Dear all,
Dr. Ali got death threat before the publication of ISLAM RETHOUGHT in NFB. Presumably he published a few articles in PAKISTAN LINK, many of which were basically critique of draconian Sharia Law. That was enough to incite the Islamist lynch mob of the infidel land called USA. Not only that, he was not a private person. That is how he became the ultimate bull's eye of the US based Jihadists.
I am pasting below one of his important essays on Sharia.
-Jamal Hasan
====================================
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/eshomabesh/conversations/topics/3185
News From Bangladesh
January 29, 1999
ESSAY
The Recodification Of The Shariah
By Dr. Ausaf Ali
In the last several weeks, I have read the expressions of opinions
by several persons on the views expressed by a prominent Saudi, namely Dr.
Sheikh Zaki Yamani. I was a bit surprised that a Saudi should have said
what Yamani did, but more power to him. If I remember correctly, he said,
to paraphrase him from the report in Pakistan Link that, compared to an age
when Muslims traveled by camels, today in the age of airplanes and fax
machines, there is a need for recodification of the Shariah, or the Islamic
law. To me his obvious proposition makes all the sense. However, Muslim
culture is a rather unthinking culture. So, I am not surprised that our
co-religionists found and reacted to his views, as if they should be
shocking. But nothing he said is shocking.
That Islam and Muslims have, to their own misfortunes in the modern
age, failed woefully to adjust to modernity is obvious. What is not
obvious to our orthodox and traditional Muslim brothers and sisters;
even when they have acquired ritually modern education and make a
living in modern professions, is that our hypocritical and
unthinking refusal to rethink, reinterpret, reformulate and recodify
the thousand-year-old Sharia has kept the Muslim society stagnant,
fixated, and caught up in pre-modernity. For which Islam, Muslims,
and Muslim culture and civilization have paid and are paying today,
and will pay in the future, too, a very heavy price.
Unfortunately, even when it is grudgingly conceded that Sharia
rules, too, must change in time, no attempt is made to stay with the
idea long enough to give an example or two, much less to give it a
extent, as to what in the Sharia, as inherited from the past, is in
need of change and what rules must be changed and why? The whole
matter is treated as a matter of public relations only, not one of
needed, urgent social and cultural change in how the Shariah can be
made relevant and responsive to changed historical and social
reality. In this sense, I found the article "Sheikh Zaki Yamani�s
Comments About Islamic Law" (Pakistan Link, Jan 8th 1999) by Dr.
Muzammil H. Siddiqi rather disappointing. What I consider
disappointing about Islamic discourse in America is that, rarely if
ever, an American Muslim or for that matter, an American Islamic
conference or retreat addresses the real and substantive issues of
Muslim life in the contemporary world head on and tries to work out
real life solutions to them. Of course, only Islam and Muslims are
worse for it. Our women, the worst of all � they are the greatest
victims of our inflexibility.
Admittedly, it is not easy, neither risk free to risk thinking a new
thought, much less making a new proposal, as to which Sharia rules
need and must be changed, over-handled, or simply left behind where
they belong, that is the past, even the distant past. Khalifa Umar
(RA) found that out already in the fist decade after the death of
the Prophet (PBUH). But Umar (RA) was daring to a fault. Not
surprisingly, Umar did not hesitate to make new rules in and for new
situations. I think he was quite right, too, not because he was the
Caliph, but because every Muslim has, should have, the right to
reinterpret and rethink the Shariah. I strongly disagree with Dr.
Muzammil Siddiqi�s recommendation that "this must be done with the
help of an international body of Islamic scholars, thinkers and
jurists". Even an international body does not think, it, too, needs
knowledge, thought, and guidance which can come, must come, because
only individuals think, from individuals. Never has a committee
collective body or even a conference of Muslims provided conceptual
breakthroughs, new ideas or paradigms of Muslim thought, or
contemporary solutions to problems, predicaments and dilemmas that
Islam and Muslims have faced in history or are facing today. Only
when a man or woman does not want to speak out his or her own mind
does he or she need a collective body to speak to the community?
Islam is not Catholicism which needs a committee of Muslim Cardinals
to issue authorized and or official pronouncements.
To be sure, modernity has tried our souls and post-modernity does so
even more, because while the former has still made some allowances
for religious hypocrisy the latter makes none. Muslim life present
many instances of it.
1.We speak of the segregation of male and female in public places,
yet we allow Muslim women in America in all public places within and
outside the Muslim community.
2.We hold domesticity as the Sharia-sanctioned work for Muslim
women, yet we allow them to work outside the home.
3.We treat non-Muslims as second-class citizens of the Islamic
state, yet we demand equal rights as citizens of the Christian,
Jewish and Hindu states.
