Banner Advertiser

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

[ALOCHONA] America’s new regime change formula

America's new regime change formula

Washington's formula for regime change underwent a makover in the 1980s. In a bid to ensure US political and economic interests were safeguarded, CIA backed coup d'états ousted democratically elected leaders from Iran to Chile.

Washington's formula for regime change underwent a makover in the 1980s. In a bid to ensure US political and economic interests were safeguarded, CIA backed coup d'états ousted democratically elected leaders from Iran to Chile.

In their place were brutal dictatorships and governments that committed heinous crimes against their people.

By the 1980s, the reign of terror that blazed across Latin America was too much for most people to stomach. From death squads to torture chambers and various massacres, the Latin American generals who trained in the US to spread democracy around the world quickly gained reputations for major human rights abuses.

To replace the overt support for dictatorships, a new concept for regime change was born; one that sounds and looks better – democracy promotion.

The concept of democracy promotion is simple; finance, train, and politically back local opposition forces around the world that support the American agenda.

Dr. William Robinson is one of the foremost experts on Washington's democracy promotion initiatives, he wrote the book 'Promoting Polyarhcy.'

"In Latin America, in Eastern Europe with the Velvet Revolutions, in Africa, in the Middle East, really all over the world, the U.S. set up these different mechanisms now for penetrating these civil societies in the political systems of countries that are going to be intervened and to assure the outcome is going to be pleasing to Washington's foreign policy objectives," said Robinson.

Lawrence Wilkerson, the former Chief of Staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell said, "We do this through surrogates and nongovernmental organization and through people who are less suspecting of the evil that may lurk behind their actions than perhaps they were before. Have we learned some lessons in that regard? You bet! Do we do it better? You bet? Is it still just as heinous as it has always been? You bet!"

So while the goal remains the same, it's no longer the CIA but the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and its partners spearheading the effort.

Allen Weintein, one of the founders of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) explained to the Washington Post in 1991, "A lot of what we do now was done covertly by the CIA 25 years ago."

And like the CIA, USAID, the National Endowment for Democracy and a number of similar organizations receive funding from Congress.

"Millions and millions of U.S. tax payer dollars go every year into funding for political organizations and campaigns in different countries in the world that promote US agenda. Most U.S. citizens are unaware of the fact that that is how their money is being spent, to meddle, and to influence and to interfere in other nation's affairs," said Eva Golinger who has been investigating the US's democracy promotion efforts in Venezuela.

The concept of facilitating regime change through democracy promotion has garnered wide criticism not just abroad but also at home in the United States.

Congressman Ron Paul once wrote "It is particularly Orwellian to call US manipulation of foreign elections 'promoting democracy.' How would we Americans feel if for example the Chinese arrived with millions of dollars to support certain candidates deemed friendly to China?"

"I think it's terrible, we use taxpayer's money to go over and use our military and the CIA these programs that say 'this is what you outta do' and influence them. There is no authority for that, it doesn't work, it teaches a lot of people to despise us," Congressman Paul told RT.

Funding and how it operates

Democracy promotion has been a long standing element of US foreign policy. It operates as a key component of soft power linked to the diplomacy apparatus of Washington.

"The moneys go from the U.S. State because we need to see this starts with the U.S. state.They go into the country that is going to be intervened and inside that country they identify a series of groups that are going to receive this money but also receive this kind of political influence that comes with giving money and comes with on the ground operatives tied to this money," explained Robinson. "When the U.S. starts an interventionist program, they identify the different sectors it wants to organize.So it's identifies the trades union movement and where are the pliant parts, the objective is to marginalize radical trade unions and bolster conservative trade unions.They identify women movements, marginalize radical movements and mobilize conservative women moments.Then they do the same with youth.All sectors of civil society will be identified and those that can be brought on board to the US interventionist project will be brought on board and funded."

One of many examples is the color revolutions in Eastern Europe.

"As I saw happen for example in Ukraine, as I saw happen in Georgia, as I see happening in other places too, they don't just propagandize or attempt to help with words and rhetoric that opposition, they actually do things that give that opposition more power," said Wilkerson, recalling the involvement of USAID and NED.

William Blum, a US historian and the author of the book "Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since WW II" said, "They copy from one area to another, the first one that was successful was the one in Serbia and they borrowed things from that revolution.Certain slogan, symbols and colors, and they use it again and again."

Analysts recall the similarities in the color revolutions where youth groups were energized, rock bands lined up, and laser shows put on. The movements were marketed as cool.

