath Tagore favored bastard HINDI language as the National Language of independent British occupied India if the land piece is liberated at all. The Poet Laureate had over sure suspicion whether independence can be achieved from the British as he never supported freedom for any human bonded with slavery under the British occupation.

Why Rabindranath was the supporter of the British? The answer to this question is a puzzle. Rabindranath's forefather was loyal to the British by welcoming them in 1757. The ancestor was very much addicted to ENGLISH and then getting attracted to Robert Clive gang. He was the interpreter and communicator for local chamchas (lieutenants) of the British.

As known for him by 1765 a fluent speaker in English became visible person in Robert Clive's pleasure house in Calcutta being a representative of Maharaja Krishna Chandra. After Robert Clive returned to Britain to face the British court the ancestor was attracted quickly by Warren Hastings. By 1772 he became official translator for him. Thus, the ancestor of Rabindranath began to make fortune for his descendents. The chunk of the money though came from Murshidabad's defeated personalities including the betrayer group members.

Munni Begum (1733 – 1820) gave tons of money to Robert Clive to put her son in the puppet throne of Murshidabad. This palace dancer lived long to stage "palace politics" with money and the line of royal descendents. Rabindranath's ancestor got money from the British which indirectly came from the royal palace in Murshidabad via British hand. The British used locally earned money for their own benefit and used local people against each other. This is called KOIER TELEY KOI VAJA (frying fish in fish oil). It is interesting that the British writers have documented such events that went against Robert Clive, though founded for the sake of British Empire.

The local agents like Rabindranath's ancestor and many others including Maharaja Krishna Chandra became very passive in the history of united Bengal. British rewarded them with Zamidari and tons of money for their support. In this way Maharaja Krishna Chandra became MAHARAJA possessing tons of acres of lands and he is remembered associating his name with the city of Krishnanagar, located in the district of Nadia in West Bengal. Rabindranath's ancestor also not only got lucrative cash for the translating job but also got Zamidari at the same time at various places within united Bengal from the British.

Eventually the descendents of Maharaja Krishana Chandra were dissociated from the descendents of the ancestor of Rabindranath. Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru never mentioned anything in his writing about his ancestry including the branches settled in Pathurighata at the bank of the River Hooghly (Bhagirathi) in the district of Hooghly. This is the way the TAGORE family became rich and high visible KORNODHAR of the Bengali speaking people at a later date.

There was no trace of any richness or bright part of education with the Tagore family prior to 1765. Their shrewd approach inclining toward British gave a solid leverage to elevate as a visible potential front line cultured family. How such a family can write against the British?

It is absolutely true that if there was no division of Bengal then there would have been no Bangladesh. Therefore, geographical location was a necessity to portray the people or inhabitant as Bangladeshis. In this way we needed to be free from the British and subsequently tearing the ties with Pakistan that materialized our Bangladesh. The entire process was blood involved whether be in 1947 or in 1971. The fact is that in 1971 we had to shed tons of blood to achieve a new flag.

Regarding the National Anthem, the people of Bangladesh need a fresh one to become lively and spirited with full of energy. The song must be dynamic, and must reflect the process of liberation of the country. It must talk about the freedom struggle and freedom of speech. The song must reflect the soil, water, air, dust, etc. of Bangladesh including the people, in general. It should talk about the faith too including perennial culture, tradition, etc. The writer must be Bangladeshi by origin and the heritage must trace to Bangladesh only.

The writer can have any religion or belong to any faith as a part of our people. The music of the National Anthem must be popular and can be sung by any level of compatriots without having class. It must be accessible to old, young, children, male, female, etc. group of people of the country. There must be no tongue breaking language and most certainly the accent must not be imported from another soil.

Nearly many countries of the world have National Anthem reflecting faith, type of heritage, freedom struggle if any, culture, tradition, etc. We need exactly similar reflecting everything MADE IN BANGALDESH. I feel that the day is not far ahead when compatriots will raise voice against the literary poem of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru and feel for the change to have a fully energized NATIONAL ANTHEM for Bangladesh.

The foregoing opinion is expressed regardless of the opinion given by the political leaders within or outside Bangladesh. Whether one writer writes two National Anthems for two countries that does not mean that the Bangladeshis are in the same frequency with the hegemony. The political leaders express often to please or satisfy the so-called bilateral issues. For the sake of changing the National Anthem the people of Bangladesh must not compromise with what we have to say in front of the Indians or the Indian leaders.

