[ALOCHONA] Successful health minisrty

Dr Pran Gopal Dutta VC BSMMU





http://www.amardeshonline.com/pages/details/2011/03/24/73687

__._,_.___

[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 rise and fall of the godfather of microfinance

The rise and fall of the godfather of microfinance

The removal of Yunus, the Nobel laureate and the darling of the international development set, and the weakening of the Grameen Bank, would give these competitor NGOs an advantage to recruit 'credit-worthy' members, and to create more power and resources for themselves. It is this toxic brew of power and envy that has embroiled Nobel laureate Yunus in a legal dispute with the current government. In the western fetishisation of this iconic individual, the real issue—the ever-deepening debt crisis for poor women—is forgotten, writes Lamia Karim

THE rise and fall of Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions. In the Bengali culture of irsha (envy), it was only a matter of time before the ire of the prime minister would fall on the Nobel laureate. After all, Professor Yunus, the darling of the international development set of multinational aid organisations, heads of states, CEOs, philanthropists, went to places that no Bangladeshi had gone before—Oslo for a Nobel, Davos, meetings with state leaders, and his personal friendship with the Clintons. He is the most celebrated Bangladeshi who has brought fame and recognition to this fabled land of floods. He is also a global leader of the microfinance movement, and his removal may send shudders throughout the industry, especially in Bangladesh. His contributions are many, and they should be recognised. While I find the forced removal of Professor Yunus disgraceful, to say the least, I want to pose some questions from a different angle.

In the past few months, there has been a flurry of news reports on the negative consequences of microfinance in South Asia. The Grameen Bank, the paradigmatic institution of microfinance, and its charismatic founder, Professor Yunus, have been in the midst of this furore. The bank and its founder are winners of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize. On March 2, 2011, the Bangladesh Bank sacked Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus as the managing director of the Grameen Bank. The bank is owned 25 per cent by the government of Bangladesh. Despite that, the Grameen Bank has always operated as an independent entity. According to a parliamentary watchdog committee, the bank does not follow the 2006 Microcredit Regulatory Act (bdnews24.com). That is to say, there are countless differences in how the Grameen Bank is operationally distinct from government banks, and of its autonomy.

The unravelling of Professor Yunus began with the airing of Caught in Debt, a Norwegian documentary in 2010. The documentary showed that in 1996 Yunus transferred $100 million meant for Grameen borrowers to one of the bank's subsidiary companies, Grameen Kalyan, without knowledge of the Norwegian donors. While the Norwegians now claim that there was no wrongdoing on his part, the Bangladesh government began an investigation. At present, there are three cases pending against Professor Yunus and the Grameen Bank for fiscal and other irregularities that are considered by many as largely frivolous.

The online news agency bdnews24.com reported that Professor Yunus had given the printing contract of the Grameen Bank to his family business. In a kin-based society, it is not surprising that Yunus favoured his family over an outside contractor. While his supporters note that no dividends or profit came to the family, one has to raise some difficult questions about his judgement. Surely, this large contract helped the family business financially. It is equally important to remember that historically the Grameen Bank did not place field officers in their native villages to prevent nepotism, but should we not note that the same rules did not apply to the bank's founder? While Professor Yunus and the bank's advocates claim that the bank is owned by the poor women as shareholders, one has to ask whether these women shareholders were consulted about this huge award to his family (and if so, how), and whether it was in the best interest of the shareholders.

Like its founder, the 'miracle' stories of microfinance empowering poor women in Bangladesh have also come under scrutiny in recent news reports. What is curiously absent in the writing by his supporters is the mention of the dire consequences often faced by women when they cannot repay their loans. The fear is that an institution that has spawned millions of members and has created thousands of jobs may fall apart. And that is a genuine concern that should be addressed seriously. If the current government was earnest about the welfare of its poor citizens, then why did it take to so long to regulate the industry? The Microcredit Regulatory Act came into existence in 2006 when the industry had been in business over 30 years. In 2001, Aminur Rahman wrote Women and Microcredit in Bangladesh, a compelling critique of the bank that was published by Westview Press (USA), and one that our esteemed UPL would not publish because it would unsettle a great institution. While knowledge can be censored for some of the time, in a globalised digital world, it is no longer possible to do so. There is ample evidence in more recent research (Ahmed 2007), and in the vernacular press, that microfinance does not live up to its rhetoric of empowerment. Yet the government had not taken any action until now, and unfortunately, in a manner that is hardly beneficial to the women borrowers of MFIs.

In my research, I have documented how the failure to pay back microfinance loans had resulted in heightened shame and pressure on poor women in Bangladesh. For example, I found that in 90 per cent of cases, the users of these loans were their husbands. But the women remained responsible for the loan repayments. Default by a lone woman resulted in friction among group members who were collectively held responsible for individual loans. Women who could not pay due to unforeseen circumstances (illness, poor investment decisions, theft of property) were subjected to public shaming by microfinance institutions.

