[ALOCHONA] Photos show US soldiers in Afghanistan posing with dead civilians

Photos show US soldiers in Afghanistan posing with dead civilians

'Trophy' pictures show US soldiers posing with corpses of Afghan civilians they are accused of killing for sport

A US soldier poses with the corpse of an Afghan boy – one of three photographs published by German magazine Der Spiegel. Photograph: AP
The face of Jeremy Morlock, a young US soldier, grins at the camera, his hand holding up the head of the dead and bloodied youth he and his colleagues have just killed in an act military prosecutors say was premeditated murder.
Moments before the picture was taken in January last year, the unsuspecting victim had been waved over by a group of US soldiers who had driven to his village in Kandahar province in one of their armoured Stryker tanks.
According to testimony collected by Der Spiegel magazine the boy had, as a matter of routine, lifted up his shirt to reveal that he was not hiding a suicide bomb vest.
That was the moment Morlock, according to a pre-arranged plan, threw a grenade at the boy that exploded while other members of the rogue group who called themselves the "kill team" opened fire.
They would later tell military investigators that the boy, a farmer's son, had threatened them with the grenade.
The pictures include a similar photograph of a different soldier posing with the same victim and a photograph of two other civilians killed by the unit.
There was no sign on Monday of the anticipated public outrage. But with Afghanistan on holiday for the Persian new year celebrations, and media outlets initially unable to get hold of the images, anger may yet build.
The US ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, recently confided to officials that he feared it might trigger the same kind of scandal as that at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, where images of prisoners being abused by US soldiers sparked anti-American protests.
For weeks the US government has been working to pre-empt any outrage, with top officials, including the US vice president Joe Biden, in talks with Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.
Despite being a setback in the propaganda war between the western coalition and its insurgent enemies, Nato will be relieved that for the time being only a tiny sample of a total collection of roughly 4,000 images and video clips have found their way into the public domain.
The publication of the photos will also mark the ultimate disgrace of the group of young US soldiers, who are currently facing military justice for killing innocent civilians for sport and mutilating their bodies by cutting off fingers and ripping out teeth to keep as trophies.
Morlock has turned on his former colleagues, agreeing to testify against them in return for a reduced jail sentence. Some of the activities of the group are already public, with 12 men currently on trial in Seattle for their role in the killing of three civilians. Morlock has told investigators that Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs was the ringleader. In videotaped evidence, he has said Gibbs would pick out a possible target with a comment such as: "You guys wanna wax this guy or what?"
Gibbs, if found guilty, could receive a life sentence.
Hans-Ulrich Stoldt, a spokesman for Der Spiegel, said the magazine had other, more graphic photos.
"We published three but not others, and we even pixilated those we did print so that the victims could not be identified," Stoldt said. "We needed to document [the accusations] in some form, and were as restrained as possible."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/21/afghanistan-trophy-photos-us-soldier

__._,_.___

[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] US wanted Bangladesh gas for India

US wanted Bangladesh gas for India

Dhaka, Mar 21 (bdnews24.com) — Wikileaks has claimed that the US was keen on India importing natural gas from Bangladesh, thus lowering its fuel dependency on Iran.

In a leaked cable, sent by US ambassador to New Delhi David C Mulford to then US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice on Sep 13, 2005, the envoy told Rice that her upcoming meeting with the Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh and foreign minister Natwar Singh could create scopes to "challenge India to take equally difficult steps on relations with Tehran".

"New Delhi is trying to support us without alienating Tehran, on whom it depends for current oil supplies, future natural gas imports (pipeline and LNG) and access to Afghanistan and Central Asia," the cable said.

"There is little warmth to the India-Iran relationship, suggesting that India's attachment to Iran could weaken as and when New Delhi is able to secure other energy sources (e.g. gas pipeline from Bangladesh) and alternative access routes to Central Asia (e.g., overland transit through Pakistan)," Mulford pointed out.

In 2002, various lobbies in Bangladesh and outside worked to persuade export of natural gas from the country to India, including the Indian subsidiary of American oil giant Unocal Corporation.

Unocal also submitted a gas export pipeline proposal, known as the Bangladesh Natural Gas Pipeline Project, to the state-run Petrobangla.

Bangladesh has been opposed to the export of gas to India on the pretext that it does not have enough gas reserves to meet its own domestic requirements.

However, Unocal officials say that based on the current domestic gas consumption in Bangladesh, there appeared to be enough gas supplies to last more than 170 years.

INDIA SHOULD BE VOCAL AGAINST IRAN

Mulford also pointed out that he had difficulty persuading Natwar and secretary Shyam Saran that "Iran could jeopardise both our nuclear initiative and India's regional security interests".

"Your meetings provide an occasion to encourage the [India] to exercise leadership on this Iran issue, rather than hiding behind the NAM consensus, as happened on UN reform," he added.

He said that he was informed by the Indian foreign minister that the "Iranians [had] reacted very negatively when Natwar pushed privately on [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] compliance during his recent visit to Tehran."

"That said, Natwar Singh must be made to recognise that Congress is watching India's role at the IAEA with great care, and the Indian vote in Vienna will have real consequences for our ability to push ahead on civil nuclear energy cooperation," the cable said.

He cautioned that the Indians might want to "lie low" and hope that the question of who they supported in the IAEA Board of Governors vote on Sep 19 did not arise during the discussions in New York.

"We need to give a clear accounting of these stakes, while also preserving the significant equity that we have built-up in the transforming US-India relationship," he stated.

__._,_.___

[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] Banning the Fatwa a Miscarriage of Justice!

Banning the Fatwa a Miscarriage of Justice!

 

Dr. R. Raashed

(Ph.D. School of Law, Macquarie University Sydney, Australia)

Managing Director,

Islamic Information Services Australia (Legal and General)

 

The legal system in Bangladesh is an extension of the British Westminister legal regimes and procedures. In a country where some 90% of population is Muslim, it's a failure on the part of the country's political system that this colonial misfit still being forced upon the public some after sixty five years from the independence. Through independence the British colonial rule was rejected by the population yet, the cunning and the shrewd among the nation wouldn't let it depart from its fate. The colonial masters are on foot guarding their agents and interest quarters in Muslim countries. But it is no pride that as a nation we have failed to distinguish between a friend and a foe. Guised under the garbs as the judiciary or executives, the stooges are happy for the servitude and indeed, are colonized at heart. Banning the Islamic Fatwa in the courts of Bangladesh represents a feature for the colonial past and hence, a distinct failure at the same time.