"The objective was to make them into a national passion, a national fad if you well," said Blum.

Student leaders of the Serbian youth group Otpor who played a key role in the 2000 ousting of Slobodan Milosevic met 7 to 10 times with officials from USAID affiliates, according to the NY Times. The same group also received several hundred thousand dollars for demonstration material, t-shirts and stickers.

On the other side of the world, in Latin America, some of the most active and capable programs have and continue to flourish in countries where Capitalism isn't the agenda.

Blum contends, "Venezuela, easily, that is the place where they send the most money.Chavez is enemy number one.

One opposition lawmaker that has been a key figure in Washington's democracy promotion model in Venezuela is Maria Corina Machado; a woman who is by many standards and to plenty of critics, a product of US interventionism.Machado rose to fame with an NGO known as Sumate, an organization that received hundreds of thousands of dollars from USAID and NED. Sumate led fierce campaigns against democratically elected President Chavez and his Bolivarian Revolution, including a referendum against the President in 2004.

"In our case, we did receive funding from NED as did several, tens of organizations here in Venezuela," Machador confessed.

Like Georgia's Saakashvili, foreign financing bolstered Machado's image on the national and international stage, even granting her a meeting with President George W. Bush.

"This is about promoting an individual; this is about promoting someone who has the capacity to rise to power and share US agenda," said Golinger.

Since 2000, USAID has activated more than 620 programs in Venezuela alone, costing up to $20 million dollars.

In 2002, a government document from USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives explained a possible coup against Chavez was in the making. The author of the memo, OTI director Russell Porter wrote about the urgency of "sending an assessment team to Venezuela as soon as possible with a prejudice toward starting an active program to support civil society and the media."

Another 2003 declassified memo drafted by USAID's OTI in relation to the 2004 referendum said, "the overarching strategic objectives of the program remain the same: that is supporting the continuation of stable, free-market orientated democracy in Venezuela."

Other documents declassified through Freedom of Information Acts show USAID affiliates NDI and IRI were awarded $500,000 each for campaign schools in Venezuela.These campaign school s were responsible for campaign strategy and organization, message development, outreach, fund-raising, public relations, get-out the-vote techniques, and candidate selection. That same cable also cites the importance of co-opting Venezuela's poor, with the barrios as the main target. The barrios have long been known as Chavez strongholds.

In Latin American, democracy promotion programs target governments or organizations that have a socialist, anti-free market leaning.

The President of NED Carl Gershman insists democracy promotion does not mean regime change.

"To him [Gershman], Democracy equates to Capitalism, the idea of socialism and democracy is alien to him, if he is working against a socialist government or movement, he is working for democracy," said Blum.

Funding democracy with US taxpayer dollars

Democracy, US-style, doesn't come cheap. Most of the money flows to forces in line with US interests. Washington has spent a far amount of money spread democracy worldwide.

"We're talking here about hundreds of millions of dollars, and over the years since this policy was consolidated, we're talking about billions. The State Department will have an appropriation of several billion dollars for what it called the Office of Transition Initiatives. The Congress will have an appropriation hundreds of millions of dollars for the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID will have its own budget as well," said Robinson.

Over the past two decades, USAID has spent 9 billion dollars promoting Washington's democracy initiatives.

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) received $132 million dollars during 2009; nearly all of the money came from U.S. government agencies.

However, USAID and NED are not the only ones. There is an entire network of organizations involved in the democracy promotion business such as the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the American Center for International Labor, the Center for International Private Enterprise and Freedom House.

But these are just the tip of the iceberg. There's an entire network of organizations involved in the democracy promotion business.

Although all the organizations insist there is no political affiliation, the board of directors for both NDI and IRI suggest otherwise.

Both boards consist of former Secretaries of State, national security advisers, members of Congress, and even Clinton, Bush and Reagan administration officials.

They all have a history in Washington. One deeply rooted in sustaining the current foreign policy priorities.

Blum said, "to understand US foreign policy, one must understand a very basic fact; the US government wants to dominate the world."

He insists the soft money working behind scenes is directly linked to the CIA.

"They had to have a new organization with a nice sounding name, with the word democracy, which would be free of the taint of the CIA, and that's why the NED was created," Blum added.

One of the key areas the democracy promotion network has invested in is Central America, where there is a rising tide in leftist, socialist ideologies.