In a face-to-face society like Bangladesh, the conduct of women is strictly controlled, and women are the custodians of family honour. Shaming women publicly brings dishonour on men, and the family. Hence, poor women bear the social costs of microfinance, often with negative consequences. Moreover, the interest rates on the loans are astronomically high (the Bangladeshi government capped it at 27 per cent in 2010), and loans often come with product tie-ins, such as hybrid seeds and breeder chickens. These are troubling aspects of a model touted as bringing empowerment to poor women! When poor women are unable to repay loans due to unforeseen catastrophe, who advocates for these hapless women? In my book, I have recounted stories from some of the earliest members of the Grameen Bank who suffered greatly because their businesses could not take off as planned. Yet, no one came to advocate for them in international newspapers!

Turning to the question of Professor Yunus's sacking by the Bangladesh Bank, the attorney general of the country in a recent televised press briefing said that if anyone should win the Nobel Peace Prize in Bangladesh, it should have been the prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, for signing a peace accord with the Chakmas in the Chittagong Hill Tracts who had fought an insurgency since the 1970s. In fact, Hasina's supporters tried to nominate her for the Nobel Peace Prize in the late 1990s.

Remember that in 1996, Yunus was a member of the caretaker government that may have given him a window into the functioning of government, and how he could rid government of corruption, inefficiency bureaucracy. Thus in 2007, he attempted to form a political party with those objectives, a decision he later recanted. The majority of his supporters were diasporic Bangladeshis who saw the Nobel laureate as endowing their country with global stature. His play for power caused ire from Hasina who saw him as a possible political adversary, and one who had won international renown that she had not received. Thus, when the Norwegian documentary was aired, it gave the prime minister the ammunition to humble Professor Yunus by removing him from power. Yet at 70, he is ten years beyond the mandatory retirement age of 60 in Bangladesh. Surely we must ask: why did it take the government ten years to wake up to that fact? And why did Yunus himself not realise it, and step down gracefully? So, the question is, why now? In 2013, Bangladeshis will again vote in national politics. What better time to send a warning signal to any uppity NGO leader of the dire consequences of acting against the interests of the ruling party? In this respect that it is important to remember that NGOs have been politicised since their participation in the Gono Adolon that led to the downfall of military dictator Ershad, and they routinely help their members to run for public office or to elect union council officers.

With over nine million borrowers, the resource-rich Grameen Bank is a formidable vote bank. If its charismatic leader goes into politics, he can take away votes from Hasina's ruling party, although he cannot undermine the party. Moreover, government bureaucrats, such as the director of the Bangladesh Bank, find Professor Yunus as a law unto himself because of his international stature. Bureaucrats feel that the Grameen Bank (and other NGOs) receives donor funds that should go to the government. In 1993-94, NGOs and bureaucrats had a face off, with the NGOs winning that round due to donor intervention. Things have changed substantially in the political domain. No longer can Western envoys pressure the government to rescind its actions against their favoured clients, i.e. NGO leaders. Hence, the procedural questions of Yunus's firing as the head of Grameen will trundle through the courts. One can only hope that the justices are impartial and above party loyalties.

Finally, there are ongoing turf battles among the largest microfinance NGOs in the country. The removal of Yunus, the Nobel laureate and the darling of the international development set, and the weakening of the Grameen Bank, would give these competitor NGOs an advantage to recruit 'credit-worthy' members, and to create more power and resources for themselves. It is this toxic brew of power and envy that has embroiled Nobel laureate Yunus in a legal dispute with the current government. In the western fetishisation of this iconic individual, the real issue—the ever-deepening debt crisis for poor women—is forgotten. And that is the saddest part of the story.

____________________________

Lamia Karim is associate professor of anthropology at the University of Oregon. She is the author of Microfinance and Its Discontents: Women in Debt in Bangladesh (University of Minnesota Press, March 31, 2011).

http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/op-ed/12659.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] Bangladesh Ready to Compromise on Yunus Dispute

Bangladesh Ready to Compromise on Yunus Dispute

Bangladesh says it is ready to compromise with Nobel laureate Mohammad Yunus, who was dismissed as chief of the microfinance bank he founded.The country's finance ministry said Wednesday the government is ready to find a solution to the issue and that Yunus must come forward to help resolve the matter.

The statement comes a day after U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake expressed concern about the effect of Yunus' departure from Grameen Bank on civil society and on the lender itself.  Blake met with Bangladeshi leaders during a visit to the country on Tuesday.

Last month, the government ordered Yunus to step down as head of Grameen Bank, which provides loans to the poor.  The Central Bank said 70-year-old Yunus violated Bangladesh's retirement laws by staying on past the age of 60.The Central Bank owns a 25 percent stake in Grameen Bank and the government has been attacking Yunus for alleged financial irregularities.

Yunus has rejected those allegations.His supporters say Yunus' dismissal is related to his decision to make a brief attempt to set up his own political party in 2007.  Yunus has denied any political aspirations.He is appealing his dismissal with Bangladesh's Supreme Court.

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/south/Bangladesh-Says-Ready-to-Compromise-on-Yunus-118505054.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] Fwd: Foreign interference unacceptable

------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Zoglul Husain <zoglul@hotmail.co.uk>
Date: Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 7:12 PM
Subject: RE: Foreign interference unacceptable
To: Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com>

Looks as though the govt has defied Blake on Yunus issue. Previously, on the same issue, they defied Hillary Clinton and all the congress members, who were concerned. Muhit trashed the report of formation of any committee for compromise. According to a report, Mozammel Babu, a columnist and businessman close to the government, has recently been involved in setting up a 'loose group of about 500 people' called the "Friends of Bangladesh" (the counter of "Friends of Grameen") to try and counter the influence of international pressure relating to Yunus along with other issues. He reacted and remarked, 'This is aggression from the west in the name of Dr Yunus on a sovereign country in applying the law of the land.'

