Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

[ALOCHONA] Bangabandhu's ideals no longer exist in Awami League



Bangabandhu's ideals no longer exist in Awami League

--Noor-e-Alam Siddiqui

Noor-e-Alam Siddiqui was one of the main organisers of the independence struggle and also one of the four 'khalifas' in Bangladesh's politics. He is also the Convenor of the Chhatra League Foundation. This veteran Awami Leaguer speaks to PROBE about the prevailing political scenario, the economy, the state, Awami League's present leadership and more.

Interviewed by ANWAR PARVEZ HALIM

Does Chhatra League Foundation have any link with Awami League? And how much faith do you have in Awami League's politics today?

Let me make it very clear that we have no links whatsoever with the present Awami League. Chhatra League Foundation is a socio-economic organisation. There are two main causes behind the present predicament of Chhatra League. One is that they have no ideology to follow. There are no political programmes. They have no scope to expand their vision. The second is that the sole function of the student body is now to please the netri (leader).

One of the main objectives of founding Chhatra League Foundation is to highlight the glorious past of this now dilapidated Chhatra League. We want to point out to Chhatra League that they are not any subservient organisation. It is a shame that they bow down in subservience. We want to tell them to give up this politics of processions and work to build up the organisation solidly. That is why we want to look into the past of Chhatra League and give recognition to the contributions made by its past leaders. This organisation is not centred on any person; it is against any one individual being kept in focus.

You say you have nothing to do with the party Awami League and yet you want to apprise Chhatra League of its history. Chhatra League is a part of Awami League, so how do you distance yourself?

Our relationship with the present Awami League is such -- we feel that the former Chhatra League inherited Bangabandhu's ideals. Awami League today is bereft of Bangabandhu's ideology. That is why we criticize Awami League, sternly and constructively. We want it to come back to its past glory.

Does the present leadership accept your criticism easily?

Not at all, it views us extremely negatively. Bangabandhu would take everyone's views into cognizance before taking any decision and we would follow his directives obediently. I want to remind those who criticise us today that when BKSAL was formed, it was I who stood before Bangabandhu and  delivered a 2 hour 55 minute speech opposing BKSAL. Now politics is in shambles, entangled in self-centred power games, exerting control over the parliament, the Constitution and the state. That is why it was so easy to divide the 400-year-old city of Dhaka within four minutes. Not a single lawmaker protested. Awami League has lost its past tradition and ideology. It is now all centred on one person.

Mahmudur Rahman Manna is a member of Chhatra League Foundation and is ready to contest as Mayor of Dhaka. Will the Foundation give him their support?

Manna is a very important member of Chhatra League Foundation. He says he will contest under the Nagorik Samaj banner. The Foundation hasn't taken any decision as yet in this regard. We will not take this election as an election for the Foundation, but he will have our moral support.

How would you evaluate the present government in its running of the country?

There are both successes and failures. In the case of the economy, the government has been an absolute failure. They have failed to fulfill a fraction of their commitments in this regard. The share market scam is another shameful event, with 26 thousand crore taka being looted from the market, leaving 33 lac people penniless. Ibrahim Khaled presented his inquiry report in this regard, yet the Finance Minister shamelessly refused to make the report public because, he said, many of the accused were "influential persons". The Finance Minister should have resigned if he had an iota of ethics.

The opposition has held long marches and a grand rally with one demand -- the caretaker government system. Yet they had no protests about the share market scandal, the economic crisis, Tipaimukh Dam, Teesta water sharing, etc. It is as if the leaders of the two major parties have only one agenda each -- one is for the trial of the war criminals and the other is for the caretaker government.

The opposition won't go to the House, yet they will draw their salaries and allowances. The parliament isn't Awami League's sole property. They are the majority in parliament and poke BNP when they come to the House, but that should not deter BNP. We spent our entire youth in jail. In 1973 Ataur Rahman attended the House as the opposition with only nine members in the opposition bench. So why can't Khaleda Zia join the House with 28 members?

You speak of the government failure in the economic sector. Where does the problem lie -- in coordination, inexperience, or elsewhere?

Politically speaking, the Prime Minister holds so much power that it has become absolute power. Therein lies the problem. There is no practice of democracy within the party. It is the same in the opposition camp. No one has the guts to say, Madam, we should go to parliament. There is no longer any place in politics for sacrifice, suffering, ethics, wisdom, tradition or honesty. The only yardstick is loyalty to the leader and that is all.

I can guarantee you that if today a consensus is reached in parliament about Tipaimukh Dam or Teesta, at least 60 to 70% of the democracy-loving people of India will take to the streets in our support. In parliament the two main leaders castigate each other, but fail to reach a consensus of matters of national interest. I don't blame Awami League alone for this; this is our national weakness, a lack of national spirit.

BNP is not the only one demanding a caretaker government system. Other than the mahajote (grand alliance), there are many quarters demanding that the caretaker system be restored. Do you think a credible election can be held if the government does not acquiesce to this demand?

The caretaker government system was Awami League's own achievement. I do not understand why they are ignoring this now, pushing it out of the way, They are using the court verdict as an excuse, but the full-fledged verdict hasn't been announced as yet. I am no soothsayer, but I have been in politics since 1962. It is very clear that if the caretaker government system is not put in place, it is unlikely any election will take place, credible or not.

Given the unrest that prevails in the political arena at present, what do you think lies in the future of politics in the country?

We are proceeding towards a serious crisis. The extent of intolerance, vengeance and hatred that exists in our politics, is almost unprecedented.

Do you all offer advice to the Awami League leadership ever?

The Awami League leadership won't even look at my shadow, let alone take our advice! I have a very clear economic and social stand. If I sit with the leader, I will be very blunt with her. She is not an ignorant leader. She has politics in her blood. But none of the people who surround her have risen from Awami League politics.

There are many unresolved issues with India, such as the Tipaimukh Dam, the sharing of Teesta waters, transit and more. Many feel that this is due to the subservient nature of this government.

I wouldn't use the term 'subservient'. Politics is a game of strategy. It is a game of diplomacy. We have diplomatic failure. For example, we are jumping in joy over the verdict concerning our maritime boundary conflict with Burma. Dipu Moni has said, "We have got more than we claimed!" Does that imply that we wanted less than what was our due? Hypothetically speaking, if I own a three-bigha strip of land, will I ask for two bighas? That would be my lacking. The fact of the matter is that the government had no idea of our legal maritime boundary. It is downright silly to think any country will give us more than what is rightfully ours.

How far does our foreign policy uphold our national interests?

We don't have to be on par with the US, China or Russia when  it comes to our foreign policy. Our foreign policy should focus on how we can benefit economically, how we can become self-reliant.

The Saudi government has a plan to bring the entire Saudi Arabia under a railway network. They are going to recruit 300,000 workers for the purpose. India is so expert diplomatically, they have already sent 100 thousand labourers there. We haven't managed to send a single worker for the purpose. We are the second largest Muslim country in the world, but the government has failed to use this to our advantage. We are having to send our readymade garments to the US with a 16.5% tax. Yet 22 countries including Vietnam have a tax-free quota. We have failed to get this. So how can we say our foreign policy is successful in any way?

How would you explain the government's stand concerning Dr. Muhammed Yunus?

I do not know him, never even had a cup of tea with him. However, he is our Nobel Laureate. He is our pride. He has brought honour to our country. He won the Nobel Prize as the founder of micro-credit. It is an open secret that none one can win the Nobel Prize without the US' blessings, but should Prof. Yunus be treated so shabbily? I read in the papers that Hilary Clinton personally phoned the Prime Minister and requested her not to interfere with Prof. Yunus. I feel the government has displayed a marked lack of farsightedness in this regard. The government has termed Yunus as 'corrupt', but what does that imply. If the Nobel Laureate of a country is corrupt, what does that speak about the rest of the people?

