Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh



1. Dada, you are probably three years older than me. Are you not in a worse situation than me with respect to learning new things?
2. Dada, you recommended me to read Bertrand Russell to "learn" that Islamic scholars had no contribution to European civilization. That's why I read (as a matter of fact re-read a few pages) from Russell and produced some quotes to show that he actually pretty well recognizes contribution of Islamic scholars. After all, he is Russell and has no problem in admitting what he thinks to be true.
3.Russell wrote the book in 1945. I am tired tonight. Hopefully tomorrow I will quote from a book that was published in 1990. You will be shocked more. 
4. As a matter of fact any reasonably good book on history of western philosophy reconizes the contribution of Islamic (muslim) scholars to the wealth of European wisdom.
5. One word of caution here. In the discussion we have to keep Islam, Mohammed, and muslim (Islamic) scholars separate from one another. That is exactly what a good book on history of philosophy does. 
6. I am surprised to learn that Russell had a Ph.D degree. 
7. About "A History of Western Philosophy" I have heard a different story. He wrote it to earn quick money when he was in deep financial crisis while his stay in the USA. An author has complained that the book was written in a hurry and hence is a job not well done.     

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
1. Mr. Chakravbarty, I have reasons to be impressed by your lack of depth on any subject.  I suppose you are a little over aged to enter into a freshman course.  With your level of comprehension, wisdom seems unattainable to you.   Ibn Sina called 'Maharshi Muhammad' a billy goat.  Read Khayyam's comments on him.  That may enlighten you.  To understand Islam, you have to study more contemporary authors than Russell.  Read Arberry, Watt, Ibn Warraqa, P.K. Hitti, Bernard Lewis etc.  Islam is a 'civilization' with many faces.  Only acceptable face is Sufism.  It had grown as a cult of Sophia, Goddess of Wisdom, and later got cloaked under the cult of Mohammedans.  The worst event in history was the fall of the Persians due to the war of succession after the death of Khosroe (poisoned by one of his sons).  Arabians filled the power vacuum thus created.  Islam is not a civilization.  It is a scourge to all great civilizations;viz., Byzantine, Egyptian, Indian, Persians, Spanish etc.  Kemal Pasha understood it and tried to be more Byzantine than Islamic.

2. Russell is informative, no doubt, but he is not the last answer.  He wrote 'History of Western Philosophy' as a Ph. D. dissertation and failed to impress his American supervisor.  In fact no book, except the 'Holy Quran' in your opinion, is the last answer.  So read as many books as you can find and draw your own conclusion.  Read every book more than once till the contents become comprehensible.  I do it myself.

3. Religion is something that binds a society together.  All 'great religions' are fragmented today.  God is also dead since long time ago. Being invented by primitive men, it can unite a few fools at best.  Even Karl Marx seem more powerful than God.


On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:15 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. I am neither a physician nor a holder of a doctorate degree.
2. I am quoting from Russell:
(i) "Its (Mohammedan civilization's) importance, which must not be underrated, is as a transmitter. Between ancient and modern European civilization, the dark ages intervened. The Mohammedans and the Byzantines, while lacking the intellectual energy required for innovation, preserved the apparatus of civilization---education, books, and learned leisure. Both stimulated the West when it emerged from barbarism---the Mohammedans chiefly in the thirteenth century, the Byzantines chiefly in the fifteenth. In each case the stimulus produced new thought better than any produced by the transmitters---in the one case scholasticism, in the other case the Renaissance (which however had other causes also)."
(ii) "He Averroes (Ibn Rushd) (1126-1198) holds that the existence of God can be proved by reason independently of revelation, a view also held by Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)."
(iii) "His (Averroes's) influence in Europe was very gteat, not only on the scholastics, but also on a large body of unprofessional free-thinkers, who denied immortality and were called Averroists.Among professional philosophers, his admirers were at first especially among the Fransiscans and at the University of Paris."
(iv) "From the twelfth to the seventeenth century, he (Ibn Sina or Avicenna (980-1037) was used in Europe as a guide to medicine.----------He was the author of an encyclopaedia, almost unknown to the East because of the hostility of theologians, but influencial in the West through Latin translations. His psychology has an empirical tendency."
 
I could have quoted more. My point is that we must not be shallow in our comments. We must read and then make a comment.
 
 

Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Once again I appreciate your comment, Dr. Roy, on the uselessness of debating with Dr. Chakrabarty.  Any really inquisitive person would read serious literature and not try to 'learn' on the blog.  I have no clue what he is up to.  I have given plenty of references, apparently he reads none of them. Prof. Amartya Sen was an aspirant for the post of the President of India.  I believe he became an apologetic of Islam with that ulterior motive.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Here we go again. I have a suggestion for Kamal Das, and that is – he needs to let go the thread after one rebuttal; he keeps following the thread at no end without realizing where he is heading. It seems like he is trying to wake up someone who is pretending to sleep. There is a point when you have to realize that you cannot change the mind of your opponent no matter how much information you pile up in front of him/her. That's when you stop.
By now every one of us should have an idea about the intellectual aptitudes, philosophical, political, and religious views of all regular contributors to this forum. As a result, there is no need to prove anything. Just tell what your views are on the subject. That's it. You should always expect that, based on someone's intellectual aptitude, philosophical, political, and religious views, he/she will either agree or disagree with your views. I learned this truth from my own observations.
Now, about the 'Maharishi' attribute to Muhammad by Rabindra Nath, I do not know the pretext of the attribution, and it really does not matter to me. I like to judge everything on my own. I do not know any Maharishi ever instructed his followers to kill all non-believers of his views wherever they can find them. I do not know any Maharishi who told his followers to kill all male non-believers and distribute all female non-believers to his followers as booty after capturing them. I know it was in the context of a war, but – still does not make sense to me. Therefore, it will not make an iota of difference in my judgment even if God-almighty tells me that it was the right thing to do. I know – millions will disagree with me, and that's fine with me. I do not want to change anyone's mind; I just want to express my own feelings on the subject.
I know some people draw conclusion about a subject based on views of others, and some draw conclusions to please others. I do not do so; I collect information and then pass that through my own filter(s) to draw a conclusion of my own. The bottom line is – just because some famous people mentioned about something does not make it a truth. I remember Professor Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate, visited Bangladesh sometime in 2001, just after the election and the worst ever communal pogrom in Bangladesh. Khaleda Zia gave him a reception, and during his speech Amartya Sen said that - Bagladesh was a perfect example of communal harmony. I am sure he knew that he was lying through his teeth just to promote his NGO program in Bangladesh. I hope I made my case.
Jiten Roy--- On Sat, 3/17/12, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Date: Saturday, March 17, 2012, 5:17 PM
 
My responses are inserted below.
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
1. Only an incorrigible fool of your variety would not know that Tagore had all kinds of mistakes.  He also plagiarized a lot.  Consult with any Professor of Bengali if he is available in Arlington or wherever you live.
-----The way you "cuss out" reflects what you are. Can you please stop it and come to business directly? Rabindranath had all kinds of mistakes and he plagiarized a lot! So? Let scholars do research on it. We will have opportunities to learn more about him. Does this dwarf the wise Rabindranath? 2.  Nirad C. Chauddhuri was hired by Oxford University to write on Hinduism.   Bhaduri may be more reliable to you who has absolutely no knowledge on anything.  I had been reading N. P. Bhadhuri since he started writing.  He is nothing more than a Hindu Mollah.  You may write him to learn Hinduism from me if he can't find a better teacher.
-----If you say Bhaduri is a Hindu mollah, I must say you have not read him properly or you have not understood it. If you have really read N.C. Chowdhui, you must have many points on which you cannnot agree with him. To me it does not matter. Why do you have an extreme view about every thing or everybody? I am just wondering. PLease enlighten me with your view on Bhaduri. Please be specific.  

