I ALWAYS said, you are more than welcome to dislike his choices after he became head of state. That is a valid narrative of many people in this country and rest of them liked his contribution as a political leader as well. I am fine and readily understand your point of view.
Can you explain - why Zia appointed a famous collaborator as his Prime Minister, if he was such a diehard Muktijoddhya?
>>>>>>>> I cannot explains Zia's actions. ONLY he could.
All I said, he was a freedom fighter and despite our political views, we should all respect him as a leader of war of liberation. NOTHING MORE and NOTHING LESS. I have no doubt about his credential as Freedom fighter. In fact he was one of the top leaders who was in the battle front during the war.
If you don't want to give him his due honor as a freedom fighter, I will NEVER agree with such view.
If you want to criticize him for appointing people who used be part of Muslim League or did not want to break their Pakistan. It is a valid position to take and I can understand and RESPECT that feeling.
Both Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Ziaur Rahman were pragmatic leaders. Bangabandhu joined the OIC (Organization of Islamic countries) meetings and had long chat with Bhutto. In the process Indira was very angry with him along with millions of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. He also established Islamic foundation, offer free education to Palestinian Students etc. None of them were bloody communist or hater of religion.
Then have taken actions that was required during a very challenging time. I may not agree with some of them but I respect their intention and sincerity.
You are welcome to hang on to your Shah Azizur Rahman and formulate your opinion. It is your right to have that.
I just don't have to agree with such childish world view.
Shalom!
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 8, 2013 4:24 pm
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
Zia died long time ago, it is of no consequence if some people deny him. He made his mark and we are a better country for his positive contributions."
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
When he made his announcement on March, he enlisted himself as one of the earliest Freedom fighters right there. It could have resulted in punishment for treason against the than Pakistan. I have spoken to many freedom fighters and ALL of them agree that he was one of the top leaders of our war of Independence. There are many who did not agree with his policies as leader of the country (Specifically for selecting some people who opposed our liberation) but it is pretty much established fact that he was one of the top leaders of that war.
The fact remains that Muktijuddho was fought in the name of Bangabandhu and was lead by Awami League.
>>>>>>>>>> I agree with you. The whole nation (Except few confused people) supported that war. Ziaur Rahman was part of the force. He did not step into politics as long Bangabandhu was alive. I am not sure WHY after decades of his shahadat, we are even debating this? He was one of the front leaders.
After we established Bangladesh, there were many political divisions. JASAD was one of them.
I am really astonished WHY educated people among us are so passionate to deny genuine history? Is politics the reason?
Zia died long time ago, it is of no consequence if some people deny him. He made his mark and we are a better country for his positive contributions.
Shalom!
From: Mahbub Kamal <mahbubk2002@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Jun 8, 2013 9:48 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 9:35:15 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
To: bangladeshi googlesgroups <bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com>; khabor <khabor@yahoogroups.com>; alochona <alochona@yahoogroups.com>; Sayeda Haq <sayedahaq@yahoo.com>; chottala yahoogroups <chottala@yahoogroups.com>; mokto mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2013 9:45 AM
Subject: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
Principal
__._,_.___
****************************************************
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
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
__,_._,___
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
What separates him from the other commanders is his post-independence role. And, his post-independence role is murky. You are unable to see it. That's why you can't understand.
>>>>>>>Nope you are not understanding. I ONLY protest stuff like, he was not a freedom fighter.
-----Original Message-----
QR: "I am really astonished WHY educated people among us are so passionate to deny genuine history? Is politics the reason?
___________
As I said before, what Zia did in the pre-independence period is not much different from the other sector commanders. What separates him from the other commanders is his post-independence role. And, his post-independence role is murky. You are unable to see it. That's why you can't understand.
Can you explain - why Zia appointed a famous collaborator as his Prime Minister, if he was such a diehard Muktijoddhya? As far as I remember, collaborators were hated enemies of Muktijoddhya at that period. So, it is hard for me to explain how a Muktijoddhya can use his very first chance to decorate a famous enemy with such a prestigious position at such early stage of independence other than to please Pakistani-master.
Jiten Roy
I am yet to find a freedom fighter who denied that fact that Zia was the leader of Z force. I am sue most of us know who the top leaders of Z force, K force and S force. He was awarded as "Bir uttam" for his contribution. I think it is the highest honor to any living person.
-----Original Message-----
'Ziaur Rahman who led the actual fighting' is a complete distortion of fact, if he led the actual fighting.
Can someone give an example of Zia actually taking part in action in the field? Also why Gen. Osmani wanted to sack him?
Unfortuanately after liberation Gen. Osmani and Awami League governement had awarded most of the gallantry awards to to members of the armed forces. That was unfair and a big mistake. Muktijuddho was a people's war, majority of Muktijoddhas were peasants, students, labourers, police and ordinary people. Thousands of political activists fought in the war, as Awami League was by far the largest party majority of the politically inclined fighters were from Awami League, though Mujaffar NAP and Communist Party were much smaller - big number of of NAP, Communist Part and Chatra Union activists actively participated in the war. Mujib Bahini (BLF) was formed by 100% Awami leaguers, there was a special force of NAP, Communist Party and Chatra Union, there were other small forces too (for example smaller groups of Naxalites fought against Pakis, but many of them supported Pakistan). Under the banner of FF (above groups were not part of FF) activists from all parties and common people fought together. Though a big number of chin-ponthies (mainly from Bhasani NAP) were confused, many fought under the banner of FF.