Even today [April 1] US Ambassador Mozena remarked, "Why will Americans come to invest here if the political situation is not stable?" What about us, the local businessmen and industrialists? It is as if we are facing a famine. We don't get gas for eight hours in our factories, we don't get electricity. How can we have production? So if we don't have confidence, how can we expect foreign investors to have confidence here? Mozena was quite correct in asking why investors should come to invest here.

http://www.probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=7908



__._,_.___


[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: Suranjit loves talking: About Tk 1cr seized from his APS, returned later



More here:



http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=229854

http://www.amadershomoy2.com/content/2012/04/11/news0884.htm


http://www.samakal.com.bd/details.php?news=13&action=main&option=single&news_id=251304&pub_no=1020

http://banglanews24.com/detailsnews.php?nssl=18e53190c184ed3623d9809dd087ccc3&nttl=11042012103219

http://www.dailykalerkantho.com/?view=details&type=gold&data=Hotel&pub_no=849&cat_id=1&menu_id=13&news_type_id=1&index=0





__._,_.___


[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] PM's speech on Shadhinota Dibosh....



PM's speech on Shadhinota Dibosh....


Also read the comments at the bottom of the page.


http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2012-03-28/news/236016



__._,_.___


[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] Where did money to open banks come?'



Where did money to open banks come?'
 
The BNP on Monday questioned the source of money required to open six new banks that the government approved a day before.

The government gave the go-ahead to six new banks to please the people tied to the ruling Awami League and its allies, said acting secretary general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir at a news conference at its headquarters to give the party's official reaction.

"Establishment of each bank requires security money of Tk 400 crore. Our question is how the owners have earned such a big amount of money only in three years since the government assumed power," Fakhrul added.
He said the decision discounted apprehensions of economists that allowing new banks would not be wise for the endangered economy.

There was widespread criticism that political pressure was at play for driving the decision. On one occasion, finance minister Abul Maal Abdul Muhith himself had said that issuing licences for the new banks was a political will of the government.

The central bank, however, has been refuting the allegation of political consideration as it gave nod on the condition that the security money must be 'white money.'Union Bank, Midland Bank, Madhumoti Bank, Farmers Bank, South Bangla Agriculture and Commerce Bank and Meghna Bank are to open.

It was reported that Jatiya Party chairman Hussein Muhammad Ershad has connection with Union Bank. Shahidul Alam is the chairman of the bank. Gholam Mosi, who was international affairs secretary of Jatiya Party, was named as one of the sponsors of the bank.

Awami League MP Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir is the chairman of the Farmers bank. Prime minister Sheikh Hasina's income tax adviser M Moniruzzaman Khandaker proposed the Midland Bank.SM Amzad Hossain is the chairman of South Bangla Agriculture and Commerce Bank, which also includes Dhaka University teacher and Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee chairman Abdul Mannan Chowdhury as one of the sponsors.AL MP HN Ashikur Rahman is the chairman of Meghna Bank while another AL MP Nasrul Hamid is one of the directors.

Rampal power plant

Fakhrul also demanded that the power plant to be established at Rampal adjacent to the Sundarbans be relocated.A joint initiative of India-Bangladesh, the coal-based power plant already received environmental clearance despite claim by environmentalists that the plant would deal a major blow to the world's largest mangrove forest.

http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=222089&cid=3


__._,_.___


[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] Fw: Maulana Moududi was against Jinnah's Pakistan --- “It is haraam to vote for the Muslim League.” he declared ....



For these comments, and not for anything else, Maulana Maududi desrves my support.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Muhammad Ali <man1k195709@yahoo.com> wrote:
 


----- Forwarded Message -----
From: SyedAslam <syed.aslam3@gmail.com>
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:43 PM
Subject: Maulana Moududi was against Jinnah's Pakistan --- "It is haraam to vote for the Muslim League." he declared ....

Although majority of the Muslims supported Pakistan, Maulana Maududi was against Jinnah's Pakistan.
Here are some of his comments:

THE WORDS OF MAULANA MAUDUDI:
1. "The establishment and birth of Pakistan is equivalent to the birth of a beast."
2. "Muhammad Ali Jinnah's place is not on the throne of leadership. He deserves to face trial as a traitor."
3. "There were three actors in the partition of India. Muhammad Ali Jinnah's performance proved to be most unsuccessful."
4. "It is haraam to vote for the Muslim League."
5. "Muhammad Ali Jinnah is the founder of fool's paradise." 6. "Pakistan is a fool's paradise and an infidel state of Muslims."
7. "Pakistan is filled with millions of robbers, thieves, murderers, adulterers and uncouth wrongdoers."
8. "An election campaign is a race of hounds."
9. "The Muslim League is an unrighteous and immoral party that has made our collective environment filthier than the lavatory."
10. "The Mohajirs are deserters and cowards, who fought a national battle, but when the time came to pay the price, they took the path of escape." (Bin Ismail, a PTH visitor)
Source:

The Two Faces of Maududi



On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 10:07 PM, <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
This is all evil l brain waves. In 1947 at least 95 percent Muslims in the sub-continent supported Pakistan. I can say about my place in Netrokona in Bengal. I did not find a single Muslim against Pakistan.Whereever referendum was held ( in Frontier province and in Sylhet), Muslims overwhelmingly voted for Pakistan then.
History should not be distorted  by Mr Mannan or Turkman..Even Congress never made such claim.
 
Shah Abdul Hannan
 

From: khabor@yahoogroups.com [mailto:khabor@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Turkman
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:18 AM
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [KHABOR] 25% Moslim had wanted Pakistan
 
 
You are one of the very few Moslims on Internet in my last 12 years on Internet, who have thanked me after I have provided References. Normally, what I write is disputed and even after I provide References what I wrote is not believed.
Subject is switched to ignore my point and I am ridiculed. declared an Enemy of Moslims, Islam and Pakistan just for quoting Facts.
I am feel very happy, when I find people like you, who believe in facts instead of Fictions that they have been brainwashed with since their birth. Thank you.
---------

> > --- In khabor@yahoogroups.com, Abdul Mannan <abman1971@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Would appreciate if you could give the source of data.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:28 AM, S Turkman <turkman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 25% of population of Moslims of British India of 1947 including former
> > > > Afghanistan's Provinces of NWF Province and Baluchistan had actually
> > > > approved of Pakistan. Following is the Statistical Data October, 1947
> > to
> > > > prove it.
> > > > .
> > > > * 1941 Moslim Population in Sub Continent India from Iran to Assam
> > 79.4 million (Ref: British India Census Bureau)
> > > > 1. 1947 Population of British India including Baluchistan and NWFP :
> > ...
> > > > 377.5 million. (Ref: Population Estimate of Census Bureau of
> > Government of British India)
> > > > 2. Moslim Population: ... 26% or 97 million (Ref: Population Estimate
> > of Census Bureau of Government of British India)
> >
> > > > 3. 1947 Population of Punjab, Baluchistan, Bahalwalpur, NWFP, Northern
> > > > Territories, Gwadur (Oman's Colony) and other few small states in
> > Punjab
> > > > that had wanted nothing to do with Pakistan: ... 7.1 million.(Ref: 1.
> > Published News in Newspapers of those days in the Sub Continent. 2.
> > Estimate of Census Bureau of Government of British India. 3. Punjab
> > Assemby's Resolution rejecting Pakistan. 4. Statements of Nawabs of
> > Bahawalpur, Baluchistan, Northern Territories etc after creation of
> > Pakistan was proposed published in newspapers of India of those days)
> >
> > > > 4. 1947 Population of Pakistan excluding the 7.1 million: ... 25.4
> > million
> > > > or 25% (Ref: Population Estimate of Census Bureau of Government of
> > British India)
> > > > 5. 1947 Population of Pakistan including Punjab: ... 27 million.
> > (Simple Mathematical Calculation)
> > > > 6. 1947 Population of East Pakistan: ... 18.6 million or 69% of
> > Pakistan. (Ref: Simple Math based on Population Estimate of Census Bureau
> > of Government of British India)
> >
> > > > 7. 1949 Population of Pakistan including what Pakistan has now minus
> > > > Gwadur: ... 32.7 million. (East Pakistan 57% of total).. (Simple Math)
> >
> > > > .
> > > > So, even when Pakistan usurped free independent states, Northern
> > > > Territories, Baluchistan and NWFP her population was 33.7% of
> > population of
> > > > Moslims of British India from Iran to Assam. It proves, 2/3rd of
> > Moslims of
> > > > the Sub Continent, Baluchistan, NWFP and Northern Territories had
> > rejected
> > > > Pakistan by not emigrating to it and had preferred to remain in India.
> > > > .
> > > > * Indian Population (3used to be 11 times that of Pakistan of 1949
> > (Ref: simple math) but
> >
> > > > Population Growth Rate of Pakistan and Bangladesh went a lot higher
> > than
> > > > India's so, now combined population of Pakistan and Bangladesh is
> > about 29%
> > > > of India's. (simple math)
> >
> > > > * Population Growth Rate of Moslims in India has declined more than
> > that
> > > > of Hindus.
> > > > * From Iran to Assam 26% of Population used to be Moslim, now its 28%.
> > (1. Add population of Pakistan, Bangladesh. 2. Substract Non Moslim
> > Population and 3. Add population of Moslims in India. 4. And then get its
> > ratio from combined population of the 3 countries)
> > > > * If India was not divided, her total Population would have been a lot
> > > > more than China's 1.32 billion. It would have left China behind long
> > time
> > > > ago because in 2011 it would have been 1.65 billion or 23.6% of World
> > > > Population. (I did my Math again. I am wrong it should have been 1.52
> > billion. Sorry)
> > > > .
> > > > S U Turkman
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > _________________________________
> > > Abdul Mannan
> > > Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
> > > Dhaka
> > > Bangladesh
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________
> Abdul Mannan
> Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
> Dhaka
> Bangladesh
>