 

As a slogan, the colonial stooges maintain entrenched love and loyalty for what they call the secular and religiously neutral identity. In reality however, their love and bias for the colonial legacies are intense. In the context of Bangladesh, it is to be juxtaposed with what the Qur'an (02:165) puts as Muslims' love for God should have been much stronger. This contrast will explain the reason why the judgment at point instigated the formidable opposition. Given the demography of the country, the judges of the courts in Bangladesh, must reflect the wishes and aspirations of people through their judgments. Banning the Islamic Fatwa would thus represent an assault on public interest.

 

A judgment is never an individual view of the judge on an issue before him/her. Instead it must reflect the realistic application of a legal instrument in its holistic consideration. The legal instrument in this sense is the written law which in every sense is also a trust in the custody of a judge or a tribunal. But a huge gap between the law in this sense and its application is a true picture for most of the judiciary and executives in Bangladesh. This is also true of many other Muslim countries. This article is only an analytical approach to the legal reality in Bangladesh and hence does not intend to hurt the public prestige of the relevant courts. In relation to the judgment banning the Fatwa, its text is important. But its context is rather crucial and thus, demands a neutral readership.

 

Through their judgment of banning Islamic Fatwa in a blanket form, the two judges of the High Court in Bangladesh have in fact struck through the hearts of 90% Muslims in the country. Worse still the duo of the tribunal have failed to appreciate this aspect of their decision. The naivety rooted in this judgment is apparent from the two judges' approach to the law in isolation from the social reality. A shallow approach to law such as this is a liability for the nation it was meant to serve. We may think of a novice in other offices, but in the application of law there is no provision for the apprentice judges. Said simply, the mediocrity has therefore, no place in law and legality. To secure the justice, not only the best and the brightest should practice the law, but also, the legal mechanism in the country must cater for this. Undoubtedly, banning the Islamic Fatwa in a blanket form drew a bad picture of legal reality in Bangladesh. Fortunately, however the Appeal Court did comprehend the gravity of the consequences and suspended its operation pending the outcome of the appeal. It is obviously a very limited comfort. We must accept that those initiating the appeal for this ominous judgment deserve being applauded. The hearing of the appeal is now continuing and hence, the relevance of this commentary.

 

A word of caution: While reaching conclusions, we will not prejudge the religious affiliation of His Hon. Justice Golam Rabbani and his partner in the tribunal Justice Najmun Ara Sultana. The excuse to reprimand this critique under the provision as "contempt of the court" does not arise. The tribunal consist of these two judges banned the Islamic Fatwa in Bangladesh in 2001. It is however, our solid right to judge the merit behind their decision given the damages it caused to the hearts of millions of Muslims in the country and beyond. We already know that the Arabic names do not necessarily make anyone a Muslim or a believer, to be precise. For an individual to be a believer or otherwise is absolutely a personal choice. Hence in our derivations, no expectation would be built on the ground of the two judges' religious persuasion. By accepting the membership to a tribunal, they two judges have obviously adopted the liability for their judgment's professional integrity being critically and vehemently scrutinized. Throughout this commentary, our focus will therefore, remain on this aspect of the judgment's professional cohesion and integrity.

 

We have a reason to presuppose that the two judges in this case are traditionally trained on the issues of law and legality in Bangladesh. Hence, they were expected to uphold the basic principles of justice for all while delivering a judgment in a case of nationwide significance. While making a judgment in such a sensitive case, what went missing was the very essence of the legal sensibility on the part of the two judges. The judgment miserably failed to protect the value system of Bangladesh as a Muslim majority nation that its constitution envisaged to protect. As the judgment of banning the Fatwa was delivered in 2001, the saga of the 5^th amendment cancellation in 2010 was never an issue then. This judgment has also failed on being sensitive to the national feelings and emotion of 90% Muslims in the country. We don't dispute that there may well be the cases where the institution of the Islamic Fatwa have been misused. Consequently, the subjects are victimized. It may well be true that not all those issuing the Fatwa in Bangladesh do have the due credentials to do so. This being the reality, the institution of issuing the Fatwa should have been regulated with the appropriate directives being issued by the court to the executives.

 

As a rule of thumb, the legal procedures aim at protecting fairness by de jure (by law) or by defacto (by the issues of fact) mechanisms. The Westminister system of legislature which has been the source of legal culture in Bangladesh is based on this basic principle. By applying a blanket ban on practice of duly made out Islamic Fatwa the two judges of the High Court have clearly failed on this account as well. This failure provided a clear case where the incompetent judges performing to the opposite direction of their appointment and office. This judgment can only be described as substandard. The misuse of Fatwa by those that are not duly qualified may warrant that this institution is regularized. Instead of applying a blanket ban, the court may in fact have won the appreciation of all by codifying the practice. This goodwill however, remained totally absent from this judgment and hence is the challenge of its professional integrity. In absence of this, the only option remaining open is either the misinformed ill will of the tribunal to the institution of Fatwa or worse still, an instance of outrageous incompetence.

 

Let's now focus on the judgment itself and analyse critically its legal aspects. This decision although suspended later on by the Court of Appeal, has recently been brought before the appeal court for the review. At the outset we must accept that the decision on this case is fraught with consequences. This judgment should have cared for the impact it is going to have on the public. Handling the religious emotion without the due care and most importantly, interfering with the fundamental legal instrument of the Islamic fatwa have the impetus to plunge the nation into civil war. The Islamic edicts issued in personal or collective issues, by the duly qualified Islamic scholars can never be eradicated. Anyway considered, it is an issue of natural justice. It is one of the most fundamental pillars of the Islamic Shair'a and hence, above the court of law's jurisdiction.

 

The constitution of Bangladesh provides for the freedom of choice and religion. By the operation of this supreme law as a legal instrument therefore, the constitution also provides the guarantee that Muslims in the country are free to seek the scholarly made out Islamic opinions where relevant, with a freedom to abide by them as well. The judgment has also failed to comprehend the true understanding of the Fatwa in Islam. When put in this perspective, the judgment banning the Islamic Fatwa in fact, defeats the operational provision of Bangladesh constitution whereby it guarantees the freedom of choice and religion. The Westminister system of administering justice represents a series of legislative procedures all of which are committed to reflect the wishes and aspirations of people in a country. This legal principle is engrained and deeply rooted in any democratic system that seeks to emulate the Westminister system.