4.We welcome Christians, Jews, Hindus, and others as converts to
Islam, yet we award a death sentence to a Muslim for converting to
any other religion.
5.We retain polygamy in Muslim countries and would stand for no
legal restrictions upon it, yet we are perfectly happy and content to live
in America where it is legally forbidden.
6.We disallow privacy (being alone together, going out for a cup of
coffee or riding in a car alone together) to our boys and girls, men
and women, yet allow Muslim male doctors to practice gynecology upon
Muslim women.
7.We denounce secular knowledge and education, yet we send our sons
and daughters to American universities to acquire the same to train
for secular careers and make good money and become rich. Compared to
us, the Amish are most consistent.
I for one am happy and proud that old Shariah rules, that are dated,
outdated, and obsolete are being discarded and new ones put in their
place in the American Muslim community. What I consider disturbing
and even shameful is that Muslims are not revising the Shariah rules
consciously, but allowing them to be changed by default. It is
American practice that�s recodifying the Shariah, not Muslim
thought, reflection and nationality. Our professional Islam and
lived Islam are diverging increasingly with every passing year.
Muslim life in America is becoming contradictory, hypocritical,
anti-thetical and double-faced, while the immigrant generation is
still alive. In the next half century it would become increasingly
insincere unauthentic and comical.
Shari�i Islam and lived Islam cannot for long run on parallel or
divergent lines. The two have to run on the same line, if the soul,
spirit, mind, psyche, personality, character, and life of the
American Muslim, male or female are to be a unity. If this is true,
the need for the recodification of the Shariah is clear. So
reinterpret Shariah forthwith.
......................................................................
The essay was also published in Pakistan Link on January 22, 1999
Dr. Ali got death threat before the publication of ISLAM RETHOUGHT in NFB. Presumably he published a few articles in PAKISTAN LINK, many of which were basically critique of draconian Sharia Law. That was enough to incite the Islamist lynch mob of the infidel land called USA. Not only that, he was not a private person. That is how he became the ultimate bull's eye of the US based Jihadists.
I am pasting below one of his important essays on Sharia.
-Jamal Hasan
====================================
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/eshomabesh/conversations/topics/3185
News From Bangladesh
January 29, 1999
ESSAY
The Recodification Of The Shariah
By Dr. Ausaf Ali
In the last several weeks, I have read the expressions of opinions
by several persons on the views expressed by a prominent Saudi, namely Dr.
Sheikh Zaki Yamani. I was a bit surprised that a Saudi should have said
what Yamani did, but more power to him. If I remember correctly, he said,
to paraphrase him from the report in Pakistan Link that, compared to an age
when Muslims traveled by camels, today in the age of airplanes and fax
machines, there is a need for recodification of the Shariah, or the Islamic
law. To me his obvious proposition makes all the sense. However, Muslim
culture is a rather unthinking culture. So, I am not surprised that our
co-religionists found and reacted to his views, as if they should be
shocking. But nothing he said is shocking.
That Islam and Muslims have, to their own misfortunes in the modern
age, failed woefully to adjust to modernity is obvious. What is not
obvious to our orthodox and traditional Muslim brothers and sisters;
even when they have acquired ritually modern education and make a
living in modern professions, is that our hypocritical and
unthinking refusal to rethink, reinterpret, reformulate and recodify
the thousand-year-old Sharia has kept the Muslim society stagnant,
fixated, and caught up in pre-modernity. For which Islam, Muslims,
and Muslim culture and civilization have paid and are paying today,
and will pay in the future, too, a very heavy price.
Unfortunately, even when it is grudgingly conceded that Sharia
rules, too, must change in time, no attempt is made to stay with the
idea long enough to give an example or two, much less to give it a
extent, as to what in the Sharia, as inherited from the past, is in
need of change and what rules must be changed and why? The whole
matter is treated as a matter of public relations only, not one of
needed, urgent social and cultural change in how the Shariah can be
made relevant and responsive to changed historical and social
reality. In this sense, I found the article "Sheikh Zaki Yamani�s
Comments About Islamic Law" (Pakistan Link, Jan 8th 1999) by Dr.
Muzammil H. Siddiqi rather disappointing. What I consider
disappointing about Islamic discourse in America is that, rarely if
ever, an American Muslim or for that matter, an American Islamic
conference or retreat addresses the real and substantive issues of
Muslim life in the contemporary world head on and tries to work out
real life solutions to them. Of course, only Islam and Muslims are
worse for it. Our women, the worst of all � they are the greatest
victims of our inflexibility.