According to the North American Congress on Latin America, USAID's latest $2 million disbursement to Honduras was based on proposals to make the Central American country economically competitive on the global market.Since 2004, the United States has spent over $18 million on democracy promotion in Honduras.

While USAID requests $800,000 for more democracy promotion programs in Honduras for FY 2011, journalists and activists are being brutalized and killed under the U.S. backed government

In Egypt, a revolt against the US backed policies of Hosni Mubarak regime has mobilized these agencies to co-opt opposition groups to ensure the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections are beneficial to Washington.

Wael Nawara of the opposition party Al Ghad told RT funding and guidance from NED, NDI, IRI and USAID has increased in the past two years, and that NDI and IRI are operating in Egypt illegally.

Other countries the US has intervened in include the Philippines, Haiti, Nicaragua, Ecuador, El Salvador, Kyrgyzstan, and the Palestinian territories.

The USAID has implemented so called democracy promotion initiatives in over 100 countries in the past 25 years. This year's budget is $1 billion dollars. According to USAID's website, spending $10 million in a target country increases its amount of democratic change fivefold.

Blum insists there is pure hypocrisy in Washington's democracy promotion agenda. "We have a very clear law on the books prohibiting foreign governments from interfering in our elections of supporting any candidates with money.So we do exactly abroad what we prohibit here at home," he said.

Encouraging transparency is a stated core element of the US government's democracy promotion efforts in foreign countries. But here at home the agencies themselves are far from transparent. Detailed program budgets and information are unavailable to the public and contact with the media is limited. Over the last six weeks, RT repeatedly requested interviews from USAID, NED, IRI and NDI. All of these requests were denied or unanswered.

Pepe Escobar, a South America based journalist for the Asia Times said US democracy promotion programs use political or other grievances in countries to push and coordinate their own agenda.

"They use the locals," said Escobar. "They mix their preoccupations and their grievances with the classic full spectrum dominance Washington agenda."

The US targets nations who are strategic competitors and regimes that antagonize the United States. It utilizes the Pentagon and CIA strategy of full spectrum dominance.

Escobar explained that anti-government messages are often propelled through mainstream corporate media outlets in Brazil and Venezuela that are indirectly linked and influenced by US organizations like Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy.

He argued that over time it is possible other nations, like China, will use their growth to influence US elections; however that could take some time.

"They [China] still do not understand the notion of soft power and smart power," Escobar said. "Maybe it's going to take a generation to understand how the West thinks."

Jacob Hornberger, the president of The Future of Freedom Foundation explained that this policy of democracy promotion is not merely an Obama or Bush policy, but instead a systemic issue in overall US policy.

"This is essentially US foreign policy and has been for decades," he said. "They funnel money into elections, they engage in invasions, assassinations, coups, regime change operations. That's what foreign policy has been about for a long time."

Those who feel the policy is truly the promotion of democracy are operating under a lie, Hornberger argued.

"The Government has no more commitment to democracy than it does to dictatorship," he said.

The US government supports those who best serve their interest at a given time, including having supported leaders Saddam Hussein in the past.

"They're trying to get their people in public office in countries all over the world," Hornberger said. "They will stop at nothing to affect that kind of regime change when the administration in that country isn't towing the official line."

With the government on the brink of bankruptcy, Americans should be more outspoken against these programs which spend millions in US taxpayer dollars.

The US has entered the realm of imperialism and needs to return to the republican form of governance it was founded on, argued Hornberger.

"This is not the limited government paradigm on which our country was founded. It's a paradigm based on an empire from which our nation was born in resistance to empire," he said.

"What Americans have to decide is what do we want? Do we want an empire that is bankrupting this country?" asked Hornberger. "Or do we want to restore a republic and a sense of normality and peace and prosperity to America?"


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

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] Law and order better: Sahara

Law and order better: Sahara
Hours after the killing of a city Awami League leader, the home minister claimed that the country's law and order situation is 'obviously better than before'. Sahara Khatun said this in response to a supplementary question from independent lawmaker Fazlul Azim in parliament on Wednesday.  Earlier in the day, miscreants gunned down Shyampur Awami league vice-president Mohammadullah and his driver Harunur Rashid at Kadamtali.
AL leader, driver shot dead in city

Azim mentioned some recent incidents of mugging, kidnapping, murder and extortion in the city and wanted to know whether any special policing system would be introduced to check the further downslide in the law and order situation. He mainly drew attention to the recent kidnapping of a lawmaker's son. Sahara said, 'Sometimes, some incidents take place. Law enforcers sometimes can rescue [kidnapped people] and sometimes fail. But overall the situation is under control.'
'The situation will get better in the future,' she said referring to several measures taken recently.