The crook Indian opportunist leaders need not be satisfied by the people of Bangladesh. The people of Bangladesh need to do what is good for Bangladesh. This is regardless of what the Indians have to say in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. Any Indian citizen or the Indian leaders must not poke nose in the Bangladeshi affairs at all as the Bangladeshi do not poke nose in the Indian affairs. The Indians should keep off the Bangladeshi median.

http://bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidDate=2006-05-09&hidType=OPT&hidRecord=0000000000000000105786

__._,_.___


[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] Declaration of the Fifth Amendment to the Bangladesh Constitution unlawful and its Consequences



Declaration of the Fifth Amendment to the Bangladesh Constitution unlawful and its Consequences

Barrister Abdur Razzaq

1. Background
1.1 In the year 2000, the owners of a cinema hall called Moon Cinema Hall filed a writ petition under Article 102 of the Constitution claiming that the declaration of Moon Cinema Hall as an abandoned property was unlawful and sought a direction upon the government to hand over the physical possession of the premises known as Moon Cinema Hall in Dhaka to their original owners. In that writ petition, the petitioners challenged the constitutionality of the Fifth Amendment Act by which various proclamations of the Martial Law were condoned by Parliament in April 1979.

1.2 By a Judgment and Order dated 29th August 2005, the High Court declared the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution unlawful and directed the Government to hand over the physical possession of Moon Cinema Hall to its original owners.

2 Islamic Character of the Constitution
2.1 In April 1979, the Parliament, by two-thirds majority passed the Fifth Amendment Act to the Constitution. It brought many changes: restored fundamental rights, multiparty democracy and among others, gave Bangladesh Constitution an Islamic character by deleting secularism and socialism from the Constitution. To give the Constitution an Islamic character, the Preamble of the Constitution was changed in the following manner:
�Pledging that the high ideals of absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah � shall be the fundamental principle of the Constitution.�
2.2 By operation of the original Article 38, no citizen had the right to form or take part in the activities of any organisation which has been formed on the basis of religion with a view to pursuing a political purpose. The High Court, by declaring the Fifth Amendment unlawful, has revived the old Article 38. For clear and better understanding, we are quoting below the original Article 38 and the amended one (amended by the Fifth Amendment):
Original Article 38
�Every citizen shall have the right to form associations or unions, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of morality or public order:
Provided that no person shall have the right to form, or be a member or otherwise take part in the activities of, any communal or other association or union which in the name or on the basis of any religion has for its object, or pursues, a political purpose.�
Amended Article 38
�Every citizen shall have the right to form associations or unions, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of public order or public health.�
It may be mentioned that the Islami character to the Constitution was given in 1976 by the Second Proclamation (6th Amendment Order, 1976), which was later ratified by Parliament in 1979.

3 Court Procedures
3.1 On 29th August 2005, the High Court declared the Fifth Amendment unconstitutional. On that day, a Judge in Chamber of the Supreme Court stayed the operation of the judgment of the High Court upon an appeal filed by the Government of the day. The new Government headed by Awami League came to power in January 2009 and on an application made by the new Government on 3rd January 2010, the Government�s appeal was withdrawn and the stay granted has been vacated.

3.2 Realising that the new Government would withdraw its appeal, earlier on two applications were filed: one by the Secretary General of BNP, and another by three advocates of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, which sought to challenge the judgment passed by the High Court declaring the Fifth Amendment void. These two applications will come up in the list of the Supreme Court on 18th January 2010 for hearing. If these two applications are rejected on the 18th of January or anytime thereafter, then various provisions of the 1972 Constitution will be revived and Bangladesh Constitution will lose its Islamic character.
3.3 In that event, no further amendment to the Constitution would be necessary to give effect to the judgment of the High Court. Parliament need not to pass any further legislation. The implementation would be automatic. The High Court has also done away with the provision of referendum to change certain provisions of the Constitution. Therefore, no referendum will be necessary either.

4 Effect of Reverting Back to the 1972 Constitution
4.1 The concept of secularism, being contrary to the history of the region and its people, references to secularism in the Constitution were removed and in its place, �Absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah� were inserted. As such, in the 38 years since the framing of the Constitution, the citizens of the country have expressed their absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah for over 34 years. This position was changed by the High Court judgment.
4.2 Moreover, the present Court judgment has also taken away the fundamental right of citizens to form associations for a religious purpose. Citizens of Bangladesh have enjoyed such a fundamental right for 34 years since 1976. Although originally under Article 38 of the Constitution it was a fundamental right of all citizens to form associations, there was no fundamental right to form associations for religious purpose. However, in 1976, amendments were introduced in Article 38 of the Constitution and the fundamental right to form associations was extended to associations formed for religious purposes.

