Shaikh Mujib
Sagol
only good thing that can be attributed to him is that Bangladesh was freed
from equally evil clutch of Pakistan. But Bangladesh should never have been
part of evil Pakistan. Bhashani started Awami League and Bhasani is the
first one who sought independence from Pakistan. Shaikh Mujib's only dream
in that earlier times was to become the prime minister of Pakistan. Only
after realizing that he can never achieve his dream did he ask people to
fight for independence. During the war, he was in prison in Pakistan and he
spend his time playing cards while leaders like Gandhi and Jinnah spent
their time reading books and contemplating the future for their country.
After the war was over and Sheikh Mujib, the great dumb ass, took over as
the head of state he proved to be the worst of the worst leaders. Everyone
listened to him initially. But instead of dedicating his life to making the
country better and separating his life from his corrupt family, relatives
and chamchas, he connived at their crimes. Also instead of introducing fair
and educated politics, he introduced gunda style politics. He thought of
himself as a king and that the limited resources of the country was for his
relatives and chamchas to eat. Sheikh Mujib was a Habuchandra Maharaja of
the story books.
The Awami league goons ruled like despots. Many people were forced to retire
early so that Awami league goons could take their place. Many people were
getting sick of the way these Awami league goons were doing things.
Sheikh Mujib created Rakhi Bahini to protect him. Rakhi Bahini was nothing
but a bunch of gundas who used to rob places. Bhashani's newspaper used to
write what crimes Rakhi Bahini had been involved in. Sheikh Mujib made sure
that those newpapers were shut down.
Sheikh Mujib is the worst administrator in this world to hold power. The
only thing he was interested in was how to stay in power for life. Thanks to
his selfishness, idioticity and corruptness, Bangladesh politics is so bad
today.
Neither Sheikh Mujib nor his chamchas had any plan of how they would set
things for Bangladesh. In a way they were agents of India although some of
them may not have realized that. As stated earlier Sheikh Mujib spent his
time playing cards instead of reading. In his academic life, Sheikh Mujib
had performed horribly. Alas, such a selfish, stupid, idiot person became
the head of state. He was only good until Bangladesh became independent.
I wonder why Pakistanis did not have him killed before although they had
killed many educated Bangladeshis during the war. Perhaps they had realized
that if they had him killed, Bangladesh would probably be in much better
shape than it is today.
> > kmus...@aol.com (KMusafir) wrote:
> > > Shaikh Mujib was an embodiment of evil. I put him at per with
> satan.
> > His
> > > contribution and achievement whatever one like to term it, ended
on
> > march 25,
> > > 71. His return from Pakistan and subsequent history, is
camparable
> to
> > savagery,
> > > insane brutality of the likes of Pol pots. His departure from
> > Bangladesh is
> > > nothing short of freedom for the new nation. The nation fought
for
> > freedom to
> > > speak, freedom to live free, freedom to read and freedom to
choose
> to
> > be
> > > governed. Instead they got the yoke of slavery, banishment of
> > political
> > > opposition, read his version of mujibism, rakkhi Bahini and rape
of
> > Bangladesh
> > > by his family and his cohorts. His departure from political
> spectrum
> > is nothing
> > > short of the greatest political event the nation saw in the last
> > century in
> > > Bangladesh.
KMusafir
today's so called Government of Consensus was stipped naked by Goons of Shaikh
Fazlul Haque Mani's Jubo League.
During seize of Bangladesh in 1996 by Shaikh Mujib's learned daughter, Shaikh
Hasina, a civil servent was stripped naked since he dared to venture out
defying her authority.
In 1999 we saw Police grab a female BNP activist and almost violate her in
Public stripping her. Photograph do not lie.
A new year, a new century and a new millenium we saw infront of TSC a female is
stripped naked by activist of Chatra league. It seems Shaikh Hasina is very
fond of stripping people. I wonder why??
man...@my-deja.com
MY RESPONSE:
GIVEN THE FACT THAT I DON'T CONDONE ANY ACT OF STATE SPONSORED
VIOLENCE, I DO CONDEMN AWAMI LEAGUE LED EXCESSES OF THE PAST AND
PRESENT. THE RECENT STRIPPING INCIDENT AT DHAKA UNIVERSITY SHOULD NOT
BE SUPPORTED BY ANYONE. I DON"T THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOT DONE ENOUGH TO
ENSURE SAFETY FOR FEMALE OR MALE STUDENTS. THE VICE CHANCELLOR'S
COMMENTS ON THE RECENT STRIPPING INCIDENT WERE PREPOSTEROUS. YET, NO
FACELESS AND INDECENT INTERNET HACKERS LIKE CHHAGOL AND KMUSAFIR ARE IN
A POSITION TO MAKE ANY OBJECTIVE STATEMENT ON SUCH INDECENT INCIDENTS.
MY RESPONSE IS TO SATANIC VERSES OF SAGOL(CHHAGOL)AND K(KHANDANI)
MUSAFIR:
In recent weeks the SCB has been drowned in all brands and shapes of
falsehoods about Bangabandhu SMR. Those virulent critics of
Bangabandhu SMR are chewing the same cud. They are spreading the same
lies again and again and again. Aimed at disseminating blatant
falsehoods and agenda driven distortions about the Father of the
Nation, one Chowdhury Irad Ahmed (CIA) Siddiqy has assumed various
types of bogus names. For examples, this very dysfuntional CIA Siddiqy
has deliberately used the following names to abuse the good name of the
Founding Father of the Nation: HEMAMALINI, PRASAD, ANTI-BENGALI-HINDU,
ARTHONITIBID, SHAMIM AHMED JHANTU alias VIGILANTIC. It is widely
believed that CIA SIDDIQY is also using the following false names to
abuse others: K(KHANDANI)MUSAFIR, BAGHA and SAGOL(correct spelling is
CHHAGOL). Both Chhagol and KMUSAFIR, proxies for CIA SIDDIQY -cum-
SHAMIM AHMED JHANTU, have indicated that they will continue to abuse
the name of Bangabandhu SMR. In view of this, I would respectfully re-
post the following article on Bangabandhu SMR for the perusal of the
respected SCB posters and readers. Thank you for your time. W.Zaman
Manik, January 8, 2000].
BANGABANDHU SHEIKH MUJIBUR RAHMAN:
PORTRAIT OF A BANGALEE PATRIOT
M. Waheeduzzaman Manik
Although Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was ruthlessly murdered on
August 15, 1975 – twenty four long years ago, we have thus far
officially observed only fourth National Mourning Day. To the chagrin
of Bangabandhu-bashers and fear-mongers, the present Government of the
People’s Republic of Bangladesh has demonstrated the willingness to
observe the death anniversary of the Founding Father of the Nation. In
defiance of the virulent critics of Bangabandhu, the present Government
of the Republic has boldly taken some admirable steps to re-designate
some of the educational institutions after Bangabandhu’s name. The
much publicized Jamuna Bridge has rightfully been named after the
Father of the Nation. These are the bare minimums what we can do to
show due respect to the memory of the departed soul to whom Bangladesh
as a nation-state owes its birth.
Bangabandhu SMR, a true friend of his people and an extraordinary
political leader who had spent more than twelve years of his adult life
in various jails for relentlessly articulating the legitimate
grievances of Bangalees against the then Pakistani ruling elite had
become a victim of the brutal and deliberate massacre of August 15,
1975. Bangabandhu, a courageous man who did not deviate a period (full
stop) or a coma from his famous Six-Point Program even under combined
pressure of brute Pakistani Military Junta and conniving Zulfiqar Ali
Bhutto was mercilessly murdered along with his wife, three sons and
other family members in independent Bangladesh. At the behest of the
murderers of Bangabandhu, the bullet-ridden dead body of the sitting
President of the Republic was most dishonorably buried at Tongipara,
far away from the capital city. The dead bodies of Bangabandhu’s wife,
three sons, two newly wed daughters-in-law, and other close relatives
were disrespectfully buried without any Dafan-Kafan and Janaja in the
unmarked graves at Banani Graveyard.
Although our nation’s indebtedness to Bangabandhu was sanguine like a
birth mark, his name was officially proscribed for more than twenty one
years. It is a national disgrace that Bangabandhu became an object of
a systematic vilification and disinformation campaign for over more
than twenty three years. Bangabandhu was the long-awaited savior of
Bangalees of the then East Pakistan. Yet this extraordinary Bangalee
statesman fell as a victim in the hands of those reactionary and
mercenary forces who had never wholeheartedly accepted Bangabandhu’s
clarion call for independence on March 7, 1971: “The struggle of this
time is the struggle for our emancipation. The struggle of this time
is the struggle of Independence.”
The readers of various Internet discussion groups, especially
Soc.Culture.Bangladesh (SCB) may be aware of the fact that I have thus
far posted a number of write-ups on the Founding Father of today’s
People’s Republic of Bangaladesh. I have posted two articles on
Bangabandhu in Global Amitech’s News From Bangladesh (NFB, August 17,
1998 and Sept. 7, 1998). The Independent, one of the leading dailies of
Bangladesh has also recently carried my article on the Father of the
Nation (August 20 & 21, 1998). To the best of my abilities, I have
expressed my views clearly and boldly. However, I have no fantasy that
my contentions about Bangabandhu will be universally supported. Given
the fact that the Founder of Bangladesh as a nation-state does not need
my promoting, I have no problem if someone disagrees with my
observations. Having no personal affiliation with the now-defunct
BAKSAL or the present Awami League Government, I feel duty bound to
dispel some of the baseless accusations against Bangabandhu, a genuine
Bangalee statesman who had bequeathed a sovereign nation-state for his
people. Notwithstanding the hollowness, irrelevance and uselessness of
such unsubstantiated contentions and motivated characterizations, the
chief purpose of this paper is to refute some of those misleading
views and global generalizations about Bangabndhu SMR, one of the
greatest statesmen of this century.
There are SCB readers who have said that somebody else had written or
prompted Bangabandhu’s historical March 7, 1971 Speech! Some Pakistani
SCB netters have even claimed that the Bangalee freedom fighters had
committed genocide on Bangalees in 1971! There are also Bihari
sympathizers who have been claiming that Bangalee freedom fighters had
killed 1 million Biharis during our liberation war. There are
Pakistani minded Bangladeshis who would love to squarely blame
Bangabandhu for the break-up of Pakistan. There are those Bangladeshis
who will say that Bangabandhu had no plan for independent Bangladesh.
Some anti-Bangalee renegades would not hesitate even for a moment to
characterize the Founding Father of Bangladesh as pro-Pakistani. Some
critics have mis-characterized Bangabandhu’s arrest on the night of
March 25, 1971 as pre-arranged “surrender” to the Pakistani army. Some
of them even suggested that Bangabandhu was having a good time in
Pakistani Jail during our liberation war! Some of the NFB readers have
already alleged that Bangabandhu was not the Father of the
Nation. It is also alleged by the critics that the undisputed leader
of all Bangalees of the then East Pakistan was not a statesman.
According to one observer, Bangabandhu was no more than a “village
leader.” One of the regular NFB contributors, who is known for his
virulence against the Father of the Nation has claimed to be “amused”
with my assertion that Bangabandhu SMR was a great “statesman.”
I don’t think that Bangabandhu SMR was beyond or above genuine
criticisms. As a pragmatic political leader, he was not a holy saint.
History will ultimately cast judgment on Bangabandhu’s life-long
accomplishments. Unfortunately, most of the criticisms about the
Founder of Bangladesh as a nation-state are nothing but vilification.