__._,_.___


****************************************************
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: Demand for the Blasphemy Law



Do a little search, Ms. Majid.  Blasphemy law was declared unconstitutional in the U. S. A.  about hundred years ago and in the U. K. it has been repealed recently.  It was I to point out first that Islam doesn't have anything to support it in scripture.  But practical Islam is a different thing.  Before calling me a communalist, look at yourself in the mirror. Didn't you go on debate with Mr. Ali Sina to prove that the 'Holy Quran' is a revealed material, an uncreated word of God.  With such ardent faith, what could you be other than a devout communalist.  Look at your own brain chamber and see how much of it is really empty.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:
 

         Where do  Communalists keep their brain? Not up there, for sure, but down, somewhere in the region of their knees. That's why response to any issue resembles a proverbial knee-jerk.

           Islam is a 'weak' faith according to Kamal Das, therefore it has blasphemy laws.  But the West has stronger religions, so, by his blind faith in the West he assumes, there is no Blasphemy law in the West. Not true.

        Blasphemy in the Biblical language (both in the Christian and Jewish Bible) is not quite the same as the Qur'anic Arabic of 'kufr'. 
The concept of kufr is complex, and the sin of committing kufr also entails hiding the truth for malevolent purposes, which our Jamaati brothers are constantly engaged in. In addition to being kafirs, they are munafiqs or hypocrites, a sin of greater degree of breach of moral duty in the Qur'an.

       Blasphemy laws exists in the books in the USA, and in the UK the old archaic laws have been retained despite many public demands to repeal them. Their enforcement has become extremely rare now.  But that was not the case in earlier centuries.

       In Pakistan the law was included in the post- Ziaul Huq days, and was revived in 1986. The Pakistani judiciary should be praised for not enforcing it frequently.  But things have changed politically recently. A liberal-minded Governor of Punjab was assassinated last year by his body-guard for protecting a "blasphemer", and the murderer was hailed with rose petals by the crowd. This murderer is still not convicted by the Court.

             The fact is, there is no Blasphemy law in Bangladesh.  Although S A Hannan & Co. and their marauding jamaati goondas would like to see one in the books.
               
Blasphemy has been a crime in many religions and cultures, wherever there is something sacred to protect. Socrates was prosecuted for blasphemy, and Mosaic law prescribed death for cursing the name of God. Jesus was tried for blasphemy, while Christians regarded the action of the Jews in trying him as itself blasphemous.


Secular modern states often retain blasphemy laws, but they are infrequently enforced. In the United States, state blasphemy laws remain on the books, but the Supreme Court's expansive interpretation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution makes it likely that any blasphemy prosecution would now be regarded as an impermissible establishment of religion.



In countries governed under Islamic law, the concept of blasphemy is broad, embracing many kinds of disrespect or denial of religion; the condemnation (1988) of the author Salman Rushdie by Iranian clerics is a recent example of theocratic action.
[Needless to say, the Rushdie Fatwa by the Iranian Ayatollah was thick with politics.  -FM]



                Farida Majid

To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
From: kamalctgu@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 09:09:08 +0600

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: Demand for the Blasphemy Law

 
"Why followers of Islamic faith are so paranoid about criticism of their religious figurehead?  Can someone explain this phenomenon in the believers of Islam?"

Because their fragile house would fall apart.  That's why.  U.SA. declared it unconstitutional.  Even GB has done away with it.  Now the 'highly educated' people like Hannan wants it. 

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 


There are so many religions on earth, and most people believe in some sort of religion. As far as I know – Hinduism does not have any blasphemy law, but Islam, Christianity, and Judaism do have provision for blasphemy law. The tolerance levels of blasphemous acts in all those three religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) vary widely. The most tolerant among those three are believers of Christianity, and least tolerant ones are the believers of Islam. They cannot even tolerate a mild criticism of their religion or their religious figureheads. They are ready to bring hell on earth for criticism of prophet.  Believers in other two religions (Christianity and Judaism) do not have such touchy feelings about their religious figures. Why followers of Islamic faith are so paranoid about criticism of their religious figurehead?  Can someone explain this phenomenon in the believers of Islam?

Jiten Roy
 
 

--- On Sun, 4/8/12, qar <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:

From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: Demand for the Blasphemy Law
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, April 8, 2012, 9:14 AM


 
Just want to add my two cents on this topic.

The main reason of our people becoming violent over petty issues is WE do not feel we have a country that respects law of the land. I see students closing national highways or calling for strike to get basic services from our governments. Here I am not criticizing our current government only rather talking about how our leading political parties (And government institution/bureaucracy) works. Until laborers in garment industries breaks few buses or obstructs major highways, they do not even get salaries regularly in many cases.

Therefore, it is easy for some of us to point finger at some people who are violent but without knowing WHY they are acting this way will not cease violence in our country. Last forty years many leaders had chances to establish rule of law in various institutions but they chose to tear down dignity of those institutions or fill them up with political workers instead (Most of the time dumb asses who only know to say yes sir or yes madam). So from judicial department, utilities departments, public universities, government owned factories etc are filled with people (Most but not all) who are incapable to do their duties. Gradually people do not even expect these institutions to protect them or be at their services. Rather they are afraid of police, WASA, Dhaka university etc and people who work in them.

Violence against alleged "Blasphemy" should not be blamed on those misguided people only. Rather all establishments who failed to do their BASIC duties. Sadly this is not the first time we witness this. (I am afraid) until we make fundamental changes this will not be the last incident either. Blaming so called "Fundamentalists" is easy and convenient (Guess Jamat-e-Islami is under radar for various ego-political reasons) but they are NOT the ONLY cause behind it. I have seen many political leaders of so called "Secular" parties abusing Hindus and Islam when it is convenient.

Now comes to "Idea" of freedom of speech. I strongly support the concept of free speech BUT I am afraid most of my countrymen do NOT understand it. For example, if I pick on a specific member of this forum and say this person stole money from me, he/she will have some options about responding to it. One possible option is to provide information and proof showing it is just a slander but not true. Another option is to expose me as a compulsive lair. Another possible option is to suit me in court of law for slander and libel.

Freedom of speech means sharing "AUTHENTIC" information or criticizing any person/institution based on FACTS. Lies, slander, libel is NOT part of the concept of "Free speech". 

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) left this world more than 1400 years ago. He is not there to defend his good name against lies, slander or libel. Therefore many Muslims feels strongly (Myself included) we have to do something to get those facts straight. However different people reacts differently to some of these "Hate campaigns". I prefer to provide authentic information to replace lies and hate campaigns, others protest it peacefully. Some of them do not have confidence that symbolic protests will stop these abuses, so they resort to violence. Islam is similar to other religions but also unique in some ways. Our love for our prophet is deeper than most ties we have in this material world, so this "Unique" bond leads SOME of us to protect the good name like we would protect the good names of our mothers or motherland.

I know non-Muslims or non-practicing Muslims do not understand this as it is an unique "Living relationship" and "Living LOVE" we have for the man who was described as "Mercy to the worlds". Those who studied his life dispassionately knows true nature of prophet of mercy (May peace and blessings be unto him). I think it is obscene to attack person (With falsehood) who died 1400 years ago.