It seems that a battle line has been drawn against Obama, with Manmohan as Hasina's mentor. Or, is it just an external show while compromise has been reached? Dipu Moni says every thing is normal, but Blake's press conference does not seem to confirm her assessment.

However, this is the govt, which India-US (Bush) brought in power. The rule of this govt is a rule of thugs and a reign of terror.  I wrote recently: "The present illegitimate govt was brought in power through a rigged election on 29 December 2008, with pre-determined results, under military deployment and conducted by the so-called Care Taker Government, which was a covert military govt for two years, run under emergency rules and which in turn was brought in by the vicious conspiracy of the so-called 1/11 2007 engineered by India-US (Bush) and supported by their allies, including their rubber stamp, the UN."

We are keeping an eye on the developments, arising out of Yunus' dismissal.
 

---

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 10:14:54 +0600
Subject: Foreign interference unacceptable
From: bdmailer@gmail.com
To:

Foreign interference unacceptable

Rashed Khan Menon, president of the left-leaning Workers Party of Bangladesh, a component of the Awami League-led ruling alliance, has rightly pointed out in the parliament that foreign countries, particularly the United States, is interfering in the internal affairs of the country. Menon was referring to the case of removal of Dr Muhammad Yunus from the post of the Grameen Bank's managing director by the government and the US administration's repeated demand that a negotiated settlement be reached between the two parties.

Menon observed that such interference was 'unacceptable.' We cannot agree with him more. While we do not accept the visible governmental efforts to malign Dr Yunus, or any person for that matter, on the basis of yet-to-be proved allegations of financial corruptions, we have no reason to accept the foreigners' continued pressures, direct or indirect, on our elected government to reach a negotiated settlement of a legally controversial issue, pending with the country's highest court. If Dr Yunus has flouted the law of the land to retain his administrative position in the bank, he should be removed from the position for the sake of the rule of law, which promises equal treatment of all citizens by the state. If Dr. Yunus is genuinely considered still indispensable for the Grameen Bank, the government is free to amend the law concerned, increasing the age-limit for the managing directors of all the banks.

However, a truly nationalist government committed not only to the political, economic and cultural interests of the people but also to the national sense of dignity can make sincere efforts to avoid foreign pressures in conducting the affairs of 'nation state.' The ruling Awami League-Jatiya Party coalition, like its BNP-Jamaat predecessor, has hardly displayed its sense of dignity in governing the state on its own. The Wikileaks report showed only the other day that the government's foreign affairs adviser had 'briefed the US administration' about the contents of the agreements signed between the prime ministers of Bangladesh and India which have never been properly disclosed to our people. Besides, the country's ruling class politicians of rival camps have long been seen, to the disgust of the ordinary millions, rushing to the foreign missions in Dhaka to complain against each other and seek their interventions in resolving local political disputes.

It is too much to expect that the country's political class voluntarily seeking foreign interference in the local affairs would now be able to resist interference with the domestic affairs by foreigners. So, who knows, the incumbents may eventually surrender to the US and its Western allies and work out a negotiation and thus make Yunus and his foreign friends have the last laugh. However, Yunus, claiming to be a big champion of nationalist causes, should not have allowed his powerful foreign friends to interfere in the country's internal affairs so nakedly. He should have rather resisted the governmental wrath against him, if there is any, with the active support of the millions of the poor that he claims to be supporting him for years now.

Meanwhile, the democratically oriented sections of our people need to organise themselves politically against the political class vulnerable to foreign pressures at any given time. Tolerating foreign interference, after all, is inconsistent with the people's spirit of the liberation war that they fought 40 years ago.

http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/editorial/12555.html

US interference unacceptable: Hanif
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=190626&cid=2

__._,_.___

[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] Cricket in Los Angeles Suburb of Woodley Park

A cricket mecca in an L.A. suburb

Woodley Park in Van Nuys, a nondescript park, is cricketdom's melting pot

By Amar Shah

Special to ESPNLosAngeles.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/news/story?id=6210816

 

Amar Shah is a writer and producer living in Los Angeles. He is developing a romantic comedy screenplay set in the world of cricket. He can be reached at shahespn@gmail.com or on Twitter

 

A look at the Leo Magnus Cricket Complex, where people of many diversities join to enjoy the game of cricket Leo Magnus Cricket Complex

 

This is indeed a hallowed ground.

 

"We've had funerals with full-on bagpipes," cricket historian David Sentance said. "There are famous cricketers buried here. Of course, we don't make much noise about it. We certainly don't put plaques up. We don't want to make this place a cemetery."

 

It's a postcard-perfect March morning at the Leo Magnus Cricket Complex, also known as Woodley Cricket Field, in Van Nuys, Calif. While hobby airplanes buzz overhead and red-tailed hawks swoop down from willow trees, Sentance, 58, dressed in his cricket whites, stands in a makeshift queue waiting his turn to bowl to an awaiting batter in the nets.