 

The court of Justice Golam Rabbani and Justice Najmun Ara Sultana has also failed on this ground. Venturing out to impose a blanket ban on Islamic Fatwas is a clear mark of short-sightedness on the part of this judgment. To say the minimum, this type of summary justice reflects the phenomenon as the miscarriage of justice itself in the system. This judgment has rightfully brought about the shame of injustice upon the nation that is paying for these judges. While deliberating, the tribunal has clearly failed to look into the law in its holistic nature and application. Should we then propose that a judgment should be merit checked before delivering? May be we should! A piecemeal approach to the law and its institutions, albeit easy, is bound to defeat the purpose behind the law. The judgment banning the Islamic Fatwa is an outstanding example.

 

It is in this context that when established beyond doubt, the intention of the law makers also becomes a strong legal instrument in the Westminister system of administering justice. Maintaining an overall outlook to the legal institutions needs a sound culture of absolute adherence to legality alone. The seat of justice is in the heart of the judges. But where the judges are corrupt or incompetent, the legal institution administering justice must take all the blames for the failure. The judges are also human beings and thus, are susceptible to being swayed by the fear or favour while fostering a particular orientation in a judgment.

 

It is an open truth that the legal institutions in Bangladesh are found to be cardinally corrupt in public opinion. But is it in fact true that they are indeed corrupt, is a million dollar question! The mechanism for disciplining the deliberate failure on the part of the judges must also be in place. Bangladesh where the judges are appointed along the line of political loyalties, paying back for such appointments is bound to victimize first the conscience of a neutral bystander. Prior to allocating a case that deals with the issues of public conscience and interest, the High Court should therefore, do a bit of in-house cleaning exercise. An audit of competency and neutrality in a judge should therefore precede the final allocation of such a case.

 

A Disqualified Law Minister:

Bangladesh where the merit based appointment of judges is at stake, the audit of competency must determine first, whether a single judge or a tribunal is competent enough to handle the case at hand and comprehend its consequences. The past ideo-political affiliation of the judges should be the deterrent from assigning to them a case that may encroach upon the bounds of neutrality. Once a government dubbed as the most corrupt on earth boasts the law and order, it becomes nothing but a laughing stock. People in Bangladesh are either, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Christians or nature worshippers. The only fabric that binds them all is belief in a religion, revealed or otherwise. The atheists thus, constitute a sheer minority in the make-up of its population. A minister for women's rights and welfare should be a woman herself. For the same reason, an atheist is an outright misfit for the law ministry. Short of realizing this, a government is either naive or a part of criminal complicity against the public interest.

 

Appointing the law minster of a highly religious nation such as Bangladesh, a self confessed communist who by definition is also the atheist, is an outright misfit and indeed, a grotesque blasphemy. In a sense, this is the hypocrisy on the part of a government that undertakes the obligation to guarantee public aspirations. Instead of interfering with the peoples' choices, this huge inconsistency is the debacle that the High Court should look into first. Without dealing with this inconsistency head on, administration of true justice will continue to be a mirage and daydream. The audacity to uphold the institution of justice at any cost needs the brave-hearted professionalism and the legal scholarship in the judges. When a judgment fails, the justice seekers do pay with their rights. But more importantly, losing the neutrality in the system of justice administration is indeed, a grave ominous sign for a religiously diverse country like Bangladesh. Should we then trust a fox with our chickens? May we then conclude that when the conscience becomes corrupt, justice is lost from the inception?

 

The constitution of Bangladesh needs to be re-done:

Let's now refer back to the judgment of blanket banning the Islamic Fatwa by the tribunal under the scrutiny. From observing the procedures of appeal, it appears that the attorneys on both sides of the application have got their approach to the case totally wrong. The attorney of the plaintiff sought to argue the case from the pure Islamic point of view, which has no place before the court in Bangladesh. The Westminister system of administering justice may therefore be excused if it decides to look at such submissions at askance. In fact, the future of this case lies squarely in arguing it on the basis of law makers' intention behind drawing up the constitution. The holistic approach to this supreme law of the nation will only guide the appeal court that the judgment of the tribunal was dangerously, localized and superficial and thus, needs to being scrapped at once.

 

It is almost annoying to note that the court appointed ten lawyers as amicus curiae (the friends of the court without any substantive credentials on Islamic law. The arguments rendered by some of its members are devoid of legal substance and hence, are ludicrous. To start with, the concept of referring a court to the amicus curia is based in the Vatican and thus rooted very much in the Christian culture of Catholicism. Making such a church based concept the jury in deciding the outcome of the Islamic Fatwa is and outright ridicule! It is a glowing example of ignorance on the part of the High Court in Bangladesh in deciding the prerequisites before setting a competent appeal process.

 

Equally disturbing is the submissions of the attorney for the defendant who in naivety, opted to argue his case also from the localized view of the constitutional provisions. By this approach he in fact failed to establish any real relevance. If it is true that the defense attorney had in fact contribution to draw up the current constitution of Bangladesh, he should have been disqualified on the basis of conflict of interest. His argument is almost blasphemous as to who is the source of the real power by the constitution. Ironically however, the judgment under the appeal hammer of the court, had failed in the first place, to uphold the provisions of the constitution itself.

 

To start with, the constitution of Bangladesh has not gone through the stringent procedures of public plebiscites and hence, it is urgently needed to be done again. In its current form, it can be described as a temporary legal document dedicated to care for the interest of an emerging nation. It clearly lacks the commitment to cater for the wide ranging interests of Bangladesh as a nation. Without undertaking a genuine and widespread public consultation, a constitution will serve nothing but an elitist approach to the law and legality. This is the guilt that Bangladesh as a Muslim nation continued to live for the last forty one years. It will indeed be a national pride for a forward looking government in future to set the foundation of the nation right to re-cast a realistic constitution based on true and wide-scaled public consultation. In fact, it can be a good public agenda for campaigning re-election by a strong political party now. Prior to this, speaking of a true representative justice system in Bangladesh will continue to be a daydream.

 

·         Dr. Raashed is the author for "The Book that Contains No Doubt" due to be published soon!