3. Einstein was a modern sage?  His wives and secretaries did not think so.
-----Looks like you are a Hindu fundamentalist. Looks like to you a sage is a "godly" man. To me a sage means a wise (original thinker) man. Remember that Manu, Vatsayana, and Kautilya are known as rishis.  In ancient times there were a limited number of them. Now we have many. All of them had human limitations. 4. Did Tagore really call Muhammad a Maharshi?  If even he did so, he might not have read any Islamic literature.  Muhamad committed eighty nine brigandages in about eight years of his sojourn in Yatrib, uprooted all Jewish enclaves, and put a whole community of Jewish tribe of about a thousand members to sword on a single day. Tell that to your 'RN' if you have a hotline with him.  Not even tell any Jew nearby that Muhamad was a 'great sage' by mistake.  You may end up with the fate of Guru Rajneesh being thrown out of the land and job together.  Read that damned biography of the prophet by Ms. Armstrong carefully.  The earlier posting on muktomona by Mohammad Asghar that I pasted recently might also be helpful.  Though he conquered Hejaj with the help of mercenaries, he did not dare to stay there.  Afterwards, the Umayyads simply ruined his grand children.  No angel prevented the ignominious death of Imam Hussain.  What do you know of the Maharshis?  Maharshi Trailanga Swami, along the modern ones, ate his own defecation all life long.  
-----Yes, he (RN) did call Muhammad a maha rishi. I am sure he read history as a common but serious and critical reader (not like you who looks for only the negatives). I am sure he was not unaware about what Muhammad did to spread Islam and I am sure he did not approve them as I also do not definitely. I am also sure he was aware about the limitations Muhammad had as a human being. But he had the broadness of mind (which you do not have) to recognize Muhammad's great teachings that have changed the world. Were our ancient rishis all flawless and without human passions? Ask yourself. I have read Asghar. It is good compilation from good sources. However, his concluding paragraph is incomplete. He has not seen any thing good in Islam and Muhammed. In my opinion it has been due to his overreaction to what is happening in the contemporary world with jihad, Islamic militancy, fundamentalism, muslim communalism, and fanaticism. The account could be complete by mentioning how Islamic (muslim) thinkers made (and are still making) huge contribution to the advancement of civilization. Goutam Roy in a recent review (Anandabazaar internet version, March 3, 2012) of a book titled "Confluence: Forgotten Histories from East and West"  by Ilija Trojanow and Ranjit Hoskote has summarized how Al-Kindi, Al-Raji, Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Ibne Rushd have influenced the European rennaissance. Anyway, this history is now well established and have been narrated in amny authentic books. 
Please stop bleating around and read books if a good library is available nearby. "Satadhauten ...malitwam na muchyate'
------Please stop being full of yourself. Read with open mind. Don't read to prove that you really are desperate to prove. Finally learn to disagree with respect which is a slogan of Mukto-mona.
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. Nrisinhaprasad Bhaduri, an authority on Indian epics, should be more reliable than Nirad C. Chowdhury with regard to time line.
2. Marhaba. You have smelled grammatical mistakes in RN's writings. The circle is now full: Bankim, Vivekananda, RN reduced to nothing.
3. To me Einstein is also a modern sage. I am not surprised that RN called Muhammad a Maharishi. 
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2012, at 12:02 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
1.Vyas Deva is a person of seventh century of the common era according to the Encarta Encyclopaedia.  Hinduism may not really be as old as some think.  One should read Nirad Chaudhury to get an idea.  According to him, no Hindu scripture is older than sixth century C. E.  2.  Muhammad may be a total myth as proposed by Prof. Kallisch of  Islamic studies at a German University.  He might have been called a 'Maharishi' by Rabindranath Tagore.  He also compared Islam and Christianity with Bolshevism due to their intolerance to other faiths.  Even he would be amused, had he been alive, to learn that someone considers him an authority on Islam(more than Imam Bukhari!).  'No evidence has been cited to prove him faltu'???  Such statements prove that he is ignorant of Tagore as well.  After he earned a Nobel, Calcutta University usually picked his compositions to quote in question papers and asked students to discuss grammatical and spelling mistakes.An ignoramus of Mr. Chakrabarty's level should stay off from blogging.3. If we have to judge people on the ability to change the world, the modern scientists are way ahead of those preachers of religions who brought about dark age and perpetrated atrocities on those who disagreed with them.  Read Voltaire to get a flavor of what I mean. 3. The way 'Maharshi Muhammad' slaughtered the people who gave them shelter in Madina, he should be compared with Macbeth instead.4. I am sick of discussing serious matters with these 'wise' men as Chakrabarty and Rahman.  I would appreciate if these men ignore my postings.  In any case, I would do it henceforth to whatever they post here.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:37 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. I am not alone. There are more as I have mentioned before. Read (don't have to agree) analytical posts of Bain, Roy, Q. Rahman, and some others. 
2. Ranindranath is lucky! No evidence has been cited to prove him to be 'faltu' even though he called Muhmed a Maharishi! 
3. Was RN not aware of Islamic history? Definitely he was. Was he wrong? My analysis is given below:
RN knew well about ancient sages. He knew about their human limitations and passions. But he could not ignore their great teachings. Vyasdev said through goddess Saraswati,'Nothing is truer than man, and nothing is above him. ' Chandidas echoed it after 2000 years. You can give a lot of examples. He saw Muhammed as nothing more than a man. He saw him as a great sage who was a seer of the past, present, and the future. He had the spirit to overlook the 
Human limitations. 
4. My concern about the accuracy of the historical accounts born out of oral traditions has not yet been addressed. I hope some one will give his valued comment on it. 
5. RN bashers question his moral values (his affairs with women including the wife of his elder brother) and use those to measure and discard him. These people should not be out role models. We need to learn small things and recognize big things. We must do this when we make judgment about personalities who have changed the world.  Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 14, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 Mr. Chakrabarty is a self claimed analytical man, though he forgot to spell it properly.  Some 'divine revelation' to some 'maharshi' is the 'holy book' on Islam.  Not even citations from the 'holy book' are enough to these 'anlytical' men to convince that the 'maharshi' was what was called 'a roving bandit' by Prof. Mancur Olson. The Surah I cited is a small one, but enough to prove the point that the 'revelations' always served the whims of the 'maharshi'  Fortunately, in those days even Muslims could be critical of their Prophet and their companions, now they can't. Of course, nobody should expect an iota of common sense who considers totally illiterate fools as 'avatars' and 'maharshis.'  May be the followers of such avatars and maharshis would soon reveal the truth by going into trance(samadhi).  A small dose of 'somerasha' may help to bring about 'samadhi' soon. "We expect more civility."  Who is this 'we'?  If these 'we' consisted of any moderator, my postings would be forbidden by now.  I don't have to learn 'civility' from functional illiterates.  I do not write here for the consumption for persons lacking even minimum 'anlytical' abilty.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 9:29 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
1. Again the same typical "school-masterly" temper! This is not your pathsala. We expect more civility. By this time you should have recognized (a man full of himself will never do that any way) that this forum is visited by anlytical and informed people with broadness of mind. You ridiculed Vivekananda as he praised Islam and ridiculed Bankim also as he praised Muslim rulers. Now it is Rabindanath's turn. It has been revealed that he called Muhammad the maharishi of Islam. Probably you will ridicule him soon. That's your choice. I will not stoop as low as you do. Can you please directly go to your arguments without insulting a blogger? Thanks.
 