Having said so I am not undermining the role of armed forces, because of their training in many cases (with exception of the forces I mentioned in the begining and Kaderia Bahini) the commanders were from armed forces or from then-EPR, all or mostof the sector commanders were from armed forces.. Members of EPR and Police forces need to be mentioned separately for their gallantry.
Not only many AL leaders, many leaders of other parties too avoided taking part in frontal action.
In addition that he was a sector commander and the commander of the Z-force (he formed this without permission from the government, and Gen. Osmani wanted to sack him, I heard that he wanted to arrest him too. Tajuddin Ahmed intervened and advised to to create K-force and S-force to neutralize the situation), Ziaur Rahman made history by reading the declaration of independence on behalf of Bangabandhu (and once he tried to distort it too by claiming him to be the leader). He was in the right place at the right time, sometimes 'fate' plays a big role in making of history.
If Zia the real 'ghosok' proclaimimg independence, he would be the commander-of-chief and acting president in 1971.
There is no record/proof of Ziaur Rahman actively leading the actual fighting.
The fact remains that Muktijuddho was fought in the name of Bangabandhu and was lead by Awami League.
Regards,
Mahbub
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
I think - whether Zia was a proud Muktijoddhya or not can be judged from his actions, after the independence.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am sorry to say, you sound like a very confused person. If Ziaur Rahman was a proud freedom fighter or not that should be judged by his action during our liberation war. In fact most leading freedom fighters were disappointed with how our country was run after we became free from Pakistan. Bongobandhu himself was so sick of people from his own party and their corruption that, he dissolved BAL and introduced BAKSHAL. There is no doubt that Ziaur Rahman made many mistakes but he also made many positive contribution to our country. When we look back, it is easy for some of us to show utter disrespect to the very people who gave us freedom. I say the same to people who ONLY criticize Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Both leaders made many mistakes but I feel their positive contribution is far more to this country than whatever the country had to pay for their collective mistakes. He made so much history after the independence that it makes no difference if he was a Muktijoddhya or not. >>>>>>>> Actually it does in a great way. It is absolutely clear that, it is Bangabandhu who inspired the nation to protest against Pakistani discrimination against our people. However it is ALSO true it was Ziaur Rahman who led the actual fighting. Most BAL leaders were missing in action or staying in India to save their skins at that time. Couple of them were actively negotiating with the PAK regime to stop the war. Khondokar Mustaq was a well known BAL leader at that time. History tells us the four leaders who lend structural/political leadership during 71, were kicked out of BAL/BAKSHAL and it was Khondokar Mustaq who stayed close to Bangabandhu. Therefore, your love laced, suger coated and biased history is the distortion. Despite their mistakes, I respect both of our national leaders and their contributions towards our freedom. Allah (SWT) gave us an astonishing victory within nice month, which is quite an achievement. It never ceases to amaze me when I hear stories of love, dedication and sacrifices my people made during 71. I'll always be indebted to them for their contributions. Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 6:14 pm Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
I think - whether Zia was a proud Muktijoddhya or not can be judged from his actions, after the independence. He appointed Sah Azizur Rahman, a famous Razakar, as the first Prime Minister of Bangladesh. What does that say to you?
So, let's stop distorting the history using relentless propaganda, and let history assess him. He made so much history after the independence that it makes no difference if he was a Muktijoddhya or not.
Jiten Roy
From: Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com>
জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না।
একথার সাথে আমি ১০০% একমত। আপনাদের মতামত কি ব্যক্ত করবেন? তবে শুনুন!!!!!!!!! আমাদের দেশে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা রয়েছেন, কয়েক শ্রেণীর:- ১- যারা চাপার জোরে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা, বাস্তবে না। ২- যারা যুদ্ধ চলাকালীন ছিলেন, দেশের বাইরে এবং যুদ্ধ শেষ হলে দেশে এসে বড় মুক্তিযোদ্ধা সেজেছেন। ৩- অনেকে পাকিস্তানী বাহিনীকে সহযোগিতা করেছেন, তারপরও তিনি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৪- অনেকে মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদেরকে হত্যা করেছেন, তারপর তিনি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৫- যুদ্ধের সময় অনেকের নিকট অস্ত্র ছিল, যার মাধ্যমে তারা শুধু ডাকাতি ও লোক হত্যা করত, তারাও নাকি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৬- সার্টিফিকেট ক্রয় করেও অনেকে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৭- অনেকেই কোন দলে যোগদান করার কারনে হয়ে গেছেন মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৮- অনেকে পাকিস্তানী সরকারের আমলা থাকা সত্বেও আজ তিনি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ৯- অনেকে মুক্তিযুদ্ধের বিরোধী থাকার পরও আর তিনি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ১০- যারা মুক্তিযোদ্ধে অংশ গ্রহণ করেছেন, যার সাক্ষ্য দেয় ইতিহাস। তারাই হল প্রকৃত মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। শহীদ জিয়াউর রহমান উপরোল্লেখিত প্রকারের মধ্য হতে প্রকৃত মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন। আর যারা বলে: জিয়াউর রহমান মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না, তারা হয়ত মনে করে, তিন ছিলেন প্রকৃত মুক্তিযোদ্ধা, খেয়ানতকারী বা ধোকাবাজ মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না। তাই আমি এবং আমার মত যারা তারা মনে করে, যে তাদের কথাটা ঠিক। তাই বলুন: জিয়াউর রহমান ধোকাবাজ মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ছিলেন না। তিনি ছিলেন: প্রকৃত দেশপ্রেমিক এবং আসল মুক্তিযোদ্ধা।
বিষয়: বিবিধ
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional