Banner Advertiser

Friday, February 24, 2012

[ALOCHONA] Sun Tzu



Sun Tzu and Mankind's Destiny of Freedom

by Szandor Blestman


The Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu is best known for writing "The Art of War." He is recognized by many as the quintessential expert on that subject and one of the top war strategists of all time. Many people like to use his quotes. He simplified his strategies into wise maxims that many have extrapolated into other aspects of life. What does it say when one considers strategies of war to be appropriate to use in life's other endeavors? I thought maybe I'd take a closer look at some of his saws and see how they can apply to some situations I see cropping up in the politics of the times.

One saying that is attributed to Sun Tzu is that every battle is won before it is ever fought. I'm not exactly sure what he meant by that, or even if he ever really said it. The closest I could find is a quote from the movie "Wall Street" where Gordon Gekko says, "Read Sun Tzu, "The Art of War." Every battle is won before it is ever fought." Anyway, many others have gone with it, so I shall also. I don't know exactly what Sun Tzu meant by this, but two schools of thought that have been brought out are he was either a fatalist, or he felt that a great deal of planning before battle guarantees victory. I have problems with both schools of thought, but I would agree that believing victory is achievable before engaging in battle will certainly improve your chances.

If we are to look at the two major philosophies in modern politics, individualism versus collectivism, and apply Sun Tzu's point of view, I would suggest that individualism has already won. There are many reasons for this, in my opinion. First off, there is persistence. It seems to me that mankind has been striving to achieve a state of freedom since the dawn of civilization. This is due at least partially, in my opinion, to the tendency for any form of government to devolve into tyranny. Yet I think there's more to it than that. It's something that I believe is bred into each and every one of us, with perhaps a few exceptions, the desire to strike out on one's own and make a mark in the world. Once one truly understands the principles of freedom, it is likely that person will settle for nothing less and will continuously strive in his own way to achieve freedom.

Second, freedom is morally correct and humans have a tendency to strive toward moral correctness so long as they are not being subjected to extreme conditions, and sometimes even in the face of tribulations. We have a tendency to spot unfairness and to battle against it. Collectivism, while it sells itself as bringing fairness to humanity, is often the most unfair system as it punishes hard work by taking away rewards the hard worker should expect and rewards laziness by giving to those who do nothing what should rightly go to the hard workers. While collectivism often sounds fair in theory, in practice it does not work and it becomes inherently unfair.

Third, freedom is part of the human spirit and the human spirit is indomitable. Throughout history tyrants have tried to crush the human spirit through imprisonment, force and torture. They have tried to use fear to keep silent those who would dissent and speak truth to power. They have cowed whole populations using police state tactics. Such societies have almost always eventually failed. Some of these tyrants have met gruesome ends. It's a tricky balancing act the collectivists engage in when they try to subjugate a people to their mandates. It seems to me that a people will, unfortunately, always allow for a bit of tyranny if they think they will benefit, but that almost always inevitably leads to more tyranny. Eventually there comes a tipping point where the people just won't take any more, where the kids on the playground decide to confront the bully. Often in history, again unfortunately, this results in violent, bloody, terrible revolution. It's cyclical. When enough people realize this, the cycle can be broken.

Sun Tzu also said "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill." It seems that perhaps the general didn't so much want to engage in battle after all. I happen to agree with him. We used to be a nation of statesmen. In fact, we were supposed to be a nation of citizen statesmen. We have ended up being a nation bowing to the will of the international corporatists. We go to war too easily and occupy other nations to protect the interests of corporations that have no loyalty to any nation. Yet we also claim to be a peaceful nation which values the friendship of others. I believe the people of this nation do, indeed, wish to practice such principles, but those who control the federal government most certainly do not. You cannot be peaceful while engaging in warfare.

As government in this nation continues to turn on its own civilians and push them to do something rash and violent, it is important to keep Sun Tzu's words in mind. The people are peaceful and need to remain so, the government is violent. This is proven by the actions of the police. As they mindlessly engage in violent behavior because their superiors tell them to, it is important to remain steadfastly non violent and show to the world who the bullies truly are. After a time, the police will begin to see their mistake. They will begin to realize they are in the wrong. They will begin to side with the people, and when that happens then victory is at hand, and it should be a lasting victory. If you wish to see peace in the world, then you must be peace, you must remain peaceful, and soon enough even those who engage in the violence of the legal monopoly of government force will become peaceful. That is how the world changes.