2. We have been discussing the veiling of women according to Islam. All of a sudden you have quoted a Sura (Verse CHI) without any relevance. I do not what you are trying to prove.
 
3. I read the juicy descriptions that you sent as quotes from well known references. It all sounded like myth to me. They were in such details. I simply questioned the reliability. (Let 100 percent muslims accept these as facts. I do not care. I am an analytical man. I love to go into the depths of the matter.) I did a little research and found that these accounts are not accepted by a big percentage of the readers. There are reasons. Muhammad lived during 570-632, Ibn Ishaq 704-766 (or 761?), and Bukhari during 810-870. About four genrations passed before Ishaq started recording the history and minimum eight generations passed before Bukhari strated his project. We have to take note of the fact that these accounts are not based on written documents. These are based on oral traditions. Traditions have been told and retold again and again. Volumes of traditions both Ishaq and Bukhari collected were so huge that they themselves had to use their own judgements to discard many of them. We also need to understand that when the narration of a fact travels from mouth to mouth over genrations it easily gets distorted. We the blind believers take any thing to be infallible and absolute if it comes from a revered author. We are afraid to challenge him. Only a brave inquiring mind is able to reveal further truths.       
 
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Burqa banning after RAJUK, now Syedpur's Lions school and college: Minority Islam in Muslim majority Bangladesh
 
Ahadith by Bukhari is the most acceptable there is.  Any half wit not appreciating Bukhari, Tabari, Waquidi, Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Kathir etc. should read the gibberish 'holy verses' and try to interpret in his own way.  Read the verse CXI.  It is a short one.  "Perish the hands of Abu Lahab, and perish he!/  .... He shall roast at a flaming fire/ and his wife,..., upon her neck a rope of palm-fiber."  Abu Lahab was an uncle of the prophet, and two of his sons were married to two of the prophets daughters before the advent of Islam.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
In this account from WikiIslam the prophet (maharishi in Ranindranath's term) has been shown to be most open minded. This account even seems to be 
dubious. I did a little google search to discover that the account by Ibn Ishak who on time scale was closest to prophet as a biographer has not been ununimously accepted. Acceptance of Bukhari seems to be less. 
It is really almost impossible to come up with the real truth. Research should continue. Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 11, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
 The holy Koran has 'revelations' from earlier sources as well, e.g., Oracles of Delphi and other temples, the Old and New Testaments etc.  Other literature on Islam cites to Umar being proud on receiving the revelation on hijab before the Prophet. Now, may I add from WikiIslam,
"The reason that Muslim women wear the hijab today is not a spiritual one, nor is it a matter of piety. Covering the hair/face cannot be considered an act of modesty because Muslim men are not required to cover theirs. The sole reason they do it is because Umar bin Al-Khattab, a companion of Muhammad, wished that Muhammad would reveal verses from Allah requiring women to wear it. When Muhammad did not oblige, Umar did not pray to Allah for assistance. Umar knew he had to make it personal for Muhammad himself in order to bring the revelation down. He followed Muhammad's wives out when they went to go to the toilet and made his presence known. When Muhammad heard of this, the revelation that Umar had so wanted was sent down from Allah. Umar knew where these revelations were really coming from, which is why he pestered Muhammad and harassed his wives instead of asking Allah.
Although the revelational circumstances for the hijab were ridiculous, the consequences that we can see to this day, are not. The requirement for the hijab has had the effect of placing full responsibility for Muslim-male self control onto the females - freeing the men of responsibility for their actions if they see an unveiled woman. Lack of self control is not an inherent attribute to men, because men in non-Islamic societies do not have such self control issues; when it is rare to see a woman covered so in these societies. The hijab's purpose, as revealed and to this day, is designed to protect Muslim females from the now acceptable behavior of Muslim males; behavior which has been deemed socially acceptable precisely because of the requirement of Muslim females to wear the hijab."
One may notice that the Prophet did not prevent Umar from stalking his wives even to the place of defecation.  It might so happen that he actually instructed to spy on them.
 
Thank you for sharing the source of your post. We can learn from it as well.

However do note that, ALL revelations in the holy Qur'an were revealed to prophet Muhammad (PBUH) NOT anyone else. Hazrat Omar (RA) might have wished for the clearer direction about the level of modesty required and that is acceptable to me. Revelations only came to messengers of Allah (SWT) not to anyone else. It would be a mistake to think Allah revealed any verse to Omar (RA).

A complete body cover excluding the eyes

Also note that, the covering the whole body but eyes is not part of the revelation. It is an assumption and there are differences of opinions among scholars of Islam. Generally some scholars feel women are required to cover whole body ( Including face except eyes) but majority of Islamic scholars feel just covering head and rest of the body is required. So you may see Muslim women with face veil (Niqaab) and others cover their heads and body (Hijab). So there are differences of opinions about "Levels of modesty" among scholars.


__._,_.___


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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?



In good old days of the 'Kazi's court, such 'teachers of civilizing' would have his limbs sliced ant tongue cut off.  Shamelessness and tomfoolery should have a limit.

2012/3/20 Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 

I wrote this with reference to Farida Majid's post. 'Sharp' guy missed it. I think my first sentence aimed at civilizing him angered him. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 19, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:

 

What made this dull person feel that I coined 'rebel' from his posting?

2012/3/17 subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
 

The last sentence in Das's post is not only irrelevant, it also harms the environment required for a healthy debate.
 
Any way, the word "rebel" is not my creation. I have borrowed it from Prof. Ahmad Sharif who has use the word "drohee" for which I have found the closest English word "rebel". There may be a more appropriate English word for "drohee". 

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:52 PM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
 
Taslima had every reason to be a 'rebel'.  Her mom was cheated on by his dad as she was by Rudra Md. Shahidullah.  The level of media attention drawn by Taslima across the world was enormous, Humayun Azad would have loved to have such attention.  Sure she had plagiarized a lot, but he did even more of it.  His novel, "Pak shar jamin.." was an effort to catch a cobra by it's tail, and not much of a post-modern literature.  Having a secured teaching position at D. U., Humayun Azad didn't have to struggle for a living while being a junior physician, Taslima had to do it.