4.3 Now no citizen will have the right to form or be a member of a union or association based on religion. Although the Constitution does not prohibit the formation of such association, however, by virtue of section 20(2) of the Special Powers Act, 1974, the Government has the power to dissolve all or any religious political party.

4.4 On 4th January 2010, the Minister for Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs has expressed the Government�s intention to dissolve all associations based on religion. Later on, the Prime Minister also expressed similar opinion. If, on the strength of the Court�s decision, the Government decides to dissolve religious political parties, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, together with a dozen other small religious parties can also be dissolved. This might create a tension in the society. Jamaat-e-Islami, and other Islamic political parties, have been operating under the framework of the Constitution. Their objective is to establish, only through democratic process, a just society based on Islamic principles. When the doors of change through democratic process will be closed, this will strengthen the hands of the extremists who have been functioning outside the democratic process and accusing the Jamaat-e-Islami in particular of compromising the principles of Islam by functioning under the democratic process.

5 Interference in International Relations
5.1 By declaring the Fifth Amendment unlawful, the High Court has also interfered with the relationship of Bangladesh with other Muslim countries based on Islamic solidarity. Article 25(2) of the Constitution provided as follows:
�The State shall endeavour to consolidate, preserve and strengthen fraternal relations among Muslim countries based on Islamic solidarity.�

5.2 For the last 33 years, this was the Constitutional basis for the Government of Bangladesh upon which its relations with the Muslim countries were established. The Fifth Amendment Case has deleted this provision. This may indirectly affect the relationship of Bangladesh (which is the home of almost 10% of the entire Muslim population of the world, with the rest of the Islamic world).

6 Change in Citizenship
6.1 Finally, an anomaly which was present in the original Constitution of 1972 has been re-introduced. Under Article 6 of the unamended Constitution, the citizens of the Bangladesh were known as �Bangalees�. Now, the territory of Bangladesh comprises of many ethnic groups. The Bangalees are one such ethnic group. As such the term �Bangalee� as used in the Constitution had the undesired effect of prima facie excluding other ethnic groups from Bangladeshi citizenship. The Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1979 having described/defined citizens of Bangladesh as �Bangladeshis� and not as �Bangalees� does not exclude other ethnic groups from the citizenship of Bangladesh. However, this beneficial amendment was deleted by the High Court Division.

7 Conclusion
7.1 The Court�s judgment has created a sea of uncertainty in Bangladesh politics. Moon Cinema Hall could have been handed over back to its original owners by the High Court without knocking down the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. By closing the doors of Constitutional politics for Islamic political parties, Bangladesh may become more unstable, more volatile and consequently more unpredictable.

Writer: Senior Lawyer, Politician


__._,_.___


[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] Are some religious people menaces in the society?



The prophet demanded allegiance from the emperors of Abissynia, Byzantium and Persia.  Only the first one agreed, but when sixty two and half percent of his income(twenty percent each for Allah, Rasul and his wives; two and half percent as Zakat for the poor)  was demanded as the religious tax, he also refused to be a Muslim.  I hope, the financial reason behind the religious organizations would be clear by reading such history.

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:50 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Thanks. That's what I learned from one of my atheist muslim friends (please re-read my e-mail blow.) My friend also told me that a harsh greeting has been prescribed for the non-muslims (it may need verification.) If my friend was right, then you must agree that the teaching is discriminatory. Therefore, reinterpretation is a must in a plularistic society.
From one of Prof. Kamal Das's posts it appears that currently re-written or revised versions of the Koran are availble in the market. I hope these are the works of the learned Ulema. To me it looks like a well-thought endevor. This will minimize the risk of taking every thing in a religious book too literally. And this will obviously broaden the unity in a multi-religious society. I am aware that this will not be an easy task. It will face challenges from those who deem a religious scripture to be God-sent and hence unchangeable. That's why I have emphasized that this should be done with a general consensus of the scholars. More importantly, religion being a sensive issue and largely being a matter of faith and prone to be abused by vested interest groups, one prerequisite must be to get people ready for the change. I don't think the Bible re-written by Jefferson has been accepted at all.       
You will agree that the prophet himself was a flexible, dynamic, and pragmatic man. The concept of 'Ummah' initailly included some Jweish tribes also. Even after the complete annihation of a Jweish tribe for their suspicious role in a battle (If I remember correctly---the battle of Uhud), the prophet did not change the scope of the concept "ummah" too much. He encouraged his people to travel even to distant China for acquiring knowledge. Despite resistance from his advisors, he wrote diplomatic letters to the rulers of the neighboring states to embrace Islam.        