Having no credibility, this kind of name-calling is filled with hatred
and antagonizing characterizations. Although such vicious attacks and
falsehoods are manifestations of hatred and ignorance of the slanderers
and character assassins, some of the NFB readers have eloquently
refuted the absurd allegations against the Father of the Nation. In my
humble assessment, most of these criticisms are false, baseless,
slanderous, patronizing, demeaning, sel. We know who are the virulent
critics of Bangabandhu. Unfortunately, many of their observations are
full of cock and bull stories and malicious conjectures. Only the
confused or motivated individuals filled with personal vendetta can
disseminate such tantalizing fabrications and blatant distortions about
the Founding Father of Bangladeshf-serving and contradictory. It is
indeed difficult to comment on the falsehoods which are full of
redundant concoctions and useless generalizations.
It is alleged by some motivated critics that Bangabandhu had no plan
for having an independent Bangladesh. They also claim that the creation
of Bangladesh was the direct result of a series of blunders, mistakes
and wrong decisions made by advisors of the then dictator Jallad Yahya
Khan and power greedy Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Rather, the truth of the
matter was just the opposite. The emergence of Bangladesh as a nation-
state was the direct result of Bangalees’ determination for carving out
an independent country out of Pakistan. Bangladesh was the outcome of
Bangalees’ willingness to fight for freedom and independence. It needs
to be clearly stressed that our struggle for freedom and independence
was not a “leaderless” fight. It is a documented fact that Bangabandhu
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman provided the much needed charismatic leadership
for our glorious struggle for emancipation and independence. Neither
the freedom-loving Bangalees nor Bangabandhu, the relentless champion
of their legitimate right for self-determination would have settled for
less than total emancipation.
It remains a “historical” fact that Bangabandhu’s name is synonymous
with Bangalees’ struggle for independence. Even a quisling of Ghulam
Azam’s stature can not question Bangabandhu’s pivotal contribution
towards Bangladesh’s independence. “The White Paper on East Pakistan
Crisis,” which was prepared by Pakistani Military regime during the
Pakistani Genocidal War in 1971 clearly noted that Bangabandhu
refused to compromise on the Six-Point Program, the magna carta of
Bangalee rights. In his book The Last Days of United Pakistan,
Dr.G.W. Chowdhury, a die-hard proponent of pre-1971 Pakistan, verified
that Bangabandhu consistently refused to compromise his demands for
full autonomy based on Six-Point program. The recently published books
written by some Pakistani scholars and Civil Servants clearly recognize
that it was Bangabandhu who had adamantly refused to compromise his
Six- Point program. In their recently published memoirs, the Pakistani
War Criminals like A. Niazi and Rao Forman Ali have criticized
Bangabandhu for his uncompromising stand on Six-point program.
Outstanding British and American scholars and journalists have fully
recognized the sanguine and pivotal role of Bangabandhu’s charismatic
leadership in the making of Bangladesh’s struggle for freedom and
independence. Although some of the celebrated Bangladeshi political
scientists are very critical about Bangabandhu’s performance as the
head of the Government in independent Bangladesh, there is almost a
consensus among those scholars about Bangabandhu’s monumental role in
uniting all Bangalees at a critical juncture of our history for waging
an armed liberation struggle. The malicious propaganda against
Bangabandhu and selective distortions of our political history are at
sharp variance with most of the universally accepted facts. Bangabandhu
is not only part and parcel of our political history but he was also
the creator of that glorious and robust history. No amount of
selective amnesia of the Bangabandh-bashers can erase Bangabandhu’s
pivotal contribution toward Bangalees’ struggle for freedom and
independence.
Some of the so-called critics of Bangabandhu floated the idea that the
undisputed leader of Bangalees did not care to ascertain what was going
on in the then East Pakistan before Pakistani military junta had
unleashed gruesome genocide on the night of March 25, 1971. This brand
of critics also claims that Bangabandhu never wanted independence for
Bangladesh. Therefore, Bangabandhu never declared independence. These
critics maintain that neither the Awami League nor Bangabandhu was
pivotal in leading Bangalees towards independence.
It is preposterous to claim that Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman did
not know what was going on in the then East Pakistan before and during
March 1971. Who were those leaders who knew what was going on in the
then East Pakistan ? It seems to me that some of these Bangabandhu-
haters want to say that Jamaat leader Ghulam Azam, Pakistan Democratic
Party (PDP) leaders like Nurul Amin, Hamidul Hoque Chowdhury and
Mahmud Ali and Muslim League leaders like Sabur Khan, Khwaja Khairuddin
and Fazlul Quader Chowdhury were the defenders of Bangalees’ legitimate
rights in 1971! Those certified pro-Pakistani quislings had
systematically tormented the Bangalees during nine months of liberation
movement. Yet some of the anti-liberation forces have started to claim
that those renegades were the real statesmen and the Founding Fathers
of today’s Bangladesh ! Some of the certified critics of Bangabandhu
are in search of a new founding father of Bangladesh. Some of those
“nobba” (new) Razakars with the reactionary background and an
opportunistic orientation would like to rehabilitate the deceased
President Ziaur Rahman, the Founder of military autocracy in Bangladesh
as the Founding Father of the nation!
What was the actual role of the rightist political parties before,
during and after Bangladesh’s liberation war? The citizens of the
people’s Republic of Bangladesh are intimately familiar with the
ignominious role of the rightist political parties. All of the rightist
parties especially Jamaat-e-Islam, Muslim League and Pakistan
Democratic Party (PDP) were on the Pakistani side during our war of
liberation. Those quislings were willing partners of Pakistani
genocidal army before and during our liberation war. They were the
creators and sponsors of Peace Committees, Razakars, Al-Badars and Al-
Shams. In view of this, no pro-Jamaati elements of Bangladesh or
Pakistani collaborators or sympathizers of Pakistani war criminals are
in a position to verify who had supported or fought for our liberation.
Or for that matter, the admirers of military dictators or certified
supporters of Jamaat or other rightist parties are not the relevant
persons to attest the role of Awami League or Bangabandhu Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman in the making and emergence of Bangladesh as an
independent nation.
No one has to be a “new” historian to tell the truth about the birth
of Bangladesh as an independent nation-state. The struggle for our
freedom did not start all on a sudden on the black night of March 25,
1971. It is totally false to allude that the Bangalees of the then East
Pakistan were waiting for a call from an unknown Bangalee Mjor of
Pakistan Army for waging our war of independence. It is a travesty of
truth even to suggest that our liberation war was fought after we heard
Ziaur Rahman's voice from radio on March 27, 1971. It is a well
recorded fact that actual fighting for our liberation started in many
places of Bangladesh immediately after Pakistani brute military animals
started genocide on the night of March 25, 1971. Indeed, Bangladesh’s
struggle for freedom and independence was in the making for a long
time. They heard what Bangabandhu had to say in his Historic Speech on
tumultuous Seventh Day of March Nineteen Hundred Seventy One. The
emergence of Bangladesh on December 16, 1971 was the culmination of a
long struggle of Bangalees for gaining full independence from the
colonial rulers of Pakistan.
It is presumptuous to claim that Awami League was the “only” party
which had asked for Bangladesh’s independence. Doubtless, there were
other patriotic leaders and political parties which also had fought or
supported for greater autonomy for the then East Pakistan.
Specifically, Maulana Bhashani and other leftist leaders with few
exceptions had demanded for Bangladesh’s autonomy and independence.
However, it is a well recognized fact that due to predominant role of
the Awami League, the leftist parties could play only a secondary role
in the management of our Muktijuddha. In fact, the Indian Government
had mobilized its support and logistics through the Awami League-led
Bangladesh Government-in-exile. What was the impact of this
arrangement? According to Talukder Maniruzzaman: “The result was that
the leftist party leaders and cadres who sought shelter in India could
play only a secondary role in the liberation war.” There is no denying
the fact that all of the leftist parties especially Bhashani NAP and
its Student Unions, Pro-Moscow NAP and its Student Union, Communist
Party of Bangladesh, Krishak Samity and Trade Union Center had taken
part in our liberation war (reference: Talukder Maniruzzamn, The
Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath, UPL, 1988, see pp.141-153 for
Role of the Left in Bangladesh’s Liberation War ).
It was the Awami League and its front organizations which had
consciously spearheaded Bangalees’ quest for emancipation and
independence. No one has to suffer from “amnesia” for telling the
truth that the dynamic and charismatic leadership of Bangabandhu led us
through the historical 1966 Six-Point Movement. The Awami League was
the INSTRUMENT and EXPRESSION of articulating the demands of Bangalee
rights. It was the Awami League under the inspiring leadership of
Bangabandhu which had earned the electoral mandate in 1970 general
elections from an extraordinary majority of Bangalees of the then East
Pakistan. It was the Awami League which had emerged as the ONLY
legitimate party to represent Bangalee interest in 1971. Bangabandhu
was the undisputed and legitimate spokesman of Bangalees of the then
East Pakistan. It was Bangabandhu at whose clarion call the Bangalees
had valiantly fought for liberating their motherland from the Pakistani
occupation forces.
There is, however, no credence to the fraudulent and partisan claims of
some enthusiastic Awami Leaguers that our liberation war was fought
“only” by the Awami Leaguers. With the exception of pro-Pakistani
quislings, Bangladesh’s liberation war was fought or supported by all
Bangalees without any regard to political affiliations or orientations.
In fact, after December 1970 General Elections, especially after March
1, 1971, Bangabandhu SMR had undeniably symbolized the entire Bangalee
nation even though he was the President of the Awami League.
Although liberation war was a peoples’ war by any definition, the Awami
League led our Muktijuddha. For better or worse, the Awami League
dominated all phases of our liberation war. It was also the Awami
Leaguers and their supporters who were specifically hounded by the two-
legged Pakistani military animals during the nine months of liberation
war. It was the top Awami League leadership which had legitimately
formed the Bangladesh Government-in-Exile. It was Bangabandhu who was
made the President of the Republic even though he remained imprisoned
in Pakistani jail. Our Liberation War was fought in Bangabandhu’s name.
One of the patriotic songs was “Ekti Phool Ke Bachaboo Bole Aamra
Juddho Kari.” (“We continue to fight for saving one flower”) -- this
liberation war song is not yet erased from the memories of our freedom
fighters and other patriotic Bangalees. In the absence of Bangabandhu,
it was Tajuddin Ahmed, the dynamic Prime Minister of the Bangladesh
Government-in-exile who had successfully led our Muktijuddha. It was
Bangabandhu’s inspiration and Tajuddin Ahmed’s competent leadership
which led us to our decisive victory on December 16, 1971.
These are independently verified and fully validated historical facts.
Some amount of tinkering or twisting of Bangladesh’s true history here
and there can not blot these historical facts. No amount of distortions
can change the fundamental fact that it was Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman who had first formally declared independence for Bangladesh on
March 26 (immediately after midnight of March 25, 1971). The
Constitution of the Republic and all other relevant documents have
affirmed that Declaration of Independence. Doubtless, there were very
capable leaders in the caliber of Tajuddin Ahmed and Dr. Kamal Hossain
in the then Awami League. Yet, it was Bangabandhu who was the unifier
and undisputed leader of all Bangalees of the then East Pakistan. It
was Bangandhu alone who was the sole spokesman of the entire Bangalee
people of the then East Pakistan. It was dauntless Bangabandhu who had
employed his historical March 7, 1971 speech for lighting the torch to
cause a revolution toward Bangalees’ complete emancipation and
independence from the oppressive and suppressive occupation forces of
Pakistan.