__._,_.___

[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: [ALOCHONA] Re: Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman on Yunus episode

We should stop politics with the reputation of Bangladesh instead fight for its right and prestige. "upore thutu marle nijer gaiai ashe" ...you forgot the basics... ----Hasina will never get peace prize ..:) she already proved how vindictive and psycopath she is..the world is watching..................   --- On Mon, 3/21/11, ShamimC <veirsmill@yahoo.com> wrote: From: ShamimC <veirsmill@yahoo.com> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman on Yunus episode To: alochona@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, March 21, 2011, 1:00 AM   Dr. Yunus won Nobel Prize along with many other prizes, now what left is enlisting his name into Guinness World Records for being the longest serving Managing Director of any company in the world, TWENTY EIGHT years. Why we will let that record go? Someone should take that initiative to let that happen. Probably this did not happen before and will not happen unless it is owned by someone personally. He was appointed Grameen Bank Managing Director by Gen. Ershad in 1983, since then: * Ershad Government completed its NINE years * Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed's caretaker government completed its term * Khaleda Zia completed her first five year term * Khaleda Zia completed her second short term * Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman's caretaker government completed its term * Sheikh Hasina completed her five year term * Justice Latifur Rahman's caretaker government completed its term * Khaleda Zia completed her third full term * Professor Iajuddin Ahmed - was compelled to resign on 11/January/2007 * Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed's military caretaker government completed its two year term * Sheikh Hasina's government running almost to its two and half year What a world record for Dr. Yunus, since his assumption of power as Managing Director of Grameen, TEN government has come and gone and the eleventh is running But he is still in the helm of Grameen Bank, congratulation to Dr. Yunus, many more to come, why not outshine eleven more! Thanks, Shamim Chowdhury Maryland, U.S.A. --- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Isha Khan <bdmailer@...> wrote: > > *"The government's mentality is reflected in its dealings with Prof. Yunus > and Grameen Bank" * > > > > – Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman, Executive Chairperson, Power and Participation > Research Centre (PPRC) and former Advisor of the caretaker government > > *What do you say about the Dr. Yunus and Grameen Bank controversy?* > > It is a totally unfortunate incident. There are times when a strong moral > stand exists behind certain incidents, but I can't find this in this > instance. Grameen Bank has about 82 lakh members. This is a huge community. > This is an inspiration. Everyone would have wanted this institution to be > strengthened further, even the government. Narrow logic and administrative > arguments may have been used to remove Dr. Yunus from Grameen Bank, but I do > not find any clear stand of the government in this regard. > > *So who will benefit from this and who stands to lose?* > > Firstly, Grameen Bank will be harmed as an institution. Some feel that if > Prof. Yunus, as a person, moves away, Grameen Bank will be harmed. My > response to that is the person Yunus is not being removed through any > transparent process. I see a huge media campaign against him. Important > persons within the government are making such comments that it is obvious > that there is a plan to remove him. Grameen Bank has thus fallen into deep > risk. We must understand that micro-credit is basically a system of trust. > It depends wholly on trust. If that trust is gone, the entire system will > collapse. Some people talk about the rule of law, but it is clear that these > are the persons least interested in the rule of law. > > The rule of law isn't simply a series of steps. There has to be an > objective. There are problems with the objective in this instance. I feel > that Grameen is being placed at risk by the removal of Yunus and the entire > country's image is being threatened. > > As a researcher of social change, I feel that Bangladesh in the midst of > poverty and a difficult situation, has used a development model and that is > the effort to move ahead in a united manner. I see the current event as an > attack on the multifaceted Grameen model. This does not bode well and the > government should take this into consideration. > > Prof. Yunus should remain at the helm for some more time in Grameen Bank. He > has to exit in a manner that does not put the bank at risk. > > *What sort of risks would Grameen face if Prof. Yunus is removed?* > > It is not as if Grameen will not be affected with Yunus' removal. A former > Grameen officer has been made the Chairman of Grameen Bank. His present > activities make the risk all the more clear. The aggressive attitude and > statements of certain responsible persons in the government have made this > risk all the more potent. Their attack on Grameen is quite open and this is > really an alarming matter. > > *What could the government's motive be behind this action?* > > The year 2011 is a difficult time for our economy. The fact that one crore > 20 lakh families are direct members of Grameen and BRAC is significant. This > is an important matter in rural economy. If the trust is put at risk, the > situation can turn serious. People have already begun withdrawing money from > the bank. If by removing Yunus from office on grounds of his age was a great > instance of establishing the rule of law, people would deposit even more. > Why would they withdraw their money? > > *What could the international repercussions be?* > > The donors may not interfere in our internal affairs, but at the same time, > providing us with assistance and facilities is their internal affair. They > will definitely evaluate our performance. Grameen's micro-credit is an > international recognized model. This is unnecessarily being attacked and put > at risk. They will certain take note of this. They may feel that democracy > isn't being practiced here. > > The entrance of our readymade garments in their markets is a matter of their > political decision. A bill has to be passed in this regard. If they feel > that democracy isn't functioning in Bangladesh, they just might say, block > their garments. So they may poke their nose into our internal affairs, but > in a roundabout manner. That is a matter of their internal decision and we > can do nothing. > > We are not an isolated country. We are a mid-income country and cannot > simply be set apart in one corner. Our target is to strengthen various > international relations to climb higher in this global world. We must lay > stress on this. The government could have avoided messing around with > Grameen and Prof. Yunus. > > *Why did the government enter into this controversy?* > > I can't say why it entered into this, but it does not bode well for anybody. > It is not good for our efforts at poverty alleviation. More important than > the government's objectives is the fallout of this action. Will this help > the country in any way? Will it help the people in any way? Will it benefit > Grameen, will it benefit the government? The answer is negative in all > cases. > > *What is the future of Prof. Yunus?* > > It will be painful for him to see this institution, which has grown over the > year, fall flat on its face. He has always striven to strengthen Grameen and > to keep it unified. That is why he wanted a dignified exit. > > The government has taken a very colonial attitude in saying it is in their > jurisdiction to take a decision regarding Grameen. Yet the real owners of > Grameen are 80 lakh poor members. The government is not looking into the > rule of law here. The government's mentality is reflected in its dealings > with Prof. Yunus and Grameen Bank > > Times ahead are difficult for Prof. Yunus. This is a sad chapter for us > indeed. This will not have good consequences. I can only hope for an amiable > solution and that we will not proceed towards unfortunate consequences. > > > http://www.probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=6922 >