From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 12:30 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
Member Subimal,

Enjoyed your post.

Just wanted share a small correction ( Hope you don't mind).

Religiously only a muslim can say Asalalmalaikum to another muslim.

>>>>>>>>> This is a misconception of many Muslims. Among Muslims who do not know about their own religion. Muslims are allowed to wish "Peace" (Meaning of salaam) to anyone. As noted all messengers of God (PBUT) before Muhammad (PBUH) also used the same greetings. So Salaam and Shalom are exactly same. One in Arabic and another in Hebrew. Most Muslims have strange misconceptions about our own faith and some of my fellow Muslims misinterpret our faith as well. I use "Unusual" greetings to destroy those misconceptions. As long we meet peaceful and fair minded people, we can be friends with them with open arms. When a religious Hindu says "Shanti" to me, it is EXACTLY the SAME greetings of Islam. There are no differences in them. As per Islam, it will be the greeting for people of heaven ( Those who attain paradise) as well. It is sad, we spend so much time in learning about our differences that, we (At least most people!) overlook the great similarities we have among us. You may not know that, the noble Qur'an actually orders Muslims to take this approach (Of seeking common grounds) with non-Muslims but most Muslims do not follow that (Source: The noble Qur'an 3:64) May you have a nice day! Shalom!  
-----Original Message----- From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sat, Nov 26, 2011 5:49 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
With reference to Jewish Shalom and Islamic Salaam let me tell you some thing from my own experience. One ex-presiedent (a muslim) of a local cultural organization used to welcome the muslim-majority audience of a cultural show by using the word Namashkar. An ex-president (a Hindu) did not mind greeting a muslim using the word Asalamalaikum. Religiously only a muslim can say Asalalmalaikum to another muslim. A harsh one has been approved by Islam for a non-muslim (that's what an atheiest muslim friend told me.) To me it should not hurt getting more open minded and secularize many religious words as long as they are not specifically tied to religious symbols or concepts.    
Let me tell you about another ex-president (a muslim) of the of the same organiztion. I have seen him helping free of cost in decorating the pooja-mandap and the stage for cultural show for another organization. On the day of the pooja I have seen him attending the hindu religious (definitely not the religious part of it) festival wearing fashionable dhoti-panjabi and his wife wearing saree and even vermillion on the forehead as a cosmetic item. All these muslims I have just mentioned are sincere believers in Islam. They don't think that their belief has been shaken a bit by acting the ways mentioned above. They know how to go beyond the literal meanings of a religious scripture. 
Many muslim names like Uma, Partha, Anindya Avatar, Debolina Dhoritree, etc. have roots in hindu mythologies. Drawing rooms of many muslims have in them sculptures of Buddha, Saraswati (controversial Farhad Mazhar has it), and Kali.
We fail to see these revolutionary changes in a religious mind and the culture of a religious community. Social progress can be accelerated by capitalizing on these revolutionary changes and can be easily halted by alienating those who believe in progress and openness.
  

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
How could you read 'brain' instead of 'inquisitiveness'?  I had enough Jewish friends to know that Shalom meant peace, when was it interrupted here? Reading more about Islam would not increase my respect for it.  Religion, by nature, is tribal.  Islam being the faith of seventeen percent population of earth, can by no means be called universal except by those who believe in it wholeheartedly.  Those, who believe that Allah was more concerned about a few thousand bedouins than a billion strong Muslims today, do not have any sense of judgement. In course of time, all religions will be 'caged', not just Islam, about whose extinction, the prophet himself is said to have predicted.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:24 AM, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
 

A final advice, stop using the Jewish 'Shalom' at the end.  Your Muslim brothers could call you an apostate.

>>>>>>>>>>> Despite the myth about my Muslim brothers, no one cared that I use Shalom at the end. It means "Peace" and those who understand the meaning should have NO problem with it. I welcome you to learn and know more about Islam and "Muslim brothers". I think one guy made fun of it and I laughed along.


Islam is a universal religion and anyone ( Muslims or non-Muslims) who want to put it in a cage (Or certain distorted narrative) would be doing something that is "UNFAIR"!!

Basically the word "Shalom" and "Salaam" are the same. I do not consider any human being my "Permanent enemies". So IF any Muslim "Brother" objects to it, I'll have a chat with him.