Another notable Sun Tzu quote is "What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations." Collectivism has been slowly creeping upon us for decades, if not centuries. I would suggest that it started in earnest back in the great depression when desperate people turned to the federal government for aid rather than insisting that government remain limited in its powers that the Constitution spells out. While I realize that many will point to the "good" that came out of this, I would ask what "good" would have come out of it if the federal government hadn't interfered? We will never know. Anyway, what did happen happened and over the decades it has morphed into the system we see today where so many are so dependent on the federal government that it will be nearly impossible to extricate them from their lives without serious repercussions. Still, extricate them we must sooner or later, for their prolonged operations has resulted in bankruptcy and something has to give or we'll see a financial collapse.

Finally, Sun Tzu said "Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win." We have won. Mankind will win. It is our destiny to find freedom. It is our destiny to live in a society where the individual is honored above the collective, where it is understood that when the violation of any individual's natural rights is allowed, violating everyone's natural rights is allowed. Remain peaceful even to the point of being beaten or worse by the authoritarian thugs, and you shall be victorious as were the followers of King and Gandhi. When the world sees who the bullies truly are, the bullies go home with their heads hung in shame.

I believe that most individuals know what freedom is and would prefer to live in a society that honors liberty rather than in a utopian socialist one, unless that individual is one of the control freaks that believes they know what's best for all people and strive to inflict their rule over others. I believe most people would prefer to be left alone to make their own decisions for what's best in their lives rather than having a nosy Nancy intruding at all levels and micromanaging every detail of their lives. You can raise to your feet and do something about intrusive government, voice opposition about their collectivist policies, and/or just simply refuse to obey their draconian mandates, or you can remain on your knees and grovel, allowing them to do with you as they please.

You win by simply resisting. You win by dissenting. You win by simply claiming your rights and insisting that they be honored. Even if they beat you, you have won. Even if they throw you in prison, you have won. No matter how they treat you, you have won, for you have stuck by your principles and acted like a free human being rather than some domesticated animal, and they have proven themselves to be no better than snarling, out of control beasts.

I am not a fatalist, but I do believe that some things are pre-destined. I do believe that every battle is won before it's fought, but it has to be fought anyway to see who wins it. Even the best laid plans can be foiled. Even the most ragged force can beat the best armed army. Even the most peaceful can defeat the most brutal. Even if there are no soldiers meeting each other on a field of bloodshed, the battle can be won in a different way. It's time we relearned the art of not only talking, but listening to each other. Only when we learn to respect each other's point of view and realize that we all need each other and one group should not rule over another will we realize a society where each individual can become the best human possible.

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/2133/sun-tzu-and-mankind-destiny-of-freedom



__._,_.___


[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] Is it a change of heart or a mockery?



Commentary: PM for Yunus as WB Chief

Is it a change of heart or a mockery?

Mahfuz Anam

After terming him the "bloodsucker" of the poor and relentlessly harassing him and forcing his departure from Grameen Bank that he founded and led to Nobel Prize stature, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, on Wednesday, requested the visiting EU delegation to use their "influence" to make Prof Yunus the next president of the World Bank.

On the occasion she also praised him, according to UNB news agency, for "his outstanding contribution in alleviating poverty through micro credit activities." The PM is also quoted to have further said that Prof Yunus has vast experience and enjoys an "excellent reputation in the world". She reportedly holds the view that Prof. Yunus' vast experience is a "valuable asset" that the World Bank, by making him its next president, can use for the benefit of the world.

This is for the first time we have heard anything positive from the PM about Yunus since she took power this time. Is Sheikh Hasina's change of heart for real? Or is it a mockery, with the underlying message, 'Take him away from Bangladesh?' We hope it is the former.

Countless numbers of us who have attended conferences abroad or who have done business with foreign companies, have faced relentless questions as to how the Bangladesh government could harass the very man honoured the world over.

The support that the international community extended to Prof Yunus was seen by our government more as Yunus' capacity to lobby to gather support rather than a sign of genuine respect that he enjoyed.

The spontaneity of the global outcry was totally lost on our government. It could not imagine, in its wildest dream, that another Bangladeshi, who wielded no political power, could have earned such a genuinely exalted place in the global scene.

So like a stubborn individual, the more the support for Yunus, the more the government stiffened its attitude and saw it as external interference in our internal affairs. Not for a moment did it ask why heads of states and governments were rooting for this private man who had nothing to show for his power except his reputation for the work he did for the poor, especially women.