The lady out to criticize Taslima here is no match for her in any respect.  Her criticism might have grown out of 'jealousy of one female for another of much wider reputation'.

2012/3/17 Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
 
There is no benefit whatsoever in denying the contribution and attention Taslima drew on the emancipation of women in Bangladesh. There may be others who are trying to do the same now in some other ways, who are undoubtedly strong winds to push the issue forward, but – Taslima was a Tornado, as far as her contribution is concerned.
Taslima brought Bangladeshi women's rights issues in the forefront of the international arena.  Now you have international attention focused on the issue, and you have NGOs working on the subject. I am aware of all these NGO activities in this field.  It seems like you are competing with her, when there is no need for it. She did her part; you can do yours.' That's how I see this issue.
I read her book, and the way she has depicted the role of women in the society, it matches my views on the subject.  In her book, she has described the role her mother played in her home, that also depicts my mother's life-story, and, I am sure, it will match stories of countless other mothers in Bangladesh. I used to think about it as a child, as she did.
My mother's world was inside the kitchen. He had to cook three times a day using a wood-burning oven, which takes quite a long time to finish the job. She used to finish cooking a meal and then she would feed everybody in the house. After that, she would eat. When she would finish her meal, it is already time to start cooking for the next meal. I have hardly seen her outside the kitchen. If she would come out of the kitchen, it was for cleaning the house or doing something else. While my mother was doing all these works in the house, my father already finished visiting many of his friends' house to gossip.  My mother never had the opportunity to do so. That's the picture emerged from her writings also. Therefore, I am not in the same boat with you.
Yes, I am aware of the recent change in the urban and suburban areas, but, I believe, very little has changed in the village, where majority of the women live. So, when you criticize Taslima, remember the condition of those women, not the women in the Dhaka-City. Also, you have to think of the time when she started her crusade, which was more than 30 years ago.
Jiten Roy

--- On Fri, 3/16/12, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ?
To: "mukto-mona" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Friday, March 16, 2012, 4:28 PM
 
           I am puzzled by Jiten Roy's negligence of the history of women's movement in greater Bengal, his hyperbolic usage of the word "implant" and the funny concept of "male-dominated ancient conservative society in Bangladesh."              To be honest, such talk is very insulting to Bengali women who have always, through centuries, been a tremendous force in the glorious economic history of Bengal, and to this day, contibutes a lion's share to the economy of Bangladesh.  Stop the women from working for a week, and the whole economy will collapse!  Women of Bengal deserve much better respect.             Don't have the time now to go into detail, but the dozen or so top women's organizations in Bangladesh will tell you how Taslima fiasco damaged their work in progress and encouraged the Islamist goondagiri.  Before the Taslima affair, these fundos were at the shadowy margins of the society. They did not dare show their faces in public before.             One other quick reminder -- the inappropriateness of the word "rebel." Taslima's final confrontation with the shadowy fundamentalists was a pure political farce. There was nothing rebel-like at all other than misquotes, and misunderstanding.  It would be a gross misjudgement to call those 'molla' types the ruling authority. They did not dictate the mores of the society, though they pretended as if they did -- but it was Taslima who created that space for them which had been steadfastly denied them by other women activists. This is what really annoyed a lot of women.              It saddens me to be talking like this.  But I am a very different type of feminist than Taslima.  I do not begin by the concept of a disempowered womanhood.  I am constantly harassed by the patriarchy because I am a woman who tells the truth, but that is the male problem. You just saw an example only last week by the spectacle put on by Canada's Abid Bahar.  Do you think that Bahari act disempowered me as a woman, or was successful in belittling the truth?  If anything, it sharpened the truth.              That brings me back to the subject of a 'rebel'.  Humayun was not a rebel. He was not fighting against any 'authority' like Kazi Nazrul's bold and beautiful voice was against the British Colonizer Rulers.  Times were different. With his many important publications, his commanding position as the Chair of the Bangla Dept. at DU, and his lively, influential presence in the cultural and political arena, Humayun occupied a central Metropolitan public space.  He WAS the authority.  Consider the theatricals of the scene of his murder attempt -- Humayun walking out of the lighted grounds of Bangla Academy, he had several books out that year including the novel 'Pak Shar Zamin Shad Baad', he had been book-signing all evening at the Agami publisher's stall, the February National Book Fair was just winding down. From across the street, from under the dark shadows of trees in the park came a few goondas with sharp machete knives and attacked the unaccompanied author!              Taslima never occupied that space, that central metropolitan cultural public square. She grabbed the central stage by acts of folly. Misquoting the Qur'an is not the equivalent of telling an incontrovertible truth.                 Farida Majid
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.comFrom: jnrsr53@yahoo.comDate: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:41:27 -0700 Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] তসলিমা নাসরিনঃ কতোটা সফল নারীবাদে ? 




__._,_.___


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

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

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

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

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

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

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




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

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony

Are you telling me that - it was the Pakistani journalist, Afzal Khan, not the Indian journalist Dipanjan Roy, who published the original news? Are you telling me that no raw-agent is involved? That's a bad news for BNP/Jamat. Now, they have to find some other propaganda arguments; may be - they can say Raw-agent bribed Afzal Khan to concoct this message. Many people will believe it.

It is stunning to see the breakdown of morality in so many Bangladeshi politicians. Here we have a country gained independence after a bloody war, and politicians are already sleeping with enemies to go to power. Nothing will happen to any of these people, even though it's a treasonous act. What a democratic country! Already, so many people are working overtime to cover up this huge offense with their relentless propaganda campaign; they have no problem accepting it.

My question is - can a country expect anything from them?

Jiten Roy

--- On Tue, 3/20/12, Muhammad Ali <man1k195709@yahoo.com> wrote:


From: Muhammad Ali <man1k195709@yahoo.com>
Subject: [mukto-mona] Fw: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony
To:
Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2012, 4:12 PM

After this authentic post , BNP-JAMAT'S  "hukka-hua" will STOP !!

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: SyedAslam <Syed.Aslam3@gmail.com>
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com; notun Bangladesh <notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony

 

 
Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy initially disclosed the ISI boss testimony

Paying money to Khaleda Zia & BNP  was a classified information for ISI. 

Now the truth has popped out ....

ISI operatives in Bangladesh are trying for damage control ... and divert attention 
from the real issue: 
ISI paid money to BNP ..... the published news is just the tipof the iceberg...... 
Obviously, there are many other payments which are still ISI's Classified info.

The initial report that disclosed the money paid by ISI to Khaleda Zia 
was written by Pakistani journalist Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad)
This was published in Dubai based Khaleej times on March 3, 2012.

(1) Fakhrul claimed: "The first news to appear in this regard was in Khaleej Times. 
An Indian journalist named Dipanjan Roy wrote the report. No Pakistani newspaper 
ran any such report," 

(2) "অনুসন্ধানে দেখা গেছে, রিপোর্টটি গত ৩ মার্চ সর্বপ্রথম খালিজ টাইমস-এর অনলাইন সংস্করণে ছাপা হয়। 
রিপোর্টটি পাঠিয়েছের প্রথম আলোর নয়াদিল্লি প্রতিনিধি দীপাঞ্জন রায় চৌধুরী, যিনি খালিজ টাইমস-এরও প্রতিনিধি ...."
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2012/03/19/136828 
These (1) & (2)  are blatant lies.... 