__._,_.___

[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: Politicised Bangladesh judiciary

Well said. Bangladesh needs a popular uprising like that is going on in the Middle East. Our veteran leaders are holding us back with the past and we need to beyond that. Enough is enough...we do want to dual in the past..its time we look at the future and have a civilized life. I am afraid as long as Hasina and Khaleda are in power there will not be any real progress in this god forsaken country.   These leader and their psycopaths are ruining this country and its own strablishments are becoming a surrogate to India. We would like to have good relations with India but not when our sovreignty is at stake. Rise up Bangladeshis and claim what is yours!! Freedom from corruption, Corrupt judiciary, kidnapping, murder and mayhem. --Thanks http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-22/u-s-may-lose-key-ally-against-al-qaeda-as-yemeni-president-faces-revolt.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.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: Banker Yunus banking on emotion defying law

Dr. Yunus won Nobel Prize along with many other prizes, now what left is
enlisting his name into Guinness World Records for being the longest
serving Managing Director of any company in the world, TWENTY EIGHT
years. Why we will let that record go? Someone should take that
initiative to let that happen. Probably this did not happen before and
will not happen unless it is owned by someone personally.

He was appointed Grameen Bank Managing Director by Gen. Ershad in 1983,
since then:
* Ershad Government completed its NINE years
* Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed's caretaker government completed its
term
* Khaleda Zia completed her first five year term
* Khaleda Zia completed her second short term
* Justice Muhammad Habibur Rahman's caretaker government completed
its term
* Sheikh Hasina completed her five year term
* Justice Latifur Rahman's caretaker government completed its term
* Khaleda Zia completed her third full term
* Professor Iajuddin Ahmed - was compelled to resign on
11/January/2007
* Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed's military caretaker government completed its
two year term
* Sheikh Hasina's government running almost to its two and half year

What a world record for Dr. Yunus, since his assumption of power as
Managing Director of Grameen, TEN government has come and gone and the
eleventh is running But he is still in the helm of Grameen Bank,
congratulation to Dr. Yunus, many more to come, why not outshine eleven
more!

Thanks,
Shamim Chowdhury
Maryland, U.S.A.