Within the country the government, its leaders and especially the prime minister came under severe criticism for their narrow mindedness. Many termed the prime minister's attitude to be an expression of her jealousy, as some had convinced her that she deserved a Nobel Prize. She appeared to be mean, vindictive, too eager to denigrate people other than her family, and totally blind against people she dislikes for whatever reason and however unjustifiably. To make a long story short, her attack on Prof Yunus greatly diminished her, her party, her government and the country.

Nothing would please us more if Sheikh Hasina really meant what she said to EU delegation. It is never too late to correct a wrong. Yunus' possible presidency of the World Bank is of least interest to us. (It may be mentioned that the office is always held by an American, just as the IMF's stewardship is held by Europeans. On what basis our PM made such a request to the EU is beyond our comprehension). What is far more important for Bangladesh and we as a people is that we stop dishonouring a man who needs and deserves to be respected. We stop telling lies about him and about micro-credit that is being adopted in almost all poor countries of the world, some not too poor and a few rich countries as well.

As the age old saying goes, charity begins at home. So also respect for Yunus should begin at home, at the PM's home (figuratively speaking) to be precise.

If Sheikh Hasina believes what she said to the EU delegation about Yunus' work, his experience, his reputation then she must acknowledge that inside the country by giving him the respect he deserves. Given the ego our leaders have, it is too much to ask our PM to retract all that she has said about him in the past, especially after it proved to be all false. She would definitely gain the esteem of her countrymen if she had the maturity and the self confidence to admit that she was mistaken.

That said, we can ask her to begin anew. She can start by giving Yunus an audience that he has long requested for and removing the misunderstanding that has been exploited by many smaller people surrounding the PM. She can take steps to restore this man's prestige that she has so unfairly, cruelly but at the end ineffectively, tried to take away from him.

But, on the contrary, if she does not believe what she has said, then she has only made herself an object of ridicule. The world will know that she advised the EU and indirectly the World Bank and all its members to honour the very man she herself does not honour. What it will do for her own credibility and stature, not to speak of respect among her peers, is an open question. But it is one that should be asked by her.

It is our fervent hope that the PM's words signal a change of heart. We would further like to hope that she will act according to what she has said and try to heal this festering wound that has harmed us all so much, more her than anybody else. However, if her words turn out to have been just that --- words, without any substance or meaning --- then it will stand out as having made a mockery of us all.

Comments:

A very well written commentary. Only time will show what, if any, political maturity and personal grace our PM exhibits going forward.

: Amer Chowdhury, London

Well said, Mr. Anam.

M. Faruque
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:14 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It is unbelievable!! A complete u-turn? Is it because her government is feeling the pinch as a result of their ill motivated efforts to discredit the person the whole world respects?

As Mr. Anam mentioned, the PM should know that the position of WB is held by a US citizen. On what basis did the PM come up with this idea to reqeust EU representative, instead of directing it to the US governmen?

Rezaul Bari
Friday, February 24, 2012 12:56 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

This editorial is written based on incomplete facts. It is strange that the editor is unaware of the recent developments at the World Bank itself. China only last week wanted a change in the selection process for WB presidentship. It wanted merit-based, transparent system, instead of a citizen-based one. Besides, Jean Lambert, the Head of the visiting EU delegation also talked about untenability of the way Directors are being selected in World Bank. A change in WB, IMF is imminent.

Shahriar
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:40 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Is she trying to cross his name from the possible chief coordinator for election list? There must be a motive behind this kind gesture.

WA
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:45 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Both you, I and also every intellectual Bangladeshi know well Hasina can only have ill motives for whatever she utters about Dr Yunus. She is jealous, hateful and scared of Dr Yunus. And like you mentioned, this latest mockery of a comment she has made about making Dr Yunus the president of WB is nothing but a naive attempt at taking Dr Yunus out of Bangladeshi politics. Don't you think it also came at the perfect time, right after the little but superb speech Dr Yunus delivered about how our politics has become dirty! lol, our PM is a joke, she is immature and childish! can't say any less about Khaleda Zia! All said and done, I want Dr Yunus to remain in Bangladesh, we need him more than anything else right now!

Roni Rahman
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:51 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

The main question is, did Prof Yunus himself request or express interest for this post?

If, not, then the govt. did a disservice for this unwarranted imposition on his name and prestige.