 

Standing in line with him are other immigrants and expatriates from all over the world. Sentance, who originally is from England, is here every Saturday to play cricket.

 

This swath of land located in the San Fernando Valley, 20 minutes northwest of downtown Los Angeles, next to an archery range and a golf course has become a Shangri-La to cricketers around the world.

 

"Cricket is my life," KCS Rao said. "I'm dedicated to it. On my wedding day, I played it before the reception. I come every Saturday because I love the game."

 

Rao, 77, also stands in line. Donning a Delhi Daredevils jacket, he tosses a high, arching googly. He had bypass surgery a few years ago, but his weekend cricket exercise is mandatory to help him in his recovery.

 

Rao emigrated from Kolkata in 1972 and helped establish the Woodley Field complex. "There were no trees," Rao said. "It was a dam site."

 

Cricket has a rich history in Southern California. The sport has been played there since the 1890s, but it wasn't until the 1930s that an elderly character actor named Sir Aubrey Smith formed the Hollywood Cricket Club with Frankenstein himself, Boris Karloff.

 

Karloff once wrote, "I feel quite safe in prefacing my remarks by the simple statement that cricket is the finest game in the world."

 

The Hollywood Cricket Club, which featured some of Hollywood's leading actors, such as Laurence Olivier and David Niven, was able to secure land at Griffith Park near Burbank, Calif. The grounds featured four fields and a grand pavilion. But in the 1970s, equestrians who had used other areas around the field decided they wanted the ground for training.

 

The Southern California Cricket Association and other members of the cricket community joined forces and fought for a spot to call their own.

 

"Fortunately, the West Indian community was well positioned at the time," Sentance said. "For over five years, there was a lot of political groundwork."

 

In 1977, the SCCA secured land in the Sepulveda Basin. "It was a bare piece of land," Sentance said. "Over a four-year period, all the cricketers planted the trees and started putting in pitches."

 

Since then, Woodley has become a multicultural hotbed of cricketdom. Those from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Australia, New Zealand and other countries from the former British Empire call the four fields of Woodley home. There are nearly 50 teams in the SCCA in five divisions.

 

Near the batting nets, a man wearing a white Panama hat puts on knee guards. Shailesh Calib came to the United States from India five years ago. He's been playing at Woodley for three years.

 

"The pitches are perfect," Calib, 33, said. "It's very well maintained. So you can play high-quality cricket. You can enjoy batting, bowling and fielding. It's like playing in a different country."

 

On this morning, the L.A. Bengals, most of whom are from Bangladesh, gather in a semicircle and practice fielding drills. Shouts of "Come on, guys, let's go!" echo in English and Bengali.

 

"Every team has all kinds of nationalities," Rao said. "They're all playing here. The unity is there. Whatever may be the differences between two countries, that is not shown."

 

In another area, a group takes a break in the shade and chats in the players' native Gujarati.

 

One of those players is Mehul Dave, who moved to the U.S. in 1998 for educational reasons. He was searching for a club to play cricket with and eventually heard about Woodley.

 

"U.S. cricket is very lucky to have a place like this," Dave said. "I don't think anywhere in the U.S. do we have four grounds that are turf wickets. Because most fields are played on AstroTurf. This is natural turf."

 

On its manicured fields and with its diversity and perfect weather, Woodley has hosted some of cricket's greatest. India played Australia in 1999, and Americans saw cricket stars such as VVS Laxman and Adam Gilchrist in action for the first time.

 

In 2007, India great Virender Sehwag played in a tournament at Woodley, and every year Woodley hosts the Hollywood Ashes, in which Tinseltown's expatriates come to play just like they did back in Smith's days.

 

Woodley also appeals to the next generation of cricketers, such as 17-year-old Shayan Abdulghani, who plays for the under-19 USA team. "It's great," said Abdulghani, who moved to California from Pakistan when he was 5. "In the whole USA, there's nothing like it. It feels like you're playing back at home."

 

As morning turns into early afternoon and the ice cream man pushes his jingling cart around the green lawns, something profound occurs. The proper gentleman's game is interrupted. A woman appears ready to play.

 

Two years ago, Sandra Ibarra had never heard of cricket. Ibarra, a Mexican-American woman from East Lost Angeles, was working at an architecture firm where Sentance was a financial adviser. One day, he was dropping off Galaxy tickets and noticed Ibarra had a soccer jersey draped over her chair. He asked whether she played soccer. She did. "But you're female," he retorted. Ibarra got defensive and gave him a litany of sports she played.

 

"He was picking my brain to see if I had mental toughness," Ibarra said.

 

Sentance asked her whether she was interested in playing cricket. Ibarra had no idea what the sport was. He explained the game and invited her to watch a match. Then he asked whether she wanted to try out. She went to Florida to try out for the U.S. women's cricket team -- and made it.

 

Two years later, she's dressed in cricket whites and all padded up to bat.

 

"I'm friends with everyone," Ibarra said. "I'm really comfortable. I'm proud to call this my home."

 

Ibarra steps into the batting nets. A bowler tosses her a pitch. She swings. A solid thwack, and she hits a line drive toward the trees.