Breaking false perceptions is a hobby of mine. I enjoy and Islam supports me in bringing people closer to "The Truth". ;-)

Your pint size inquisitiveness is buried deep in religious faith.  If you had read religious literature,e.g., Quran and Hadith, even moderately, your faith would have developed holes.
>>>>>>> "Pint size brain"??? :-)


Guess you cannot argue with the points we discuss, so the name calling. So far pint size brain is working fine to answers concerns you posed. So I'll gave the rest of the brain a little rest. When I meet someone with proper knowledge and courtesy, I'll summon the rest of the brain Inshallah!! :-)
you do not have the aptitude of even a freshman.
>>>>>>>> OK!!


I have read religious literature and kept questioning it UNTIL I found answers for them. So far I am happy, secured and satisfied with answers I have. If a days comes when I have "Holes" in my faith, I'll let you know.

However do understand this process can go both ways. I came to know about people who had "Huge HOLES" in their faith and became an atheist. However after examining their "Faith-Status" (Lack of faith)  they returned to their Maker.

You have been very entertaining. Thank you!!

Shalom!




-----Original Message----- From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 22, 2011 5:42 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
Mr. Q. Rahman Your pint size inquisitiveness is buried deep in religious faith.  If you had read religious literature,e.g., Quran and Hadith, even moderately, your faith would have developed holes.    Say about the verse on Abu Lahab, could such hatred be divine?  If it were so, how the person and the prophet could be related by marital alliance? The problem with you is that graduate course of comparative religion are not meat for a freshman, and you do not have the aptitude of even a freshman.  Please read the holy Quran, along with Bukhari, Tirmizi, Muslim and other hadith.  Also read Tabari, and occasionally read the ex-Muslim critiques.  Zaki Ameeni, Abul Kashem etc. have encyclopedic knowledge on Islam.  The attachment I gave earlier entitled "Prophet of Doom" may also be helpful.  Develop enough intelligence to differentiate between a good and a bad post. A final advice, stop using the Jewish 'Shalom' at the end.  Your Muslim brothers could call you an apostate.
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 11:29 PM, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
 
The first biography of the prophet was written over a hundred years after his death by Ibn Ishaque.  I hope you know his name. There is, however, no reason to believe the authenticity of the biography or that of the person.


>>>>>>>>> Help me understand what you are saying. Do you agree with "One scholar" that, prophet Muhammad (PBUH) did not exist? :-)
I have spent more time than many studying religious literature, and am confident that I have more information than these recent net browsers.  The believers in the holiness of their religion may read the attachment.  
>>>>>>>>>> I am glad to hear that you know a lot about religion. I hope your future posts will reflect your deep knowledge of this subject. I need your help to understand something. Your attachment was the "Qur'an" and we were discussing prophet Muhammad (PBUH). So prophet's life should be part of the hadith texts.
Do let me know HOW do I learn about prophet's life from text of the Qur'an?
Appreciate your kind attention. Shalom!!  
-----Original Message----- From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 20, 2011 9:12 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society? [1 Attachment]
 
[Attachment(s) from Kamal Das included below]
The first biography of the prophet was written over a hundred years after his death by Ibn Ishaque.  I hope you know his name. There is, however, no reason to believe the authenticity of the biography or that of the person. I for one don't need fifteen minutes of fame, neither do the persons I refer to as scholars.  I have spent more time than many studying religious literature, and am confident that I have more information than these recent net browsers.  The believers in the holiness of their religion may read the attachment.  
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
 
Member M. Rahman, Member Das was talking about my comments not yours. However I did not call him dumb but I called the question "Dumb". If Jesus, Moses or Muhammad (PBUT) ever existed are asked by people who want to stir up the pot a little. Going after 15 minutes of fame. People who quote these "Media attention hungry" people often do not know enough of these topics but want to "Shake up" discussions or situations. As I said, I welcome honest questions and critics on any topic (Including religion). However if someone ask if Muhammad bin Abdullah (PBUH) ever existed, it is only FAIR to call that QUESTION dumb. I have not called any member by any names. I think this part was misunderstood. Neither I am interested to relegate our discussions/debate to that level.  Throwing down absurd comments about the holy prophet's janaja or circumcision ( Who the heck going to verify that???) is a cheap way to get someone agitated. BUT in response all I asked to learn more about "Sources" of such information. It is interesting to note that, the whole Muslim world never worried about such issues but some of our atheist friends are!! Which says a lot about the level of desperation. I still welcome all comments or questions about topics I discuss. ( Recently posted one about Jesus son of Mary and Christianity). I am not here to preach to people but ONLY to replace wrong/false information with correct information. ==================================================== Being dumb yourself, you see others as dumb. Member Das, Hope you understand the I did NOT call you dumb. Rather my comment was directed at the quality of the comment. I do stand by that. I do not consider myself as scholar but even with my limited knowledge I can EASILY prove to anyone that, prophet Muhammad (PBUH) did exist. The German scholar is also welcome. Despite our differences of opinions, I enjoy your passion in our discussion. Shalom!!;-)