Mesbah
Friday, February 24, 2012 02:31 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Does the EU delegate have any authority in respect of appointing the President of WB? Isn't it that the appointment of the President of the organisation is completely beyond the delegate's ambit? Could Mr Mahfuz Anam please reflect on this? Professor Yunus has already highlighted why suggesting the appointment on the part of the PM was inappropriate, that too at this level!

Congratulations though for writing this article.

Jumana Sarwar
Friday, February 24, 2012 02:41 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

The mystery of Egg or Chicken has been solved. It's now confirmed the chicken comes first. The question you ask is way easier to answer, it is mockery.

Abdul Aziz Mir
Friday, February 24, 2012 02:52 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Fabulous, outstanding, brilliant, exceptional, admirable, tremendous, and excellent proposal of the century!! All our political leaders should be great minded like our Prime Minister!! Then our country will be like Switzerland !!!

within short period, definitely??? But...

.

Masudur Rahman
Friday, February 24, 2012 02:54 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Let the sun shine, let wisdom undermine ignorance, and jealousy- better late than never.

Saleh Tanveer
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:06 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It should be noted that prominent American politicians had proposed Dr. Yunus as a World Bank president in the past, including an OPED in a prominent US newspaper about 10 years back; as far as I know he declined to be considered since he did not want to leave BD. However, he was involved in advisory capacity as the Chairman of the Policy Advisory Group for the CGAP (Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest), World Bank, Washington DC, USA (1995 - 2000).

Dr. S. A. Miah
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:16 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

With the flatterers around her, the PM does not and even now do not understand what to do or what to say. Sometimes she talks deliriously. Even she did not hesitate to say that saving the journalists (Runi and Sagor) in their bedroom is not the duty of the government. What an unfortunate exclamation from an elected P.M. of our wretched country!

Eliza, Canada
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:31 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Can we embarrass ourselves any further?

Md. Ashrafuzzaman, D.Sc.
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:38 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Politics is also a social work but social work is never politics. Politicians need to honor social workers and to certainly abstain from executing mockery with them for the welfare of the societies and components there in. Prof Yunus is like a distant star for our PM but a next door neighbor for the poors.

Yamuna Zaman
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:38 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Minus Yunus strategy??

Nevertheless, Dr. Yunus and the EU members have probably been laughing at her (privately). Her proposal does NOT fit any equation of her past and she obviously can't fool Yunus anyway!

Zahir Sadeque
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:39 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

@ Rezaul Bari, The commentary is not based on incomplete or erroneous information. What he refers to are all in the realm of talks not what is practiced until now. There was some noises along the same line before C. Lagarde was appointed IMF Chief after DSK's resignation, but what happened if I may ask Mr. Bari? Besides, the Editor very candidly stated what is the practice of appointing WB & IMF chiefs, not calling it immutable or anything else. I think instead of commending the bold editorial some people are nitpicking.

Robin
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:47 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Hasina's ignorance about the WB President selection process makes her a laughing stock.

By harassing Dr. Yunus, Hasina did great harm to Bangladesh and not to Yunus.

MOHAMMAD IQBAL, Ottawa, Canada
Friday, February 24, 2012 03:55 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Well done Mr. Mahfuz Anam, thank you very much for your courageous and appropriate words for this commentary, these are the feelings of millions of Bengalis living at home and abroad.

Absar
Friday, February 24, 2012 04:21 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I am sure PM knows historically WB is headed by US and IMF headed by EU. It's just mockery she is making. She realised that earth under her feet is falling apart.

Dr. Golam Sarwar
Friday, February 24, 2012 04:45 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I do agree with Mr Anam. Superb article.

Dr Islam
Friday, February 24, 2012 04:47 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Thanks Mr Anam for your unusual bravery

Hasan
Friday, February 24, 2012 05:18 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I have lost my respect for our PM after she ridiculed one of the greatest Bengalees in history. Hasina has done something which will judge her in the future as a jealous person who could not show the basic respect to a person who has earned so much prestige for the nation. Unfortunate reality of our nation.

Kamal Ahmed
Friday, February 24, 2012 05:31 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It is neither a 'change of heart nor a mockery', it is ignorance combined with poor original instinct. At best a damage control, inspired by elements surrounding her and driving her inevitably to political disaster in the ensuing poll.

Shimul
Friday, February 24, 2012 06:40 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

This is mockery, pure and simple. This is to further dishonor our Dr Yunus and to replace him with Amartya Sen in our country.