==============================================================
--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, "Emanur Rahman" <emanur@...> wrote:
>
> This is how mischief is made. Through the presentation of distortion
as truth. Let's get a few facts straight:
>
> • Grameen Bank is not a government institution. The government
is only a shareholder.
>
> • The rate of interest charged for loans gets higher as the
notional of the loan gets smaller.
>
> • An interest free regime would have resulted in a loss making
entity requiring constant subsidy.
>
> • No statistics or metrics have been produced to show that
micro-credit has been largely unsuccessful.
>
> • Yunus was not removed because micro credit is a failure.
>
> • If 10 poor people were lifted out of poverty, that is still
more than BAL (starting with Mujib) or BNP has ever achieved.
>
> • Yunus was not found guilty of any form of corruption.
>
> • Grameen's commercial activities are controversial but that is
an intellectual debate about the limits (should there be any?) that
should be applied to social enterprises in a free market economy.
>
> To my mind, intellectual dishonesty is one of the worst of all crimes.
However it makes sense that this is the stock in trade of politicians,
their sycophants and their charlatans.
>
> Envy is the root cause here - plain and simple - and EVERYONE
including this charlatan knows it. The sycophants have so little
backbone that they won't even say it although it is now in the record of
the JS after the BAL MPs "prayed" for a Nobel for Hasina!!
>
> Its laughable.
>
> So the real question for the charlatans is - should we now close
Grameen Bank as it is a bad idea? What about BRAC? What is different?
>
> That's the thing with BAL and their supporters - I expect them to
ALWAYS work against the national interest as they are one to all,
TRAITORS.
>
>
> Emanur Rahman | m. +447734567561 | e. emanur@...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shamim Chowdhury veirsmill@...
> Sender: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 21:58:56
> To: Shamim Chowdhuryveirsmill@...
> Reply-To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Banker Yunus banking on emotion defying law
>
> We must give credit to Dr. Yunus for taking micro financing to world
stage and branding Bangladesh as the brand owner and finally wining a
Nobel Prize. He may have not invented the idea but certainly he was able
to give it a height which no one was able to do before. Because of his
personal connection with Hillary Clinton the then first lady current
Secretary of State of the most powerful country of the world Dr. Yunus
was able to get the world attention.
> Â
> Dr. Yunus got his first world wide media attention during the first
micro summit which took place in Washington where our present PM Sheik
Hasina co-chaired the summit along with Queen Sofia of Spain . In the
home turf Dr. Yunus got support of the then Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina
who went all the way to Washington to unveil Bangladesh brand financial
system in first ever world summit on microfinance.
> Â Â
> In the early days of microfinance, Dr. Yunus has a success story to
tell but not much audience other then few media outlet. The country was
going through high trouble. It was couple years after the death of Gen.
Zia when Gen Ershad claimed the power overthrowing corrupt BNP
government of Justice Sattar. In a state wide televised speech, Justice
Sattar claims wide spread corruption in his government and asked
military to take over, so did Gen Ershad. Suddenly Dr. Yunus saw some
light at the end of the tunnel, military marshal law governments civil
Finance Minister Abul Mal Muhit, yes readers, ironically it’s the
same person who is our current Finance Minister.
> Â
> Finance Minister Muhit gave an audience to Dr. Yunus and Dr. Yunus was
the speaker, as good orator he was and is Yunus was able to make Muhit
understand the value of starting a new bank solely for the poor. Muhit
as the Finance Minister was able to get permission of Gen. Ershad to
form the Bank name Grameen Bank, a bank for the poor. Ershad’s
military regime issued a proclamation establishing the bank and
appointed Dr. Mohammad Yunus as its Managing Director, it was 1983 and
since then he is the head of this government institution.
> Â
> It need to be clear that Grameen Bank unlike many other privately
owned NGO is not a private entity at all but a government entity with
autonomy and Dr. Yunus is nothing but government approved Managing
Director of the Bank. Success of Grameen Bank is not just the success of
its Managing Director Dr. Yunus’s but the government of
Bangladesh and its shareholders as well.
> Â
> Mohammad Yunus played a wonderful role of mentoring the organization
setting its goal. The negative story picks up there where Grameen Bank a
bank for the poor changed its role of providing free of collateral cheap
loan to the poor especially women to high interest loan sharking
business.
> Â
> A noble cause and idea which started its journey from village Jobra
under the stewardship of a young professor Dr. Yunus caught into
so-called social business gimmick. Loan to the poor started with no
interest climbed to as high as THIRTY percent though in Grameen
transaction shows it as twenty percent not showing the actual cost that
the borrowers has to bear.
> Â
> Day by day Grameen involved it self into all sorts of profit making
business, telecommunication to making so called energy curd and what
not. A brand name Grameen paid a hefty price for that as well not just
financially but receiving endless criticism. While the poor people
Caught into microfinance debt Grameen caught into illegal VOIP business
and slapped with hefty punitive fines of hundreds of millions of BDT
during last caretaker government and loosing its clean image.
> Â
> Some people may say Dr. Yunus has no relation to those illegal
wrongdoings of Grameen Telecommunication. How ever that notion will not
be justified and he had to bear the responsibility. Grameen mobile is a
part of Grameen family and Grameen receives a huge stash of profit out
of it. So if you accept the profit you have to bear the responsibility
as well.
> Â
> A Nobel laureate like Dr. Yunus never came up with one word to condemn
his organizations wrongdoing but keep tight-lipped. His muted un
acknowledging attitude of this grave matter did hurt lot of his
supporters as well as rest of the nation. Though this is nothing new
from him, he kept mum or talked in favor of military and undemocratic
rulers as near as past Gen. Moeenuddin-Fakhruddin  or Iajuddin
government.
> Â
> Dr. Yunus who started (not really) claiming as the
originator/author/owner of this microfinance idea thought about Grameen
Bank with same obsession. Like many others who rose to power and fame
Dr. Yunus started thinking about him as indispensable and his role as
Managing Director as prerequisite for banks survival.
> Â
> Probably Dr. Yunus himself and many others thought him and Grameen
Bank as one and one entity, that thinking process was based on a
complete flawed understanding. Â It is very unfortunate Dr. Yunus did
not play an affirmative role on bringing that wrong notion down rather
fueled the idea.
> Â
> A noble idea strangulates to death slowly but surely. A bank that was
created to ensure loan to the poor ravenous people of Bangladesh is now
hungry it self for fame and ready to play any game. Getting the Nobel
Prize whisked away Dr. Yunus into a fairy land of foolishly considering
him as indispensable and a savior of the world poor. High ambition and
hunger for fame and name ruined his stature and brought him down to
earth facing criticism home and abroad.
> Â
> Grameen Bank was and is an autonomous government entity though it is
not just like much other autonomous body but a special one. If the
banking law of the country as well as Grameen Bank’s own employee
service manual clearly states that all Grameen employees will retire at
age 60 then how in the world it is OK for Managing Director Dr. Yunus to
violate that law and say I am indispensible therefore I must stay for
life and defy any law.
> Â
> Some Yunus supporter might say there are others too who has crossed
that age such as PM her self or others in the cabinet. Yes that is true
but that is a whole new subject/concept to deal with. Present law of the
land dose allow those position holder to continue their official duty at
or above sixty, if you do not like it then go ahead and make effort to
change it. But as long the law allows or disallows, you just have to
abide by the rule, period.
> Â
> Dr. Yunus in many of his speech talked about lawlessness in our
society and politics but when the time came for him to set the standard
he downplayed the law and played his sentiment card and vowed to stay in
power as long someone is not able to pull him down.
> Â
> During caretaker military rule, Dr. Yunus talked harshly about
politicians and labeled them as corrupt and promoter of family dynasty.
He did talk about fresh leadership to make the difference and now when
the question comes about new leadership of Grameen, Dr. Yunus back out
and his laughable reply that Grameen will not be able survive
without him or there is no one who can assume that responsibility. If
so, then it is shame for him that he stayed in that position for couple
of decade but miserably or the more correct choice of word would be
mystically failed to create a chain of leadership who can and will take
new challenges.
> Â
> Critics say, to keep his tight grip on all matter Dr. Yunus never
allowed any new leadership capable of running the organization
independently around for too long. Any one who happened to be capable
will be removed and a person will be replacing the position with his
approval only.
> Â
> The nine members of the board out of twelve are selected by Dr. Yunus
himself and rest three appointed by the government of Bangladesh . Nine
members of the board who has been handpicked by Dr. Yunus have
absolutely no idea whets so ever of how a billion dollar bank like
Grameen runs. They are there no more then to act as rubber stamp to go
along with Dr. Yunus whim.
> Â
> Dr. Yunus has taken full advantage of the disadvantage of his
executive board members neophyte of the banking business and ruled the
business as he wishes rather then following the business rule prescribed
in Grameen’s business policy.
> Â
> The bank which strictly supposes to land only to the poor’s
started funding family owned business defying all rules. Grameen is tax
exempted business institution. They do not pay to the government in
return they do public service, is this what public service, service to
the poor means to Dr. Yunus.
> Â
> When Grameen Bank’s poor member has to return every singe penny
they borrow whether loose or gain otherwise face penalty, intimidation
and legal or social boycotts by the group but strangely his family gets
a very sweet deal of sharing profit and loss which even commercial banks
do not offer other then some Islamic banks. Is this kind justice and
honesty Dr. Yunus is talking about while in the international stage.
> Â
> It is unfortunate that a man of his stature will set such a bad
precedence and take ill advantage of his position and international
connection to pressure law of the land takes a different course to keep
him in his position. It is more unfortunate that now he wants keeps the
nations image hostage and play his emotions card once again to keep his
position.
> Â
> It is so childish for him and his lawyer Dr. Kamal Hossain to say that
if he was allowed to violate the bank law for ten years then he should
not be blamed about it at any letter stage? Does Dr. Yunus mean
violation get justified if it was not challenged or corrected in time?
> Â
> Are we going to say that recent epoch making judgment of high court on
nullifying all military rule of seventies and eighties in Bangladesh and
declaring it as illegal occupation of power was wrong judgment as it
happened thirty years ago and no one challenged it earlier therefore
illegal unconstitutional occupation of power by military rulers was
justified!
> Â
> High interest Grameen’s micro credit is nothing but unambiguous
rape of frail but lucrative financial body of poor of the poorest
especially women. Most vulnerable segment of the society is trapped into
Grameen’s loan shark landing microfinance policy, calamitous
attempt of the poor to escape from local loan shark known as Mohajon to
get caught by institutionalized shark loan lender named Grameen is
unfortunate and unwanted.
> Â
> It’s a farce that the poor of the poorest who need the most low
interest finance to change their ill fate are locked into maximum high
interest loan up to 30 percent from Grameen while the affluent society
gets loan at very low interest some where 10 to 12 percent from
commercial banks. Now Grameen might say we are giving loan to someone
with no collateral therefore we have to cover our risk. No comments on
that as that is a fact, however then question comes, do not call this
sort of loan sharking a social enterprise call it what it is.
> Â
> In U.S. to often you will get advertisement about car loan or housing
loan with bad credit or no credit everyone applies everyone gets credit.
Those lenders are known in the U.S. as loan sharking institution and
they do not challenge it. If Dr. Yunus also agrees that Grameen does the
same then their will be no question but question comes when he claims to
be doing business of social just. Grameen’s over exorbitant
interest rates and alleged coercive debt collection policy has no
difference then shark lender of the west.
>
> What is Loan Shark: A loan shark is a person or body that offers
unsecured loans at high interest rates to individuals, often enforcing
repayment by blackmail or threats of violence. Dose that sounds Dr.
Yunus and Grameen Bank, Yes it dose. Wikipedia Link explains the
characteristics of Loan Shark: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loan_shark
> Â
> If wants know more about the result of Grameen Loan Sharking business
and hide and seek game then go to this link and play the video:
http://www.france24.com/en/20080404-bangladesh-burden-microcredit-caring\
-grameen-bank-mohammed-yunnus
> Â
> Watching this video will raise very suspicious question what Grameen
and Dr. Yunus wants to hide from getting out? Its no wonder anymore why
Dr. Yunus wrote a personal memo to NORAD asking help to keep donors fund
misappropriation secret, WHY? What he is scared off! Why Dr, Yunus
appointed director Noorjahan Bagom ask her security to tie the
journalist who simply says that he wants to ask some question! Hope one
day the poor of the poorest will know about the name of the game.
> Â
> I just read his public statement (March 7th 2011) where he makes calls
to the nation. That is just tricky rubbish. When a case is waiting for
ruling, his public statement is a mere attempt to fuel confusion among
mass people and pressure on the court to take the verdict in his favor.
> Â
> He and his lawyears are making evry effort to make our justice system
look bad, that is not right thing to do for a Nobel lauriate! He himself
went to the court challenging Bangladesh Bank notice of his removal now
after three days of deliveration his lawyears are talking saying they
might not get justice. Dr. Yunus is following a carbon copy plan of
Khaleda Zia after she lost her house and court fiasco played by her
lawyear.
> Â
> Within months of getting the Nobel Prize he applied this same sort
of public call/statement technique during last military CTG attempting
to grab political power in the vacuum using help from military
intelligence unit. I surely hope dr. Yunus stop this uncalled technique
and keep faith on system.
> Â
> IÂ certainly hope Nobel laureate Dr. Yunus will come intto his
sense and do what is good for the Bank and its poor borrowers not
just looking at self interest. Reduce the interest burden from the poor
and be a real benevolent banker of the poor. Above all, he will abide by
the law of the land as any other ordinary citizen and not claim aspecial
stature just becouse of he is a Nobel laureate.
> Â
> Â
> Shamim Chowdhury
> Maryland, U.S.A.
> Email: veirsmill@ yahoo.com
>