Concluding Remarks:
The fraudulent and dramatic coup d-etat of August 15, 1975 in which
Bangabandhu was brutally murdered and his elected government
overthrown along with the subsequent political developments in
Bangladesh were not so surprising as they seemed to the outside world.
The assassination of the Founding Father of the Nation along with his
family members was one of the cruelest political murders in human
history. This ghastly killing and its aftermath littered with illegal
seizures of state powers through coups, blackmails and counter-coups
have been characterized by some heartless observers as the direct
result of the manner in which politics and administration of the new
nation were managed under the leadership of Bangabandhu. The alleged
failure of his leadership in the post-liberation period has been linked
to numerous causal factors. We are often allured that Bangabandhu “lost
out” partly because the situation in the early years of independent
Bangladesh was so desperate but mainly because he failed to translate
his charisma and tremendous popularity into an efficient and effective
government. Yet Bangabandhu’s accomplishments as the head of the
government of a newly established country were of monumental
proportions.
Despite the seething criticisms of his elected regime of only three and
a half years, Bangabandhu has remained synonymous with Bangalees’
relentless struggle for freedom and independence. Aimed at banishing
the Founding Father from the pages of our history and the memories of
our people, deliberate attempts were made by various regimes (Mustaque-
Zia-Ershad-Khaleda) during post-1975 era. Yet Bangabandhu’s pivotal
role in the emergence of Bangladesh as a sovereign nation-state
couldn’t be washed away from the memories of his people.
Notwithstanding the alleged mismanagement of the economy and
administrative machinery in early years of our independence, the
sanguine role of Bangabandhu in the making and igniting our struggle
for freedom and independence can never be marginalized. In spite of
the relentless vilification campaign against the Founder of the Nation
for more than twenty three years, Bangabandhu’s name has remained
enshrined and engraved in the minds of our people as the emancipator
and savior of Bangalees from the ignominies of brute Pakistani rulers.
The immortal name of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the legacies
of his extraordinary accomplishments will live through ages. Indeed,
Bangabandhu SMR symbolizes the portrait of a true Bangalee patriot.
Let me conclude this note on the Father of the Nation with the widely
quoted lines from Annada Shankar Roy’s poem:
“Jatoo Kaal Robe Padma-Meghna-Gouree-Jamuna Bahamaan,
Tatakaal Robe Keerti Toomar Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.”
“The accomplishments of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman will survive as long as
Padma, Meghna, Gouree and Jamuna will keep on flowing.”
{Reprinted from my earlier SCB post. Thanks. W.Zaman Manik])
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
vigil...@my-deja.com
Oops Manic bhai. I accidentally deleted the article that you re-re-re-
re-re-reposted. Can you please respectfully re-re-re-re-re-re-re-repost
it A-G-A-I-N so that we can all peruse it A-G-A-I-N.
Thanks in advance.
Jhontu
KMusafir
his arrival in Bangladesh and till his exit on Aug 15, 75. No wonder, none shed
a tear. Now only BAL supporters do that. None else. whole nation do not
celebrate his return, his death or any of his so called his dream.He may be a
GOD to some Bangladesh Awami League inept, insane and druged workers, to me he
was a simple thug, a shitpot.
Shomir
Goes to tell us who you really are! Please do not try to generalize and make
proclamations representing "all" people. You are entitled to your opinions, and
would do well to air it, but no more. Sometimes it is a sign of maturity to live
within ones' intellectual abilities.
--
Shomir
==========================
vigil...@my-deja.com
You are an Indian, aren't you. Do not poke your nose in the affairs of
Bangladesh. Why does it burn you to see criticism of Mujibur Rahman? He
was very suitable for you, na? Nobody can logically deny the
wrongdoings of Mujibur. He was corrupt, king of nepotism, incompetent,
fascist, autocrat. He killed 85,000 political opponents to keep his
'godi'. People only vomit meaningless crap in his defence. There is no
material in those - case in point manicZ. I am sure even you are tired
by his psycho-babbles although you won't have the guts to admit that.
We raised Mujib to power, we pulled him down. That is none of your
business. Mujib will be always remembered by the people of Bangladesh
as the biggest traitor thug and father of corruption. Not a single
person shed a drop of tear when he was killed in 1975. People rejoiced
all over the country at the freedom unleashed by the death of the
dictator criminal. Now the Awamis are trying to fool the nation,
specially the young people who were not present in 1975 or were too
young to remember the black days of 1972-75. They are trying to erase
the 'achievements' of their Bandhu-pita during the period. But they are
such big fools - truth ultimately prevails.
Maybe to you Mujib was a big asset as he sold away our independence to
India. We know that you are sad that we kicked him out in 1975 and
saved Bangladesh. In fact, you Indians created Mujib by your agents and
money, and he turned out to be the best Indian agent in Bangladesh. You
know it all, and are not ashamed of it at all. You are so shameless
that you think Bangladesh is your 'paitrik sampatti'. We kicked Mujib
into the same bin as Hitler, Pol Pot and Musolini. That's where he
belongs. What is you problem? Why don't you work on some of your own
problems. Or you do not have spines for that.
Jhontu
[Mr. Kazi I sincerely appreciate your sentiment on this issue. I was a
second year student at Scottish Church College in 1971, when I had the
opportunity to make a trip to Bangladesh, during the "mukti juddho",
with a group of friends. Those days the border was porous and we
slipped into East Pakistan through the check post at Benepol. We
carried some food, clothing and some small items as a token gesture of
our support for the gallant freedom fighters. I forget the exact date,
but we were in Rupdia village, just outside of Jessore town, a few
miles from Jhicargacha. We stayed overnight with a family, and were
planning to stay a couple of days more, but that did not happen because
the Pakistani army which was holed-up in the Jessore Cantonment, came
out that day, and we could see dark smokes along the path of their
advance, as they were carrying out "scorched earth" mode of defoliation
and property destruction. -part of writings by Shomir]
In article <3878F0ED...@My-Dejanews.com>,
Shomir
More than an Indian, I am a Bengali. It hurts to see the manner in which
you, Kmusafir, CIA Siddiki are trashing this person who tirelessly worked
all his life to give you your voice. Like all politicians and leaders, he
made his share of mistakes, but certainly not what you accuse him of. If
he was half as "clever" as a leader, he would have ensured that Bangladesh
was free of hateful betrayers like you and your cohorts. Yes, he failed,
and that is what cost him his life. In my view he was one of the greatest
Bengali LEADERS that was ever born, and people like you are like little
irritating lice and bugs. Yes you bite a little now and then, and cause
irritation, but basically you all are pests. Sooner or later the people of
Bangladesh will see what the true face of betrayers look like, and they
won't have to go too far, there is one Mir Zafar like you in every corner
of Bangladesh. I just hope that the good Bengali people will have the
courage and fortitude to isolate betrayers and the kin of Razakars like
yourself. That day is not very far.
Shomir
=========================
vigil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Shomir
==========================
"Success has many parents, failure is an orphan"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is
expressly prohibited under USC Title 47, Section 227.
Violators are subject to charge of up to $1,500 per
incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
vigil...@my-deja.com
I am touched that you are more Bengali than an Indian. My question
would be what are you still doing in Indian subjugation or why not WB
join the Bangladesh - the free land of Bengalis.
But this is about Mujib - 'your' hero. Yes, he chmpioned the cause of
the poor people of Bangladesh for long time. But his record was never
clean when he was in opposition in Pakistan. He was a minister in the
sixties and his tale of corruption was then a legend (which of course
was eclipsed by many others later). But what he did after becoming the
unequivocal leader of Bangladesh in 1972 was unpardonable. The dreams
that he talked about for two decades were shattered in two years by his
selfish focus on building his family autocracy and fortune. He was no
more for the Bengalis, he was for the sons and daughters, nephewes and
nieces, inlaws and brothers. He became so possessive of the whole
country that he literally thought it was his Jamidari. He actually
thought that the whole country owed it to him, just like you are
arguing now. He thought that he did so much for the country, now its
the country's turn to do something for him, even if the country had to
die for him. He was not acting like a leader, he was acting like a
mafia boss. The number of people that were annihiated by the direction
of his finger point does not say that he had just 'his share' of
mistakes. You did not have to go through that so it is not easy for you
to see. It is such a joke that you lament that Mujib was not clever
enough. Shame on you! You are suggesting that he did not kill enough of
his opponents and should have killed more people, right? You benia the
dalal of British. Your forefathers collaborated with the sahibs in the
same way and helped to prosecute the freedom fighters. For people like
you the British could rule India for that long.
You and people like you think that whoever opposed Mujib had to be a
rajakar. The Awamis also lived in a fool's paradise like this. They
wiped out the rajakars after 1972 and thought that the Bandhu-pita was
safe and every other opposition was just insignificant. Mind you that
the valiant group of people who acted on 15th August 1975 - each and
everyone one of them was a decorated freedom fighter who bet their
lives against the Punjabi army. You spineless coward will not dare to
admit that. Cowards like you will always hide behind your 'mayer
achol', and talk big 'mew mew' as you do not stand to lose anything.
Save your love for Bengalis when the Bengalis of WB will have enough
manhood to speak for their rights and independence, their culture and
heritage and will suffer like we did. How much Bengali you are is
evident by the sweeping victory of Hindi over you. Please do not try
teach us how to be patriotic Bengali. Try to cultivate some shame in
your nature before writing any more rubbish.
Jhontu
In article <38793352...@My-Dejanews.com>,
man...@my-deja.com
An objective study of history of Bangladesh's freedom struggle brings
out the crucial fact that Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was indeed
an expression and instrument of articulating the political and
economic aspirations and grievances of Bangalees of the then East
Pakistan. It was Bangabandhu who could provide the much needed
charismatic leadership to unify all Bangalees in our freedom movement.
Bangabandhu's name can NEVER be blotted from the sanguine and glorious
history of Bangladesh. Take it or leave it, the true history of
Bangladesh is not complete without uttering the name of Bangabandhu.
Believe it or not, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur will live for ages. no
amount of distortions can change Bangabandhu's role in the emergence of
Bangladesh as a nation-state. Neither CIA SIDDIQY nor his cohorts can
taint Bangabandhu's name. CIA Siddiqy and his father were the direct
beneficiaries of the killing of Bangabandhu. They salute the killers of
Bangabandhu. Therefor, the defenders of the convicted killers of
Bangabandhu have no credibilty to make any meaningful criticism on the
Founding Father of bangladesh. Like a typical Pakistani, CIA SIDDIQY
alias Jhantu the Musafir is fond of floating anti-India bogey without
any reference or relevance. CIA SIDDIQY IS SYMBOL OF SHAME.
I would point out that immediately after Bangabandhu's brutal
assassination on August 15, 1975, Khondaker Mushtaque seized power in
connivance with the killers of the Father of the Nation. By any
definition, Mustaque Government was an illegimate regime. How many
parties were there in Bangladesh from August 15, 1975 through November
3, 1975? How did the then Army CHIEF Ziaur Rahman had seized power? How
did Zia become the President of the Republic? How, why and when did Zia
remove the then President Justice Sayem first as a CMLA and
subsequently as the President? When and how did Ziaur Rahman
consolidate power? When, how and why did he hold referrendum? On what
date, month and year did Justice Sattar had formed a political front at
the behest of the then Army Chief, CMLA and President Major General
Ziaur Rahman? How many political parties were there in Bangladesh
before Ziaur Rahman himself float his own front and political party?
When did Ziaur Rahman form BNP? When did he contest the Presidency?
Could Zia form a political party during his tenure as the Army Chief of
the Republic? Who was H.M. Ershad during Ziaur Rahman regime? Was he
(ERSHAD) of some assistance to Ziaur Rahman when Justice Sayem was
removed from the position of CMLA and later from the Presidency of the
Republic? What kind of political system was introduced by Ershad in
Bangladesh? What are differences between Ziaur Rahman's assumtion of
power and Ershad’s seizure of power? What was the state of affairs
after Bangabandhu's regime was overthrown? What was the state of
corruption, nepotism and favortism durinng the regimes of Ziaur
Rahman, Ershad and Ziaur Rahman's wife's administration?
Bangabandhu's performance as the head of a new born country needs to be
assessed within the context of the answres to these relevant questions.
I respectfully request the critics of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
to evaluate his performance as Prime Minister and President of
Bangladesh with reference to his successors' performance. Let me share
what I found: some of the policies and programams of Bangabandhu regime
did not accomplish desired results. Some policies were hastily
initiated and ineffectively implemented. Yet if we compare
Bangabandhu's performance with his suuccessors' performance,
Bangabandhu looks like an unfaded rose.
Finally, I respectfully conclude this response with the following
observations: All "greatmen" are not necessarily "statesmen." But all
statesmen are greatmen. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was both a
greatman and a statesman. The Founding Father of Bangladesh was a
"statesman" because he was a greatman and vice-versa. Above all,
Bangabandhu was always imbued with sense of humility which itself is
admirable quality of greatman. Thanks. W.Zaman Manik (january 10, 2000)
In article <85bjej$adm$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Shomir
> Shomir:
>
> I am touched that you are more Bengali than an Indian. My question
> would be what are you still doing in Indian subjugation or why not WB
> join the Bangladesh - the free land of Bengalis.
I do have my reasons to not like the current system of parliamentary
democracy in India. I have written many posts in the past suggesting that a
federal system like that in the USA would be ideal for India, where all the
states get the power and freedom to do as they wish. I see a "strong"
central government as a pretext for the deeply entrenched political
establishments to dominate over the states. That however, different from
"Indian subjugation", because Bangla is a part of India. How does one
subjugate oneself? Is there a formula for that? Perhaps the you know
something that we don't, is it possible that you could enlighten us a bit?
Did I ever suggest Bangla and West Bengal ever joining together? I
sincerely believe that most Bengali Hindus of erstwhile East Pakistan have
learned their lessons of trusting people like you. They have been
ethnically cleansed, and many of our ancestors bear deep scars from their
traumatic experience. I am sure there would not be many Bengalis from
Bangla who would even remotely consider that option, given the ruthless
characters of many of Bangladeshis (like yourself, Kmusafir, & CIA Siddiky),
who already stabbed them once. It would be foolish to imagine that the
Hindu Bengalis will fall for this cheap trick once again to become a
minority in a declared Islamic state. Besides, how can one trust people
like KMusafir, CIA Siddiky and hundreds of thousands of rabid fanatics like
you, who don't even acknowledge the sacrifice of your own father-of-the
nation, who happened to be a Muslim?
> But this is about Mujib - 'your' hero. Yes, he chmpioned the cause of
> the poor people of Bangladesh for long time. But his record was never
> clean when he was in opposition in Pakistan. He was a minister in the
> sixties and his tale of corruption was then a legend (which of course
> was eclipsed by many others later). But what he did after becoming the
> unequivocal leader of Bangladesh in 1972 was unpardonable. The dreams
> that he talked about for two decades were shattered in two years by his
> selfish focus on building his family autocracy and fortune. He was no
> more for the Bengalis, he was for the sons and daughters, nephewes and
> nieces, inlaws and brothers. He became so possessive of the whole
> country that he literally thought it was his Jamidari. He actually
> thought that the whole country owed it to him, just like you are
> arguing now. He thought that he did so much for the country, now its
> the country's turn to do something for him, even if the country had to
> die for him. He was not acting like a leader, he was acting like a
> mafia boss.
That is your bigoted opinion, displaying your deep seated hatred against an
individual whose sacrifices you are incapable of comprehending. Instead of
attributing everything wrong that happened to Bangladesh upon SMR, and
reflected a few moments you would have seen that even if Allah came down to
help you all, you would still call Him a traitor, and everything else you
attributed to SMR, and drive Him out of your "sonar Bangla".
> The number of people that were annihiated by the direction
> of his finger point does not say that he had just 'his share' of
> mistakes. You did not have to go through that so it is not easy for you
> to see. It is such a joke that you lament that Mujib was not clever
> enough. Shame on you! You are suggesting that he did not kill enough of
> his opponents and should have killed more people, right? You benia the
> dalal of British. Your forefathers collaborated with the sahibs in the
> same way and helped to prosecute the freedom fighters. For people like
> you the British could rule India for that long.
Based on your allegation that SMR annihilated untold numbers of people in
Bangladesh, isn't it rather curious that somehow vicious anti-SMR like
yourself escaped? Where were you during those tumultuous days? In Calcutta
perhaps? Why don't you tell us where you were during those days? I would
also like to get some documented evidence of your unsubstantiated
allegations regarding the so called "annihilation" perpetrated by SMR. Is
there anything that you can provide to enlighten us?
> You and people like you think that whoever opposed Mujib had to be a
> rajakar. The Awamis also lived in a fool's paradise like this. They
> wiped out the rajakars after 1972 and thought that the Bandhu-pita was
> safe and every other opposition was just insignificant.
Indeed, that was a great lapse on the part of SMR if he got complacent that
all the enemies of Bangladesh have been eradicated. He failed, and he
should have been more vigilant. He paid dearly for that lapse, with his own
life, I repeat my statement again.
> Mind you that
> the valiant group of people who acted on 15th August 1975 - each and
> everyone one of them was a decorated freedom fighter who bet their
> lives against the Punjabi army. You spineless coward will not dare to
> admit that. Cowards like you will always hide behind your 'mayer
> achol', and talk big 'mew mew' as you do not stand to lose anything.
Those "bir pungabs" whom SMR trusted and put them in those positions did
something that shamed the whole world. In the dark of the night those bunch
of thugs burst into his residence and wiped out everyone, including women
and innocent children! This tells me a lot about YOUR character, when you
call them "decorated freedom fighters".
I can also see those heroes, who are now hiding in exile under the "jobbas'
of some Arabic Seikh in Libya or Saudi Arabia, and I am sure that all of us
are trembling hearing their "singho-garjan"... hahahahaha!
> Save your love for Bengalis when the Bengalis of WB will have enough
> manhood to speak for their rights and independence, their culture and
> heritage and will suffer like we did. How much Bengali you are is
> evident by the sweeping victory of Hindi over you. Please do not try
> teach us how to be patriotic Bengali. Try to cultivate some shame in
> your nature before writing any more rubbish.
Bengalis of Bangla are far better off than the people of "sonar Bangla", and
they have no desire to become "Independent", because they are independent.
The Bengalis of Bangla are far more creative and advanced in economic,
cultural, and literary aspects and need not listen to cheap conjunctures
from Mir Zafars like you.
Good advice is only useful when the person in question has a open mind, you
are not one of them, so any effort to educate you is futile, and I am fully
aware of that. I am simply exercising the rights to my freedom of
expression, is that too complex a concept for you to grasp?
> Jhontu
>
Shomir
=======================
Artho-niti-bid
Lanka-r kaache gi-a maathaa kaare het.
-- Arthonitibid.
--
Bidda Dadati Binayam, Binayat Jaati Patratam,
Paatrataat Dhaanat-apnoti, Dhaanat, Dharma,
Taatha Shukhom.
SEJamil
not know the difference between head and a tail. If anything, that man BBSMR
stood for the pride of Bangalees in their known history. He stands tall there
for the simple act of trying to deliver the Bangalees from the slave mindset
that the Bangalees are used to. I have no doubt Musafir wants Bangalees to be
slaves, it shows so clearly in his stupid statements with few corroborations.
Wake up you little fellow. Research a little more. If you have any sense of
history and can understand the lives of great people in history, you will show
restraint and not throw up these trash on the net.
KMusafir
pig. In fact we all know what that pig stood for. I have been very generous
with that pig.
KMusafir
sttod for. A posthmous doctorate perhaps
man...@my-deja.com
The filthy comment of (K)Khandani Musafir proves beyond reasonable
doubt that only the PIGS or Children of Pig can congratulate the
killers of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Only the filthy pigs
celebrate brutal murder of Bangabandhu on August 15, 1975. The dirty
comment of KMUSAFIR demonstrates only the Pigs and the dysfunctional
children of pigs can characterize Bangabandhu as a pig. Let me the post
what Mr. Mahfuz Anam, the Editor of THE DAILY STAR, wrote almost two
years back about Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Reprinted from Times Of India, August 15, 1998]
Memories of Mujib
Legacy that is Fast Fading
By MAHFUZ ANAM
SHEIKH Mujibur Rahman, called "Bangabandhu" (Friend of Bengal), the
founder of the state of Bangladesh, was murdered in the early morning
of August 15, 1975. He was killed along with 18 family members. All
Sheikh Mujib's immediate family were eliminated except his two
daughters - Sheikh Hasina, the present prime minister, and Sheikh
Rehana - who escaped because they were both travelling in Europe. There
is perhaps no parallel in the post World War II period of a political
assassination so brutal in its nature and so widespread in its reach.
It was as a courageous protestor and an indefatigable political worker
that Mujib first made his mark in the politics of pre-1947 Bengal.
Immediately following partition, he joined Maulana Bhashani and Hossain
Shahid Suhrawardy in forming Awami League in 1949. From 1949 to 1958,
when Gen. Ayub Khan imposed the first martial law in Pakistan, he
worked closely with Suhrawardy and became a leading figure among a few
notable politicians from East Pakistan who relentlessly fought for the
political, economic and cultural rights of the Bengalis of Pakistan.
Mujib's leadership can be said to have really come of age when he put
forward his famous six-point formula of regional autonomy for East
Pakistan at a meeting with President Ayub Khan in a conference in
Lahore in 1965. The Pakistani military-civilian elite took this as a
plan to break up the country, and made up their minds that Mujib was
working against the integrity of Pakistan. The immediate offshoot of it
was the false and infamous Agartala conspiracy case in which Mujib was
accused of seeking Indian help to dismember Pakistan. In the face of a
tremendous mass movement, the Pakistan government had to withdraw the
case, release Mujib from jail, and come to terms with him about the
transfer of power from a military to a representative government. By
this time, Sheikh Mujib, now the Bangabandhu, had become the
unquestioned leader of the people of East Pakistan and its supreme
arbiter.
Thumping Majority
As a result of the movement, which had also spread in West Pakistan and
saw the emergence of Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto as a leader of the masses,
Gen. Ayub fell and was replaced by Gen. Yahya, who had to promise
general elections to gain temporary acceptance of his rule.
Elections were announced for January, 1970. Mujib mobilised the people
of East Pakistan behind his six-point programme and, in the first ever
general elections held in Pakistan a good 23 years after its birth, he
took an overwhelming majority of seats making his party the single
largest in the national assembly of Pakistan.
Liberation War
The subsequent refusal of Gen. Yahya's government to honour the verdict
of 1970 elections -- a direct result of Bhutto's lobbying with
Pakistan's military elite -- set the inexorable course of Pakistan's
demise in motion. The unleashing of the military on the unarmed
civilian population began the genocide that buried Pakistan as it
existed then, under the dead bodies of millions of Bengali martyrs.
Arrested on the night of March 26, Sheikh Mujib was in a Pakistani
prison throughout our liberation war. The country that he left as a
prisoner, he returned to as a hero. Immediately on his assuming the
reigns of government in post-independence Bangladesh, he made himself
the Prime Minister, from the post of President that he was given in
absentia in the government in exile. It was an excellent move, and at
once set Bangladesh on the right course to set up a Westminster-type
parliamentary government.
While he was laying the foundations of a democratic Bangladesh, Mujib's
inexperienced, unsettled, and fund starved government had to undertake
a massive rehabilitation programme to resettle the 30 million refugees
who were either in camps in India or were displaced within the country.
All these families had their houses looted and destroyed, and in most
cases one or more members of their families were killed or missing. In
addition, there were the wounded Mukti Bahini members who needed to be
given medical treatment and resettled. All these tasks had to be done
with most of the essential infrastructure destroyed or damaged.
Sheikh Mujib returned to independent Bangladesh on January 10 1972. He
was assassinated on August 15 1975. Within a mere three years and seven
months, the man who led us to our freedom was killed. With such an
extraordinary achievement like founding a new state for his people, it
remains the greatest mystery of his political life as to why he decided
to introduce a one-party political system in Bangladesh. He did so when
he enjoyed unquestioned loyalty and support of his people and had total
control of parliament.
He also banned all newspapers save four which he brought under
government ownership, when there were hardly any that wrote against him
except some weeklies. The man of the people suddenly appeared to have
lost trust in them and wanted to create a centralised authority with
all powers concentrated under one structure. In an amendment that took
hardly a few minutes Sheikh Mujib changed the fundamental character of
the Constitution and transformed the parliamentary system into a
presidential one, elevating himself to the post.
Political Ethos
Mujib's death marked some qualitative changes in Bangladesh's politics.
Military entered politics as it had done in Pakistan. The rule of
military and quasi-military dictatorships took 15 years and many lives
to defeat. His murder also created tremendous indiscipline in the army
as it broke the chain of command and had a section of majors dictating
to the highest leadership of the army.
A new political ethos gained currency, one of opportunism, self-seeking
and public manipulation. Democracy took a backseat. Military
intelligence became a major player in national politics and a `clean'
certificate from them was a precondition for a place in the hierarchy
of power. Political parties were floated with its guidance and active
participation. In this new dispensation, the ideals of the Liberation
War and the democratic struggle that marked two decades of politics
before it had no place. This was the time to re-write history, recreate
new heroes and destroy established ones. Facts and events were
reinterpreted to suit the views of the new masters.
The author is the Editor, The Daily Star, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
[Reprinted from the Times Of India, August 15, 1998 for wider
dissemination]
SEJamil
man that helped to liberate Bangladesh or it is the base hatred that is pushing
such downgrading expression of calling him SOB. Yes, in my mind he was the Son
of Bangladesh. He was not the smartest but he was a visionary and a courageous
man. The responsibilty to fix the rest of the problems did not lie with him
alone, but with all of us. Making him the scapegoat for all our failures is
totally irresponsible. When a man inspires a group of people to sacrifice for
pride, dignity, self-respect -- he automatically secures his position in
history which is beyond the comprehension of wanderers.....!!!
KMusafir
know. No, I need not be reminded who shaikh Mujib was and what he stood for. I
have seen it all and so did the whole nation. Yes, I agree some have very short
memory, not me and many like me. What happened in pre 70 and post 70, I saw
that too. Ofcourse I am bitter. I have nothing to be proud of what happened in
Bangladesh during Mujibs time. You may call it the golden time time, I call it
the suffocation. Even in the worst of Pakistan time, we never lost the right to
read newspapers, we never had a ggoda bahini raised were given uniform to
protect a political thug and his cronies. Ofcourse Rakkhi Bahini was raised
because of historical necessity, the Prime Minister says. Yes they were also
given the immunity from prosecution for arresting, detaining, torture and
causing fatal injuries as long it was done in good faith. Blabber mouth
sycophants should read the para 13 of the Rakkhi bahini act. How his Chasha
afmily became one of the richest family in Bangladesh in three years. How
Shaikh Moni grabbed that Newspaper building and became owner of a newspaper
with the most modern eqpt. overnight. If he was so intelligent and had this
wealth how come he even did not have a regular job? Whose property did he grab
and made it his home and his family is still occupying till today? What
happened to its original owner? What happened to all the barges carrying
mercahndise abondoned in freed Bangladesh ? How come Shakh Nasser became
instant owner. Three milion dead? From where this figure came? No one denies
the atrocity. Were Pakistanis the only perpetrater? How many biharis/Urdu
speaking people were killed in halishahar, syedpur, Adamjeenagar,
Mirpur.Khulna, narayanganj pre election and post liberation? Do fools have an
account? Till todate not a single list has prepared showing exact cause of
death. Why not. Is it such a monumental task. Only thing we hear is mujib baba,
mujib baba, mujib baba.
Shomir
reference to any of those allegations. You being a literate person, it is not hard
for you to understand that accusations by themselves do not make a lot of sense,
unless supported by relevant proof or documentation. I will give you a small
example, for instance if I made this statement that a Md. Ershad Alam had an
illegal relationship with your wife, and I do that to malign you, how would that
appear to you? You would probably want to sue me for defamation, right? Same way,
when you make accusations about a person who is no longer alive to defend himself
and his honor, you are being unfair. May I say that it is un Islamic? But then...
who knows what you are, and what religion you follow!! besides, who cares?
Now for the substance of your message, even if I were to assume that the relatives
of MR did all those heinous crimes. Would you please tell us what prevented
successive Jia/Ershad/BNP governments which were in power for more than 20 years
after MR's assassination, to prosecute those culprits? Certainly you will not
claim that the ghost of MR was protecting those people during the times when the
people in power were arch enemies of MR!! Come on Mr. Musafir, get real... people
in these NGs are not idiots, and they understand where you are coming from. I
concede that some abuse of power did happen during MR's era, but attributing
everything to MR is being highly dubious. It is a common knowledge that people
from your part of the world are less ethical, and people do try to make a fast buck
whenever the opportunity arises, but that is a common trait among most people of
the region. I am sure if you disclosed your identity, there will be many people
who will be able to provide enough evidence against you for many illegal activities
you have participated in during your pitiful and sorry life in Bangladesh.
Shomir
=================
KMusafir wrote:
--
vigil...@my-deja.com
Please pay attention here. If necesaary, please take a minute to go
over the previous exchanges between me (Jhontu) and Shomir to verify my
observations below.
Here is Shomir, an Indian Bengali Hindu, who claims that he is a
'secular' person. He says Bengali is the more important identity of him
than being an Indian. BUT, he will prefer to be with India under Hindi
control than to join a greater Bangladesh in Bengali control simply
because he will not like to be part of a system where Muslims are in
majority or Hindus are not in majority.
Think about Shomir's true main identity now. His most important
identity is not Bengali, not Indian, but being Hindu is his priority.
And he professes secularism to us, Bengalis of Bangladesh! Surely, he
does not believe in it himself, but pretends as a 'secular' person to
his convenience.
This Indian Shomir finds it very much within his right to dispense
advice for Bangladeshis on how we should run our affairs. He things it
is his 'paitrik' right poke into our affairs as he speaks Bengali and
he portrays himself as a 'secular' person.
A 'humanitarian' in she sheep skin, he has the audacity to say on our
face that Sheikh Mujib did the right thing to kill thousands of
political opponents through his gestapo force Rakkhi Bahini, and the
fascist ruler should have killed more people, because then he would not
have the fate of 15th August. Anything that pleases Shomir's desire.
Actually, all Shomir cares about is continuation of the Indian hegemony
in Bangladesh through agents like Mujib and instruments like Awami
League. He is bent on forcing us swallow the pills which will make us
their satellite. He simply can not cope up with the loss of an agent
like Mujib 1n 1975. After all, an obedient servant betraying the nation
like him is hard to come by. (The only other person that came close to
him was Mir Zafar). Shomir, with his limited capacity, is doing his
best to take us back to the pre-1975 days. He is not ashamed at all to
interfere into Bangladeshi affairs nakedly and audaciously. He claims
legitimacy to his actions by championing the 'Bengali' cause. But we
saw his real face - he is nothing but a Hindu to the core and he is a
Hindu first. He pretends to be secular so that he can reach us with his
dubious message easily.
There is nothing wrong in being Hindu, but this kind of hypocracy needs
serious thoughts. It immediately makes his motives suspect, if not
outright criminal. I am not saying that all Bengali Hindus are like
him, but his sentiment echoes the sentiment of the majority of Hindus,
in my opinion. It has striking similarity with the sentiment of the
Hindus early last century who on one hand opposed 'Banga-bhanga', but
later supported it so that the whole Bengal does not go into Pakistan.
It is fine to be Bengali as long as Hindu majority is maintained,
otherwise cut 'Banga mata'. Is it not funny that the more the things
change, actually the more they stay the same!
This candid (may be inadvertant) admission by a 'modern' 'secular'
Hindu Shomir that he is nothing but a Hindu, and that's where he draws
the line, proves that the people of East Bengal was right to
overwhelmingly opt for Pakistan in 1947. It lends credence to the
suspicion that whatever India did in 1971 was not out of any charitable
reasons, but actually to settle a score with the people of East Bengal
for their position in 1947, and to bring it into her fold. The
justification for a Muslim majority land in the sub-continent was valid
not only in 1947, but also today. It proves that we did not commit any
mistake by opting for Pakistan in 1947, and we will not commit any
mistake by not falling for Indian designs again. It justifies strongly
the need of independent existence of Bangldadesh today and in future
for our existence with our hopes and aspirations, culture and heritage.
It underscores the importance of being vigilant for our independence
and not take it easy. Because people are out there working hard to
undermine our independent existence. It is not any secret any more that
the suggestions for an 'akhand Bharat' is becoming louder on both sides
of the border. The agents implanted by India in Bangladesh are working
relentlessly for that.
We can not but be careful about the 'secular' forces on both sided of
the border. Their only mission is to create a smokecreen and confuse
people into thinking that India is a harmless secular place with equal
rights for everybody. They want to give the Bangladeshis a false sense
of security in the wolves overlooking us. Secularism is a nice word and
is easy to sell. But the fact remains that anti-Muslim violence and
riots and the resulting Muslim deathtoll in 'secular' India in the last
53 years is far far higher than anti-Hindu riots and Hindu deathtoll in
non-secular Pakistan and Bangladesh. The latter were mostly in response
to the anti-Muslim riots in India, not that it is any justification for
a backlash. In Bangladesh, Hindus enjoy rights and previlages that are
only dreams for Muslims in India. The numbers (e.g. Hindus in high
positions in Bangladesh) will corroborate that. Same thing goes for
their economic standing in the society. The picture in India is just
the opposite. So secularism has always been a myth in India, and we
should not fall for that sugar-coated pill.
I would urge all Bangladeshis who are reading this, to disseminate this
significant piece of evidence to others who may not be reading it here.
Talk about it to your friends. Forward it to your friends, other news
groups and discussion forums of Bangladesh, mailing lists other e-
groups etc. You can also make copies of the series of the exchanges in
this thread and pass them on to others. I will make an MS Word format
of the relevant sequence of exchanges of the thread in the right order
to make it more easily readable so that the point will come out clear
to the readers. I will not tamper it even by a single alphabet, I
peomise. Whoever wants to get that can send me an e-mail, and I will
mail it to him/her. It is is extremely important. This is the least we
can do for our independence - be vigilant.
With best regards.
Shamim Ahmed (Jhontu)
In article <38797B11...@My-Dejanews.com>,
Shomir <Sho...@My-Dejanews.com> wrote:
man...@my-deja.com
My Response: I am not alone who writes on Bangabandhu SMR. There are
outstanding Bangladeshi and foreign scholars who have thus far written
on Bangabandhu SMR. Although I write and post on Bangabandhu in the
Internet, I am nothing in comparison with those distinguished
individuals who have written on Bangabandhu. There are many scholars
who have been very critical of Bangabandhu's performance as the Chief
of Government in independent Bangladesh. Indeed, most of the
Bangladeshi political scientists are very critical of Bangabandhu's
Awami League Government (1972-'75). I myself wrote cirtical graduate
and conference papers spotlighting the weaknesses of the Awami League
regime. But there is a consensus among scholars that it was Bangabandhu
SMR who had emerged as the legitimate spokesperson of Bangalee
population of Pakistan after the land slide victory of the Awami League
in 197o general elections. It was Bangabandhu's relentlessness which
earned independence for Bangladesh. Whatever may be our politcal
passions orientations or preferences, they can't be employed to distort
the state of verifiable facts and evidence about Bangabandhu SMR's
contribution toward liberating the Bangalees of the then East Pakistan
from the demeaning Pakistani colonial domination.
Yet, CIA Siddiqy, with a variety of moving aliases, is engaged in
disseminating blatant lies about Bangabandhu SMR. This dysfunctional
individual is not even willing to accept the fact that the emergence of
Bangladesh was the most significant accomplishment of our people. For
CIA Siddiqy, Bangabandhu was a traitor. For him, our freedom fighters
were undesirable criminals. In a piece of trash in NFB (Jan. 12), he
(under the fake name Shamim Ahmed Jhantu) characterized Masterda Suryya
Sen, one of the greatest freedom fighters in our struggle against the
British rule, as a criminal. How low one can drown in a latrine! (The
sudents of Dhaka University had renamed Jinnah Hall, the largest
student dormitory of DU, as the the Masterda Surjja Sen Hall). For CIA
Siddiqy, Sgt. Zahurul Huq, the man who was falsely accused of
conspiracy against Pakistan, was a criminal. There is litlle wonder why
the SCB readers have characterized as a renegade. Sgt. Zahurul Huq was
implicated in the infamous Agartala Conspiracy Case along with Sheikh
Mujib. He was brutally murdered while he was custody. In fact, he was
tortured to death because he refused to testify against Sheikh Mujib.
The students of "Iqbal Hall" of DU renamed that dorm as "Sgt. Zahurl
Huq Hall." These are parts of our glorious liberation war history.
Let the readers find out from reading Mahfuz Anam's article that CIA
Siddiqy's rotten thoughts have no relevance to truth. There are people
in Bangladesh who mourn the brutal murder of the Father of the Nation.
In my humble assessment, CIA SIDDIQY alias Vigilantic or Arthonitibid
or KMUSAFIR, a dysfunctional and pathological hate-monger, is not at
all in a position to make an objective assessment on the role of
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the emergence of Bangladesh as a
nation-state. CIA Siddiqy might represent the certified and convicted
criminals of Bangabandhu Murder Case. Yet, CIA Siddiqy does not
represent the mainstream Bangalee population of Bangladesh. Thanks for
reading this post. W.Zaman Manik (Jan. 14, 2000).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[Reprinted from The Daily Star August 15, 1998)
Turning Our Grief into a Nation-Building Force
by Mahfuz Anam
[The Editor, The Daily Star]
We as a people must mourn the brutal assassination of Bangabandhu
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and make a firm resolve to punish his killers.
This we should do not only to pay our tribute to the founder of our
state but also to strengthen the moral foundations of our nation. If we
just consider the inhuman nature of the crime itself. Bangabandhu was
killed along with practically all the members of his immediate family.
His wife, three sons including wives of the elder two, was all
murdered. Only the two daughters - Sheikh Hasina, the present Prime
Minister, and Sheikh Rehana - escaped the massacre because they were
abroad. Also killed the same night were his brother Sheikh Naser,
nephew Sheikh Moni along with his pregnant wife and relative Abdur Rab
Sarniabat, a cabinet minister, also with his wife and children. Several
servants were also killed who came in the way of indiscriminate bullets
that were sprayed in their respective houses.
It was as if Bangabandhu had to be destroyed without a trace of any of
his family members being alive. There must be a deep moral revulsion in
all of us against this crime. We must create conditions so that it is
never repeated. We must establish rule of law. No individual or group
can kill a family and still remain unpunished. This is our moral
obligation to ourselves.
What was Bangabandhu's "crime" for which he had to pay so dearly? Was
it because he introduced BKSAL and destroyed the parliamentary system
that he himself had created? According to the killers' statements, made
while they were abroad, and in interviews given to authors of articles
and books, the planning for the murder had started much before the one
party presidential system was even thought of. Though we do not accept
that any mistake, however serious, made by any political leader
entitles any other person to assassinate him; still we would like to
make the point that the killers had started planning to kill Sheikh
Mujib from end '73/early '74.
Then again, if we take the President's killing as a political murder,
why were his family members, his children and one aged only 10, killed?
Why were the two newly wed wives of Kamal and Jamal killed? Why was
Sarniabat and his family killed? Let us consider another fact. Along
with murdering Sheikh Mujib and his family, the killers imprisoned
Tajuddin Ahmed and Nazrul Islam, Prime Minister and Acting President
respectively of the war-time government in exile, and Mansur Ali and
Syed Qamruzzaman also cabinet ministers of that government. All of them
were Bangabandhu's lifelong associates and leaders of our liberation
war. They, with Nazrul Islam as the Acting President and Tajuddin Ahmed
as the Prime Minister led the war efforts and successfully steered our
independence struggle to a glorious conclusion. These four leaders were
brutally murdered inside the Dhaka Central Jail when the assassins were
about to lose power in the November 3 [1975] army putsch.
To us it is clear that those who killed Bangabandhu and his family
wanted to wipe out all the leaders of our liberation war. Will it then
be wrong to conclude that the 15 August assassination was really the
beginning of an elaborate attempt to wipe out the leadership that led
us in our independence war? If yes, then, it obviously follows, the
real plan behind the assassination was to undo whatever has been gained
through our two decades-long democratic struggle in the fifties and the
sixties and the magnificent achievements of our liberation war.
Herein lies the real significance of the assassination of Bangabandhu.
We must see it in its wider context. Immediately after the killing, and
in the years that followed, it was the constant attempt of the ruler of
the day to show that the August killing's aim was only to change the
political leadership of the day. In fact in some circles for a long
time the August killing was mainly referred to as the "August
Changeover", as if nothing of significance had happened on that day
except that some new people came to power instead of the old. Killers
were able to hide their intentions well as they were able to put in
place a new cabinet that contained many faces from the just ousted AL
government. This was done through Khandakar Mustaque, a long time Awami
Leaguer and member of war-time government. Mustaque had his own agenda
part of which became revealed during our independence war. However his
reasons for joining hands with the killers still remain to be fully
unearthed. Awami League itself needs to come clean on how it was
possible that so many members of Bangabandhu's cabinet could join
Mustaque's cabinet over the dead body of their leader. This fact alone
played havoc in the public mind and helped the killers to create the
initial confusion.
It is our considered view that the assassination of Bangabandhu was the
first major step of an elaborate plan to undo the gains of our
liberation war. Perhaps the redrawing of our map was their ultimate
aim. However a reversal of our political, economic, social and cultural
goals was definitely the short and medium term agenda of the killers.
It was because of these aims that they were able to find some immediate
collaborators of their heinous act.
While we await the unearthing of the real reasons for killing the
founder of our independent state, and vigorously pursue the trial of
his killers, we suggest that we transform the grief of his death into a
massive force for nation building. We feel it is not enough just to
mourn his murder. He was far greater a man, and his contribution
towards our freedom and independence far too much to just mourn for him
or demand the death of his killers. We must translate this tremendous
grief into a positive force. If we really want to show respect for and
gratitude to him, then let us build the country that we helped us to
free. There cannot be any glory or satisfaction for him, or for us who
profess to love and respect him, if our Sonar Bangla remains a poverty
stricken country with a significant part of its population suffering
for malnutrition and ill health. What respect can we earn from the
world if majority of our people suffer the indignity and debilitating
effect of illiteracy?
The only durable and meaningful monument we can erect in the name of
the founder of our state is a reasonably prosperous Bangladesh with a
sufficiently rising growth curve that will eliminate poverty within the
foreseeable future. We have to build a country where we will be able to
send all boys and girls to school at least up to the secondary level,
produce enough food so as to abolish malnutrition, and provide primary
health for all. We will have to create opportunities for our
entrepreneurs to invest and thereby create jobs. We will have to make
the government sector more efficient and turn the bureaucracy into
genuine "public servants". These are the real and durable monuments we
can, and must, build to glorify Bangabandhu.
The slogans, the meetings, the rallies and the endless seminars will
last only as long as those who organise and attend them find it
convenient. They will change with the changing winds. Only nation
building will last, and last forever. Therefore if we are sincere about
avenging Bangabandhu's assassination then we must turn our grief into a
massive and electrifying nation building force and show the world that
we really deserved the independence and the new state that Bangabandhu
inspired us, and we fought an armed struggle, to get.
(Mahfuz Anam is a distinguished Bangladeshi citizen with integrity of
character. He is a voice of reasoning. He has added professional
excellence to the journalism profession. Like his illustrious father
late Jonab Abul Mansoor Ahmed, Mahfuz Anam expresses his views without
any fear or favor. Reprinted from The Daily Star of August 15, 1998 for
wider dissemination. Thank you very much for perusal of this article.
W.Zaman)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <85ml7g$dhp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Shomir
You are giving me far too much credit for the things I don't deserve, but
coming from you I will accept it with a lot of humility and grace. I am
somewhat flattered that you have spent a fair amount of time writing the
essay on me, which is a remarkable piece of work considering the "depth" of
your analytical prowess and your ability to analyze my philosophical
attributes, character, morality, and psychological setup.
After I read this entire essay, my first impulse was to instantly post a
"fitting" rebuttal to your researched findings. On second thoughts I
decided to totally ignore it, but then changed my mind considering that you
have devoted a fair amount of your time, and I should at least respond as a
matter of common courtesy. It is also quite apparent from your
"dissertation" that you have been kind to me with the use of your words and
language, especially in comparison to what you had to say about Seikh
Mujibur Rahaman! Thank you!
I am a petty individual (sadharon lok), and as a pastime I spend some time
at these NGs and occasionally express my views regarding things that I care
for. I rarely indulge in religious squabbles, because that is not one of my
strong points, and neither is religion my topic of interest. I like to
discuss issues related to the elimination of poverty for all the people of
the Indian sub continent, not only in India. I also participate in
discussions related to economics and politics especially from the oppressed
peoples' point of view. I do use strong language when I respond to bigots
and religious fanatics, be I never insult any religious denomination or any
religious figure. I consider myself to be an agnostic, and believe that
religion is man's creation, which has no place in the modern world. I don't
call myself "secular", because it is a meaningless terminology to me, being
an agnostic. A search of my posts will show that I am making factual claims
here.