A Bangalee
Friday, February 24, 2012 07:36 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It would surely be very good if it came from her sincere heart. But the history of the relationship between Dr. Yunus and Sheikh Hasina for the last three years showed otherwise. She is very insincere and does not believe what she says.

Anonymous
Friday, February 24, 2012 07:39 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Hasina thinks that the Nobel Peace Prize belonged to her but Dr. Yunus got it. That is the beginning of the trouble.

FIROZ
Friday, February 24, 2012 07:48 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Thank you Mr. Anam for a timely commentary. It is widely believed that our PM's heart is very heavy and full of ridicule, mockery, grudge and unhealthy lyric. She can't come out of her dark heaven as she is destined for a despair and destruction. It is her fate.

Mohammed M. Zaman, Vermont, USA
Friday, February 24, 2012 07:53 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Truth always hurts no matter which side you are looking at it. He did not suck blood of the poor I have seen all my life it is the dishonest so-called politician who does that....People of Bangladesh knows how an honest man has been discredited by our own govt. Mr. Anam thanks for telling the truth.

Mahfuzul H Chowdhuy
Friday, February 24, 2012 07:58 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Excellent! Mr. Anam, excellent piece. Thank you again for picking up the issue. But you and the whole world know what it was and what has it been now.

Mohsin
Friday, February 24, 2012 08:22 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Mr Mahfuz tried to replenish PM's image a little bit. But how many times, you can do that? She is well enough to ground herself.

Himu
Friday, February 24, 2012 08:34 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Or this may be a desperate response to the conspiracy against the Padma Bridge hatched by interested quarters.

DMAI
Friday, February 24, 2012 09:46 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

How true and just commentary. They reflect my own.

NDS
Friday, February 24, 2012 10:07 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It is not difficult to assume that possibly the honorable PM made the proposal just as a counter poise to EU delegation's query regarding her position on unwarranted removal of Dr.Yunus from Grameen Bank. So it is really difficult to take the proposal as a change of heart on the part of honorable PM. But still we would like to see it not as a mockery but as a sincere gesture of a changing heart.

Reaz Hassan
Friday, February 24, 2012 10:25 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Is it really difficult to understand that this was a satire directed at the patrons of Dr. Yunus? She expects that birds of the same feather should flock together. His ideological philosophy is moored in the West, and indeed he is an icon of that environment. So, why not WB presidency?

M.Shafiqul Alam
Friday, February 24, 2012 10:28 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

We cannot read the PM's mind but what is apparent is that she might be tired of hearing recommendations for reinstatement of Dr. Yunus and had to come with counter recommendations that have been well received by the EU delegates and Dr.Yunus also. Maybe Dr. Yunus's social business will not fit well in the development perspective of world bank but he can at best be a challenging candidate for the coveted job of WB President that has been traditionally dominated by US economists only. I fully appreciate the PM's stance.

Abdul Patwary
Friday, February 24, 2012 10:52 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Mr. Editor is wasting his time. She is only teasing the world. You are right she is mean and vindictive, so do not 'throw pearls....'. If Hasina could return to pure heart we would not have two stock markets during her rule. She has no effort to bring the culprits to the dock. She has agreed to the finance minister's suggestion that the culprits are too powerful. Who is more powerful than Hasina?

Rashed Hossain
Friday, February 24, 2012 11:19 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Lets just come to the main point: The Honorable PM made a fool of herself. There is simply no arguments on that and nothing can change this fact of u-turn (with or without this great piece of writing by Mr. Anam).

Mamun
Friday, February 24, 2012 11:21 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

A great mockery!!! She is expert at mocking.

Alamgir Hossain
Friday, February 24, 2012 10:42 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I think this Editor has over reacted to the PM's comment. I thought he would hail the PM and support her to get Dr Yunus this position. Instead, Mr Anam has echoed what the opposition leaders are saying. Mr Anam is also factually wrong. WB presidency does not go to USA always. Please look at the history and the recent change in their administration.

M
Friday, February 24, 2012 09:09 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

It is a well known fact that World Bank chief is always a US citizen and the IMF is always headed by an European.

So mockery must have its limits, if coming from a head of government!

M Khan, USA
Friday, February 24, 2012 11:58 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Thank you Mr. Mahfuz Anam for your keen observation and well written commentary. It is regrettable that our head of state are not accountable for their misdeeds. Our honorable Nobel Laureate Prof. Yunus deserves to be respected, regardless of your personal view. Unfortunately, mean spirited and ignorance driven politics and political leaders will dominate our county.