 

It's a trend she will continue next weekend. Same time. Same place.

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___

Nice post.

Albeit it is not very important to me who said what. We all know Ziaur Rahman actually fought the war for Bangladesh. Which is most important. The role of Sheikh Mujib and awami league is also known to all Bangladeshi. I am not sure why politicians worry so much over this issue?

-----Original Message-----
From: Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com>
To: Bazlul Wahab <bazlul@yahoo.com>; Mohammad Aleem <aleem53@yahoo.com>; Iqbal Yusuf <iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com>; Bangladeshi American <bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com>; Mohammad Gani <mgani69@gmail.com>; Rezaul Karim <akmrpatwari@msn.com>; Akram Bhuyian <abhuiya@comcast.net>; Kazi Muazzem <kazi4986@yahoo.com>; Sayeda Haq <sayedahaq@yahoo.com>; quazi nuruzzaman <quazinuru@gmail.com>; Sohrab Khan <sohrabkhan16@yahoo.com>; alapon yahoo <alapon@yahoogroups.com>; Nazda Alam <alamnazdak@comcast.net>; Alochona Groups <alochona@yahoogroups.com>; diagnose group <diagnose@yahoogroups.com>; Khobor Yahoo <khabor@yahoogroups.com>; Fazlul Karim <azadkk@gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, Mar 19, 2011 4:00 am
Subject: [ALOCHONA] RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved

 

Shaheen
Gen Shafiullah is not as devil as Hasina and her most of the sychophants, and therefore, will not be able to give untruthful statement regarding his one time sir, 'Zia' (In army those who are seniors in-terms joining dates, always says sir to their seniors as a tradition even one supercedes in position in service).
 
Now let me talk about truthfullness in a matter very precious item in the history of Bangladesh. 
 
Tajuddin Ahmed, Barrister Kamal Hossain and Barrister Amirul Islam never ever said or uttered a single statement indicating Sheikh's declaration of independence (all three of them were with Sheikh until 11 PM on 25th of March). Rather, Barrister Amirul mentioned quite a few times that Tajuddin had written a declaration of independence and placed infront of Sheikh at Sheikh's residence to sign before their departure from that Dhanmodi house but Sheikh refused saying, "I will be termed by Yahya as traitor, and I do not want to be a traitor". He also asked, "You all leave Dhaka immediately." He even did not say to them to go to India. Amirul Islam did not go home, instead accompanied Tajuddin all the way to India and reached Kolkata sometime on 4th of April. 
 
Also see the proclamation of independence at Mujib Nagar done by Tajuddin Ahmed. Did Tajuddin ahmed mentioned anything on Sheikh Mujib's declaration. No, not at all, even though, he knew that somebody (Hannan and crew) have given statement from Kalurghat on behalf of Sheikh Mujib after Zia officially declared war of independence making himself chief of revilutinary council and head of the state of Bangladesh on 26th of March. He also knew that one day later, that is, on 27th of March, on others (AK Khan, MR Siddiqui) persual, Zia redeclared on Sheikh's behalf. For him (Tajuddin) those were not important as he knew Sheikh did not do it.
 
Begum Zohra Tajuddin, once the prersident of Awami League (after Sheikh's assasination) had ever mentioned on that ground or will ever say anything on that ground. Because they are not sychophants and will not utter untruthful statement knowingly to please some one or some party sychophants. 
Barrister Amir, Barrister Kamal, Begum Zohra Tajuddin, are still alive and should be pursuaded to say the real truth for the sake of truthful history. I do not think, Sheikh or Zia will loose or gain on this matter whatever position they have in the history and creation of Bangladesh.
Sirajul Islam, best khown journalist of BBC, received Sheikh Mujib at London Airport after he was released from Pakistan. According to him Sheikh said, "Koss ki, ami to shaottoshashon chaichhilum, shadhinota na"  
Shahadat Suhrawardy
 

---

Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 19:07:53 -0700
From: bazlul@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved
To: aleem53@yahoo.com; iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com; bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com; faiz208@hotmail.com