-----Original Message----- From: MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN <mustafiz84@hotmail.com> To: Mukto-mona Mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 5:49 am Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
Mr Kamal Das,

I did not call you dumb. But if you are going to read and quote sources who are critics of Islam as you seem to be, then what can be done? You will continue to bring out absurd claims like the "Prophet was not circumcised" in this Forum with the sole intention of maligning this great man !! Detractors and faultfinders of Islam and its Messenger with continue to come up with atrocious claims in the garb of intellect.

Mustafizur Rahman
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com From: kamalctgu@gmail.com Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 07:45:47 &# 43;0600 Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?  
Mr. Rahman Being dumb yourself, you see others as dumb.  I did not present the question you deem dumb, it is the theory of Professor Sven Kalisch.  He teaches Islamic history and culture at a German University.  You can debate with him if you like.  Apparently, you don't know that after the prophet was missing for days the news spread of his death.  Even Hajrat Umar did not believe it and came with an unscathed sword to the abode of Ayesha where he met Abu Bakr who cooled him down.  Then Abu Bakr and Umar belonged to one group who coerced others into submission to the caliphate of Abu Bakr.  The last sermon had nothing to do with his death. By the way do you know that the prophet was not even circumcised.  Thus he broke the covenant of Abraham with God.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
 
Member Das,

No mainstream Muslim scholar agrees with YOUR narratives on Islam or our holy prophet (PBUH). Earlier you presented a dumb question by asking IF the last messenger of God (PBUH) ever existed? I have read many DIFFERENT commentaries and spoken to many scholars and NEVER heard such absurd claims.

Either way, the prophet (PBUH) did die a natural death and last time I checked English speaking world does not label that as "Dubious"!! NO way!!

Before the death of the noble prophet (PBUH) he gave his famous sermon during the last hajj, which was so complete and powerful that, it indicated the end of his work on earth. He started by saying...

"O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and TAKE THESE WORDS TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT BE PRESENT HERE TODAY....................................

[ Source: Last hajj sermon]


http://soundvision.com/info/hajj/lastsermon.asp

I cannot stop writing on religious issues as long people like yourself come up with ridiculous and false information about Islam. Someone needs to supply correct information about it. That is all I am doing. Earlier, I have supplied books about the noble prophet by world famous scholars from all corners of the globe and NONE of them talks about the "FICTIONAL" topic YOU brought up here ( About janaja). If this was one time mistake, I would have accept it as such. However you keep coming up with WRONG information about Islam!! Logically it cannot be an accident. It is deliberate and it says a lot about you!! Mainstream narrative of Islam and the last prophet (PBUH) is well known. The last prophet (PBUH) was probably the most documented human being on the face of the earth. His speeches, practices, ideals, values were preserved by his followers as per his direction. http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/sunnah/ I am unable to see what was so dubious about his death? People were shocked, sad and confused. When a beloved leader dies, it is the natural response from people. I have given names of books and scholars in an earlier post. If Islam and prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is always in your mind, I invite you to read about him. It would be helpful if you know about the topic you want to critic. ;-) Shalom!!
-----Original Message----- From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 17, 2011 5:27 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
If you need the sources on the death of the prophet, you should stop writing on religious issues.  Ask any maulana and find out or read the Cambridge History of Islam, or 'Islam and the West' by Norman Daniel.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:44 AM, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:
 
Even the prophet died under dubious conditions and did not get janaja.


>>>>> SOURCES PLEASE???