Admittedly, it is not easy, neither risk free to risk thinking a new
thought, much less making a new proposal, as to which Sharia rules
need and must be changed, over-handled, or simply left behind where
they belong, that is the past, even the distant past. Khalifa Umar
(RA) found that out already in the fist decade after the death of
the Prophet (PBUH). But Umar (RA) was daring to a fault. Not
surprisingly, Umar did not hesitate to make new rules in and for new
situations. I think he was quite right, too, not because he was the
Caliph, but because every Muslim has, should have, the right to
reinterpret and rethink the Shariah. I strongly disagree with Dr.
Muzammil Siddiqi�s recommendation that "this must be done with the
help of an international body of Islamic scholars, thinkers and
jurists". Even an international body does not think, it, too, needs
knowledge, thought, and guidance which can come, must come, because
only individuals think, from individuals. Never has a committee
collective body or even a conference of Muslims provided conceptual
breakthroughs, new ideas or paradigms of Muslim thought, or
contemporary solutions to problems, predicaments and dilemmas that
Islam and Muslims have faced in history or are facing today. Only
when a man or woman does not want to speak out his or her own mind
does he or she need a collective body to speak to the community?
Islam is not Catholicism which needs a committee of Muslim Cardinals
to issue authorized and or official pronouncements.
To be sure, modernity has tried our souls and post-modernity does so
even more, because while the former has still made some allowances
for religious hypocrisy the latter makes none. Muslim life present
many instances of it.
1.We speak of the segregation of male and female in public places,
yet we allow Muslim women in America in all public places within and
outside the Muslim community.
2.We hold domesticity as the Sharia-sanctioned work for Muslim
women, yet we allow them to work outside the home.
3.We treat non-Muslims as second-class citizens of the Islamic
state, yet we demand equal rights as citizens of the Christian,
Jewish and Hindu states.
4.We welcome Christians, Jews, Hindus, and others as converts to
Islam, yet we award a death sentence to a Muslim for converting to
any other religion.
5.We retain polygamy in Muslim countries and would stand for no
legal restrictions upon it, yet we are perfectly happy and content to live
in America where it is legally forbidden.
6.We disallow privacy (being alone together, going out for a cup of
coffee or riding in a car alone together) to our boys and girls, men
and women, yet allow Muslim male doctors to practice gynecology upon
Muslim women.
7.We denounce secular knowledge and education, yet we send our sons
and daughters to American universities to acquire the same to train
for secular careers and make good money and become rich. Compared to
us, the Amish are most consistent.
I for one am happy and proud that old Shariah rules, that are dated,
outdated, and obsolete are being discarded and new ones put in their
place in the American Muslim community. What I consider disturbing
and even shameful is that Muslims are not revising the Shariah rules
consciously, but allowing them to be changed by default. It is
American practice that�s recodifying the Shariah, not Muslim
thought, reflection and nationality. Our professional Islam and
lived Islam are diverging increasingly with every passing year.
Muslim life in America is becoming contradictory, hypocritical,
anti-thetical and double-faced, while the immigrant generation is
still alive. In the next half century it would become increasingly
insincere unauthentic and comical.
Shari�i Islam and lived Islam cannot for long run on parallel or
divergent lines. The two have to run on the same line, if the soul,
spirit, mind, psyche, personality, character, and life of the
American Muslim, male or female are to be a unity. If this is true,
the need for the recodification of the Shariah is clear. So
reinterpret Shariah forthwith.
......................................................................
The essay was also published in Pakistan Link on January 22, 1999
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 22:12:17 -0400
Subject: Reformist Muslims
From: alishaheen2010@gmail.com
To: poplu@hotmail.com
I suppose if Muslims are not able to come to concensus among themselves, governments will do it for us. The Bible today is King James's version, which was standardized by him. And so was the Arabic Quran by Calipha Usman about two decades after the death of the Prophet.
Thought you might be interested in two translations of the Quran that are more recent: (1) The Sublime Quran by Laleh Bakhtiar - which is also the first translation by a woman and (2) The Quran: A Reformist Translation by Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban and Martha Schulte-Nafeh. Both are well researched and use contemporary language which is a refreshing change from old translations.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Jamal Hasan <poplu@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/02/uk-austria-muslims-idUKKCN0HR26X20141002
Facing fears over extremism, Austria unveils new law on Islam
BY SHADIA NASRALLA
VIENNA Thu Oct 2, 2014 7:15pm BST
(Reuters) - Austria called on Thursday for standardised German-language translations of the Koran and moved to prohibit foreign funding of Muslim organisations on its soil in a draft law aimed inpart at tackling Islamic extremism.
The bill will overhaul a 1912 law governing the status of Austrian Muslims, prompting concern from a major local Islamic body, which saw it mirroring widespread mistrust of Muslims.