If Zia was involved, the army chief at that time, General Shafiullah would have found it out later. General Shafiullah is still alive and why AL does not get his side of story?   Has general Shafiullah ever said that he thinks Zia was involved with August 15 killing?   Shaheen   --- On Thu, 3/17/11, Faizul Momen <faiz208@hotmail.com> wrote: From: Faizul Momen <faiz208@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved To: aleem53@yahoo.com, iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com, bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011, 1:15 PM Dear Mr. Alim,   I apologize if I hurt you or anyone by my comments on Gen. Zia's involvement in August 15th incidents. I don't have any evidence that suggests that Gen. Zia was in the spot or spots where the inhuman killings occurred. However, here is an interview with Col. Faruque that suggests that Gen. Zia was well informed about the plan before August 15th, and he instead of denouncing the plan as a senior army officer, gave his nod as a support. He, as Lawrence Lifschultz said was in the shadow of the events during that time. And the way he honored and rewarded the so called 'sons of the sun' after August 15th, plainly accentuate the suspicion of his all-way support to the plan. The indemnity bill that Gen. Zia introduced  was his strongest obvious support to the whole episode of August 15th, which indirectly implies that he prevented anyone to ask for justice even for the murder of a 10 year old kid. Plain and simple. There is doubt if Gen. Zia had to do it under any external pressure.   A murder is a murder, let us take it that way. Be it done by me or you, by Mujib or Zia.   Thanks for your time, take care,   Faizul   Col. Faruque Rahman implicates Gen. Zia with Bangabandhu killing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI_h3ROZUEU&feature=related   Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 12:01:02 -0700 From: aleem53@yahoo.com Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved To: iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com; bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com; faiz208@hotmail.com   Bhai Faizul Momen:   Looks like you have solid proofs of what you said in your e-mail... I pulled out the following two for questioning...   Q1. Can you present the proofs you have rather than just throwing remarks?   Q2. As of 8/15/1975, the commander-in-chief was General Shafiuallah, and he is still alive. What did he (Gen Shafiullah) do when he saw Sheikh Mujib's blood in Zia's hand? How deputy chief could do such a thing with the Chief alive, healthy and in command? That general is still alive today, without facing any charge for not helping  Sheikh Mujib from the danger and not punishing his deputy. Why don't you question his role? (I know why - he aligned with AL...)   >> The point is: Zia was involved with August 15th killings >> very plain fact that Zia's hands are stained with bloods of Sheikh Mujib     --- On Tue, 3/15/11, Faizul Momen <faiz208@hotmail.com> wrote: From: Faizul Momen <faiz208@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved To: iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com, bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com Date: Tuesday, March 15, 2011, 7:13 PM The point is: Zia was involved with August 15th killings; who did what after that- that's another issue. Which 'chagal' said what or 'pagal' did what- does not change the very plain fact that Zia's hands are stained with bloods of Sheikh Mujib and his family including an 8 year old kid and a pregnant daughter in law.   > Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:40:17 -0700 > From: iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com > Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved > To: bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com > > The so called 'jubiliant masses' is another fabricated creation of the killer Ziaur Rahman and gong to justify the killings of 1975. It is true though that the people were shocked and horrified and hence could not come out of their houses. We have seen the true jubiliant masses when some of the killers of Bangabandhu were hanged. > > The current Sheikh Hasina govt. is not the beneficiary of any killings, rather this govt. is the result of mass people kicking out military dictators like Zia and Ershad and corrupt Khaleda Zia and sons. > > > --- On Tue, 3/15/11, Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > From: Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com> > Subject: RE: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved > To: "Iqbal Yusuf" <iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com>, "Bangladeshi American" <bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com> > Date: Tuesday, March 15, 2011, 1:45 PM > > > > > The reactions of the jubiliant masses on 15th August, actively says that whole Bangladesh was involved in removing a tyrant and killer of democracy. I haven't seen any where in the article or in the written statement, where Mr. Lifshultz says involvement of Zia, in action or passsion. What he said is that Zia became benificiary. As a matter of fact, whole country of Bangladesh, each and every Bangladeshi became benificiary of that Coup Detat. Most beneficiary of the 15th August Coup Detat, was the then Awami Coteri (more than half of the Awami Leaguer). Even the present government is indirectly a beneficiary of the outcome of that change. Would Hasina and her socalled Awami Leaguers could come to form government now if that did not happen? >   > > > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:10:08 -0700 > From: iqbalyousuf1@yahoo.com > Subject: Bangabandhu Killing: Zia passively involved > To: bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com > > > > > > > http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/print_news.php?nid=177794 >   > http://www.thedailystar.net/suppliments/2011/03/taher/court-14.pdf ; > > > Tuesday, March 15, 2011 > > Bangabandhu Killing > Zia passively involved > Lifschultz tells HC, submits written statement on Taher killingAshutosh Sarkar > > > Lawrence Lifschultz > > > Gen Ziaur Rahman was passively involved in the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, US journalist and writer Lawrence Lifschultz yesterday told the High Court. > > Clik here to read Lifschultz's statement > This has become clear from the conversations with Col Farooq Rahman and Col Abdur Rashid, convicted killers of Bangabandhu, and from the book Bangladesh: A Legacy of Blood written by Anthony Mascarenhas, he said. >   > He said Ziaur Rahman was in the shadow of the whole episode of August 15, 1975 because he was very much one of the main players of the game. >   > In reply to a question from the HC, Lifschultz said Ziaur Rahman could have stopped the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman because he (Zia) knew the plot. > Zia was a complicated man and was the main beneficiary of the assassination, he said, adding, Zia was responsible for killing many freedom fighters including army official Khaled Mosharaf. >   > The Pulitzer Prize winner who