The first report on the money paid by ISI to  "Bangladesh's Khalida Zia"    
was written by renowned Pakistani  journalist  Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad), 
not by Diponjon Roy. Diponjon Roy's artcle in Daily Mail appeared on March 15, 2012.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2115584/Pakistan-ISI-admits-supporting-insurgency-Indias-Northeast.html

Read:
"Asghar Khan's petition finally comes
up for hearing" 
by Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) 3 March 2012
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/international/2012/March/international_March76.xml&section=international&col=
The Khaleej Times report was published on 3 March 2012 and was written by  Afzal Khan  who mentioned "A total of Rs140 million was disbursed after Mehran Bank illegally advanced it to the ISI account. Another Rs50 million was allegedly paid to Bangladesh's Khalida Zia to help her in polls against Hasina Wajid's Awami League generally perceived by Pakistan's security establishment as pro-India. " ....
The Khaleej Times is a daily English Language newspaper published in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The newspaper, Khaleej Times  is part-owned by the government of the United Arab Emiries.



















On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Abdul Mannan Azad <mannanazad@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Paris vision news:
http://www.parisvisionnews.com/articles/2860-dipanjon-roywho-misled-us-on-isi-boss-testimony.html

M.A.Mannan AZAD



After this authentic post , BNP-JAMAT'S  "hukka-hua" will STOP

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: SyedAslam <Syed.Aslam3@gmail.com>
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com; notun Bangladesh <notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony

 

 
Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy initially disclosed the ISI boss testimony

Paying money to Khaleda Zia & BNP  was a classified information for ISI. 

Now the truth has popped out ....

ISI operatives in Bangladesh are trying for damage control ... and divert attention 
from the real issue: 
ISI paid money to BNP ..... the published news is just the tipof the iceberg...... 
Obviously, there are many other payments which are still ISI's Classified info.

The initial report that disclosed the money paid by ISI to Khaleda Zia 
was written by Pakistani journalist Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad)
This was published in Dubai based Khaleej times on March 3, 2012.

(1) Fakhrul claimed: "The first news to appear in this regard was in Khaleej Times. 
An Indian journalist named Dipanjan Roy wrote the report. No Pakistani newspaper 
ran any such report," 

(2) "অনুসন্ধানে দেখা গেছে, রিপোর্টটি গত ৩ মার্চ সর্বপ্রথম খালিজ টাইমস-এর অনলাইন সংস্করণে ছাপা হয়। 
রিপোর্টটি পাঠিয়েছের প্রথম আলোর নয়াদিল্লি প্রতিনিধি দীপাঞ্জন রায় চৌধুরী, যিনি খালিজ টাইমস-এরও প্রতিনিধি ...."
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2012/03/19/136828 
These (1) & (2)  are blatant lies.... 

The first report on the money paid by ISI to  "Bangladesh's Khalida Zia"    
was written by renowned Pakistani  journalist  Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad), 
not by Diponjon Roy. Diponjon Roy's artcle in Daily Mail appeared on March 15, 2012.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2115584/Pakistan-ISI-admits-supporting-insurgency-Indias-Northeast.html

Read:
"Asghar Khan's petition finally comes
up for hearing" 
by Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) 3 March 2012
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/international/2012/March/international_March76.xml&section=international&col=
The Khaleej Times report was published on 3 March 2012 and was written by  Afzal Khan  who mentioned "A total of Rs140 million was disbursed after Mehran Bank illegally advanced it to the ISI account. Another Rs50 million was allegedly paid to Bangladesh's Khalida Zia to help her in polls against Hasina Wajid's Awami League generally perceived by Pakistan's security establishment as pro-India. " ....
The Khaleej Times is a daily English Language newspaper published in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The newspaper, Khaleej Times  is part-owned by the government of the United Arab Emiries.



















On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Abdul Mannan Azad <mannanazad@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Paris vision news:
http://www.parisvisionnews.com/articles/2860-dipanjon-roywho-misled-us-on-isi-boss-testimony.html

M.A.Mannan AZAD



[mukto-mona] Fw: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony

After this authentic post , BNP-JAMAT'S  "hukka-hua" will STOP !!

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: SyedAslam <Syed.Aslam3@gmail.com>
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com; notun Bangladesh <notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 12:58 PM
Subject: [KHABOR] Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy disclosed the ISI boss testimony

 

 
Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) not Dipanjon Roy initially disclosed the ISI boss testimony

Paying money to Khaleda Zia & BNP  was a classified information for ISI. 

Now the truth has popped out ....

ISI operatives in Bangladesh are trying for damage control ... and divert attention 
from the real issue: 
ISI paid money to BNP ..... the published news is just the tipof the iceberg...... 
Obviously, there are many other payments which are still ISI's Classified info.

The initial report that disclosed the money paid by ISI to Khaleda Zia 
was written by Pakistani journalist Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad)
This was published in Dubai based Khaleej times on March 3, 2012.

(1) Fakhrul claimed: "The first news to appear in this regard was in Khaleej Times. 
An Indian journalist named Dipanjan Roy wrote the report. No Pakistani newspaper 
ran any such report," 

(2) "অনুসন্ধানে দেখা গেছে, রিপোর্টটি গত ৩ মার্চ সর্বপ্রথম খালিজ টাইমস-এর অনলাইন সংস্করণে ছাপা হয়। 
রিপোর্টটি পাঠিয়েছের প্রথম আলোর নয়াদিল্লি প্রতিনিধি দীপাঞ্জন রায় চৌধুরী, যিনি খালিজ টাইমস-এরও প্রতিনিধি ...."
http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2012/03/19/136828 
These (1) & (2)  are blatant lies.... 

The first report on the money paid by ISI to  "Bangladesh's Khalida Zia"    
was written by renowned Pakistani  journalist  Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad), 
not by Diponjon Roy. Diponjon Roy's artcle in Daily Mail appeared on March 15, 2012.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2115584/Pakistan-ISI-admits-supporting-insurgency-Indias-Northeast.html

Read:
"Asghar Khan's petition finally comes
up for hearing" 
by Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) 3 March 2012
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/displayarticle.asp?xfile=data/international/2012/March/international_March76.xml&section=international&col=
The Khaleej Times report was published on 3 March 2012 and was written by  Afzal Khan  who mentioned "A total of Rs140 million was disbursed after Mehran Bank illegally advanced it to the ISI account. Another Rs50 million was allegedly paid to Bangladesh's Khalida Zia to help her in polls against Hasina Wajid's Awami League generally perceived by Pakistan's security establishment as pro-India. " ....
The Khaleej Times is a daily English Language newspaper published in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The newspaper, Khaleej Times  is part-owned by the government of the United Arab Emiries.



