The initiative comes at a time of robust support for the far-right in Austria and also alarm over reports of Muslims from the small, neutral country joining Islamist militant forces fighting in the Middle East.
"The clear message should be that there is no contradiction between being a faithful Muslim and a proud Austrian," said Foreign Affairs and Integration Minister Sebastian Kurz, a member of the conservative People's Party.
"If you don't have orderly legal regulation ... this can always bring dangers (of extremism). In this sense, if you like this is maybe a part of prevention," he told reporters.
He added that Sharia, or Islamic law, had "no place here".
Roughly half a million Muslims live in Austria, representing about 6 percent of the total population, which is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic.
For example, unlike France, Austria has not moved to ban Muslim women from wearing full-face veils in public.
However, tensions have grown with the rise of the anti-immigration and Islam-critical Freedom Party, which is backed by roughly a quarter of Austrians according to opinion polls.
"NOT A GIFT"
Under the terms of the draft bill, state-recognised religious organisations will have to offer a unified German-language version of their doctrine and sources of faith, including for the Muslim holy book, the Koran.
At present, there are only two officially recognised Islamic organisations in Austria.
The legislation would also forbid Islamic teachers employed by any foreign states from working in Austria and stop outside funding for any Islamic organisations.
"Among the Muslim base, the law is not seen as a gift for the Eid holiday," said Carla Amina Baghajati, spokeswoman of the Islamic Community of Faith in Austria (IGGIO), referring to Eid-al-Adha which Muslims will celebrate in the coming days.
"(The bill) mirrors in its overtone the spirit of the times we currently perceive, which is marked by blanket suspicion and mistrust against Muslims," she said, adding that she was optimistic the legislation might still be amended.
Specifically, the IGGIO was worried about the law appearing to bundle together various Sunni, Shi'ite and Alawite sects and also about the ramifications of trying to agree on a unified German-language version of the Koran.
The Arabic version of the Koran is generally thought of as the word of Allah in Islam, with any translation including an element of interpretation.
"If a version of the Koran (in German) comes along as the codified, ultimate (version), then this would contradict the self-conception of Islam," Baghajati said.
Foreign minister Kurz told Austrian radio last month that numerous translations of the Koran had generated countless interpretations and said it was in the interests of local Muslims to eliminate possible misunderstandings.
The Austrian government warned in August that Islamist militancy was on the rise and officials have said around 140 people have left Austria to fight with the likes of the Islamic State, which has grabbed control of swathes of Iraq and Syria.
Last month, Austria said it would ban militant Islamist groups' symbols and strip citizenship from people who travel abroad to fight with jihadists.
On Thursday Kurz dismissed suggestions that a unified translation would pose a problem.
"Am I sceptical when I hear this is difficult or not easily done? Fundamentally no," said Kurz, adding that it had previously been possible to create unified teaching material for Islamic religious studies at schools across Austria.
(Editing by Crispian Balmer)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 00:20:41 -0400
Subject: Re: {PFC-Friends} The Minister's remarks on Haj
From: alishaheen2010@gmail.com
To: pfc-friends@googlegroups.comI can only speak for myself and my sentiments with respect to my faith are not so fragile as to be hurt by anyone's speech. God takes care of Islam, it is not in danger with 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, and we don't have to kill each other, even figuratively, over it. IMHO Islam is in greater danger from fellow Muslims like ISIS than atheists. People must be free to follow their conscience - that is the Islamic way. Those who believe should know that people who denigrate any religion are accountable to their Creator for their actions, not to any of us. If we are secure in our faith we don't have to take the bait. I hope people who are quick to take offence over any criticism of religion will also be mindful when they interact with fellow members. Let's create a culture of respect where people and their faith, or lack of it, are all equally respected and we do not resort to name calling which adds nothing to the discussion. Reform begins with us so let us engage in dialogue and be the tolerance we want to see in the world!On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Mohammad Serajul Islam <serajul7@gmail.com> wrote:I am reading with great concern that in the name of free speech, the Islam-haters are again having a filed day defending Latif Siddiqui. And again the name of our holy Prophet (peace be upon him) is vein drawn in this vicious anti-Islam campaign, I would like to draw the attention of the administrator/s to be cautious because the sentiments of a lot of members are benign hurt in the name of free speech.On Oct 8, 2014, at 8:44 AM, Mumtaz <mumtazjahmed@hotmail.com> wrote:Mr.anisur Rahman,s Cardinal error quote "without fear whatever he wants to say" .no in any society even here in the west you cannot say "whatever". Let him say whatever n see where he lands in USA,UK,CANADA.
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 17:54:25 -0400
Subject: {PFC-Friends} The Minister's remarks on Haj
From: alishaheen2010@gmail.com
To: anisur.rahman1@btinternet.com
CC: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; mohiuddin@netzero.net; shah.deeelder@gmail.com; gopalsengupta@aol.com; akhtergolam@gmail.com; rashedanam1971@gmail.com; syed.aslam3@gmail.com; sheikhhasina@hotmail.com; obaidul.quader@gmail.com; dr.dipumoni@gmail.com; drmohsinali@yahoo.com; nurunnabi@gmail.com; abdul_momen@hotmail.com; abid.baha@gmail.com; shahdeeldar@gmail.com; poplu@hotmail.com; bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com; suhasboston@gmail.com; nurannabi@gmail.com; adewan@emich.edu; alochona@yahoogroups.com; faruquealamgir@gmail.com; abid.bahar@gmail.com; anis.ahmed@netzero.net; nazrulic@gmail.com; mostofadrgholam@gmail.com; editor@thedailystar.net; farida_majid@hotmail.com; bdmailer@gmail.com; m.jamalghaus@gmail.com; khondkar.saleque@gmail.com; rezaulkarim617@gmail.com; bipulnahar@yahoo.com; zainul321@yahoo.com; mukulcity@gmail.com; bangladesh-zindabad@yahoogroups.com; zoglul@hotmail.co.uk; shahadathussaini@hotmail.com; asifuli@gmail.com; jalamb.desh@gmail.com; neawamileague@gmail.com; ahrar.ahmad@bhsu.edu; pfc-friends@googlegroups.comAnis - I fully agree with you that everyone has the right to free speech and educated individuals should not be turning into a lynch mob over a Minister's offensive remarks. Calling for imprisonment, hanging and invoking non-existent blasphemy laws over a person's opinions are way over the top. I do hope BD does not have the kind of blasphemy laws that exist in Pakistan.That being said, in a democracy it is also fair to ask for the Minister's resignation when people disagree with his policies or if he makes racist or sexist remarks. That happens in the West too. As such politicians need to be a little more circumspect about the remarks they make in public. In my opinion he was committing political suicide by questioning Haj at a time when there is enough opposition to secularism already in BD. Therefore the PM would be justified in accepting his resignation.I would have preferred to hear him say that people should not be going into debt to perform Haj or that we should not be going for Haj until the Kaaba is liberated from Wahabis or until Saudi Arabia treats Bangladeshis with respect or until women are just as free to perform Haj without an escort as men - but that is my personal bias :). Given the human rights abuses of Bangladeshis in Saudi Arabia, the Minister would have been perfectly justified in asking whether Bangladeshis should be performing Haj under the Saudi government which does not respect their human rights. Freeing holy places from oppressive regimes is part of jihad too. The problem is that the Minister made public remarks suggesting Haj is a waste of time and money - that is unacceptable and offensive to practicing Muslims.Perhaps others may correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that Muslims believe the Kaaba was built by Abraham. However, over the years it was being used by the Quraish to worship idols. The Prophet removed these idols after the fall of Makkah. Haj therefore is a Muslim tradition as it is practiced today. You are absolutely correct that it has economic implications and is a major source of revenue for the Saudi government after oil.Just my two cents.On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:18 PM, ANISUR RAHMAN <anisur.rahman1@btinternet.com> wrote:Dear Ahrar,Despite the fact that the string of emails shown below is private between you and Mr Serajul Islam, but because they are being exchanged in the public forum through mukto-mona (where I write regularly as a blogger), I am taking the liberty to comment on this issue.First of all, I must say that I am appalled and ashamed, like any one else, by the deceitful fabrication of facts by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO). The Dhaka Tribune's report that Ban Ki-moon showered praises on Hasina is a total fabrication. There was not a single official statement from the UN Secretary General Office where he had even mentioned the name 'Sheikh Hasina', let alone showering any praise for her. (If there was any praise that Hasina recollects, it must have been her private meeting with the UN Secretary General and the UN Secretary General is reluctant or ashamed to disclose).If you search the UN website, you will find that over the whole of 2014 until now (from January 1 to 30 September 2014) the UN Secretary General only issued one speech related to Bangladesh - 40th anniversary of Bangladesh's membership of the UN. The link is given below for anybody to peruse. In that speech, Ban Ki-moon had not mentioned, not even once, the name 'Sheikh Hasina'. So how could he have praised her?We want Bangladesh to be praised, to be shown as a shining example. But claiming praise, when there was none, is disgraceful and shameful.I also agree with you that this attitude of exaggeration of importance is our national character. I remember after last year's UN General Assembly meeting when Hasina returned to Bangladesh, the government newspapers flashed: "Hasina's triumphant return to the country". It was, as if, Hasina went to New York, fought a vicious battle with world leaders, had them all flatted and now returning triumphantly to the country! This is all, as you said, from implicit feeling of inferiority and low estimation and wants to show to the general public her inflated status and standing at the world scene.However, I can't accept that this attitude has anything to do with the legitimacy of the last election. Last year around this time, she returned "triumphantly" from New York and her previous election was entirely legitimate. Even I would say that the last election was not all that illegitimate. The other party (BNP) did not come to the election and behaved most undemocratic and thuggish way - burning national assets, killing people, destroying national economy etc. Whoever won the election, despite all these things, has the right to run the country for the full term.By the way, I published today the write-up on "What happened to 'freedom of speech?'" in bdnews24.com. I am not supporting ALS nor am I condoning his viewpoint, but I am defending his right to say, without fear or favour, whatever he wants to say. That is his democratic right. The link is:- Anis bhai
From: "Mohammad Serajul Islam serajul7@gmail.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Mohiuddin Anwar <mohiuddin@netzero.net>; "shah.deeelder@gmail.com" <shah.deeelder@gmail.com>; "gopalsengupta@aol.com" <gopalsengupta@aol.com>; golam akhter <akhtergolam@gmail.com>; "rashedanam1971@gmail.com" <rashedanam1971@gmail.com>; "syed.aslam3@gmail.com" <syed.aslam3@gmail.com>; "sheikhhasina@hotmail.com" <sheikhhasina@hotmail.com>; "obaidul.quader@gmail.com" <obaidul.quader@gmail.com>; "dr.dipumoni@gmail.com" <dr.dipumoni@gmail.com>; "drmohsinali@yahoo.com" <drmohsinali@yahoo.com>; "nurunnabi@gmail.com" <nurunnabi@gmail.com>; "abdul_momen@hotmail.com" <abdul_momen@hotmail.com>; "abid.baha@gmail.com" <abid.baha@gmail.com>; "shahdeeldar@gmail.com" <shahdeeldar@gmail.com>; "poplu@hotmail.com" <poplu@hotmail.com>; "bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com" <bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com>; "bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com" <bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com>; "suhasboston@gmail.com" <suhasboston@gmail.com>; "nurannabi@gmail.com" <nurannabi@gmail.com>; "adewan@emich.edu" <adewan@emich.edu>; "alochona@yahoogroups.com" <alochona@yahoogroups.com>; "faruquealamgir@gmail.com" <faruquealamgir@gmail.com>; "abid.bahar@gmail.com" <abid.bahar@gmail.com>; "anis.ahmed@netzero.net" <anis.ahmed@netzero.net>; "nazrulic@gmail.com" <nazrulic@gmail.com>; "mostofadrgholam@gmail.com" <mostofadrgholam@gmail.com>; "editor@thedailystar.net" <editor@thedailystar.net>; "farida_majid@hotmail.com" <farida_majid@hotmail.com>; "alishaheen2010@gmail.com" <alishaheen2010@gmail.com>; "bdmailer@gmail.com" <bdmailer@gmail.com>; "m.jamalghaus@gmail.com" <m.jamalghaus@gmail.com>; "khondkar.saleque@gmail.com" <khondkar.saleque@gmail.com>; "rezaulkarim617@gmail.com" <rezaulkarim617@gmail.com>; "bipulnahar@yahoo.com" <bipulnahar@yahoo.com>; "zainul321@yahoo.com" <zainul321@yahoo.com>; "mukulcity@gmail.com" <mukulcity@gmail.com>; "bangladesh-zindabad@yahoogroups.com" <bangladesh-zindabad@yahoogroups.com>; "zoglul@hotmail.co.uk" <zoglul@hotmail.co.uk>; "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>; "shahadathussaini@hotmail.com" <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com>; "asifuli@gmail.com" <asifuli@gmail.com>; "jalamb.desh@gmail.com" <jalamb.desh@gmail.com>; "neawamileague@gmail.com" <neawamileague@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, 6 October 2014, 2:43
Subject: [mukto-mona] Re: {PFC-Friends} How Photo Session became very important meeting between UN Secy. Gen. and Sheikh Hasina, Please read the article
AhrarI did not discuss the moral ambiguities but that does not mean I am not concerned about it as much as you are. I agree with what you called political tradition having worked with the government of Bangladesh in terms of exaggerations of such issues to make the powers that be happy. But I must underline that no past government has distorted outcome of meetings at the highest levels and have been rebutted the way it has happened with the President's meeting with the US Secretary-General, and the Prime Minister's meetings with the British Prime Minister and the UN Secretary General. In fact, i would like to stand corrected but as far as my information goes, no government anywhere has been contradicted and embarrassed the way our government has been in the past couple of months for distorting its version of a highest level meetings.This is why I was trying to figure why would our side give out such distorted statements where simple common sense should have told them that the statements would be contradicted. This is also why i concluded tentatively as I cannot prove it that those working by the Prime Minister's side are worried about the pressure on the government on the issue of legitimacy and made these statements to make the Prime Minister happy. Still, i am flabbergasted how they could think that they could both make the Prime Minster and hope at the same time, the hosts would not see the blatant distortions.This is not simple sycophancy which is of course the main reason for the distortions but stupidity at its worst.This I would like to differ with you Ahrar that this is not part of our political tradition that you have suggested. When we worked in government, we faced even greater pressure from the military dictator HM Ershad. But we never thought that we could make distorted statements of his meetings with foreign leaders to make him happy. You know too well how he craved for recognition from foreign leaders and governments for domestic reasons because he too suffered from the issue of legitimacy for his government. Nevertheless, we never even thought this was possible. We were not stupid or insane although under greater pressure from HM Ershad to please him that those serving the present Prime Minister are not, although under pressure they are.Best wishes.Shabuj BhaiOn Oct 5, 2014, at 9:12 PM, Ahmad, Ahrar <Ahrar.Ahmad@bhsu.edu> wrote:Sabuj bhai:I am as appalled, and perhaps as embarrassed, as you are regarding the routine exaggerations and distortions emanating from the Prime Minister's Office (PMO). But this tendency to make it appear that we are more important than we are, and to make something which is not, is firmly embedded in our habits of thought and behavior. On top of this is the shameful tendency that we demonstrate in trying to prove our closeness to FOREIGN personalities. It reflects our deep-rooted inferiority complex and our frantic need to seek external validation.You seem to be arguing that this practice is being driven by the desperation to seek legitimacy at home, and an acknowledgement of the anxieties surrounding the Jan 5 electoral fiasco. I tend to think that this is not unusual, and AL would have done exactly the same if the elections had been less controversial. In other words, you are reading political weakness into this behavior, I am concerned about the moral ambiguities that define our political tradition.I share your outrage, but not your conclusion.AhrarFrom: pfc-friends@googlegroups.com [mailto:pfc-friends@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mohammad Serajul Islam
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2014 10:06 AM
To: pfc-friends@googlegroups.com
Cc: Mohiuddin Anwar; shah.deeelder@gmail.com; gopalsengupta@aol.com; golam akhter; rashedanam1971@gmail.com; syed.aslam3@gmail.com; sheikhhasina@hotmail.com; obaidul.quader@gmail.com; dr.dipumoni@gmail.com; drmohsinali@yahoo.com; nurunnabi@gmail.com; abdul_momen@hotmail.com; abid.baha@gmail.com; shahdeeldar@gmail.com; poplu@hotmail.com; bangladeshiamericans@googlegroups.com; bangladesh-progressives@googlegroups.com; suhasboston@gmail.com; nurannabi@gmail.com; adewan@emich.edu; alochona@yahoogroups.com; faruquealamgir@gmail.com; abid.bahar@gmail.com; anis.ahmed@netzero.net; nazrulic@gmail.com; mostofadrgholam@gmail.com; editor@thedailystar.net; farida_majid@hotmail.com; alishaheen2010@gmail.com; bdmailer@gmail.com; m.jamalghaus@gmail.com; khondkar.saleque@gmail.com; rezaulkarim617@gmail.com; bipulnahar@yahoo.com; zainul321@yahoo.com; mukulcity@gmail.com; bangladesh-zindabad@yahoogroups.com; zoglul@hotmail.co.uk; mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; shahadathussaini@hotmail.com; asifuli@gmail.com; jalamb.desh@gmail.com; neawamileague@gmail.com
Subject: Re: {PFC-Friends} How Photo Session became very important meeting between UN Secy. Gen. and Sheikh Hasina, Please read the articleOne has to ponder why would this government be indulging in this game of distortion meetings of the Prime Minister and President with world leaders. First, the meeting of the President with the US Secretary General was distorted. The UN Secretary General's office then issued a statement nailing the lie that humiliated the President and the country. UN Secretary General's office never in the past did anything like this. Then the Foreign Minister distorted the meeting of the Prime Minister with David Cameron that a statement from No 10 Downing Street nailed as another lie. Now this distortion of the photo session between the US Secretary General and the Prime Minister that has again been nailed by the SG's office. Thus a pattern is emerging of lies and distortions by those at the highest level of this government of meetings of the Prime Minister/President with foreign dignitaries. This is extremely humiliating for every citizen of the country, irrespective of party affiliations because it demeans Bangladesh. This also underlines that its show on impunity notwithstanding, the government is nervous and shaking inside on the issues of the January 5 elections and its legitimacy. It is desperately seeking legitimacy.On Oct 5, 2014, at 11:50 AM, Mohiuddin Anwar <mohiuddin@netzero.net> wrote:হাসিনা-মুন বৈঠক ছিল ফটোসেশন মাত্র!