Therefore, it is not "Practical" to expect we are not going to react to slanders and libels against our noble prophet (PBUH). Thankfully most people do tolerate abuses against a great man like prophet Muhammad (PBUH) but in this large community there are people who are less effective to control their emotions. So we see violence.

A true tolerant community needs a strong court system and law enforcement institutions (That is easily accessible) to protect "Tolerant nature" of that community.
Just like countries need to have srong army to protect peace. So NOT only Hindus pay the price, many more powerless Muslims, Chrsitians, tribal people ALSO face oppression in this "Golden Bengal" of ours.

I am encouraged by criticism of Islam or prophet Muhammad (PBUH) by non-Muslim Zionist scholars like Bernard Lewis who probably knows more about Islam than 99% of Muslim population. I have followed some of his works and he is well known for criticizing Muslims. But I have not seen him spreading blunt lies against Islam or Muhammad (PBUH). I do not agree with some of his "Interpretations" but that is "Free speech". So I do not have to agree with him (Albeit I respect his scholarship) in everything.

At the same time, I do not respect well known hate mongers against Islam and Muslims. That is not intolerance but supporting truth and justice. 

That is why I wrote in my last post that, until we become united to invest in our institutions (last two decades political parties were reluctant to make any fundamental changes to our colonial style institutions) people of all religion will suffer. I bet you anything, you will find MANY incidents of Muslims facing similar oppressions in this country for being in the wrong place in the wrong time every year.


It is WRONG to teach people that freedom of speech means you can spread lies about great people. Just a reminder, many countries all over the world (Including ours) made it illegal to criticize founding fathers of those countries. Why do you think it is OK to spread hateful lies against one of the greatest men who ever lived?

I am not making the last claim out of my faith only. I have studied his life (Yes critically as well) enough to know he was truly a messenger of mercy. I have been studying works of well known atheist Aroz Ali Matubbar for a while and amazingly his complaints were not against Islam in most parts but he detested how we practice Islam. I think I said similar things in this forum plenty of times. Aroz Ali even distributed his property according to Islamic philosophy!!

Sadly people without proper education in theology makes absurd comments about religious figures and even lesser educated people lead the wave of protest (Sometimes violent protest) against it. If we successfully build strong institutions, we'll see a more tolerant and liberal country in Bangladesh.

Lastly my humble request if you wish to "Respond" to this post, please read it one more time first......

Shalom!!  




-----Original Message-----
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 7:13 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: Demand for the Blasphemy Law

 
My sincere question to Mr. Hannan: who creates the turmoil? Who instigates them? 
I was a student of DU when Daud Haider wrote a so called blasphemous poem that was published in the daily Sanbad. The Sanbad office was burnt down. Daud Haider was allowed a safe passage out of the country. His village home was burnt down though. There was a big demonstration. We were on the sidelines. I got an opportunity to read the poem thanks to one of senior Muslim students. He was a religious person. But he enjoyed the poem and reading it again and again. The poet has not spared any prophet. Krishna, Buddha, and Jesus were included. My friend was saying to us,"Why did the mollas do that? Simply by writing a poem a poet cannot do any harm to a religion. But the way the way mollas reacted put shame on us. " 
10-15 years I met Daud Haider in one of my Muslim friends' house. I asked him,"Do you repent for having written that poem?" with a firm voice he answered,"No." Age has not changed his conviction. I don't know if my senior friend Siraj bhai has changed. But I still believe what he said: the mollas overreacted for nothing. 
Now I understand that it was all politics against secularism and general students and common people were only tools and tool men were the instigators. 



Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 7, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:

 
What Mr. Hannan feels is simply that these 'religious people' are to vulnerable to criticism though they are free to criticize those who don't subscribe to their religions.  These 'religious personalities' have long enjoyed special privileges.  It is against human right to protect a certain group of people who nurture and propagate wrong concepts about the Universe and live like parasites in the name of religion.

On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 5:14 PM, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
Dear Mr.  Jiten and others,
My best regards. Human logic differs. I sincerely feel that attack on religious personalities ( particularly on Prophets or founders of all religion) create turmoil and this should be handled by a law stipulating deterrent punishment's far as I know there is blasphemy law in some form in some western countries. Even our penal code does not allow insulting religion or their Prophets or founders. Only thing is punishment is low and it is not applied. I only propose that punishment should be stern and in such cases government should file case as they do in case of murder.
Shah Abdul Hannan
 

From: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jiten Roy
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012 8:24 AM
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [mukto-mona] Fw: Demand for the Blasphemy Law
 
 
When I hear demand for a law to protect the integrity of the God (or His messenger) from highly educated people, like Mr. S. A. Hannan, I keep wondering where their logical thinking abilities are. Don't they understand that, by asking for such a law, they are, in fact, questioning the almightiness of the God? This is not such a complicated logic. Is it?
 
If it comes from an uneducated religious person, I could understand but, mere fact that, such thought can emanate from highly educated people also - really puzzles me.   
 
In my view – there is only one reason for the Blasphemy Law, and that is to block all criticisms of the subject. You do so when you are not confident about the integrity of the subject, and you are afraid that it will not withstand criticisms. If your faith is genuine, it should withstand all criticisms. Where am I going wrong?

Jiten Roy

--- On Fri, 4/6/12, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 


--- On Fri, 4/6/12, 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

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] 25% Moslim had wanted Pakistan--This is all evil l brain waves and distortion of history



Mr. Hannan, when he says that 95% of subcontinental Muslims wanted Pakistan in 1947, conveniently forgets the fact that even his leader Maulana Maududi didn't want it, the people of Baluchistan and Peshwar didn't want it, the Deoband school didn't want it, and the list is really endless.  This spokesman of Jamaat, Mr. Hannan, may distort history at will, but facts would remain facts.  I would suggest him to read Wali Khan's 'Facts are Facts' on the subject.

In fact, it would have been wiser for Mr. Hannan to accompany Bacchu Rajaker to wherever he went.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Captain Chowdhury <captchowdhury@yahoo.ca> wrote:
 

Unfortunate, Netrokhona/Mohanganj/adajacent areas was Hindu dominated places and gradually become worst !!
Due comunal disturbances,most of them concentrated in Nethrokona town now.
How-ever, remote areas in Kolmakando/close to Tanguar Haur (one of the remarkable Lake), still have poor minorities, vast paddy field  
and sweet fishing zone.
Trust people will refrain from destroying communal harmony within that area!
Khulna/Jessore: Massive destruction in the past with silent exodus of minorities !!
 
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
Dear sir,
I regret. How this mistake crept in I  am unable to recollect. I am sincerely sorry on the point you have mentioned. I have corrected it.
Sincerely,
 
Shah Abdul Hannan
 
From: khabor@yahoogroups.com [mailto:khabor@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Abdul Mannan
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:30 AM
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [KHABOR] 25% Moslim had wanted Pakistan--This is all evil l brain waves and distortion of history
 
 
Hannan Sb. Some people say you are a man of honour. I was surprised to see my name dragged into your comment. Did I agree or disagree with Mr. Turkman in any way? I asked for the references from the author. If I write on on the issue I will hopefully answer to your comments. Please do not mislead people. Netrokona is not India.

Warm wishes and regards.

M
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:07 AM, <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
 
This is all evil l brain waves. In 1947 at least 95 percent Muslims in the sub-continent supported Pakistan. I can say about my place in Netrokona in Bengal. I did not find a single Muslim against Pakistan.Whereever referendum was held ( in Frontier province and in Sylhet), Muslims overwhelmingly voted for Pakistan then.
History should not be distorted  by Mr Turkman..Even Congress never made such claim.
 