On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Abdul Mannan Azad <mannanazad@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Paris vision news:
http://www.parisvisionnews.com/articles/2860-dipanjon-roywho-misled-us-on-isi-boss-testimony.html

M.A.Mannan AZAD



[mukto-mona] Re: [KHABOR] ISI paid Rs50 million to Khalida Zia in polls against Hasina Wajid - this fact as Ex ISI Chief confessed in highest Court of NaPakistan - not the mere opinion of Sheikh Hasina



Paying money to Khaleda Zia & BNP  was a classified information for ISI. 

Now the truth has popped out ....
ISI operatives in Bangladesh are trying for damage control ... and divert attention 
from the real issue: 
ISI paid money to BNP ..... the published news is just the tipof the iceberg...... 
Obviously, there are many other payments which are still ISI's Classified info.

The initial report that disclosed the money paid by ISI to Khaleda Zia 
was written by Pakistani journalist Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamad)
This was published in Dubai based Khaleej times on March 3, 2012.

(1) Fakhrul claimed: "The first news to appear in this regard was in Khaleej Times. 
An Indian journalist named Dipanjan Roy wrote the report. No Pakistani newspaper 
ran any such report," 

(2) "অনুসন্ধানে দেখা গেছে, রিপোর্টটি গত ৩ মার্চ সর্বপ্রথম খালিজ টাইমস-এর অনলাইন সংস্করণে ছাপা হয়। 
রিপোর্টটি পাঠিয়েছের প্রথম আলোর নয়াদিল্লি প্রতিনিধি দীপাঞ্জন রায় চৌধুরী, যিনি খালিজ টাইমস-এরও প্রতিনিধি ...."
These (1) & (2)  are blatant lies.... 

The first report on the money paid by ISI to  "Bangladesh's Khalida Zia"    
was written by renowned Pakistani  journalist  Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad), 
not by Diponjon Roy. Diponjon Roy's artcle in Daily Mail appeared on March 15, 2012.

Read:
"Asghar Khan's petition finally comes
up for hearing" 
by Afzal Khan (Dateline Islamabad) 3 March 2012
The Khaleej Times report was published on 3 March 2012 and was written by  Afzal Khan  who mentioned "A total of Rs140 million was disbursed after Mehran Bank illegally advanced it to the ISI account. Another Rs50 million was allegedly paid to Bangladesh's Khalida Zia to help her in polls against Hasina Wajid's Awami League generally perceived by Pakistan's security establishment as pro-India. " ....
The Khaleej Times is a daily English Language newspaper published in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The newspaper, Khaleej Times  is part-owned by the government of the United Arab Emiries. 


On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:37 AM, numan azmi <numanazmi@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Anu Bhuiyan

What you are referring to as fact is nothing more than a concocted lie a by an anti Bangladesh Indian journalist named Dipanjan Roy Chowdhury. He has been credited in a book by a Mr. Kalekar (Bangladesh : next Afganistan). This book is a propaganda against our beloved Bangladesh and the writer is a known anti Bangladesh propagandist.

All the articles published on BNP-ISI issue was written by Mr. DR Chowdhury. The tiiming of these articles conveniently coincided with the biggest anti govt rally in Dhaka on 12th March. Mr. DR Chowdhury is the Indian rep for Khalij Times, a pro Indian media based in the middle east, where his original article was published. It was then published in India Today, another media which he also works for and it was a copy of his original report. Then BSS, BD official news agency, just copied and pasted the same report. Finally, the Indian online version of UK media Daily Mail, for which, Mr. DK Chowdhury is also a reporter.

Interesting thing is, none of the Pakistani or even the main stream Indian media said anything about this, despite this being such a sensational news (it would be sensational if it was true). Even the official authentic transcript from Pakistan Supreme Court doesn't say anything about BNP either. The fact is, the Former ISI Chief never mentioned anything about giving money to anyone outside Pakistani politicians, let alone giviong money to BNP or Khaleda Zia.

Please see the links below about the truth and the REAL FACTS behind Mr. DR Chowdhury's lies and propaganda.

http://www.dailynayadiganta.com/details/35782.

http://bdnews24.com/bangla/ details.php?cid=3&id=188960& hb=top.
http://banglanews24.com/ detailsnews.php?nssl= 75cb31c968b4c59d92e02b44c03e86 a7&nttl=1803201297238.

http://www.amadershomoy2.com/content/2012/03/20/news0066.htm

http://www.sonarbangladesh.com/blog/mohaimen/


However, I would like to point out about the article in the well respected and well known UK media The Economist, which has said that India  has given bags of money to Awami League during the 2008 election to ensure that AL wins more than 75% of the seats to enable passing any law they want to benefit India. We all know the result of the election and the subsequent decision by AL govt in the last 3 years to give in to all Indian unfair demands. See the link to that article (http://www.economist.com/node/21524917).

So, I urge you to open your eyes to the truth, stop this kind of false propaganda and stop supporting known anti Bangladesh propagandist.

Thank you


On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Engr. Shafiq Bhuiyan <srbanunz@gmail.com> wrote:
Shame to BNP  !!!



Shame to BNP's liar Acting GS Top most Liar Mirza Fakhrul !!!



(He may be realtive of Mir Jafar)


Ex ISI Chief confessed in highest Court of NaPakistan




This is not the mere opinion of Sheikh Hasina



Ex-ISI boss admits funding BNP in highest Court of NaPakistan




Mar 16th, 2012, http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=220462&cid=3





Pakistan's spy agency Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) has admitted that
it had funded the BNP during the 1991 general elections which the party won
and formed government. The confession came from a man no less than former
ISI chief Asad Durrani during a Pakistan Supreme Court hearing on the spy
agency's mandate on Wednesday, according to London-based Daily Mail.



He also confessed to supporting insurgency in India's northeast. Prime
minister Sheikh Hasina on Mar 10 accused BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia of
taking money from ISI before the June 1996 and Oct 2001 parliamentary
elections. "It is beyond doubt that she (Khaleda) took money before 1996
national polls. The future will reveal more on... I think the amount was
higher in 2001," the Awami League chief had said.



But the BNP denied the allegation. On Thursday, its acting
secretary-general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir slammed Hasina for her
remarks that Khaleda had taken money from ISI before 1991, 1996 and 2001
elections. He dared the prime minister to prove it and said her statement
was 'devoid of decency'. "Our leader [Khaleda] does not take money from
foreigners for using in politics," Fakhrul had said.



A three-member bench of the top court headed by chief justice Iftikhar
Muhammad Chaudhary grilled the former spy agency chief on ISI's funding for
politicians both within and outside Pakistan, the British newspaper added.
Recently, a UAE-based daily had alleged that ISI paid 50 crore rupees to
BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia ahead of the 1991 elections.



There are allegations that the ISI has been active in Bangladesh whenever
the BNP has been in power in 1991-96 and later during 2001-06. The spy
agency was also alleged to have launched a campaign from Bangladesh to
destabilise the India's northeast region by patronising and providing
logistic support, including funds, to the insurgent groups operating from
Bangladesh.



The ISI is also alleged to have supported a network in Bangladesh, which
includes the Jamaat-e-Islami, the BNP and northeast insurgents groups
during the BNP's rule. In December last year, Pakistan's defence ministry
had admitted in the Supreme Court that it did not have operational control
over the military and the ISI.