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

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] Fwd: Delhi: Thousands protest high food prices

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Zoglul Husain <>
Date: Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:37 AM
Subject: Delhi: Thousands protest high food prices


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

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: [ALOCHONA] Prayer practice of majority Bangladeshis

majority-minority is the core factor of democracy/

Majority- is the focus of a " need assessment "....for million dollar projects/

Majority- is the simplest method to take decisions in parliament/

majority- is the biggest force to decide about local park, school, playground/

khoda hafez

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:15:39 -0500
Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] Prayer practice of majority Bangladeshis

      What is this MAJORITY - MINORITY game all about?  Who taught us to play this cruel game?
 It is this evil thing called "religious identity" -- not Religion itself -- that is the founding stone of COMMUNALISM.

  The British colonial Administration started counting the people of this land by their religous identities.  Our society, politics or economy before the advent of the British did not function around religious identities of the populace.  God knows that there are many other ways of classifying people.  Language and culture are better and bigger identifiers, each religion being a contributor to our overall culture.
                  Ekushey amader porichoy. Let us celebrate Amor Ekushey!
                          Farida Majid 


Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:50:15 -0800
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Prayer practice of majority Bangladeshis

Prayer practice of majority Bangladeshis


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

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] Reflections on Ekushey, or the International Mother Language Day

To and From Ekushey: A Long and Tortuous Journey


                      Farida Majid


            Mixed emotions of remembrance of the traumatic days of February, 1952, when three of my uncles were hauled to Dhaka Central Jail for involvement in the agitation, have become more mixed up in recent years.  In 1952, the real 'culprit' among the police-imprisoned three was the youngest, Mustafa Monowar a boy of 15 or 16 then. The police hunted him down for having drawn a cartoon poster which he had posted by the paan-shop on the main street in Narayanganj.


            The cartoon depicted a supine man, clearly recognizable as the figure of Khawja Nazimuddin, flat on his back with his ample belly up in the air.  Over and around his belly were ant-like crowds of people marching in a procession carrying placards in their hands that read "rashtro bhasha bangla chai."


            The police arrested the boy-artist and his local guardian, his dula-bhai (brother-in-law), that was my khalu, Lutfar Rahman, and they took along khalu's younger brother, Moshi. The three were beaten up with police baton, harshly enough to cause swollen arms and eyes visible a few days later when my mother and I visited them at Dhaka Central Jail. They remained imprisoned for a whole month before my nana negotiated a release. We used to live in Narinda, close by the Central Jail. My mother would take a tiffin-carrier of food and argue heatedly with the jailer for her right to visit her minor brother incarcerated for no bigger offence than drawing a black-and-white picture. On the way back from the jail visits I used to sob and vow never to learn Urdu.


           I now regret not having a reading proficiency in this, quintessentially an Indian language. One would have thought that I had the good chance of acquiring it in the Pakistani era of 1950's. But Pakistan dared not impose Urdu on East Pakistan as was dreaded. Among my contemporaries I know no one who can read and write Urdu because he or she was forced to learn it at school. Even being in the first batch of students in Viquarunnisa Noon Girls' School where there were plenty of Urdu-speaking girls and teachers, there was no compulsory class for learning the Urdu language.  I had nothing to rebel against. So, on Feb. 21, 1956, at the end of the school day, I went around to several empty classrooms and in big bold letters wrote on the blackboards: "rashtro bhasha bangla chai." There was a big uproar the next day.  I was severely reprimanded and as punishment had to stand in the sun during the break period foregoing my tiffin.


           I get flashes of insights as I revisit old issues. What was beneath the surface of the passion, the demand for Bangla as a State language of Pakistan? Bangla was even then a big and expressive modern Indian language with a Nobel Laureate poet to its credit among a dazzling array of world class litterateurs. Bengali artists, musicians and technicians figured prominently in the burgeoning moving picture and gramophone record industries.  Outside the class politics, in the cultural milieu of mid-twentieth century India, Bangla and Urdu were not pitched in any apparent battle. 


          So the trouble began with the choice of a State language. Where did this idea of a State language come from? Urdu was not all that alien a language in Bengal. As a matter of fact, one of the native languages of this great 400-year-old city of Dhaka is Urdu. But the British sahibs had been classifying and labeling not only peoples of India but even languages of India strictly according to religion. Urdu was given the label 'Muslim'. 'Bengali' received the ticketing of 'Hindu' at Fort William College that was turned into a veritable factory for manufacturing communalized Indian history and culture.


             Hence "Urdu, and Urdu only" will be the State Language of Muslim Pakistan, declared Jinnah on March 21, 1948, which we Muslim Bengali people must accept because we had made the choice of becoming Pakistani. That mistaken choice roiled us in 1948; and the protest in 1952 was actually a foil for a massive regret. The word 'mass' needs to be used here in a literal sense; I see it as a people's movement expressing bitterness of a betrayed idealism, an idealism that yearned for a democratic secular state that was betrayed by a non-Bengali elite group deciding our fate.  It was tough to admit, after the bloody communal riots, loss of lives and property, and untold human misery, that the grand Partition along the religious fault-line was a grave mistake. A large but late realization dawned on the conscience of Bengali Muslims:  Our identity – our collective 'porichoy' is through our language and culture. Our various religions are enriching parts of our common culture, not separate entities outside it.


            The whole idea of a 'State language' was and still is a mid-20th century hoax -- an imported idea from Europe thrown in the midst of turbulent India as a golden apple of Strife -- yet another imperialist trick to keep the former colonies forever in-fighting amongst themselves. The British had no intention of leaving India intact. Neither was it in the geopolitical interest of the USA, an emerging world power.   One State One Language seemed a good enough formula whose application to India's newly formed nations would emulate the native European model. The model for one language one nation with many states was provided by the U. S. A.  All in all, a thoroughly modern idea for a backward India!


          Instituting a state language was considered pre-requisite for a modern state as opposed to the perceived "chaos" of multiple languages, dialects, local cultural differences within a large language group and varieties of sects, sub-sects, within any one religion co-habiting in an integrated civilization. Not content with classifying Indian languages according to their own whimsical notions of 'Hindu' languages and 'Muslim' languages, the departing Imperialists warned the newly independent nations against any state of multilingualism which they euphemistically labeled "language problems" and that the problems needed to be attended to for economic and political reasons. Thus, the very sociological aspects that had contributed to India's pre-colonial status as the wealthiest nation on earth became characterized as "problems" to be tackled by suppression.


          Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah were all aglow in European Enlightenment. A paternalistic top-down morality replaced an older, traditional sense of justice that was shared equally by all.  British–educated political leaders, mostly from landed upper class, thought oppressed Muslims of India ought to have a homeland carved out of India.  Jinnah even toyed with the idea of Dalitstan, a homeland for the lower caste Hindus. Instead of looking for the root causes of oppression most of which were started by the British imperial rule, and determinedly discarding communalism and casteism (the form of inflexible 'scheduled' caste that was a British invention) as the legacies of evil machination of the British administrators, these political leaders sought means of solutions that caused death and displacement of more than two million people, and perpetuated the strife well into the next generation in the form of neo-colonialism.


            It is worthy of note here, especially as a hindsight, that the only set of intellectuals with any sense of obligation towards the magnificent mosaic of Indian civilization was the learned Muslims of Jamiat-ul Ulema i-Hind.  They thought it was a ridiculous idea to carve the Indian peninsula and ghettoize the Muslims in a separate state. Muslims and Hindus had lived side by side for centuries. "We should be joining our Hindu brothers in the struggle to oust the British from India," said Moulana Shibli Noumani, renowned for his authoritative tome on the Prophet's life. He rebuked the Muslim League for indulging in a 'tamasha'.  Many leading Deobandi scholars from Darul Uloom, the most influential seat of Islamic learning in India, vociferously opposed British imperialism and the 'two-nation' theory of the Muslim League that posited the demand for a separate country.


            Those venerable religious men were not politically naïve. It never ceases to amaze me how perfectly sensible, humanitarian, pragmatic and far-sighted ideas of these Islamic scholars were shunted aside by the religious-identity champions of Muslim Leaguers. The Ulema were not 'angreji'-educated! The two-nation theory-wallahs were. They were also 'rai's' and 'ashraf' and they all spoke Urdu. I call these men Macaulay's Imperialist Dream Puppets. The Mill-Macaulay-Grant education policies of 19th century were given a boost by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan who was doggedly opposed to social equality in matters of 'ajraf' or lower class Muslims receiving English education. Pursuant to his commitment to creating vigorous 'ashraf' hegemony among Indian Muslims who would be loyal to Queen Victoria, Sir Syed expressed his disgust openly for Bengali Muslims since an overwhelming majority of them were from a lower social order. Bengali was the language of these despised people.