Shah Abdul Hannan
 
From: khabor@yahoogroups.com [mailto:khabor@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Turkman
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:18 AM
To: khabor@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [KHABOR] 25% Moslim had wanted Pakistan
 
 
You are one of the very few Moslims on Internet in my last 12 years on Internet, who have thanked me after I have provided References. Normally, what I write is disputed and even after I provide References what I wrote is not believed.
Subject is switched to ignore my point and I am ridiculed. declared an Enemy of Moslims, Islam and Pakistan just for quoting Facts.
I am feel very happy, when I find people like you, who believe in facts instead of Fictions that they have been brainwashed with since their birth. Thank you.
---------

> > --- In khabor@yahoogroups.com, Abdul Mannan <abman1971@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Would appreciate if you could give the source of data.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:28 AM, S Turkman <turkman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 25% of population of Moslims of British India of 1947 including former
> > > > Afghanistan's Provinces of NWF Province and Baluchistan had actually
> > > > approved of Pakistan. Following is the Statistical Data October, 1947
> > to
> > > > prove it.
> > > > .
> > > > * 1941 Moslim Population in Sub Continent India from Iran to Assam
> > 79.4 million (Ref: British India Census Bureau)
> > > > 1. 1947 Population of British India including Baluchistan and NWFP :
> > ...
> > > > 377.5 million. (Ref: Population Estimate of Census Bureau of
> > Government of British India)
> > > > 2. Moslim Population: ... 26% or 97 million (Ref: Population Estimate
> > of Census Bureau of Government of British India)
> >
> > > > 3. 1947 Population of Punjab, Baluchistan, Bahalwalpur, NWFP, Northern
> > > > Territories, Gwadur (Oman's Colony) and other few small states in
> > Punjab
> > > > that had wanted nothing to do with Pakistan: ... 7.1 million.(Ref: 1.
> > Published News in Newspapers of those days in the Sub Continent. 2.
> > Estimate of Census Bureau of Government of British India. 3. Punjab
> > Assemby's Resolution rejecting Pakistan. 4. Statements of Nawabs of
> > Bahawalpur, Baluchistan, Northern Territories etc after creation of
> > Pakistan was proposed published in newspapers of India of those days)
> >
> > > > 4. 1947 Population of Pakistan excluding the 7.1 million: ... 25.4
> > million
> > > > or 25% (Ref: Population Estimate of Census Bureau of Government of
> > British India)
> > > > 5. 1947 Population of Pakistan including Punjab: ... 27 million.
> > (Simple Mathematical Calculation)
> > > > 6. 1947 Population of East Pakistan: ... 18.6 million or 69% of
> > Pakistan. (Ref: Simple Math based on Population Estimate of Census Bureau
> > of Government of British India)
> >
> > > > 7. 1949 Population of Pakistan including what Pakistan has now minus
> > > > Gwadur: ... 32.7 million. (East Pakistan 57% of total).. (Simple Math)
> >
> > > > .
> > > > So, even when Pakistan usurped free independent states, Northern
> > > > Territories, Baluchistan and NWFP her population was 33.7% of
> > population of
> > > > Moslims of British India from Iran to Assam. It proves, 2/3rd of
> > Moslims of
> > > > the Sub Continent, Baluchistan, NWFP and Northern Territories had
> > rejected
> > > > Pakistan by not emigrating to it and had preferred to remain in India.
> > > > .
> > > > * Indian Population (3used to be 11 times that of Pakistan of 1949
> > (Ref: simple math) but
> >
> > > > Population Growth Rate of Pakistan and Bangladesh went a lot higher
> > than
> > > > India's so, now combined population of Pakistan and Bangladesh is
> > about 29%
> > > > of India's. (simple math)
> >
> > > > * Population Growth Rate of Moslims in India has declined more than
> > that
> > > > of Hindus.
> > > > * From Iran to Assam 26% of Population used to be Moslim, now its 28%.
> > (1. Add population of Pakistan, Bangladesh. 2. Substract Non Moslim
> > Population and 3. Add population of Moslims in India. 4. And then get its
> > ratio from combined population of the 3 countries)
> > > > * If India was not divided, her total Population would have been a lot
> > > > more than China's 1.32 billion. It would have left China behind long
> > time
> > > > ago because in 2011 it would have been 1.65 billion or 23.6% of World
> > > > Population. (I did my Math again. I am wrong it should have been 1.52
> > billion. Sorry)
> > > > .
> > > > S U Turkman
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > **
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > _________________________________
> > > Abdul Mannan
> > > Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
> > > Dhaka
> > > Bangladesh
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________
> Abdul Mannan
> Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
> Dhaka
> Bangladesh
>



--
_________________________________
Abdul Mannan
Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
Dhaka
Bangladesh




--
_________________________________
Abdul Mannan
Educator-Researcher-Writer-Analyst
Dhaka
Bangladesh









__._,_.___


****************************************************
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: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন



Observation by a ten year old might really be authentic, though nobody should take it seriously.

2012/4/10 danesh Hawlader <danesh1963@yahoo.com>

 Dear Mr.Russel,

During our freedom fight 99% people of our country support it, I observed it attentively because  I was then 10 years old. It is my out of  imagine  where Mr. Jitten Roy found it  after 40 years of our independence. Very sad- very sad- very sad  !!!

- Mohammad Danesh 

--- On Mon, 4/9/12, GT International <gti82@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: GT International <gti82@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Fw: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, April 9, 2012, 6:33 AM


 

Mr. Jitten Roy,
I am curious to know how did you come up with this number that 40% of Bengalies supported the Pakistani regime during our war of independence? Your claim is absolutely WRONG if not FALSE!! Please check your source again. You are trying to minimize the will of Bengalies under the leadership of Bangabandhu in achieving our independence is really strange one!!!
-Russel
 

To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
From: kamalctgu@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:30:33 +0600
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন

 
I would suggest you to read 'White House Years' by Henry Kissinger.  He has dedicated about hundred pages in it on the events of 1971.  If you trust him, you would get an idea about the role played by Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

2012/3/19 Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>

Gaffor Chowdhury is dreaming for the victory of the socialism around the world. He is severely late for that train; it's gone, and gone forever.

Two things brought our independence – 1) Muktijodha and 2) Indian participation. Sheikh Mujib's non-cooperation movement ignited the seed for Muktijodha. Now, let's analyze the contribution of Muktijodha towards the independence. Muktijodha started, and Sheikh Mujib is in the Pakistani jail.  Sixty percent Bangalee populations are supporting the Muktijodha; other 40% started collaborating with 93,000 Pakistani soldiers. Now, let's assume India is not willing to participate in the Muktijodha. What would happen? Muktijodha would drag on for year after year. As it drags on, Banglalee population would slowly start withdrawing their support for it, and they would start to collaborate with Pakistani soldiers. Pretty soon collaborators would supersede the supporter of Muktijodha, and, ultimately, it would die down. Sheikh Mujib would be prosecuted as a traitor, and after the prosecution, he would have been hanged, just like Bhotto. In the mean time, most religious minorities would migrate to India, and they would be exiled there forever. East Pakistan would become a 99% Muslim majority Islamic country, and live happily ever after.

Pakistanis kept Sheikh Mujib alive only because 93,000 Pakistani soldiers got trapped in the East Pakistan. He was their last bargaining chip to swap those soldiers. Had they won - that bargaining chip would have been redundant, and Shekh Mujib would have been executed. Therefore, it is naïve to bestow all the success of the independence movement to the non-cooperation movement of Sheikh Mujib. We have to analyze the circumstances realistically; otherwise it is a fictional analysis. Gaffor Chowdhury's analysis appears to be a fictional analysis to me.

Jiten Roy

 

--- On Sun, 3/18/12, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:


From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, March 18, 2012, 11:49 AM


The acts of killing of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman along with his family, the killing of the four national leaders in the jail, and then indemnifying the criminals will probably remain the most shameful acts in the history of Bangladesh even after many thousand of years from now. It is indeed too shameful that Ziaur Rahman is still a fairly popular figure in Bangladesh .
 
If Zia were an honorable person, he would have resigned from the military and started a political opposition movement, if he felt that the country was in the wrong hands in 1975. Instead, he approved the assassination of the Commander in Chief of the military, who was also the President of the country. If Bangladesh had an honorable combination of population and leadership, Zia would have been punished appropriately by a Court Martial shortly after 1975.
 
As for Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, I think he deserves the Bangabandhu title, because he deeply cared about the Bangalees within the framework of Pakistan . He certainly loved his people and his motherland. But he did not excel in administering the country. He kept the Pakistan-sympathizer elements in important positions in the military and in the bureaucracy. With his huge popularity, he certainly had the power to kick out a lot of criminals and corrupt individuals from his party; but he did not do that. He failed to punish any war criminal in his more than three years of power in Bangladesh ; in fact there is no credible evidence to suggest that he was serious about punishing the war criminals. I think it is an extremely sad story for Bangladesh that, while Sheikh Mujib had the deepest emotions of love for his motherland, he did not know how to put those into real actions.
 
I am actually unimpressed with the quality of Abdul Gaffar Choudhury's essay.
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
==========================================
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন

 
The level of chaos in Bangladesh during the rule of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman(vide- Prasashaner andarmahale Bangladesh by Muntasir Mahmun and Jayanta Roy) is indicative of what could have happened if he lived till today.  However, the brutal murder of the Shaikh along with his clan was one of the most heinous acts in history.  It is comparable to the overthrow of the Omayyad dynasty by the Abbasid.  If Ziaur Rahman had any foresight, he would have done at least a sham trial of the killers.  Probably his international masters prevented him from doing so.  

2012/3/17 Muhammad Ali <man1k195709@yahoo.com>

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: SyedAslam <syed.aslam3@gmail.com>
To: Khobor <khabor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 1:56 AM
Subject: বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন

বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন 

কালের আয়নায়
 আবদুল গাফ্ফার চৌধুরী
আমারও ধারণা, বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন, তাহলে আপসের পথে যেতেন না। বাংলাদেশকে কোনো কারণেই সাম্প্রদায়িকতা, ধর্মান্ধতা ও নব্য আধিপত্যবাদীদের হাতে তুলে দিতেন না। তিনি বিশ্বের নিপীড়িত জাতিগুলোর নেতাদের সঙ্গে মিলিত হতেন, আবার অস্ত্রের মোকাবেলায় আন্দোলনের শক্তিকে জাগ্রত ও ঐক্যবদ্ধ করা যায় কি-না তার চেষ্টা করতেন