------------------------------------

[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/

[ALOCHONA] China: “Southern Tibet” (Arunachal) ‘Invaded’ by India

China: "Southern Tibet" (Arunachal) `Invaded' by India; Separating Northeast From India Can be a Response From Beijing

 

"What we see therefore is an India which is getting aggressive with the sole purpose of defeating China, occupying more land and reestablishing a new great Hindustan!"  

 

Full Article –

 

http://deshcalling.blogspot.com/2011/03/china-southern-tibet-arunachal-invaded.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.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] The Evil Empire Strikes Back from Sheikh Dynesty's Power Base!

The Evil Empire Strikes Back from Sheikh Dynesty's Power Base!
Abid Bahar


In understanding the Yonus and Hasina turfs or power bases, international observers shouldn't underestimate Hasina. Hasina is not the Mujib of the 70's, she is much more powerful than her father but she follows a similar pattern of leadership which are (1) her reliance on local cadre politics,(2) internationally relies on Indian help to keep the dynesty in power and (3) ideologically she keeps a sober face of being secular and progressive who is ready to fight against "Islamic terrorism." With such armours Hasina is not weak at all to fight against Yonus, even when the latter keeps a strong international connection.
(1)The power of Mujib-Hasina's Cadre Politics
Like Mujib locally Hasina's power lies in her Chatro League, Jubo League and Awami League cadres. In the thick of things, cheating on the national wealth they receive favouratism on a daily basis. This sweetner used through distribution of favouratism obliges/blinds the Mujibbadis not to use their conscience or to have obligation to the nation. The party interest, and the Sheikh dynesty's interest is placed above the national interest.This tradition of nepotism to the party workers was the hallmark of Mujib's leadership.This is a common practice among fascist leaders worldwide.
(2) The Power of Indian puppetiary
Another front of Mujib's power base in Bangladesh was the India backed Rakkhi bahini. Now in Hasina's Indian security is fully provided to Hasina, on record Pronob Mukherjee confirmed it in the Indian Nation Assembly. Thus, in exchane for her puppetiary, her power base is Indian anti Islamic (socalled secular) connection (Pronobda) with the wider world. The Indian imperialist ambitions with the Doctrine/ Islamphobia Doctrine watches any real development in Muslim World that could undermine their agenda. In this Dr. Yonus is too smart to be ignored. Due to these connections Hasina as an Indian puppet is even more confident to mobilize the unproductive and anti Bangladesh forces for herself to stay in power. This is contrary to Dr. Yonus who has been directing productive forces to bring national and global changes..
In this tug of war between Hasina and Yonus, history repeats itself with the type of arrogance we are familiar with Mujib (who during the entire war period was in Pakistan) back from Pakistan in only three years put Bangladesh in the world map as a country with a bottomless basket, The 1974 famine was man-made says Amerta Sen. The all talk and little action in development but the demagague Mujib's BKSAL was enough harmful to the economy. Now through Hasina's AL India is after destroying the infrastructure like the Gramin Bank of Bangladesh.
(3) Sheikh Dynesty's ideological power base
IdeologicallyMujib the founder of the Sheikh dynesty called himself secular (it was not tolerant but anti religious), he was pro-Indian who jointly opened the Farraka barrage causing devastation in the north West of Bangladesh but himself claimming to be the father of Bangladesh even when he didn't clearly declared the independence and remained the entire war period in Pakistan.His giant misrule led to his assasination.The death and destruction by Mujib's one party rule through his cadres called by many Mujib as being a fascist leader with a history of a short rule of Bangladesh.
In the lack of independent -minded and conscious Bangladeshis to monitor the Sheikh dynesty's built-in puppetary mindset, Hasina comes back to power again. She allows India to open the Tipaimukh dam and borrowed 1 billion dollars to built infrastructure for transit to India while Hasina and Al's love affairs continues with India, the BFS continues to kill Bangladeshis indiscriminately. Anybody that disagrees with Hasina becomes an anti liberation force therefore a razakar. History repeats itself, Mujib's cadre based Chatro League is back to control the streets.the Indian evil empire once again strikes back from Sheikh dynesty's power base to turn Bangladesh into an Indian Bhutan.