Saif Shahid
Friday, February 24, 2012 12:14 PM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Mr. Rezaul Bari's observations are correct. There is a move now led by China ans some other countries that the leadership of WB is given to a developing country's suitable candidate and Prof Yunus is undoubtedly one of the most suited candidate for the position.

The World Bank's official goal is the reduction of poverty.

US, which was once the major contributor with about 65% of total contributions, has a much reduced amount of contribution, although it is still the major donor compared with others.

In 2010, voting powers at the World Bank were revised to increase the voice of developing countries, notably China. The countries with most voting power are now the United States (15.85%), Japan (6.84%), China (4.42%), Germany (4.00%), the United Kingdom (3.75%), France (3.75%), India (2.91%), Russia (2.77%), Saudi Arabia (2.77%) and Italy (2.64%). So, the possibility of Prof Yunus being voted to the position of President of the WB is not as remote as it could have been earlier.

M.Hossain
Friday, February 24, 2012 11:40 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

Your commentary on PM proposal is so clear to the conscientious people of the World.

You have the courage to speak the truth about the utterances by PM on the celebrated & renowned Economist of the World, Dr. Yunus, who is the pride and honor of Bangladesh.

The poor politicians and some vested so-called journalists found wrong with this great person like Dr. Yunus.

Dr M. Khan, NY, USA
Friday, February 24, 2012 12:53 PM GMT+06:00 (23 hours ago)

Thank you Mr. Anam for your courageous and brilliant commentary, at least someone pointed it out. There is no change of heart, but there is a panic and desperation for the power and money hungry political leader. Millions of Bangladeshis share Mr. Anam's views.

W. Zaman Manik
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:29 PM GMT+06:00 (23 hours ago)

This is a succinct commentary Dr. Yunus is more than qualified to be President of the The World Bank. However, it is my opinion that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has neither admiration nor respect for Dr. Yunus. It is not at all a change of heart. Although Prime Minister's comment is not mockery per se, I am willing to characterize her latest comments on Dr. Yunus as TAUNTING. It was a cheap joke on both the World Bank and Dr. Younus. This is unfortunate. W. Z

Anonymous K
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:06 PM GMT+06:00 (23 hours ago)

Thanks Mr. Anam for writing such a thoughtful and courageous article. When most of our so-called intellectuals and scholars are busy worshiping someone for their own selfish interests,you are an exception. Everybody should be respected for what he or she deserves, not to be idolized. Prof. Yunus is not a perfect man as nobody is, but he is our pride, our recognition and hope for our future. As a Bangladeshi I was ashamed of myself the way this poor professor was castigated and handled by our PM and her cronies. There is no place to hide this shame and self-destruction of our heritage and culture. Before recommending his name for the WB president (which is totally absurd) Sk. Hasina should have been apologised to Dr. Yunus for her misleading information and disgraceful attitude towards him.It is not still too late to apologise and ask her countrymen for their forgiveness.

Faisal Khan
Friday, February 24, 2012 04:18 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I am amused and honestly startled to read an editorial of this nature by Mahfuz Anam. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has taken a bold step by openly nominating a Bangladeshi candidate for the World Bank Presidency; instead of appreciating and welcoming this move, the editor seems to be pre-occupied with questions that attack on the personal integrity of a national leader.

Furthermore, the editor is evidently unaware of changes that are currently undergoing in the World Bank. Much of the leadership capacity in the WB is shifting onto developing countries and this will be an increasing trend that we are likely to see in the upcoming years, at least within the next one or two decades. Nominating Dr. Yunus at such a transformational period shows the long-term thinking and effective strategizing of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina; by all means, I support her decision and see no reason of questioning her integrity and positive policy-making with regards to Dr. Yunus.

The commentary is evidently biased and skewed towards favoring Dr. Yunus. Much of the microfinance poverty-alleviation story is still empirically non-founded. Although there's continuing research, we do not know, if micro-finance has enabled families to graduate from poverty. It's an effective strategy to maintain living standards, but whether it substantially improves living standards to the point that poor people graduate out of their poverty status remains a crucial question, that neither economists, nor sociologists or welfare researchers have found.

In the future, Mr. Anam would do readers a favor if he can remain more objective in his commentary and (hopefully) a more balanced view.