আজ যদি বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবুর রহমান বেঁচে থাকতেন, তাহলে তিনি তিরানব্বই বছর বয়সে পা দিতেন। এতটা দীর্ঘ বয়স, কিংবা তার কাছাকাছি বয়সের কোনো নেতা কি বেঁচে ছিলেন না কিংবা বেঁচে নেই! নেলসন ম্যান্ডেলা তো আছেন। চার্চিল, ভেরউড, রেগান আরও কত নেতার নাম করব? মহাত্মা গান্ধী বলেছিলেন, তিনি ১২৫ বছর বেঁচে থাকবেন। নথুরাম গডসে তাকে হত্যা না করলে তিনি হয়তো বেঁচে থাকতেন। 
বঙ্গবন্ধুকে যদি ১৯৭৫ সালে নির্মমভাবে হত্যা করা না হতো, তাহলে তিনি কি স্বাভাবিকভাবেই নব্বই-ঊর্ধ্ব বয়সে বেঁচে থাকতেন না? প্রশ্নটির জবাব আমি জানি না। হয়তো বেঁচে থাকতেন। তবে নেলসন ম্যান্ডেলা বা ফিদেল কাস্ত্রোর মতো ক্ষমতা থেকে অবসর নিতেন। আমি এ ক্ষেত্রে ফিদেল কাস্ত্রোর কথাটাই বেশি ভাবছি। তিনি রাষ্ট্রীয় ক্ষমতা থেকে অবসর নিয়েছেন; কিন্তু জাতীয় অভিভাবকত্বের দায়িত্বটি তিনি এখনও পুরোপুরি পালন করছেন। গণতান্ত্রিক ব্যবস্থাতেও একটি উন্নয়নশীল দেশের জন্য একজন জাতীয় অভিভাবক প্রয়োজন হয়। বঙ্গবন্ধু ছিলেন জাতির পিতা। তবে সদ্য স্বাধীন দেশটির জাতীয় অভিভাবকত্বের দায়িত্বটি তার আরও কিছুকাল পালন করা উচিত ছিল। 
যদি তিনি তা পালন করতে পারতেন, তাহলে বাংলাদেশের আজ যে দুরবস্থা, কিছু মানুষের উন্নয়ন আর সমষ্টির ভয়াবহ অবনতি, সামাজিক ও রাজনৈতিক মূল্যবোধের চূড়ান্ত অবক্ষয়, তা সম্ভবত ঘটত না। মাহাথির মোহাম্মদ বা লি কুয়ান কোনো জাতি গঠন করেননি। তারা মালয়েশিয়া ও সিঙ্গাপুরকে উন্নতির বিস্ময়কর শিখরে তুলে দিয়ে গেছেন। অন্যদিকে বঙ্গবন্ধু একটি জাতির অস্তিত্ব পুনরুদ্ধার করেছেন, একটি জাতিরাষ্ট্র গঠন করেছেন এবং সময় ও সুযোগ পেলে বাংলাদেশকে মালয়েশিয়া ও সিঙ্গাপুরের চেয়েও উন্নত ও সমৃদ্ধ রাষ্ট্রে পরিণত করে যেতে পারতেন। তিনি যে তা পারলেন না তার কারণ, কিছু কাপুরুষ ও নরপশু বাঙালির মধ্যরাতে নির্মম ও নিষ্ঠুরভাবে পিতৃহত্যা। 
পণ্ডিত নীরদ সি চৌধুরীর একটি বইয়ের নাম 'আত্মঘাতী বাঙালি'। বাঙালির চরিত্র নির্ণয়ে এর চেয়ে সঠিক অভিধা আর কিছু হয় না। বাঙালি তো আত্মঘাতী একবার হয়নি, বহুবার হয়েছে। 
একবার হয়েছে পলাশীর যুদ্ধের মাঠে। একবার হয়েছে অবাঙালি জিন্নাহ নেতৃত্বের কাছে বাঙালি হক নেতৃত্ব ও সোহরাওয়ার্দী নেতৃত্বকে বলিদান করে। তারপর আত্মঘাতী হয়েছে ১৯৪৭ সালে বাংলা ভাগের সময় কংগ্রেস ও লীগের অবাঙালি নেতৃত্বের প্রতারণার ফাঁদে পা দিয়ে। বাঙালির সবচেয়ে ক্ষতিকর আত্মঘাতী ভূমিকা ১৯৭৫ সালের ১৫ আগস্টে। বঙ্গবন্ধু হত্যার পর অন্নদাশঙ্কর রায় লিখেছিলেন, 'পিতৃহত্যা বড় পাপ।' এই পিতৃহত্যার পাপের দেনা বাঙালি এখনও কাটিয়ে উঠতে পারেনি। 
কুড়ি শতকের গোড়ায় ১৯২০ সালের ১৭ মার্চ বঙ্গবন্ধুর জন্ম। বিশ্ব এখন একুশ শতকের গোড়ায়। এই প্রায় একশ' বছরের মধ্যে বিশ্বের সামগ্রিক এবং আঞ্চলিক পরিস্থিতি এতটাই বদলেছে যে, গত শতকের গোড়ায় কোনো মানুষ যদি আজ একুশ শতকের গোড়ায় রিপভ্যান উইঙ্কলের মতো হঠাৎ দীর্ঘ ঘুম থেকে জেগে ওঠেন, তাহলে বিশ্বকে দূরের কথা, নিজের দেশকেও চিনবেন না। কুড়ি শতকের গোড়ায় ব্রিটিশ শাসনাধীন যে কৃষিনির্ভর সামন্ত যুগীয় বাংলাদেশ ছিল, আজকের একুশ শতকের গোড়ায় স্বাধীন, খণ্ডিত এবং শিল্পোন্নতির যুগে প্রবেশে উন্মুখ বাংলাদেশের (দুই বাংলারই) সঙ্গে তার কোনো তুলনা করা চলে কি? 
বঙ্গবন্ধুর কুড়ি শতকের বাংলাদেশের চেয়ে একুশ শতকের বাংলাদেশের সমস্যা অনেক বেশি জটিল ও বিপজ্জনক। বঙ্গবন্ধুর সমস্যা ছিল স্বাধীনতা অর্জন। এখনকার সমস্যা সেই স্বাধীনতাকে রক্ষা করার। এটা আরও বেশি জটিল ও দুরূহ। বঙ্গবন্ধুর সময়ে খণ্ডিত পূর্ব বাংলায় জনসংখ্যা ছিল সাড়ে সাত কোটি। এখন তা পনেরো কোটি। তখন বাঙালি সিভিল ব্যুরোক্রেসি ছিল দুর্বল। তাদের মিলিটারি ব্যুরোক্রেসি ছিল না বললেই চলে। নব্য এবং চরিত্রহীন ধনী গোষ্ঠী তখন মাথা তুলছে মাত্র। প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়নি। দুর্নীতি ও সন্ত্রাস ছিল। তা এখনকার মতো বর্বর সিন্ডিকেট ও মাফিয়া চক্র হয়ে উঠতে পারেনি। দেশে সাম্প্রদায়িকতা শক্তিশালী ছিল; কিন্তু হিংস্র মৌলবাদ ছিল অস্তিত্বহীন। 
বঙ্গবন্ধুর আমলের আন্তর্জাতিক প্রেক্ষাপটটিও ছিল ভিন্ন। বঙ্গবন্ধুকে যুদ্ধ করতে হয়েছে নব্য ঔপনিবেশিকতা, পশ্চিমা সাম্রাজ্যবাদ ও ক্যাপিটালিজমের আগ্রাসী ভূমিকার বিরুদ্ধে। বর্তমানের বাংলাদেশসহ অধিকাংশ আফ্রো-এশিয়ান ও লাতিন আমেরিকান উন্নয়নশীল দেশগুলোকে যুদ্ধ করতে হচ্ছে আরও ভয়াবহ গ্গ্নোবাল মার্কেট ক্যাপিটালিজম এবং তার হিংস্র আধিপত্যবাদের বিরুদ্ধে। বঙ্গবন্ধুর আমলে বিশ্ব ছিল দুই শক্তি শিবিরে বিভক্ত। বিশ্বে একটি শক্তিশালী জোটনিরপেক্ষ আন্দোলন (ন্যাম) ছিল। সমাজতন্ত্রী শক্তি শিবির এবং জোটনিরপেক্ষ আন্দোলনের সমর্থন ও সহায়তা পেয়েছেন বঙ্গবন্ধু। আজ সমাজতন্ত্রী বিশ্ব শিবির নেই। জোটনিরপেক্ষ আন্দোলন নিবীর্য। 
অন্যদিকে বিশ্ব এখন ইউনিপোলার। একটি মাত্র দুর্ধর্ষ শক্তি শিবির বিশ্বে। সেটি মার্কিন নেতৃত্বাধীন একক শক্তি শিবির। তার হাতে মারাত্মক সমরাস্ত্র। কোনো নৈতিকতাবোধ, মানবতাবোধ এই 'নিউ ওয়ার্ল্ড অর্ডার' নামধারী নব্য ফ্যাসিবাদের নেই। মধ্যপ্রাচ্যে এরা তথাকথিত ওয়ার অন টেররিজমের নামে ধ্বংসযজ্ঞ সৃষ্টি করেছে। ইরাক ও আফগানিস্তানকে ধ্বংস করে এখন সিরিয়া ও ইরানকে ধ্বংস করতে উদ্যত। দ্বিতীয় পরাশক্তি হিসেবে সোভিয়েত ইউনিয়নের অস্তিত্ব আজ থাকলে গোটা বিশ্বে এই মহাপ্রলয় ঘটানো গ্গ্নোবাল ক্যাপিটালিজমের দানবের পক্ষে সম্ভব হতো না। কোনো কোনো পশ্চিমা গবেষকের মতে, গত শতকে সোভিয়েত ইউনিয়নের অস্তিত্ব না থাকলে বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতার যুদ্ধও নয় মাসে শেষ হতো না। বঙ্গবন্ধুকে হয়তো 'ট্রেইটর' হিসেবে পাকিস্তানের কারাগারে প্রাণ দিতে হতো।
আজ গণতান্ত্রিক বাংলাদেশের মিত্র এবং সহায়ক শক্তি কোথায়? সমাজতান্ত্রিক শক্তি শিবির নেই। জোটনিরপেক্ষ আন্দোলন নিবীর্য। বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা যুদ্ধের সবচেয়ে নির্ভরযোগ্য মিত্র ছিল যে প্রতিবেশী দেশ ভারত, তার সরকার আজ আমেরিকার কাছে নতজানু, তার সঙ্গে আধা-সামরিক চুক্তিতে আবদ্ধ। বাংলাদেশের সঙ্গে বিভিন্ন সমস্যা সমাধানে গণতান্ত্রিক আওয়ামী লীগ সরকার ক্ষমতায় থাকা সত্ত্বেও দিলি্লর মনোভাব মিত্রসুলভ নয়। দিলি্লতে মনমোহন সিংয়ের অরাজনৈতিক নেতৃত্বে এমন একটি রাজনৈতিক সরকার ক্ষমতায় অধিষ্ঠিত, যার চেয়ে দুর্বল সরকার আগে কখনও দিলি্লতে ক্ষমতায় বসেনি। রাজ্যগুলো কেন্দ্রের কথা শুনতে চায় না। মোগল সাম্রাজ্যের শেষ দিকে সম্ভবত বাহাদুর শাহই দিলি্লতে এ ধরনের একটি সরকারের নেতৃত্ব দিচ্ছিলেন। দিলি্ল পাকিস্তানকে বলছে, 'মেরেছো কলসির কানা, তা বলে কি প্রেম দেব না?' অন্যদিকে বাংলাদেশের সীমান্তে কাঁটাতারের বেড়া বাড়াতে চাচ্ছে।
