Ezajur -
Indira took "hasar Saloka badla" and Ezajur kinds want to take 40 saloka badla.
Can we become "freedom fighter" without committing treason to oppose resent BAL's misrule?
Thanks
tom
--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, "ezajur" <Ezajur@...> wrote:
>
> You presume so incorrectly that you should not try to presume.
>
> I believe:
>
> 1. War crimes trials must proceed
> 2. War crimes will not divide the nation
> 3. War crimes trials are largely symbolic but still worth doing
>
> And, YES, categorically, every other crime is acceptable - and to challenge you properly I will say that every other crime is encouraged.
>
> Don't you see the news? Don't you read the papers?
>
> Here. Plain English:
>
> As long as AL goes after war criminals you don't give a damn what AL does today. I can sympathise that you want to hold accountable those who committed crimes in 1971. But you should not be so surprised that many want to hold AL/BNP accountable for crimes they commit in 2010! And many of us can't give AL a blank cheque for crimes committed today becasue they aregoing after crimes committed 40 years ago.
>
> And, I challenge you further. When token justice is partially served by the hanging of a handful of jamaatis you will find no change in the course of justice in 2010.
>
> That doesn't mean you don't hang convicted war criminals. Please do.
>
> Clear enough?
>
> A 12 year old girl committed suicide last week after she was married off. No one gives a #### in 2010.
>
> --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Farida Majid <farida_majid@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bangladesh. Where war crimes are unacceptable.
> >
> > And everything else is acceptable!
> >
> > By which, I presume, the writer means every crime is accaptable, even encouraged, in Bangladesh
> > except War Crimes.
> >
> > Who talks like that? Who can be that insensitive to the justice-seekers of crimes and atrocities
> > committed 39 years ago still unheeded? Only those pretending to care about 'law and order' and yet
> > sneers and snarls at attempt to end the culture of impunity for the cruellest of the criminals walking free
> > in Bangladesh.
> >
> > Let me try to explain to those who visibly shake in rage at the mention of "war crimes" of 1971.
> > What we, and the international community, are attempting to call "war" crimes are these very heinous
> > crimes --- killings, looting, vandalizing, arson, rape, etc.---- committed systemetically on a mass scale
> > for the realization of a political/communal proposition. That proposition being that Muslim and Hindu peoples
> > cannot live together anymore even though these peoples have lived side by side for centuries on this land.
> >
> > The realization of this irrational and idiotic proposition, first manufactured by the British colonial
> > administrators for facilitating their purpose of 'divide and rule', was welcomed by neo-colonizers of
> > Pakistan, and then, after 1971, by the neo-Pakistanis of Bangla origin.
> >
> > Equally irrational and ironic is the idea that the war crimes trials would divide rhe nation. It can
> > only do so if we assume that close to half the nation holds the same criminal record as the Jamaati
> > honchos and the grizzled old Muslim League razakars.
> >
> > Farida Majid
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> > From: Ezajur@
> > Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:27:41 +0000
> > Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: New BNP stance on war crimes trial unfair, unacceptable
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The blank cheque given to criminals who support AL is such that I'm now begining to think that BNP is right to hamper the government's progress.
> >
> > Bangladesh. Where war crimes are unacceptable.
> >
> > And everything else is acceptable!
> >
> > --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Isha Khan <bdmailer@> wrote:
> > >
> > > New BNP stance on war crimes trial unfair, unacceptable
> > > THE opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party has visibly changed its position
> > > as regards the trial of the Bengali collaborators of the Pakistan army that
> > > committed war crimes against the people of Bangladesh in 1971. Until
> > > Tuesday, the party's spokespersons maintained that the BNP does not have any
> > > problem with the war crimes being investigated and the criminals tried,
> > > while warning the government that it must not victimise leaders and
> > > activists of the opposition camp, in the name of trying war crimes. Fair
> > > enough. But on Tuesday, the BNP chairperson, Khaleda Zia, told a gathering
> > > of a section of the freedom fighters, according to a report front-paged by
> > > New Age on Wednesday, that `attempts are being made to push the nation to a
> > > confrontation in the name of war crimes trial four decades after
> > > independence.' Referring to the clemency given to the guilty of the
> > > Pakistani army by the post-independence government of the Awami League, and
> > > subsequent `general amnesty' to the collaborators, Khaleda also said `such
> > > double standard' of the ruling party `must be resisted'. The BNP chairperson
> > > has taken a clear position against the `war crimes trial' in the name of
> > > consolidating `national unity'. We believe the new BNP stance on the issue
> > > of war crimes trial is unfair—and thus unacceptable—as it amounts to
> > > injustice towards those who were killed, tortured, raped and burnt by the
> > > occupation forces of Pakistan and their local collaborators during the
> > > country's liberation war.
> > >
> > > It is historically true that the post-independence government of the Awami
> > > League officially `forgave' the guilty officers of the Pakistan army, saying
> > > that `the Bengalis know how to forgive.' It is also true that the Awami
> > > League government of the day granted `general amnesty' to the local
> > > collaborators, of course, barring those involved in heinous crimes like
> > > killing, rape and arson. We believe such steps of the post-independence
> > > Awami League government were unjust, as those amounted to injustice towards
> > > those who sacrificed lives, underwent brutal torture, humiliation and
> > > enormous ordeal for the sake of national liberation. We believe the
> > > government of the day did not have the moral right to `forgive' the
> > > perpetrators of war crimes.
> > >
> > > However, the inability, or opportunistic reluctance, of the
> > > post-independence government to try the perpetrators of war crimes and their
> > > collaborators does not mean that the crimes cannot be investigated and the
> > > criminals punished now, forty years after the war of independence. There are
> > > instances in history that war crimes have been tried several years after the
> > > crimes were committed. It is better late than never, especially when it
> > > comes to justice. We have no reason to believe the mere trial of war crimes
> > > would divide the nation anew – the nation is already divided on political
> > > lines – as the number of `collaborators' in 1971 was very few as against the
> > > entire population of the day who stood for the country's liberation from the
> > > occupation forces.
> > >
> > > We, therefore, believe the government should go ahead with the trial of the
> > > collaborators of war crimes, and demand that the surviving officers of the
> > > Pakistan army who perpetrated war crimes in Bangladesh should be handed over
> > > to the war crimes tribunal for trial. Notably, the Pakistani authorities,
> > > while signing the tripartite agreement with Bangladesh and India for the
> > > repatriation of the guilty officers to Pakistan in 1973, promised to try
> > > their crimes in their homeland. But the Pakistani authorities failed to keep
> > > the commitment. It is time that Bangladesh demanded, at the least, that the
> > > guilty officers be tried in Pakistan in accordance with the commitment that
> > > its government had made four decades ago.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, the country's democratically oriented citizens committed to
> > > justice require to keep an eye on the whole process of the trial in Dhaka,
> > > so that the trial is fair and transparent, and that the government of Awami
> > > League cannot victimise its political rivals in the name of trying the
> > > perpetrators/collaborators of war crime, nor can it prolong the trial unduly
> > > for politically using the issue for parochial partisan interests for the
> > > years to come, as it has done before.
> > >
> > > http://www.newagebd.com/2010/oct/07/edit.html
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/