had covered the trial of Col Abu Taher in 1976 placed his statement before the HC bench of Justice AHM Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik and Justice Sheikh Md Zakir Hossain. >   > The bench is hearing a writ petition that challenged the martial law regulation under which the military tribunal was formed and Taher was sentenced to death. > Earlier on January 20, the HC bench requested Lifschultz to appear before it to place a statement on the trial and execution of Taher. >   > Lifschultz on January 31 sent a written statement to the HC bench through the Attorney General's Office saying that Gen Ziaur Rahman made the decision of Col Abu Taher's execution before formation of the military tribunal that gave the execution order. > Gen Manzur, then high-ranked military officer, knew with absolute certainty that Zia had decided to have Taher hanged before the "so-called trial" began, Lifschultz said in the statement. >   > "Subsequently, this fact was also confirmed to me by two high-ranking military officers, who were close to Zia at that time," he said in his January 31 statement, which was placed before the HC bench on February 3. >   > Lifschultz yesterday appeared before the same HC bench around 2:30pm and placed a written and a verbal statement before it. > He said the trial of Col Taher was not even a show-trial since it had no projection or demonstration. >   > There existed a "Special Military Tribunal No 1" which convened at the Dhaka Central Jail. "I was there. I stood outside the prison. I watched men, like Colonel Yusuf Haider, the so-called Tribunal's chairman, walk through the prison gates," he said in the written statement. >   > It was a premeditated assassination of which Ziaur Rahman was the assailant, Lawrence Lifschultz who arrived in Dhaka on March 12 told the court. > Although Zia had convened a meeting of the generals returned from Pakistan as Moudud Ahmed stated in a book, the decision to kill Taher was taken exclusively by Zia, he said, adding that he (Zia) had convened that meeting only to pretend that those generals had involvement in killing Taher. >   > "Moudud Ahmed claimed that Ziaur Rahman had convened a gathering of 46 "repatriated" officers to discuss the sentence that should be passed on Taher. It was well known that not a single officer who had participated in the Liberation War was willing to serve on Special Military Tribunal No 1. But General Zia's special convocation of repatriates appears to have ended with unanimous decision. They wanted Taher to hang," his written statement said. >   > "Moudud claims his source for this story was General Zia himself. In this respect, Moudud's version of events tallies with what General Manzur claimed to me regarding General Zia having personally taken the decision on what the verdict would be. One man, Ziaur Rahman, decided, on his own, to take another's life. He then asked a group of about fifty officers to endorse his decision," he stated. >   > The US journalist said he had tried to go inside the so-called court but was not allowed. > "I had tried to meet Ziaur Rahman many times for taking an interview from him, but he did not allow me to do so," he said, adding that he was expelled from Bangladesh at that time. >   > Replying to another question from the HC, Lifschultz said he could not term it as anything other than assassination, as Syed Badrul Ahsan, a journalist of The Daily Star, stated in 2006 that it was purely and simply a murder. >   > "Syed Badrul Ahsan has called the Taher case 'murder pure and simple'. In an article published in July 2006, Ahsan writes: 'When he (Lifschultz) speaks of Colonel Taher and the macabre manner of his murder (it was murder pure and simple) in July 1976, he revives within our souls all the pains we have either carefully pushed under the rug all these years or have been allowed to feel through the long march of untruth in this country,' according to the statement. >   > Zia decided to kill Taher as he wanted to appease the army officers repatriated from Pakistan and also consolidate the grief on power. > Taher wanted to return democracy in the country, but Zia wanted to rule the country as a dictator, he said. >   > Lifschultz said it was one of the saddest human rights violations in the whole of Asia. > He said he had been trying to get the whole truth for so many years and he was happy that he was now in a position to disclose whatever information he had before the HC. > The court will resume the hearing today. >   > Attorney General Mahbubey Alam and Additional Attorney General also appeared before the court. > > > > > > -- > * Disclaimer: You received this message because you had subscribed to the Google Groups "Bangladeshi-Americans Living in New England". Any posting to this group is solely the opinion of the author of the messages to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com who is responsible for the accuracy of his/her information and the conformance of his/her material with applicable copyright and other laws where applicable. The act of posting to the group indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator(s). To post to this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/BangladeshiAmericans?hl=en ]. > > > > > > > > -- > * Disclaimer: You received this message because you had subscribed to the Google Groups "Bangladeshi-Americans Living in New England". Any posting to this group is solely the opinion of the author of the messages to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com who is responsible for the accuracy of his/her information and the conformance of his/her material with applicable copyright and other laws where applicable. The act of posting to the group indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator(s). To post to this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/BangladeshiAmericans?hl=en ]. -- * Disclaimer: You received this message because you had subscribed to the Google Groups "Bangladeshi-Americans Living in New England". Any posting to this group is solely the opinion of the author of the messages to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com who is responsible for the accuracy of his/her information and the conformance of his/her material with applicable copyright and other laws where applicable. The act of posting to the group indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator(s). To post to this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/BangladeshiAmericans?hl=en ]. -- * Disclaimer: You received this message because you had subscribed to the Google Groups "Bangladeshi-Americans Living in New England". Any posting to this group is solely the opinion of the author of the messages to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com who is responsible for the accuracy of his/her information and the conformance of his/her material with applicable copyright and other laws where applicable. The act of posting to the group indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator(s). To post to this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/BangladeshiAmericans?hl=en ].