এমন একটি পরিস্থিতিতে আজ যদি বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিব বেঁচে থাকতেন, এমনকি ক্ষমতাতেও থাকতেন, তাহলে কী করতেন? দক্ষিণ এশিয়ায় এই সবচেয়ে দুর্যোগময় মুহূর্তে তিনি কি পারতেন শক্ত হাতে রাষ্ট্র-তরণীর হাল ধরতে, এই দুর্যোগ সমুদ্র পাড়ি দিতে? পারতেন পাকিস্তান ও মধ্যপ্রাচ্যের পেট্রো ডলারের মদদপুষ্ট বিএনপি-জামায়াতের এই ক্রমাগত ষড়যন্ত্র এবং সন্ত্রাসের রাজনীতির মোকাবেলায় জাতিকে একাত্তরের মতো ঐক্যবদ্ধ রেখে বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীন, সেক্যুলার চরিত্র রক্ষা করতে? তার মাথার ওপর অনবরত ঝুলত হত্যা চক্রান্তের হিংস্র তরবারি। পারতেন তাকে উপেক্ষা করে গণতান্ত্রিক রাজনীতিতে অনড় ও অবিচল থাকতে? 
এতগুলো প্রশ্নের জবাবে আমার মতো এক নগণ্য কলামিস্ট যদি হ্যাঁ বলি, যদি বলি পারতেন, তাহলে অনেকে বিস্মিত হবেন। কিন্তু এটা শুধু আমার নয়, মুজিব চরিত্রের কোনো কোনো বিদেশি বিশ্লেষকেরও ধারণা। প্রয়াত ব্রিটিশ বাম বুদ্ধিজীবী জ্যাক ওয়াদিসের মতে, 'শেখ মুজিব ছিলেন অপরাজেয় রাজনৈতিক চরিত্রের নেতা। কিন্তু তিনি আত্মরক্ষার কৌশলটি সম্পর্কে ছিলেন উদাসীন। যদি উদাসীন না থাকতেন, তাহলে কাস্ত্রোর মতো সফল হতে পারতেন (নেলসন ম্যান্ডেলার কথা ওয়াদিস বলেননি। ম্যান্ডেলার চূড়ান্ত সাফল্য দেখার আগেই তিনি মারা যান)। তার জাতীয় ও আন্তর্জাতীয় শত্রুরা জানত, তাকে মধ্য বা শেষ রাতে আকস্মিকভাবে হত্যা করা ছাড়া নির্বাচনে বা কোনো রাজনৈতিক যুদ্ধে পরাজিত করে ক্ষমতা থেকে হটানো সম্ভব নয়। আর বাঙালির স্বাধীনতা এবং সেক্যুলার রাষ্ট্র ব্যবস্থার ব্যাপারে তিনি কোনোভাবেই আপসরফায় যেতেন না।' জ্যাক ওয়াদিসের এই বিশ্লেষণ আরও অনেক রাজনৈতিক বিশ্লেষকের দ্বারা স্বীকৃতি পেয়েছে।
কুড়ি শতকের গোড়ায় প্রত্যন্ত বাংলায় একটি কৃষিনির্ভর সমাজে এবং সাম্প্রদায়িক রাজনীতির পরিবেশে শেখ মুজিবের জন্ম। যৌবনে ধর্মীয় দ্বিজাতিতত্ত্বে বিশ্বাসী হয়ে পাকিস্তান আন্দোলনেও অংশ নিয়েছেন। কিন্তু তার রাজনৈতিক চরিত্রের বিকাশ বিস্ময়কর। বাংলা ভাগ হওয়ার আগেই তিনি ধর্মীয় দ্বিজাতিতত্ত্বে বিশ্বাস হারান এবং বাঙালির প্রাচীন লোকায়ত সমাজ-সংস্কৃতির ভিত্তিতে একটি স্বাধীন, গণতান্ত্রিক বাংলাদেশের স্বপ্ন দেখতে শুরু করেন। সেই ঘোর সাম্প্রদায়িক রাজনীতির যুগে তিনি আওয়ামী মুসলিম লীগকে অসাম্প্রদায়িক আওয়ামী লীগে রূপান্তর করার কাজে মওলানা ভাসানীকে শক্তি ও সমর্থন জোগান। আন্দোলন দ্বারা ধর্মীয় পরিচয়ভিত্তিক স্বতন্ত্র নির্বাচন পদ্ধতির অবসান ঘটিয়ে অসাম্প্রদায়িক যুক্ত নির্বাচন প্রথার প্রবর্তন ঘটান। পূর্ব পাকিস্তানকে আবার বাংলাদেশ নামে রূপান্তর করার প্রথম ঘোষণা তার।
বাংলাদেশকে স্বাধীন নেশন স্টেটে পরিণত করার প্রথম সূচক আন্দোলন_ 'দুই অর্থনীতির আন্দোলন', তারপর ভাষা আন্দোলন, ছয় দফার আন্দোলন এবং স্বাধীনতার যুদ্ধ। প্রত্যেকটিতে তিনি নেতৃত্ব দিয়েছেন এবং তার রাজনৈতিক নেতৃত্বের বৈশিষ্ট্য এই যে, তিনি তার রাজনৈতিক আন্দোলনকে দেশের আর্থসামাজিক বিবর্তনের ধারাকে এগিয়ে নিয়ে যাওয়ার কাজে সচেতনভাবে ব্যবহার করেছেন। অন্য অনেক নেতা যেটা পারেননি। 
তার দুর্জয় রাজনৈতিক সাহস লক্ষ্য করার মতো। তিনি প্রতিকূল রাজনৈতিক ও সামাজিক পরিবেশে দেশের রাজনীতিকে সাম্প্রদায়িকতা থেকে অসাম্প্রদায়িক ধারায় এবং সব শেষে সমাজতান্ত্রিক ধারায় (বাকশাল গঠন দ্বারা) উত্তরণ ঘটানোর সাহস দেখিয়েছেন এবং নিজের লক্ষ্যে অবিচল থেকে আত্মদান করেছেন। মহাত্মা গান্ধী ব্রিটিশ শাসনের বিরুদ্ধে অহিংস-অসহযোগ আন্দোলন করে সফল হননি। কিন্তু শেখ মুজিব পাকিস্তানের বর্বর সামরিক জান্তার বিরুদ্ধে অহিংস-অসহযোগ আন্দোলন দ্বারা সফল হয়েছিলেন। কারণ, নিরস্ত্র জনগণকে প্রস্তুত করে কখন অহিংস-অসহযোগ আন্দোলনকে সশস্ত্র মুক্তিসংগ্রামে পরিণত করা যায়, সেই কৌশলটি তিনি জানতেন। এই কৌশলটি তিনি বর্তমানে বেঁচে থাকলে গ্গ্নোবাল ক্যাপিটালিস্ট জান্তার বিরুদ্ধেও হয়তো প্রয়োগ করতে চাইতেন।
এমএন রায়ের হিউম্যানিস্ট মুভমেন্টের এক ব্রিটিশ নেতা কিছুকাল আগে একটি চমৎকার কথা বলেছেন। তিনি তার একটি ছোট পুস্তিকায় লিখেছেন, 'বিশ্বের মানবতাবিরোধী শক্তি এখন ভয়াবহ মারণাস্ত্রে সজ্জিত। শক্তি দ্বারা এই শক্তির মোকাবেলা করা সম্ভব নয়। সাবেক সোভিয়েত ইউনিয়ন এই শক্তি দ্বারা শক্তির মোকাবেলা করতে গিয়ে ভেঙে গেছে। নয়া চীন এখন চাচ্ছে এই সামরিক শক্তি দ্বারা মার্কিন সামরিক শক্তির মোকাবেলা করতে। কিন্তু সে তার নৈতিক শক্তির মূল কেন্দ্রটি থেকে সরে গেছে। সুতরাং চীনের পরিণতিও কী হবে তা এখন বলা মুশকিল। এখন দরকার প্রয়াত গান্ধীর অহিংস-অসহযোগ আন্দোলনের বিশ্বব্যাপী সম্প্রসারণ এবং শান্তিকামী নেতাদের বিশ্বময় ঐক্য।'
এই নিবন্ধে অহিংস-অসহযোগের শক্তির উদাহরণ দেখাতে গিয়ে ব্রিটিশ হিউম্যানিস্ট নেতা বাংলাদেশের এবং বঙ্গবন্ধুর কথা উল্লেখ করেছেন। তিনি বলেছেন, 'একটি নিরস্ত্র জাতির নেতা হিসেবে একটি সশস্ত্র সামরিক জান্তার বিরুদ্ধে যুদ্ধে প্রথমে অহিংস-অসহযোগের আন্দোলনে নেমে সফল হওয়া বিশ্বে এই প্রথম। বর্তমানেও মানবতার শত্রু ভয়াবহ মারণাস্ত্রের অধিকারী বিশ্ব দানবের বিরুদ্ধে যুদ্ধে নিপীড়িত বিশ্বের নেতারা ঐক্যবদ্ধ হলে এবং প্রথমে বিশ্ব জনমত গড়ে তুলে বিশ্বময় অহিংস-অসহযোগের ডাক দিলে এই দানবকে সার্থকভাবে মোকাবেলা করা সম্ভব। বর্তমানের বিভীষিকাময় পরিস্থিতি থেকে বিশ্ব মানবতাকে রক্ষার এটাই একমাত্র পন্থা। কিন্তু সে জন্য প্রথমেই দরকার শেখ মুজিবের মতো দুর্জয় সাহসের অধিকারী একজন নেতা। শুধু একজন নয়, দরকার আরও কয়েকজন শেখ মুজিবের।'
আমারও ধারণা, বঙ্গবন্ধু আজ যদি বেঁচে থাকতেন, তাহলে আপসের পথে যেতেন না। বাংলাদেশকে কোনো কারণেই সাম্প্রদায়িকতা, ধর্মান্ধতা ও নব্য আধিপত্যবাদীদের হাতে তুলে দিতেন না। তিনি বিশ্বের নিপীড়িত জাতিগুলোর নেতাদের সঙ্গে মিলিত হতেন, আবার অস্ত্রের মোকাবেলায় আন্দোলনের শক্তিকে জাগ্রত ও ঐক্যবদ্ধ করা যায় কি-না তার চেষ্টা করতেন। প্রয়োজনে আবার প্রাণ দিতেন, পিছু হটতেন না। প্রতি বছর ১৭ মার্চ তারিখটি এলেই আমার মনে প্রশ্ন জাগে, বাংলাদেশে আরেকজন বঙ্গবন্ধু আবার কি জন্মাবেন?
লন্ডন, শুক্রবার, ১৬ মার্চ ২০১২
শনিবার | ১৭ মার্চ ২০১২ | ৩ চৈত্র ১৪১৮ | ২৩ রবিউস সানি ১৪৩৩


ProthomAlo:

ধানমন্ডিতে বঙ্গবন্ধুর প্রতিকৃতিতে প্রধানমন্ত্রীর শ্রদ্ধা


Daily Star:

Sangbad:
বঙ্গবন্ধুর ৯৩তম জন্মদিন আজ

KalerKantha:

বঙ্গবন্ধুর জন্মদিন ও জাতীয় শিশু দিবস আজ

AmaderShomoy:
¯^vaxbZvi gnvbvqK e½eÜz †kL gywRe




















__._,_.___


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

__,_._,___