Ex-ISI chief admits funding BNP polls '91

17.3.2012, http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=226659



The Daily Mail Online Former ISI chief Asad Durrani has admitted funding
BNP during the 1991 parliamentary elections. The admission came during a
Pakistan Supreme Court hearing on the spy agency's mandate on Wednesday.



A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar
Muhammad Chaudhary grilled the former spy boss on Inter Services
Intelligence's funding for politicians both in and outside Pakistan.
Recently a UAE-based daily had alleged that ISI paid Rs 50 crore to BNP
Chairperson Khaleda Zia ahead of the 1991 elections in which the party won
and formed the government.



There are allegations that the ISI has been active in Bangladesh whenever
BNP has been in power (1991-96) and later during 2001-06. The spy agency
was also alleged to have launched a campaign from Bangladesh to destabilise
the Northeast by patronising and providing logistic support, including
funds, to the insurgent groups operating from Bangladesh.



The ISI is alleged to have supported a network in Bangladesh, which
includes Jamaat-e-Islami, BNP and Northeast rebel groups during the BNP's
rule.

Ex-ISI chief admits to funding BNP in 91

http://www.newstoday.com.bd/index.php?option=details&news_id=56439&date=2012-03-17



A former Pakistani Inter services intelligence (ISI) chief has admitted the
spy agency had funded main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)
during 1991 general elections as he was summoned to testify in a case
before the Supreme Court of his country, reports BSS. According to reports
carried by several Pakistani and Indian media ex- ISI chief Asad Durrani
made the admission as the Supreme Court summoned him for his testimony for
hearing on the spy agency's mandate on Wednesday.



The Islamabad-based News International reported that the Supreme Court on
Wednesday issued notices to Durrani in a decade- old pending case of
retired Air Marshal Asghar Khan. "The admission came from no less than
former ISI chief Asad Durrani during a Pakistan Supreme Court hearing on
the spy agency's mandate on Wednesday," commented India Today as it carried
a report on the issue.



A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar
Muhammad Chaudhary grilled him on ISI's funding for politicians both within
and outside Pakistan as Khan accused Durrani and ex-army chief Aslam Beg of
distributing public money for political purposes through the Mehran Bank.
Khan, an elderly politician who heads the Tehreek-i-Istiqlal party, filed
the case in the country's apex court in 1996, originally alleging that the
bank donated funds to Beg in 1990 while he loaned the amount to ISI so that
it could be used in the creation of Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI), which
was set up in 1988.



But the UAE-based Khaleej Times earlier this month reported that ISI paid
BNP chief Begum Khaleda Zia Rs 50 crore ahead of the 1991 elections "to
help her in polls against Hasina's Awami League generally perceived by
Pakistan's security establishment as pro-India". The report on Durrani's
testimony came as BNP trashed the report with the party's acting secretary
general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir yesterday demanding proof on the
allegation. "Our leader (BNP chief) never took money from abroad. The
allegation of taking money from ISI is absolutely false and we are
collecting information about it.



We will give our reply in time," Alamgir told newsmen as the report sparked
a wide cross- border media and political sensation. Prime Minister Sheikh
Hasina demanded a BNP explanation on the allegation saying "You (Begum Zia)
sold the country (interest) by taking money from those who resorted to
genocide". "The people of Bangladesh won't forgive you. Why did you take
money from the defeated forces?," she said at a huge rally organised by her
ruling Awami League earlier this week



Agencies flouting their mandate: CJ

By: Terence J Sigamony, March 15, 2012,



ISLAMABAD – Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry said on Wednesday that
the intelligence agencies of the country are doing things that are beyond
their mandate.



Hearing Air Marshal (r) Asghar Khan's petition regarding distribution of
funds by the then ISI director general among the politicians in 1990
elections, the chief justice observed that this country belongs to 'all of
us' and it's protection is a collective responsibility contrary to the
thinking of some people who consider themselves exclusive guardians of the
state and think they can run the country according to their wishes.



The chief justice said there should not be any intervention of agencies in
political affairs, adding there was a need to set the guideline in this
regard. He said: "Everyday we say (to the state functionaries) run the
country in accordance with the constitution but when we see the role of
agencies we think what is (this) happening."



The chief justice asked Salman Akram Raja, counsel for Asghar Khan, to file
a petition regarding the distribution of money by IB to topple the Punjab
government in 2009 as reported in an English language daily. The CJP
inquired whether a civilian force too indulges in such practices. Raja said
the case was tip of the iceberg and for the last 65 years the nation is
facing this flouting of mandate by different state institutions. The court
issued notice to the newspaper, publisher and the reporter, who filed story
on IB distributing funds among the politicians.



Attorney General Maulvi Anwarul Haq informed the court that he had examined
the statements of Gen (r) Naseerullah Babar and Gen (r) Asad Durrani, which
they had given in-camera at SC registrar office during the hearing of the
same case in 1999. The AG stated he has no objection if the statements of
Mr Durrani and Mr Babar are declassified as all the relevant facts in the
documents are in public domain. The court said that a written order to make
the report public will be passed during the next hearing.



However, the court expressed discontentment with the attorney general for
not producing the former inquiry commission reports regarding Mehran Bank
and Habib Bank. The AG sought time, saying the law secretary did not have
the reports while the secretary interior was out of the country. On his
arrival he would check from him. Responding to which, the Supreme Court
sarcastically remarked whether the interior secretary carries the reports
in his pockets.



Salman Akram Raja said that it was the federal government's responsibility
to procure these documents as Interior Minister Rehman Malik had stated two
days ago that he has lot of documents regarding the case and if the Supreme
Court would summon him he would furnish the documents in the court. The
chief justice sought clarity from Gen (r) Durrani regarding his statement
wherein he had said he distributed the amount on his own behalf and not on
behalf of the ISI. The CJP said at that time you were holding the charge of
two agencies  MI and ISI. Durrani replied he was not MI DG then. The CJ
wondered that how could Durrani deny the involvement of the ISI given the
fact that he was holding office at the time when the money was being
distributed. Durrani told the court that there were elements outside the
ISI who were appointed for the task of distributing money. He added that he
involved some officer from ISI but not the ISI as an institution. The chief
justice remarked: "At that time you and Gen (r) Beg were sitting general,
therefore, now the burden is on both of you regarding the case".



Yunus Habib submitted an affidavit in response to the rejoinders of General
(r) Aslam Beg and Lt-Gen (r) Asad Durrani. He submitted that with all
sincerity, honesty and in order to bring the truth on record he filed an
affidavit on March 8, 2012, and there is no question of scandalising the
highest court of the country.



"I have no interest in dramatising this case and just wanted to speak truth
before this honourable court (before death) to enable and empowered the
Supreme Court to reach at correct conclusion." He stated since Air Marshal
(r) Asghar Khan filed the petition he never met any political figure till
he deposited affidavit on March 8. "Only General Mirza Aslam Beg spoke to
me in the last two years only 4 to 5 times."