Faqrul, USA
Friday, February 24, 2012 05:15 AM GMT+06:00 (1 days ago)

I think it is both. The vising delegates and country envoys never miss the opportunity to praise professor Yunus for his outstanding works recognized all over the world..In effect Prof Yunus remains in their visiting agenda for talks in Bangladesh. So far the purpose was to restore his position in Bangladesh as stands outside world

In this present process the prime minister has just put the ball in the court of international well wishers of Professor Yunus, which serve both the purposes as this analysis trying to draw conclusion from the gesture of the prime minister, both carry weight and and rationale to be true.

Anwar Akhtar
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:42 PM GMT+06:00 (22 hours ago)

The PM should be appreciated Even though she may have said with double standards, As said ,she has recommended Dr Yunus and try to get him more honor though she hasn't honoured him nationally, rather humiliated him.

I hope the Govt will realize its mistake. The sychophants in her party have done more harm than good to AL.

Aminul Islam
Friday, February 24, 2012 01:52 PM GMT+06:00 (22 hours ago)

The commentary is the exact summary of what millions of people want to say. Sheikh Hasina needs to be driven by wisdom instead of emotion !

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=223679



__._,_.___


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




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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Re: Border firing to go on: Reasserts BSF chief



Some references:

http://sonarbangladesh.com/blog/post/96106
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Video-exposeacute-BSF-men-strip-beat-Bangladeshi/916250/
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=218966&cid=2

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
Border firing to go on

Reasserts BSF chief day before home ministers' meeting in Delhi

Indian Border Security Force chief UK Bansal yesterday reaffirmed his
view that his soldiers at the border with Bangladesh would fire on
criminals who dared them, a statement that has already created
controversy over border killings.

"If, despite their [BSF personnel] efforts [of exercising restraint],
they get into a situation where they are threatened and their lives
are in danger, then they will use the force available to them to save
their lives or the lives of their companions. That means they will
fire," Bansal told Press Trust of India news agency.

According to the rights organisation Odhikar, 203 people lost their
lives in BSF firing near the border between 2009 and 2011.

None of the killings occurred in a situation in which the Indian
guards' lives were at stake.

Triggering a controversy, Bansal had earlier said firing by BSF along
the border with Bangladesh cannot stop completely.

The BSF chief, however, made it clear that firing will be the last
resort and that the force has put in a number of measures to avert
casualties.

His remarks came a day ahead of a meeting between Indian Home Minister
India P Chidambaram and Bangladesh Home Minister Shahara Khatun. When
the two ministers meet, Shahara is expected to raise the issue of BSF
firing and killing of Bangladeshi civilians along the border.

Yesterday the BSF director general said, "They [BSF personnel] will
fire with the available weapon... it may be non-lethal, it may be
lethal... every patrol company will have both weapons but if a person
is under attack and he is holding a rifle, he will fire his rifle.

"Even that firing he will do as far as possible with the intent not to
kill but if casualties occur... we will have to tolerate it as an
inescapable alternative," he said.

"It gives me no pleasure in killing any civilians. We have the best of
relations with Bangladesh. We want to improve those relations... but
we certainly cannot sacrifice the lives of our officers and men and we
also have to complete our mandate, which is border guarding and,
therefore, we are trying to strike a difficult balance between
completing our task with as little force as possible," Bansal said.

He said the BSF is sending a fresh lot of non-lethal weapons to 23
border posts along the Bangladesh border. However, he claimed that
since the time BSF decided to exercise "restraint" while dealing with
cross-border movements, criminals have become bolder.

"They are coming in larger numbers... sometimes even 300-400 at a
time. They are breaching the fence with the confidence that they can
get away with it... Cattle smuggling is being attempted with much
greater openness," Bansal said.

"Some people say these are cattle traders and that BSF is killing
them. My question is what trade is done in the middle of the night?
From dusk to dawn, on the entire Bangladesh border we declare curfew
and no movement is permitted. Whether Indian or Bangladeshi, he has no
business to be there... So, to say that these people are innocent
traders is not a very convincing argument," he said.

The DG said the BSF has asked the Border Guard Bangladesh to ensure
strict vigil in vulnerable areas during the nights.

He claimed that since Chidambaram's visit to Bangladesh in July last
year and subsequent order to exercise maximum restraint on the
Bangladesh border, shooting incidents have come down by "about 70
percent".

Meanwhile, Home Minister Shahara Khatun reached New Delhi yesterday
afternoon leading a 12-member delegation including Gowher Rizvi,
international affairs adviser to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina,
Bangladesh High Commissioner to India Tariq A Karim, and Home
Secretary Mustaq Ahmed.