ডেস্ক রিপোর্ট
জাতিসংঘ মহাসচিব বান কি-মুনের সঙ্গে প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনার বৈঠক ছিল ফটোসেশন মাত্র।রেকর্ডভুক্ত কিছু নয়। এ নিয়ে দেশের দৈনিক মানবজমিন-এ প্রকাশিত রিপোর্ট ঘিরে এমন তথ্যই উঠেএসেছে।
জাতিসংঘ সাধারণ পরিষদের (ইউএনজিএ) ৬৯তম অধিবেশনের সাইডলাইনে জাতিসংঘ মহাসচিবের সঙ্গেপ্রধানমন্ত্রীর বৈঠক নিয়ে ফলাও প্রচার চালায় সরকার। জাতিসংঘ মহাসচিব বৈঠকে প্রধানমন্ত্রীর ভূয়সীপ্রশংসা করেন এবং সমর্থন দিয়ে যাওয়া কথা জানান বলেও দাবি করে সরকার।
কিন্তু এটা কোনো শিউডিউল বৈঠক ছিল না বলে রিপোর্ট প্রকাশ করে মানবজমিন। আর তাত্ক্ষণিক এরপ্রতিবাদ জানিয়েছে নিউইয়র্কস্থ বাংলাদেশের স্থায়ী মিশন। মিশনের পক্ষ থেকে বলা হয়, রিপোর্টটি মিথ্যা,বিভ্রান্তিকর ও উদ্দেশ্যপ্রণোদিত।
মানবজমিন দাবি করে, কাউসার মুমিনের রিপোর্টটি ছিল তথ্যনির্ভর। জাতিসংঘের কর্মকর্তাদের বরাত দিয়েএই রিপোর্টটি তৈরি করা হয়।
জাতিসংঘের ডেপুটি মুখপাত্র ফারহান হক এক ই-মেইল বার্তায় জানান, হ্যায় মি. কাউসার, এটা ছিলফটোসেশন মাত্র। রেকর্ডভুক্ত কিছু না।
কাউসার মুমিন জানতে চেয়েছিলেন, মহাসচিবের সঙ্গে বৈঠকে কি আলোচনা হয়েছে। এর বিস্তারিতপাওয়া যাবে কিনা? এর জবাবেই ফারহান হক এই তথ্য দেন।
এখানেই শেষ নয়, জাতিসংঘের স্ট্র্যাটেজিক কমিউনিকেশনস অ্যান্ড পাবলিক অ্যাফেয়ার্স বিষয়ক সিনিয়রঅফিসার হোজে ল্যুইজ ডিয়াজ অপর এক ই-মেইল বার্তায় এটা নিশ্চিত করেন যে, মহাসচিবের সঙ্গেসাক্ষািট ছিল আলোকচিত্র তোলার সুযোগ সংবলিত একটি সাক্ষাত্। সেখানে কোনো বিবৃতি পাঠ করাহয়নি।
শুক্রবার জাতিসংঘ সফর নিয়ে সংবাদ সম্মেলনে এক প্রশ্নের জবাবে শেখ হাসিনা বলেন, 'বিরোধী রাজনৈতিক দলগুলোর সঙ্গে আলোচনার কথা জাতিসংঘ মহাসচিব এবার বলেননি। সম্ভবত তিনি কোনোসমস্যা দেখছেন না। আগে তো আমরা আগ বাড়িয়ে শুনেছি, এবার তেমন হয়নি।'
প্রসঙ্গত, এর আগে জাতিসংঘ মহাসচিবের সঙ্গে রাষ্ট্রপতি আবদুল হামিদের বৈঠক নিয়েও সরকারের বিরুদ্ধে তথ্য বিকৃতির অভিযোগ উঠে।
এছাড়া প্রধানমন্ত্রীর সঙ্গে যুক্তরাজ্যের প্রধানমন্ত্রী ডেভিড ক্যামেরনের বৈঠকের আলোচ্য বিষয় নিয়েও একই কেলেঙ্কারির জন্ম দিয়েছিল সরকার।
____________________________________________________________
The #1 Worst Carb Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
FixYourBloodSugar.com--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PFC-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pfc-friends+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
__._,_.___
Posted by: Jamal Hasan <poplu@hotmail.com>
****************************************************
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
__,_._,___