            Bengali Muslims had been subjected to a double-dosage despise from their countrymen throughout the colonial period. The emergent urban educated middle class Hindu Bengalis were oblivious of Muslim presence amongst them.  Or so it would seem if one were to look in the entire corpus of Rabindra-literature.  As little girls my younger sister and I used to be complimented for our prettiness by Hindu neighbors with the words: "They don't look like Muslims, do they?" There was a reasonable mingling of Hindus and Muslims in the realm of music, but Muslim Bengali writers and poets thrived in a Jim Crow-like literary world of their own away from the limelight. It is no wonder that this Muslim intelligentsia of Bengal would opt for East Pakistan for fear of more Hindu domination after the British departure. Ekushey's was a complex revolt of Bengali Muslims against not only the double dosage of despise but also against its aftermath.


            Such stark realities of human experiences do not often find expressions in the current narratives or the formal ritualisation of Ekushey in a coherent way.  Yet they sure formed the load of discontent behind the back of the visible eruption of protests in East Pakistan over the State language policies in 1952.  The political ramifications of the unrest grew, as we know, with the passing years through oppression, discrimination and military dictatorships. Stories from Ekushey to the 1971 War of Liberation and the birth of Bangladesh have been well-told. But the journey begun on Ekushey, 1952, is not done yet, unfortunately.


           Ekusey was the realization that decolonization of 1947 was not 'freedom' from imperial domination but a continuation of it by local collaborators of imperialism. As we commemorate what had been achieved in 1952 we must also reflect upon all that has been underachieved thus far. For this reflection to be meaningful we need to revisit the psychological spot where a 15-yr old boy was pasting a protest poster on the side of a pan-shop in Narayangunj.  How did his sense of a citizen's rights get mixed with his passion for his mother language?  We need to trace the emotions and walk the trail back down a complicated, yet formative part of our history.



©2011 Farida Majid, a poet, scholar and literary translator. Taught English at CUNY and Bangla at Columbia University in the City of New York.


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

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] A report on Jasmine Revolution in China

A report on Jasmine Revolution in China

On Feb. 20, the response of the government to the Internet proposed Jasmine Revolution made this event come true.  Police showed up in the proposed locations or city square for those no specific location given in the announcement of Feb. 19. In many cities, police out-numbered of protesters.

There are many professional reports already, Boxun publish some exclusive selected pictures from different cities on Feb. 20.

First of all, Boxun has been attacked since Feb. 19, the attack was stopped for a few hours in the morning of  Feb. 21 (Beijing time), then the strong attack resumed. During Feb. 20, Boxun updated the progress instantly through its temporary site hosted by Google's blog.

1. Pictures and videos of Beijing:

Boxun published three videos from at least four persons, here is the one we just published:


2. Shanghai

3.  Tianjin

4. Urumqi, Xinjiang

5. Chengdu

6. Nanning, Guangxi

Boxun received descriptions of what happened in about 20 cities.


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

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] Defiant Libya:Qaddafi pulls the knife from his back

Defiant Libya

Qaddafi pulls the knife from his back and stabs back
by Tony Cartalucci

There really is no way to strafe your enemies from the air without killing innocent people and incurring considerable collateral damage, ask any Iraqi, Afghan, or Pakistani who suffers such attacks by the United States on a nearly daily basis. And while the United States and NATO have justified for decades now these grievous tactics, they are suddenly quite sensitive regarding their use in opposition to their hoped toppling of Libya's Qaddafi.

Deciphering the events on the ground in Libya is admittedly difficult. But we can be sure of one thing, the globalists want Qaddafi out and his defiance has conjured an almost tangible, rabid fit from the global-corporate elite whose future plans hinge on the domino effect they most assuredly started in Tunisia and Egypt with US-funded CANVAS, International Crisis Group ElBaradei, and the US-trained, funded, and directed April 6 Movement in Egypt.

The International Crisis Group, of which Egypt's protest leader Mohamed ElBaradei sits as a trustee beside Zbigniew Brzezinski, George Soros (the "Funding Father" of Egypt's new constitution), notorious neo-con Richard Armitage, and NATO's Wesley Clarke, has made a statement calling on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to implement a no-fly zone over Libyan airspace. This is meant to prevent Qaddafi from using his air force to strike back against the growing insurgency.

These are not signboard carrying, fist waving protesters. By both Libya's and the corporate owned media's admissions, the protesters
have seized armored vehicles and military weapons and are advancing on military bases to seize yet more. It is an armed insurrection by all accounts. China is reporting that a thousand of their workers have been routed from the country by looters, and reports of arson, wide spread violence, and disorder also indicate the protests are not peaceful.

It should be noted that the West is fully prepared to foment such unrest in foreign nations. The US Brookings Institute report "
Which Path to Persia?" specifically suggests supporting hordes of protesters as in the Iranian "Green Revolution," funding, equipping, and supporting known terrorist groups, and proposing the use of US military support, covert and otherwise support both protesters and terrorist groups. There is no reason yet to discount the possibility of such support being lent to Libya's uprising. Indeed, in Iran, the US is already overtly supporting the "Green Revolution," the funding of subversive political activities, and operating terrorist organizations within the country.

The elated bravado found splashed across the pages of globalist think-tanks, gloating over the successes in Tunisia, Egypt, and the gleeful celebrations as it spread out has now been replaced with almost child-like fits of hand-wringing and over-the-top propagandizing over reports admittedly coming from hearsay amongst the Libyan protesters themselves. The best example is Brookings Institute Senior Fellow Daniel Byman's hand-wringing found in his article, "
Democratization From Above? In Libya? Unlikely."

"Muammar el-Qaddafi's regime in Libya, we can hope, will be the next government to fall as the wave of protests and calls for better governance sweep the Middle East," says globalist policy wonk, 9/11 Commission white-wash staff Daniel Byman. He most likely means better "global" governance via US-funded "civil society." He goes on with a litany of childish interjections, devoid of facts the mainstream media and foreign governments concede are difficult to obtain or confirm.

Eliot Abrams (
CFR, PNAC) makes his desires to see Qaddafi removed from power abundantly clear in a National Review piece posted on the Council on Foreign Relations' website, titled "Ghadaffi's End."

The Council on Foreign Relations has their entire front page covered in topics relating to the unfolding crisis in Libya. The Foreign Policy article "
Intervening in the Libyan tragedy," calls again for NATO and the UNSC to intervene, including enforcing no-fly zones, holding military officers responsible for defending the embattled regime, and "sending a strong message" to other regional autocrats who might be tempted to fight back against the Western-backed conflagration consuming North Africa and the Middle East.

The mainstream media is already falling over itself to make a case for military intervention, in op-eds like this one from the
Christian Science Monitor, perhaps due to globalist fears Qaddafi may yet battle his way out, emboldening other targets of globalist ambition to strike back against Western-fomented unrest inside their countries. Cuba's Fidel Castro, long standing in the way of globalist ambition, stated recently NATO may use the unrest as pretext to invade Libya. Perhaps Castro's been reading the globalist think-tank reports as well.

Another tell-tale sign the globalist's are ruffled over Qaddafi's defiance is simply looking at BBC's one-sided coverage. In
a recent report, BBC once again concedes that reports coming out of Libya are "impossible to report." Despite this admission buried within their article, they continue relaying reports coming out of the US State Department's's translations of protester accounts.'s efforts can be observed by following them on Twitter via @AYM, revealing nearly everything reported by the mainstream media is coming from the US-backed "Twitterati."

BBC's Frank Gardner says this of Qaddafi's defiance: "

"Even by his own bizarre and eccentric standards, the latest speech by Col Gaddafi was breathtaking in its defiance of both the wider world and the reality now facing him. Speaking from his favourite location, Tripoli's bombed-out Bab Al-Azizia Barracks, he referred to the protesters variously as "cockroaches" and "traitors" who were "drug-fuelled, drunken and duped". At times, the Libyan leader seemed to lose control of his temper, shouting his words in Arabic. At others, he paused to adjust his matching khaki shawl and cap. His language, while undoubtedly aimed at shoring up what support he still has in the country, was one of quaint nationalist slogans from the 1960s and 70s. To many of those opposing his rule, who use Twitter, Facebook and the internet, this was a speech from a bygone era from a man whose time they believe has long passed."

It is safe to say objectivity has long since been abandoned by BBC.

We hear again from BBC's Jon Leyne who claims eastern Libya appears to be wholly under opposition control and that people are "deliriously happy." It appears BBC has no problem accepting the charged rhetoric of their Western-backed "Twitterati" as fit to print, and are determined to once again convict Libya in the court of skewed world opinion.

What many may be wondering now is when the International Crisis Group will likewise call for no-fly zones over Central Asia to stop a similar atrocity, now 10 years in the making, from continuing on, or perhaps why the Western public's outrage over Libya isn't equally matched with anti-war sentiment against the United States and the UK. And one may wonder if Qaddafi wore a Nobel Peace Prize and used drones instead to strafe his opponents, if then his bid for power would be acceptable to world opinion.

Respected geopolitical analyst and historian, Dr. Webster Tarpley leaves us with a cogent reminder and warning to remain objective and skeptical in regards to the media circus. He cites specifically the hyped-propaganda used to start the first Gulf War regarding the "
Kuwait incubator babies."
And this is the overall point, not to defend Qaddafi or the use of military aircraft certain to incur innocent deaths, but to point out how the global elite are creating and then manipulating the unrest. The point is to show how the global elite are forcing regimes to pick between global hegemony ruled by the depraved plutocrats of Washington and London, or paying a heavy price to remain sovereign and sort out national problems in their own way.


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

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] Catching a whiff of jasmine in Kashgar

Catching a whiff of jasmine in Kashgar

TWO fire engines stood parked by the road leading past Kashgar's main mosque. They were clearly not deployed to fight any fires. Atop one sat a helmeted officer behind a shield. The nozzle of the vehicle's water hose pointed to the junction where an alley leads into the maze-like old city of this ancient oasis town. An officer in camouflage uniform sat on the other vehicle. In a nearby government compound, several more security personnel could be seen wearing helmets and carrying shields, standing next to a line of armoured vehicles. They had not been there the day before.

Kashgar is no stranger to security measures. It belongs to a part of China's Xinjiang region that is periodically racked by separatist incidents, sometimes violent, involving members of the ethnic Uighur community.  It has been particularly edgy in the past two or three years. An outbreak of deadly clashes between Uighurs and Han Chinese in 2009 in Urumqi, the provincial capital, has left the authorities uneasy.


But today the government perhaps had reason to be a little more jittery than usual. Calls had been circulating on the internet for Chinese to gather in central areas of 13 major cities (none in Xinjiang were named) on February 20th to stage a "jasmine revolution"—in reference to the upheavals that have are convulsing the Arab world. An unsourced posting to an American-based Chinese website, (in Chinese, and currently under a DDOS-style attack) seems to have started the flurry. Chinese authorities quickly moved to suppress it by blocking posts on microblogs that contain the word "jasmine". They stepped up surveillance of several activists and deployed large numbers of police near central Beijing, apparently to pre-empt any protests.


Banyan's latest column discusses why China does not, in fact, appear to be on the brink of a pro-democracy upheaval. In Xinjiang  however the authorities might worry that Muslim Uighurs can identify more readily with their democracy-seeking co-religionists in the Middle East and Africa. Many of Kashgar's Uighurs do have much to complain about, from discrimination to unemployment to a makeover of their old city which has forced thousands of them from their homes into soulless new apartment buildings. Soon after my arrival on February 18th I noticed I was being followed by a black Volkswagen. It remained on my tail until I left the city 48 hours later. When I proceeded on foot, one of its occupants would get out of his car to lurk behind me. Kashgar's police have a reputation for intimidating foreign correspondents in this way.


They probably have little to fear, however, from any popular uprising in support of democracy. Xinjiang's troubles tend to be related to ethnic tensions rather than democratic yearnings (though some activists might hope that ending rule by the Han-dominated Communist Party might pave the way for democracy). In Urumqi, tensions between the communities have become so ingrained in the aftermath of the rioting in 2009 that it is hard to imagine Hans and Uighurs marching together to call for political reform. Security is far less visible than it was then, but squads of black-clad riot police, some with batons and others with rifles, can still sometimes be seen in the streets.

Xinjiang does have at least one strong connection with recent events in Egypt, however.


It was here that Chinese authorities pioneered the technique of shutting off the internet and mobile-phone messaging systems as way of controlling unrest. Five days cut off from the internet was not enough to stymie the masses arrayed against Hosni Mubarak's regime. Xinjiang was subject to similar restrictions for months in the wake of its riots. This created at least some sense of common cause between Uighurs and Hans. Members of both communities complain that business was badly disrupted by the blackout.


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

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