I was born in a Hindu family and educated at a Catholic multi-ethnic and
multi-cultural environment, so I did not grow up with deep seated religious
convictions, specially with respect to Hindu rituals. The Durga Puja and
Saraswati Puja etc. were times when I enjoyed somewhat more freedom in the
form of being able to stay out with my friends till late in the night,
without being punished for violating the normal curfew time of being at home
by "dark". Obviously, I was not chanting the Durga mantra during those
relaxed hours, and I assume you would understand that as a teenager, I had
"other" interests to pursue. Now, that is the depth of my relationship with
Hinduism. In fact, at school I was exposed to Jesus Christ much more than
any other religious character. I am sure Mr. CIA Siddiky will certify that,
since he also attended a Jesuit Institute, St. Paul's School at Darjeeling.
You will probably come to the conclusion that my parents were not religious
fundamentalists either, because they were not hesitant to send me to a
Christian Institution. It is in that context, I would like to state that I
did not grow up in a prejudicial environment, nor was I raised in a hateful
or bigoted social surrounding. Our maid (typically called "jhee" in
Bengali) was a Muslim from 24 Paraganas, and we were required to call her
"mashi". There were many poor Hindus who were available for that kind of
work, but in our house there was no religious discrimination. [Hopefully
you will not cite this as an example of our exploiting a Muslim woman! :) ]
Later on when I was employed at a steel plant in Bengal, I worked with a
workforce comprising of about 30-35% Muslims. I had to deal with them on a
daily basis, and obviously had many opportunities to attend Muslim religious
festivities. It was a non vicious environment, where Hindus and Muslims
worked side by side. That in general is my background. I am writing this
so that the readers can judge for themselves what to decide regarding my so
called "Hindu" upbringing.
To answer your specific allegations if any, I would unhesitatingly state
that I am indeed a Bengali first. The first words I spoke were Bengali and
not Hindi or Arabic or Urdu or English, so that is my primary identity. I
did not have any control over the fact that I was born in a Hindu family,
nor did I have a choice of time and venue when I was born. Being born in
India, I was also raised to love and respect my country of birth. Indeed I
am grateful that India and specially the people of BANGLA were gracious
enough to give us shelter and give us the opportunity to re-build our lives
along with the 25-30 million other Bengalis who were "ethnically cleansed"
from their country of birth. Now, how can one be so ungrateful to not
acknowledge the kindness of the Bengali people of Bangla, Assam, Tripura and
Manipur who welcomed us with open arms? Perhaps you do not feel that way,
judging from your sense of gratitude that you display towards the father of
your nation.
Consider for a moment the extent of suffering and uncertainty the refugees
of East Pakistan had to endure, having lost everything and having to start
everything from scratch. Would you ever trust those people who killed
thousands, raped lakhs and looted millions of innocent neighbors? That is
precisely the reason why the displaced people from East Pakistan/Bangladesh
or the people of Bangla will never consider to be a part of a nation where
the majority looted, plundered, killed and forcibly occupied their land and
possessions. There is no other place in the world where such tyranny was
displayed. So, yes, I am a Bengali and no thank you for your offer to be a
part of your culture and heritage.
Regarding Seikh Mujib, I just have to say that I consider him to be a true
patriot. I did not gain anything from him materially, during his brief
tenure as PM of Bangladesh. He is one who gave you and your people and also
me and the Bengali Hindus an identity. He is the one who established all of
us as a race in the world community, otherwise no one would have known about
us, almost 200+ million now. Without him, you all would still be a part of
Pakistan, and would be treated like second class citizens being the beast of
burden, toiling under the whips of the Punjabi masters. It is with that
sense of gratitude and reverence we express our reverence of Seikh Mujib.
That is why, I will continue to defend him, whether you like or not. You
can concoct any phony baloney stories about him and his legacy, but history
is never kind to cowards like you, only the valiant pass the test of time.
The barbaric manner in which Seikh Mujib and his family was annihilated, is
something that is rarely repeated in history of mankind. It is truly sad
that you, KMusafir and CIA Siddiky praise his killers as patriots. Tell me,
why should we Bengalis, those who are non Muslims trust you? You don't even
acknowledge the sacrifice of the son of your soil!! I know that most people
of Bangladesh are good, honest hard-working but they are just as much a
victim of the hatred and fanaticism that you and your cohorts espouse. The
killings of the thousands of Bengali intelligentsia by your fundamentalist
brothers, the Razakars, are ample evidence of the extent of barbarism people
like you can unleash upon ordinary folks. So, you may try as much to
mobilize all your supporters to gang up on me, but that is not going to
deter me from expressing my opinion. I look at your silly effort as an act
of cowardice, and I pity you for your bigoted and hate filled existence. I
will leave it up to the good people of Bangladesh to make whatever decision
they reach regarding your cowardice and your betrayal of the people of
Bangladesh.
Regards,
Shomir
=========================================
vigil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hear ye Bangladeshis,
>
> Please pay attention here. If necesaary, please take a minute to go
> over the previous exchanges between me (Jhontu) and Shomir to verify my
> observations below.Here is Shomir, an Indian Bengali Hindu, who claims
Artho-niti-bid
Here is Shomir, a guy I have finished dealing with, who
had previously challanged fanatically all claims of Bangladesh
and most of what you have written. He had even provided my
address to the people to come and kiss me at home for my
Pro-Bangladeshi views. With him there are couple of others in
SCB like Murshed Ahmed Choudhury, Manikz, Cerebral etc. who
have problems with the legitimacy of Bangladesh and are
committed to do what they are doing, since they can neither
change nor contest the reality of Bangladesh anywhere else. You
have perhaps seen that Manikz still refers you and me as the
same individual in all his posts and his like-minded Shomir
and company always mentions Kmusafir, you and me together,
despite the fact that we are different individuals with our
independent thinking on these issues. It is therefore
wise not to say good words to deaf ears or perhaps pearls
on the neck of a woolf. Shomir, Manikz, Murshed Chowdhury and
others are here to get approval for what they believe and
rest is all waste.
With Cheers,
Arthonitibid.
P.S. For more on Shomir's Anti-Bangladesh SCB activities, see
Shomir's replies to some of my 1999 posts under
arthonitibid and csiddiky.
--
Bidda Dadati Binayam, Binayat Jaati Patratam,
Paatrataat Dhaanat-apnoti, Dhaanat, Dharma,
Taatha Shukhom.
man...@my-deja.com
Artho-niti-bid <arthon...@my-deja.com> wrote:
W.Zaman Manik Responds:
EVEN a small decent child will shun what CIA siddiqy is doing. He
shamelessly denies that Arthonitibid in not ITARAMEEBID Shamim Ahmed
Jhantu alis Vigilantic. What then happened to CIA Siddiqy. What
happened to his degrees from Yale and Iowa? A vagabond is vagabond-- no
amount of vague posting will change that fact. Every one knows that
there are some vagabonds and touts who project themselves as “new”
expatriate intellectuals. They also demand some kind of recognition and
attention through their useless and irrelevant name-callings on the
Internet news groups. Some of them are nameless or faceless. Some of
them are hard core and certified patrons and beneficiaries of the
brutal elimination of the Founding Father of the Nation. One of those
certified character assassins (Shamim A. Khandekar) had asked us on
August 15, 1998, to SALUTE the self-confessed killers of Bangabandhu
SMR. There was universal condemnation of his irresponsible utterances.
I was one them who criticized those Bangabandhu-bashers.
However, since last November-December (1999), Chowdhury Irad Ahmed
(CIA) Siddiqy has flooded the Internet with anti-Bangabandhu and anti-
Bangladesh propaganda. Thus far this very CIA Siddiqy, Son of Chowdhury
Tanvir Ahmed (CAT) Siddiqy, has assumed more than half a dozen false
names (for example; HEMAMALINI, PRASAD, ANTI-BENGALI-HINDU, KMUSAFIR,
VIGILANTIC< ARTHO-NITI-BID and SHAMIM AHMED JHANTU) for the sole
purpose of demeaning and defaming Bangabandhu, Bangladesh’s history and
cultural heritage. He has thus far attacked the Bangalees in general
and Bengali Hindus in particular. His comments on Bangalee Hindus are
prefaced by meanest type of hate-mongering. His comments on our liberal
war and Bangabandhu SMR are characterized by falsehoods, absurdities,
fantasies, conjectures and profanities. In comparison with CIA Siddiqy,
other critics seem to be more civilized. Having caught red handed by
the readers of SCBs for lying about his claims of having his first
Ph.D. in History from Yale University and second Ph.D. in Economics
from the University of Iowa, CIA Siddiqy started abusing the SCBites
with his brand of Boliadi pornography, profanities and name-callings
under all kind of fraudulent names. In stead of apologizing for his
blatantly false claims of having academic degrees, he started floating
personal attacks on his critics.
The attack on Bangabndhu SMR is not new on SCB. There are people other
than CIA Siddiqys types of Bangladeshi national of Pakistan who speak
and write in favor the killers of Bangabandhu. For example, there are
Bangabandhu-bashers who project themselves as pro-liberation forces,
Yet they endorse or validate the absurdities and distortions of anti-
liberation forces. This is a hypocrisy. They have been disseminating
blatant falsehoods about Bangabandhu SMR, the greatest exponent of
Bangalee nationalism. This kind of touts have come up with the
fantastic claim that Bangabandhu SMR had done more harm to Bangalees
than the entire Pakistan army. I usually don’t respond to any
disjointed and dishonest comments of those posters who are the patrons
or beneficiaries (or both)of brutal murder of Bangabandhu Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman on August 15, 1975. I also avoid responding to posters
with double or triple personalities. I have nothing to do with those
who wear two hats-- one for pro-liberation forces and another for anti-
liberation forces. Personally, I don't patronize Birds of Passage. Yet,
some of those distortions and falsehoods need to be confronted.
Specifically, CIA Siddiqy’s unsubstantiated allegations, name-calling
and hate-mongering can go unnoticed.
I need to point out that I respect many posters who might have differed
with my views. Often I post many write-ups in SCBs even though I don't
fully endorse the views of the authors. There are honest differences of
opinions. That's neither a problem nor an issue in case of CIA
Siddiqy. He has proved that he is a coward of the lowest quality.
Although his views are not widely shared, he endorses his views himself
under different names. Shame on him. CIA Siddiqy is a symbol of shame
for Bangladesh.
I have never claimed that Bangabandhu SMR was a saint. I don’t think
that Bangabandhu should be worshipped. Rather, he deserves to be
understood. Like many politicians, Bangabandhu SMR was engaged in the
game of "who gets what, when, and how." Yet, UNLIKE many Pakistani-
minded politicians of Bangladesh, he DID NOT compromise the INTERESTS
of Bangalees. It his him who persistently articulated the Bengali
interests within the framework of Pakistan. He never betrayed the
interests of his people. Bangabandhu refused deviate even a word from
his demand for “MAXIMUM AUTONOMY” based on SIX-POINT Program. It was
Bangabandhu SMR who had carved out an independent nation-state for his
people. No civilized son or daughter of Bangladesh can compare
Bangabandhu with Adlof Hitler.
Yet, I am not willing to suggest that Bangabandhu SMR was above
objective criticisms. Most of my comments on Bangabandhu SMR, however,
are based on his role as the most volatile and champion and defender
of the rights of the then East Pakistan. Based on verifiable facts, I
believe that Bangabandhu SMR was the LIBERATOR of BANGALEES of the
then East Pakistan. He was the sole-- I repeat SOLE, spokesman all
Bangalees in 1971. It is not a matter of opinion. It is not a matter of
belief or faith. It is a verified FACT. I was old enough to make
objective judgment on the political situation in 1969 or 1970 or 1971.