-----Original Message----- From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 15, 2011 9:31 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
If Mr. Mustafizur Rahman does not see that the dominant contemporary religions are based on the geocentric model of the universe, and sees the ancient and medieval periods were not bad periods, no debate is possible.  Nobody can single a period that was good.  As he is a believer in Islam, may I point out that out of the four 'rightly guided' Caliphs, the first one was poisoned to death while the rest were killed. While Omar was bleeding to death, he requested the majlis members not to make his son the Caliph under any condition.  Usman was killed by a group of assassins in the mosque while reading the 'holy' Koran, and Ali was speared to death.  The killers of Usman asked Ali to take over the Caliphate, his dead body was left without a janaja for days.  Even the prophet died under dubious conditions and did not get janaja.  The Shias insist that he was killed by two of his wives, daughters of th e first two Caliphs.  I am really impressed by the depth of ignorance of these mullahs who are using this forum to spread the 'values' of Islam.
2011/11/14 MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN <mustafiz84@hotmail.com>
 
Equal opportunity critic to all religions? Why? Why criticize all religions? Medieval period was not a bad period. In English literature this word is at times used in a negative sense. Human progress went through - as the West has categorized it - stages like iron period, bronze period, medieval period etc. Can you single out one period that was bad? If you disbelieve in the very existence of God, that is a different matter. But what will you do with the billions of people who do believe in the existence of a Creator and seek His assistance?

Mustafizur Rahman
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com From: qrahman@netscape.net Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 14:36:52 -0500
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?  
You have been sharing orientalist myths about Islam. Modern day scholars do not buy these any more. Such orientalists also spread lies against Hindus as well. Which prompted Swami Vivekananda to visit USA over hundred years ago. He went there to answer to those myths and explain his faith to the west.

Over and over I have asked you to share SOURCES of your info but only got unclear answers. Please clarify your positions or take this opportunity to learn something new.

Peace.


-----Original Message----- From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sun, Nov 13, 2011 8:39 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
I do not spread venom against Islam.  I am an 'equal opportunity' critic to all religions, and every medieval tendency to invoke God as an answer to all problems.   I refer to historical facts when some 'religious' men use this forum to spread Islam.
2011/11/12 MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN <mustafiz84@hotmail.com>
 
Kamal Das, Jiten Roy etc,

Will you STOP taking advantage of this Forum and refrain from spreading your venom against Islam?

Mustafizur Rahman
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com From: kamalctgu@gmail.com Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:07:31 +0600
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?  
The core message was not convincing enough even to Abu Talib, the mentor and the protector of the prophet.  The message is to obtain 72 houries and 28 gillmans in the afterlife with an everlasting erection.  Even Ibn Sina wondered, how the prophet, being the intelligent man that he was, spread such rubbish.  Then he came up with his own intelligent solution!  Consider the intelligence of the average people of medieval times, and you have the answer. About the animal sacrifice, it is the practice in many cultures.  The poor animal dies to serve the religion.  In the primitive times, the first  child was to be sacrificed as an expiation to the cardinal sin from which every child is born.  Abraham himself was a butcher in the temple of Melech.  As he was not sure of his fatherhood of his children, given his age and inability to sire any during his life, he exiled Ismael and Hagar to Mecca, and took Isaac to sacrifice as burnt offering to Moloch.  But he changed his mind later and told the Canaanites that God intervened in the last moment.  Abraham was used to telling lies.  Earlier he passed Sarah as his sister to gain material advantages.  Animal sacrifice has been a common practice across the world. There was no cheaper way to feed people in feasts.  Cow sacrifice by Indian Muslims are intended only to anoy the local Hindus.  Such practice is not the Arabian norm.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 4:48 PM, sentu tikadar <sentu92003@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
You are right these were acts of half educated idiots who do not understand the core message of Islam.
 
What is the core message ?

 What is the core message of Islam?
 
Tolerance to other Faiths? 
 
Deny others' Faiths and indirectly condemn others' Faiths five times a day? And  brain washing five times per day (like advertisement) later the uncivilised indisciplined Beduin forget  Mohammad ?  So much endeavour to be remembered by ppeople just like a politician sex maniac.
 
What is the teaching? Killing people who would not accept his Faith and used the women of the defeated people. Told something good in Mecca and the same thing told in a reversed way in Medina.  He had written( actually by other) a Book copied from other Book (Bible) because he knew he could not write a completely new  Book out of nothing.So he had taken the easiest and ready- made way. Just Copy and relate him with taht Book's men. So intelligent he was. 
 
Just see the Qurbani in Idd? How people can cut throat the cow which he garlanded with flowers? Giving flowers garland means showing respect to it? After showing respect and / or love it is cut. Desert culture has ruined us. It had divided us. It had killed us. It had made us animals from human. That's why Saudi never allows other to follow their religions in open? In Kashmir, In Pakistan, in Bangladesh , even in India (Deganga of West Bengal) temples' deities demolition is a noble job.
 