__._,_.___

[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] Who wrote Famous 'Six point' Program?

Taj Hashmi

 

Although Professor Bilayet Hossain was not my direct teacher, since he was a professor of Physics while I was an arts student at Dhaka University, technically he is my teacher. And as I knew him later as a colleague, I found him to be a very humble, exceedingly polite and an upright person with genuine concern for the well-being of the University and Bangladesh. So, I do not take his comments on my observations on Mujib, BAKSAL and related issues with any adverse feelings at all.

 

I think Prof Hossain has done a good job by pointing out how a metamorphic process has taken place during the years, turning me into a bitter critic of Mujib and his party from an ardent admirer of those up to January 1972. Without going into the details and responding to all his assertions, I would like to tell him that I was NOT the only Bangladeshi who metamorphosed  into a bitter critic of Mujib and his policies from an admirer. Thousands of die-hard Awami supporters, including favourites and beneficiaries of Mujib, also turned into his critics and adversaries. My turning into a Mujib critic is not as significant as his beneficiaries doing so.

 

I did NOT take any benefit out of his government and party (which I could have due to my connections, including close relationship with H.S. Suhrawardy and his family). I would humbly ask Prof Hossain if he has given any thought as to why so many ardent followers of  Mujib became his bitter critics during his life time. I am sure, Prof Hossain remembers it quite well that Abdur Rab of JSD in a public meeting in Dhaka in 1973 wanted to make shoes of Mujib's skin (and that Rab was taken into Hasina cabinet).

 

I agree with Prof Hossain that Mujib had to climb a difficult mountain of problems and problems in independent Bangladesh. People would have borne all the burdens and suffering cheerfully had Mujib's cronies, influential Awamis, including his mighty nephews, brother, brothers-in-law and notorious sons would have suffered along with the masses. While Mujib advised people to marry off their daughters by not  adorning them with gold but Jasmine flowers (Beli Phool), his daughters-in-laws wore Nao Ratan crowns (Nine jewels or precious stones). And these came out in newspapers.

 

Mujib did not stop his cronies from acquiring "abandoned" properties right and left in Dhaka and elsewhere. Do you think it was befitting a "Father of nation"? Don't you think killing someone in police custody (as the BNP govt is also doing) is a flagrant violation of human rights? And bragging about in the Parliament (televised nation-wide), "Kothay Siraj Sikdar", is sickening. His government did not kill only Siraj Sikdar, thousands of young and not-so-young JSD and Sarbahara Party men were killed during 1972 and 1975. I know one of them. Maniruzzaman Tara of Sirajganj ( A Naxalite activist) was found lying dead at a graveyard in Sirajganj, while officially he was in Dhaka Central Jail in 1975.

 

Mujib's becoming the Prime Minister in 1972 was not a sacrifice in a Parliamentary System of Government. In fact, I was told by a confidante of Tajuddin Ahmed that Mujib told Tajuddin while coming to the Race Course Maidan from Tejgaon Airport on 10^th January 1972: "Tajuddin, aami kintu prodhan mantra habo".

 

Mujib's allowing freedom of the press up to june 1975, was NOT an act of mercy and there is nothing to glorify about it. A father's  act of looking after his children is normal, his deviant behaviour is abnormal.

 

Mujib took the whole credit for the famous Six Point Programme, which was drafted NOT by Mujib but by a group of Bangladeshi intellectuals like Rehman Sobhan, Muzaffar Ahmed Chowdhury, Ahmed Fazlur Rahman, Banker Khairul Kabir and others. The late Khairul Kabir told me in 1997, about a few days before his death in Singapore, that he handed in the Six Point Demand to  Mujib at Dhaka Airport in early 1966, asking him to read it in the aircraft. Anyway, his taking the full credit, or at least not acknowledging the help of others does not show his greatness. His treatment of fellow agartala prisoners was not that benign either. One of them lives on charity in a village in Bhola.

 

Any criticism of Mujib does not mean glorification of Zia, Ershad or other dictators.

 

Finally, as I heard from some Hindu gentlemen from Barisal about the identity of Mohiuddin Ahmed of Awami League, as the one who terrorized Hindus in Barisal in 1950 ( known as Pistol Mohiuddin), I reproduced it in my posting. I agree with Prof Hossain that I should verify the fact. Having said this does not mean that Mohiuddin was a great man. He lent support to Khondkar Mushtaq Ahmed by leading his parliamentary delegation to Moscow. Similarly,Malek Ukil led Mushtaq's delegation to London and compared Mujib with Pharaohs of Egypt.

 

Since the expectations were too high and mujib failed to fulfill those even partially after independence and condoned the crimes of his cronies and relatives, Mujib cannot be above criticism.

 

I don't agree with Prof Hossain about 7^th November 1975. I saw millions of people celebrating the victory of Zia. I don't care what Col Hamid has to say about it.One may verify my assertion by watching the video clippings of 7th November, which i believe the BNP government will telecast on 7th November, if in the meantime the Government is not toppled! Who knows?

 

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___