"I have no interest in the politics of the country and can never think of
maligning any person and obstruct the course of justice. The photo
submitted by me in the affidavit is the proof that the former President
Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Gen (r) Aslam Beg pampered me to the extent that I
could not refuse to their orders."



"I took out Rs1,480 million from Habib Bank Ltd and not Rs1,800 as stated
by General (r) Aslam Beg." He stated as Asghar Khan petition pertains to
use of money in the 1990 election to block the victory of PPP government
therefore he restricted his disclosure of fact confined to Habib Bank Ltd
and did not touch the issue of Mehran Bank except of Rs150 million that
were paid to late Jam Sadiq for licence. "I am ready to file the affidavit
in case of Mehran Bank if a case is filed or the Supreme Court itself
orders me to submit the affidavit in this respect."



 "It is correct that I paid more than Rs3 billion. I actually have so far
paid Rs345 crores to the Habib Bank Ltd and only Rs115 crores is to be paid
to HBL, and this amount can be easily paid by selling a plot of 32 acres
situated at Gulshan-e-Iqbal Karachi." He stated that in his March 8
affidavit he submitted that Brig Hamid Saeed and Col Akbar were 'introduced
to me as ISI officers'. However, after the affidavit of Lt-Gen (r) Durrani
'I pray the court to delete the word of ISI' from my previous affidavit.



The chief justice asked Yunus Habib and Lt-Gen Asad Durrani to engage
counsels as under Article 10A the court would like to give them fair
opportunity. The chief justice ordered Yunus Habib to avoid giving
interview to TV channels. The attorney general was directed to get the
verification and attestation of Yunus Habib. The hearing was adjourned
until March 30.





Air Marshal Asghar Khan's petition finally comes up for hearing

3.03.202, Khaleej Times, news@khaleejtimes.com

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?section=international&xfile=data%2Finternational%2F2012%2Fmarch%2Finternational_march76.xml

http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2012-03-04/news/229699





After a very long wait the petition filed by Air Marshal Asghar Khan
against funds doled out by the establishment through the Inter-Services
Intelligence (ISI) to a select group of anti-Benazir Bhutto politicians in
1990 finally came up for hearing before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.



The case was, however, adjourned because of absence of certain key
witnesses amid warning by the Chief Justice that notices must be issued to
former chief of ISI Gen. Asad Durani, and former chief of Mehran Bank
Younus Habib to appear before the court in the next hearing on March 8. By
his own admission, Gen. Durrani had directly delivered the money to
individual politicians and groups including Pakistan Muslim League's Nawaz
Sharif as ordered by the "boss", meaning the then army chief Gen. Mirza
Aslam Beg. In turn Gen. Beg had named the 'chief executive' (President
Ghulam Ishaq Khan) for supervising the entire exercise. Nobody thought of
ethnical or legal violations of their secret proceedings. Its sinister
purpose was to defeat the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) under Benazir
Bhutto in the 1990 elections. A total of Rs140 million was disbursed after
Mehran Bank illegally advanced it to the ISI account. Another Rs50 million
was allegedly paid to Bangladesh's Khalida Zia to help her in polls against
Hasina Wajid's Awami League generally perceived by Pakistan's security
establishment as pro-India.



The ISI had brought together various conservative and religious parties and
groups under the banner of Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) to collectively
face the PPP. It effectively checked the Benazir tide in 1988 denying her
absolute majority. She got 92 seats against 54 by the IJI while 102 votes
were needed to form the government. In Punjab, the major battleground, the
IJI got 109 seats against 105 of the PPP while 44 were elected as
independent. President Ghulam Ishaq Khan withheld invitation to Benazir to
try to constitute a coalition until Nawaz Sharif succeeded in luring the
independents to lead the provincial government. Ishaq Khan finally
dismissed Benazir government in less than two years and ordered fresh
elections in 1990 for which financial support was provided to IJI
politicians. Apart from that, arrangement to completely demolish the PPP
was tightened by establishing an election cell in the Presidency under Gen.
Rifaqat. Benazir could get only a limited number of seats from Sindh and
helplessly declared that the elections were massively "stolen". It is a
shameful chapter in country's history in which the 'troika' of President,
prime minister and army chief joined hands to secure desired results
through brazenly dubious means. Gen. Durrani and Gen. Beg acted in direct
contravention of their oath and willingly obeyed illegal orders.



Asghar Khan filed a petition against the illegal disbursement of funds to
the IJI politicians. Gen. Durrani in his testimony gave details of amounts
given to each leader. The court reserved further action after recording
initial evidence. The resurrection of the case has vindicated Supreme
Court's credentials as a neutral and independent entity not leaning against
or towards any party. The court is unlikely to punish anybody but would
once again expose the interference of security establishment in political
matters in violation of the constitution. Imran, who has pressed for
revival of the case, apparently wants to retaliate against PML-N for its
campaign against him that he is being propped up by the ISI. The case will
instead expose Sharif and his allies for receiving money from agencies. It
will also show to the nation how the establishment operates to ensure that
political system does not stabilise.



Former ISI chief Gen. Hamid Gul unabashedly takes credit for fathering the
IJI in 1988 to stem Benazir's tide. "She would have swept the polls," he
once admitted. A weak coalition under Benazir became an easy prey for Ishaq
Khan to be sent home packing within less than two years. The decade of
1990s saw similarly fragile arrangements alternating after every two years
and being dispensed with by the president in collaboration with the army
chief. Democracy was thus not allowed to take firm roots and was given bad
name for incompetence and corruption.



The Supreme Court has been persistently dared and even criticised by the
PPP for reluctance to take up the petition because it targets the security
agencies and their once favourite politician Nawaz Sharif. Imran recently
moved the court to revive the hearing. Theoretically such a hearing has
only a historical importance and provides an opportunity for exposing
Shairf. But the recourse to past history only diverts attention from real
issues confronting the people.



Winston Churchill had once warned politicians: "I consider that it will be
found much better by all parties to leave the past to history, especially
as I propose to write that history myself." While Imran will be able to
avenge the 'campaign of vilification' launched against him by Nawaz
Sharif's PML-N that he is being propelled by the ISI, the PPP shall have
the opportunity to expose Sharif who continues to target Asif Ali Zardari
for his alleged corruption. However, if, beyond these short-term gains, the
case serves a higher purpose of ensuring cleaner and untainted politics in
the future, the hearing of Asghar Khan's petition would promote a noble
objective.






On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:

> **
>
>
> *ISI paid Rs50 million to Khalida Zia to help her in polls against Hasina
> Wajid*
>
>
>
>
> http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?section=international&xfile=data%2Finternational%2F2012%2Fmarch%2Finternational_march76.xml
>
> http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2012-03-04/news/229699
>
>


 "Bangaleera Sustha thakon, nirapade thakon ebong valo thakon"

Shuvechhante,

*Engr. Shafiqur  Rahman Anu
*
*Senior Network Engineer*
Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
GSM:  +968 96391648, +968 920820548

N.B.: If any one is offended by content of this e-mail, please ignore &
delete this e-mail. I also request you to inform me by an e- mail - to
delete your name from my contact list.



--
_________________
Numan Azmi
Stockport, England
0790 891 8583




__._,_.___


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

__,_._,___