--
* Disclaimer: You received this message because you had subscribed to the Google Groups "Bangladeshi-Americans Living in New England". Any posting to this group is solely the opinion of the author of the messages to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com who is responsible for the accuracy of his/her information and the conformance of his/her material with applicable copyright and other laws where applicable. The act of posting to the group indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator(s). To post to this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to BangladeshiAmericans-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups-beta.google.com/group/BangladeshiAmericans?hl=en ].

__._,_.___

[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] EPW - Love in the Time of 1971: The Furore over Meherjaan [1 Attachment]

[Attachment(s) from Robin Khundkar included below]

Love in the Time of 1971: The Furore over Meherjaan

 Nayanika Mookherjee

The film Meherjaan, which was released in Dhaka in January 2011, was quickly pulled out of theatres after it created a furore among audiences. The hostile responses to the film from across generations highlight the discomfort about the portrayal of a raped woman, and its depiction of female and multiple sexualities during the Bangladesh liberation war of 1971. The furore also underscores the nationalist repoliticisation of the younger generation in Bangladesh and its support for the ongoing war crimes tribunal of the 1971 war. View Full Article

 

Article Attached in PDF FORMAT

Attachment(s) from Robin Khundkar

1 of 1 File(s)

epw meherjaan.pdf

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] একাত্তরের এদিনে বাংলাদশের ঘরে ঘরে স্বাধীনতার পতাকা ওড়ে

http://www.amrabondhu.com/manik/2797

একাত্তরের এদিনে বাংলাদশের ঘরে ঘরে স্বাধীনতার পতাকা ওড়ে

লিখেছেন: নুরুজ্জামান মানিক | মার্চ ২৩, ২০১১ - ১:১০ অপরাহ্ন

২৩ মার্চ ছিল পাকিস্তান প্রজাতন্ত্র দিবস। লাহোর প্রস্তাবের স্মরণে প্রতি বছর দিবসটি পালন করা হত। কিন্তু সেদিন ঢাকার প্রেসিডেন্ট ভবন ও সেনাবাহিনীর সদর দফতর ছাড়া বাংলাদেশে আর কোথাও পাকিস্তানের জাতীয় পতাকা ওড়েনি। ঢাকার সেক্রেটারিয়েট, হাইকোর্ট, গণপরিষদ, ইপিআর, রাজারবাগ পুলিশ সদর দফতর, ঢাকা বেতার, টেলিভিশন, ঢাকা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়, প্রধান বিচারপতি ও মুখ্য সচিবের বাসভবনসহ সব সরকারি-বেসরকারি ভবন এবং শিক্ষা প্রতিষ্ঠানে আনুষ্ঠানিকভাবে স্বাধীন বাংলার পতাকা তোলা হয়।

এদিনেই বঙ্গবন্ধু আওয়ামী লীগের স্বেচ্ছাসেবক বাহিনীর সদস্যদের সামরিক কায়দায় অভিবাদনের মধ্য দিয়ে তাঁর বাসভবনে স্বাধীন বাংলাদেশের পতাকা উত্তোলন করেন। এর আগে ছাত্রলীগের পক্ষ থেকে সংগঠনের প্রেসিডেন্ট নূরে আলম সিদ্দিকী এই পতাকা আনুষ্ঠানিকভাবে বঙ্গবন্ধুর হাতে তুলে দেন।

পাকিস্তান দিবসে স্বাধীন বাংলা ছাত্র সংগ্রাম পরিষদের প্রতিরোধ দিবসের ডাকে এদিন বাংলাদশের ঘরে ঘরে স্বাধীনতার পতাকা ওড়ে। ঢাকায় আনুষ্ঠানিকভাবে পাকিস্তানের পতাকা নামিয়ে স্বাধীন বাংলার পতাকা উত্তোলন করা হয়। পতাকা উত্তোলনের সময় গান ফায়ারিং করেন স্বাধীন বাংলা নিউক্লিয়াসের সদস্য ও জয় বাংলা বাহিনীর উপপ্রধান কামরুল আলম খসরু।

এই বাহিনীর পাঁচ শতাধিক সদস্য সামরিক কায়দায় স্বাধীন বাংলার পতাকা নিয়ে মিছিল করে সারা ঢাকা শহরে। ছাত্রী মিছিলের নেতৃত্ব দেন মমতাজ বেগম। জয় বাংলা বাহিনীর পাঁচ শতাধিক সদস্য প্যারেড করে বঙ্গবন্ধুর বাসভবনে যান। বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবকে তাঁরা সেখানে অভিবাদন জানান। বঙ্গবন্ধু সালাম গ্রহণ শেষে জয় বাংলা বাহিনীর সদস্যদের উদ্দেশে সংক্ষিপ্ত ভাষণে বলেন, বাংলার মানুষ কারো করুণার পাত্র নয়। আপন শক্তির দুর্জয় ক্ষমতাবলেই আপনারা স্বাধীনতা ছিনিয়ে আনবেন। বাংলার জয় অনিবার্য।

আওয়ামী লীগ নেতা সৈয়দ নজরুল ইসলাম, তাজউদ্দীন আহমেদ ও ড. কামাল হোসেন পাকিস্তানের প্রেসিডেন্টের উপদেষ্টা বিচারপতি এ.আর. কর্নেলিয়াস, লে. জেনারেল পীরজাদা, এম.এ আহমেদ কর্নেল হাসানের সঙ্গে দুপুর এবং বিকালে দুই দফায় দুই ঘন্টা স্থায়ী বৈঠকে মিলিত হন।

__._,_.___

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

__,_._,___