Before the talks with her Indian counterpart, Shahara is expected to
call on Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at his residence around
10:00am today.

Home secretaries of the two countries held a preparatory meeting
yesterday at the Indian home ministry ahead of the talks between the
two home ministers.

Meanwhile, an official statement of Indian government last night said
Chidambaram and Shahara would have one-on-one meeting before the
delegation-level talks today.

Issues on security, border management and enhanced cooperation between
the police and law enforcement agencies of the countries will be high
on the agenda.

India's National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon, Home Secretary RK
Singh and Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai would be in the Indian
delegation.

The meeting of the home ministers of Bangladesh and India take on the
added significance with the presence of Gowher Rizvi and Indian
National Security adviser Shivshankar Menon, said officials who
regularly attend ministerial-level talks between the two sides.

This clearly indicates that the home minister-level talks would focus
on all issues relating to security cooperation between the two sides,
especially the drives against terrorists and criminals.

Sources have said India is likely to ask Bangladesh to consider
imposing night curfews along the border to prevent movement of people
as India has done.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=223674

EU shocked by killings at border:

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=223675



__._,_.___


[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] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faith



What happened to the immigrant Jews? Did Hindu preachers convert them to Hindus? What I know about Buddhists is this: Hindus made Buddha as one of their "avatars". Can you please shed light on the parts of Indian history when Hindus tried to convert non-Hindus and "untouchables" including various tribes Hinduism? According to Nihar Ranjan Ray even the chandals in Bengal were outside the chaturvarna system. This means that they were not even shudras.I don't understand why you react so sharply when I want to say that exit from Hinduism is lot easier than getting into it if not impossible! This attitude of the Hindus made it lot easier for the Buddhist, Christian, and Muslim preachers to convert the Indians to their respective religions.  

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faith
 

"Hinduism" and "Judaism" are "too pure" to accept an outsider.  Really???  What happened to the three major waves of Jewish immigrants to India?  What happened to the Buddhists who constituted ninety percent of Bengal populace before Adisur?

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:17 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Preaching or propagating a religion if you will is marketing of an idea. As in modern marketing you have to use all the marketing tools, strategies, and tactics to be effective. Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam have been being missionary religions. And we know what missionaries do in general. Besides the soft spoken preachers, rulers and conquerors also supplement the efforts of the preachers sometimes with sword. Historically Christian and Islamic history of preaching have not been always peaceful particularly when the rulers and conquerors have taken active roles. Buddhism although a proselytizing religion was an exception in this respect. "Hinduism" and "Judaism" are "too pure" to accept an outsider. Hinduism within its own periphery will rather suppress the lower casts obliging them to convert to another religion. In that sense Hinduism is anti-preaching. In modern times, Chaitanyadeb and Vivekananda made exceptions. While Christian missioneries risked their lives to go to remote araes in India, the custodians of Hinduism kept themselves busy with the task of making religion more and more inaccesible. Service to the distressed humanity and bringing light to the underprivileged and neglected people are the good sides of preaching. There are ugly sides too. Bribing for example is an example.     

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 5:58 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faith
 
All religions allow lying to save one's life. If that's Taqiya, it's understandable,  but I heard -  it also includes provision for any deceitful tactics for propagation of Islam, including conversion. Is that so? Could someone clarify this misunderstanding?
Jiten Roy--- On Tue, 2/21/12, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faithTo: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2012, 9:38 PM
 
It also means telling a few lies.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:18 PM, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faith.This is permitted by some sects in Islam, not all. I feel it appropriate in case of danger.
Nothing should be distorted.
 
Shah Abdul Hannan
 
 
 
From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Kamal Das
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 8:33 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: OP meeting on "Hindu temples and properties are d estroyed in Chittagong, Bangladesh"
 
 
Even God supports deceit in the 'interest of religion', the Arabic word for it is taquia.  About the 'referendum of 1940', the Lahore resolution was not a referendum.  It was the result of a Muslim League meeting.  The participants, e.g., Sikander Hyat Khan of the Unionist Party, G. M. Syed of Jiye Sind, and Fajlul Haque of K. S. P.,  were members of provincial parliaments elected in 1937 on the separate electorate basis.  They were coerced by the British Governors to be members of the Muslim League, else their cabinets would be dissolved (Ref.- A. J. Moore in Escape from the Empire).  According to Maulana Azad, Indian Muslims had grown weaker as a political force due to partition in 1947.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 


__._,_.___


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

__,_._,___