They don't feel any pity to that cow? In Pakistan some children stay night with the cow or goat putting flower garlands around its neck. In the morning that animal is cut throat? Height of cruelty !!!  This is the culture mid east had given to us. We borrowed the hard religion from desert while we were not the desert people. 
Is this the teaching of real Allah? Giving pain to a living being Allah feels happy? Don't believe that Allah who is biased. Allah is not a democratic fellow? So the believers of that Allah can not be democratic. That's why most of the Allah believers democratic country are failed country. Who will accept Allah he must be ruled with iron hand otherwise he will loose faiths. So many trics Mahammad had understood and apllied. A real dictator of 1400 years ago. 











     
 
 
--- On Thu, 11/10/11, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:

From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, November 10, 2011, 5:47 AM
 
Killing of the Ahmediyas by the followers of Mowdoodi in Pakistan, killing and raping of freedom loving Bengalis in 1971, bombing of mosques to kill innocent Shiites in Pakistan and Iraq and somewhere else----are all these the acts by the secularists?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are right these were acts of half educated idiots who do not understand the core message of Islam. However atheist people have done more murdering of innocents than any religious people. Stalin, Mao (Of china) etc done their part in killing anyone who had a different point of view.
-----Original Message----- From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, Nov 10, 2011 6:37 am Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
Killing of the Ahmediyas by the followers of Mowdoodi in Pakistan, killing and raping of freedom loving Bengalis in 1971, bombing of mosques to kill innocent Shiites in Pakistan and Iraq and somewhere else----are all these the acts by the secularists?
From: S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 2:16 AM
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
Respected all,
Atheists and secularists (who believe in naturalism and rationalism only and who deny role of religion in public life) are more menace to humanity, morality, civilization as history shows. Most of the wars including first and second great wars were waged by them.
Most of the people of religions are good people. Many of them are misguided by secular political leaders or some ignorant and aggressive religious bigots.
Religious people of all religions should fight these exploiters and stand for humanity, morality and social welfare.
 
Shah Abdul Hannan
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 6:42 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
 
@Nihar Singh:
 
The true religious people - who are they? Whether they bother anybody or not - is not the issue. The issue is how much is their contribution towards the advancement of the modern society? Are people, who take part in the communal riots or blowup innocent people in the name of religion, any less religious? You may think so - but they don't.
 
@Kamal Das:
The New Testaments does not contain many of the violent verses of the Old Testament means these are not absolute truth. This is the point I am trying to make.
 
Thanks.
 
 
From: nihar singh <nihar_singh786@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2011 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?

 
Truely religious people dont disturb anyone. On the other hand atheists try to make everyone atheists. That is true menace. Look at darwin he made everyone think that they eveolved from apes. Many jokers believe this to be true.



--- On Mon, 11/7/11, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Are some religious people menaces in the society?
To: "Mukto-mona" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, November 7, 2011, 7:12 PM
Are some religious people menaces in the society?
 
I have been asking this question lately to myself. I tried to find the roles and contributions (I mean, real contributions) of religious people in the society that brought us here from the beginning of time. What I envisioned is that - religion played a very insignificant role towards our social, moral, and scientific developments in this world. Most of these developments are made by religiously indifferent people. The religious people mostly deal with and talk about things that are out of this world. As a result, many of these religious people are misfits and menaces in the society.
 
Many argue that religion builds our moral character, and we learn good and bad from religion, etc. etc. I, on the other hand, think – good and bad we learn from our ancestors, and from our own experiences; religion has nothing to do with it. You might ask where our ancestors learned them from, in the first place. They learned good and bad from their ancestors' experiences, so on, and so forth. Most Chinese do not have any religion. When I asked a Chinese man - how most people there learn about good and bad without religion, he told me - they learn them from their elders' wisdoms. That's right; our ancestors transferred their knowledge and wisdom to us. Therefore, I truly believe – this world would have been a much better place without religion. Religions have divided us into many sectarian hateful clans, which are constantly fighting with one another.
 
Many of us believe that religious doctrines and dogmas are heavenly absolute entities. They forget that - many of those doctrines, dogmas, and interpretations have already been modified from the original preaching during emancipation. For example, Old Testament has been replaced by the New Testament, many Quranic interpretations have been changed, and many Vedic/Puranic practices and interpretations have been changed, etc., etc. That means - religious teachings and practices are subject to change with the time, which means they are not so heavenly endowments as we believe them to be. This is a critical point to remember. Those who think otherwise are the menaces in the society.
 
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

__,_._,___