Notwithstanding Bangabandhu SMR's many alleged failures and weaknesses
during his 44 months' Awami League Government, Bangabandhu SMR remains
the Founding Father of the Nation.
The introduction of one party regime in Bangladesh through the
formation of BAKSAL was at variance even with Bangandhu’s life-long
struggle for parliamentary type of democracy. The sycophants of the
ruling Awami League had endorsed this type of one-party government.
Yet, the formation of BAKSAL can change or delete the basic fact it was
Bangabandhu’s relentlessness and his blunt refusal to compromise our
interests that led us to victory. It is obvious that CIA Siddiqy is
one of the beneficiaries and supporters of the killers of the
Bangabandhu SMR. He is not the person to make an objective assessment
on Bangabandhu SMR.
The patrons of the killers of Bangabandhu have no place in Bangladesh.
Let the convicted killers of Bangabandhu SMR, the then sitting
President of the Republic, serve their terms in jails. Let the
certified admirers, patrons and beneficiaries of those convicted
murderers go to hell.
The crux of the issue is that the existing judicial system of the
People's Republic of Bangladesh has given the GUILTY VERDICT on the
killers of Bangabandhu SMR. This is not a matter of opinion. Those
killers have been found GUILTY by the legally constituted Court
symstems of Bangladesh. Among those convicted criminals, some are
already serving JAIL TERMS. Some of those convicted murderers are
absconding. The criminals are criminals. Therefore, the defenders,
supporters and, of course, promoters of those CONVICTED CRIMINALS are
engaged in illegal and immoral activities. I do condemn various types
of patrons of the CONVICTED CRIMINALS.
There are provisions even to investigate the illicit connection between
those convicted criminals and their shameless and characterless
promoters. We want to know whether or not those absconders are being
given shelter by the some of the supporters of the brutal assassination
of Bangabandhu SMR. Instead of disseminating defamatory falsehoods
through posting irritating few liners in the Internet, the certified
touts and the self-declared protectors of the convicted criminals
should make honest confession about the nature of tangible and
intangible benefits they have thus far accrued after the brutal murder
of Bangabandhu SMR. I want to know the real motives of those who have
been speaking on behalf of, or, in support of. the CONVICTED murderers.
Sincerely, W.Zaman Manik (Jan. 15, 2000)
Shomir
Dear Mr. Siddiky:
I noticed that you are not quite able to understand English language, so I
will respond in Bengali.
Apnar ei post-ér uttor deoa amar ruchi biruddho holey-o, sadharon bhadrotar
khatiré abong onno pathak der obodharon-er jonno ei jobab dité badhyo
hocchi. Besh koyek mash holo apni nana bhabe, bibhinno chhadya namér
abogunthoner aDal theké Bangalidér apoman koré jacchen. Sudhu matro Hindu
bolei noi, apni Bangladesh-er Bangalidér keo niyé nana rokom bidrupatyak
montobyo korechen. Sheta boDo kotha noi, abong apnar bak-swadhinotar
odhikar onujayi apni apnar motobad janiyechen, ta niyé amar kono birodh
nei. Amar apotti holo apni jokhon bibhinno choddo nam dharon koré nijeké
amader kaché uposthona korechen. Apni bodh hoi money koréchilen jé
Internet-er beDajalér pechoné theké apni ja khushi koré jaben, tar kono
protikar nei. Apanar bhul dharona bhangar jonno ami saddho moto chesta koré
apnar mukosh kholar chesta korechi abong onnono onekei eki chestar dwara
apnar choddobeshér mukosh khule dité pereché. Bhadrolok holé poDé apni
lojjai atmosanbaron korten, kinto apni aboyshoi bhodrolok noi, jar jonno
apnar bhetor kono onushona hoi ni. Shudhu tai noi, apni nitanto itor
byaktir moto ekhon onno pathokder nam niye byangatyak abong be-ruchisulobh
obantor akraman chaliye jacchen.
Apnar proDochonar phanDé poDé ami kothin jobab dité baddho hoyechi, jar
jonno ami kichuta poDitopto. Bangladesh amar pitripushér desh, amar
shorir-er shob "gene" Bangladesh-er onu-poromanu diyé toiri, ato sohojé ki
koré ami Bangladesh bhulté paDi? Apni bollei ki hajar bochorer bastob-ké
hariye deoa jai? Bangali hishebé, Bangla bhashar opr amar tototai odhikar
jotota apnar, abong duniyate kono shokti nei ja amar ei adhikar keDé nité
paDé.
Rajnoitik karone aaj Bangladesh amar desh bolé dabi korté paDi na shotti,
kintu ekbar chinta korlé dekthe parben jé aj Palestine-er Musalman-ra Israel
er theke nijeder odhikar pabar jonno jé chesta korché, amar adhikar tar
theké kono ongshé kom noi. Amar purbo purushra Bangladeser kono jomidar
shrénir lok chilen na, na chilo tader kono jaigirdar. Bangladeshér koti
koti sadhoron lokadér moto amrao oti sadharon lok chilum. Hinghsa o
bidyeshér boshe apnar moto onekéi amaderké bhoi dekhiyé nisho koré rastai
cheDé diyeché. Ta sottyeo ami abong amar moto koti koti Bangali Hindura
apnaderke shotru hishebé moné kori na, abong mon pran diyé amra cheyechi
jate Bangladesh swadhin hoi, abong unnoti koré. Ér pechoné amader kono
swartha nei, Bangali Hindura konodin ar pherot jabé na cheD é asha itihashér
pothé. Apnara nirbhoyé thakte paDen. Bangladesher kichur opor-i amader
kono lobh nei, bolle poDé apni abong apnader sakred Jhontu, KMusifir abong
apnader moto onno jara, tara bishsas korbé na, kintu refugee Bangalider ami
joto chini, apni bairer theké tar kichui janen na. Sesh baRer moto apnake
bolchi, Bangladeshér proti amader kono gupto obhilash nei, apnara bhalo
thakun, apnader mongol hok, shetai amar antorik kamona.
Bohu bochor holo India cheDe America esechi, akhon ami edesher nagorik.
India amar jonmo-sthan holeyo, ekhon ami markin shyamrajobadir doLé.
Oboyoshi ami otota India bhokto noi ja apnara amaké moNé korchén. Tai jodi
hoto, ta holé ami desh tyag koré saat sagor paaD koré ekhaney ashtam na.
Édeshé ashar poD shob theké agé onubhob korlam, ami BANGALI. Éi onubodh
amar deshé kokhono hoi ni, tai aaj ami amar shob shokti diye amar éi odhikar
protirokkha korbo. Apnar abong apnar dui ék jon phajil, fokkor, abong
bachal itor shrenir lokér proDochonar phadé ar poDté raji noi. Apnara ja
lekhar iccha likhé jeté paDén, amader ja sadhyo aché ta diye amra apnadér
opoprocharér jobab debo. Bangladesh abong Banglar sadhoron lokera ér théke
ja bojhar, bujhben. TanDér subuddhir proti amar otol bishsas.
Shomir
=========================
vigil...@my-deja.com
Mahfuz Anam is a bonafide Awami Chamcha. Why do you keep on providing
his writings as certificates for your bandhu-pita? That is no better
than your own babbling. It is the same junk. Junk coming from others
(than you) is still junk. Have you heard the phrase 'shuri'r shakkhi
matal'? Do you know that even the Awamis laugh at your foolishness, and
can clearly see through your empty head? You really lost your mind.
Listen, what we see from you is your brain on drug. Here is some pure
brain for you. Mujib was a hero, so was Hitler. Mujib was almost
worshipped by the Bengalis, so was Hitler by the Germans. Mujib did a
lot for the Bengalis, so did Hitler for the Germans. Mujib killed
people - lots of innocent people to keep his godi. Hitler killed people
- a lots of innocent people for his twisted ideology (at least not for
godi). Mujib became a hated person in Bangladesh. Hitler became a hated
person in the world. Mujib was not as famous as Hitler to begin with.
Mujib was killed by his own countrymen. Hitler was not killed by
anybody, he committed suicide because he probably had some shame unlike
Mujib.
So don't repeat your eulogy (chatukarita) for the pre-1972 Mujib like a
parrot. He was many things beforehand. But so what? we all remember
what he became in his final days. A Bengali's blood-sucking kapalik. A
fascist. A dictator. A traitor to our independence. A mafia father to
his partymen. So please cut the ..... .
Remember this: SHOB BHALO JAR SHESH BHALO.
Jhontu
In article <85ne45$v1g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
man...@my-deja.com
> > [Reprinted from The Daily Star August 15, 1998)
> >
> > Turning Our Grief into a Nation-Building Force
> >
> > by Mahfuz Anam
> >
> > [The Editor, The Daily Star]
> >
> > We as a people must mourn the brutal assassination of Bangabandhu
> > Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and make a firm resolve to punish his
killers.
> > This we should do not only to pay our tribute to the founder of our
> > state but also to strengthen the moral foundations of our nation. If
[rest of the post is deleted for creating space in this thread]
In article <85rl4r$s56$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
vigil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hitler was a great hero for the Germans for his tremendous
contribution
> to Germany before he left the scene disgracefully. But nobody is
> eulogizing Hitler for his earlier work now after what he did finally.
> And nobody is trying establish him as a hero now. May be the skinheads
> are doing it a little.
>
> Mujibur was a great hero for the Bengalis for his contribution to East
> Bengal before he left the scene disgracefully. But some people are
> eulogizing Mujibur for his earlier work now after what he did fianlly.
> They are trying to establish him as a hero now notwithstanding the
> crimes he committed against the Bengalis. May be they are the
skinheads
> of Bangladesh.
>
> How can one justify honor for a murderer simply because he did some
> good thing at one time? How can one demand that we have to ignore the
> grave crimes of a person like Mujibur because of his popularity at one
> time? Mujibur's place in history is fixed by his audacious crimes
> against humanity during 1972-75. He was no father to us, he was only a
> godfather to his mafia gang. Any attempt to salvage his image is
> ridiculous and can never succeed. All can be done is to spread lies
and
> mislead people about Mujibur when the Awami sychophants are in power.
> That is only temporary.
MY RESPONSE to Irad Ahmed Siddiqy via Floating Aliases:
First of all, Mahfuz Anam is not an AWAMI LEAGUER. He was never an
Awami Leaguer. Nor was he connected with Stduent League during his
students days in the University of Dhaka. I openly and publicly
challlenge CIA siddiqy or any body else in the whole world on this. It
is pure "Badmaishhe" of CIA Siddiqy to characterize Mahfuz Anam, one of
the most distingushed voices of today's Bangladesh Civil Society, as an
Awami Leaguer or Awami League chamcha. Shame on you, CIA Siddiqy.
I can post any article on any body or any topic in SCBs and any number
of times as I see fit. I can write on anything. If I babble, let the
readers judge it. If you don't like my writing, you are at liberty to
ignore it. You are incapable of digesting good stuff. You have allergic
to Bangalees and Bangalee culture. After all, neither a street dog nor
a khandani dog can digest GHEE (butter). You may go to hell. Just leave
us alone.
The Dysfunctional Child of a Dysfunctional Father seems to be
desperate. He lost his mind. He is out of control. He is insulting and
tormenting everybody. He is now calling all kinds of names.
CIA SIDDIQY should know it better that only the deformed and
dysfunctional children of dysfunctional fathers can compare Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman with Adlof Hitler. I knew a dysfunctional father of a
dysfunctional child who had begged Sheikh Mujib to make him an
Administrator of a Textile Mill in Tongi. Through corruption and
embezzlement, that dysfunctional father greatly benefitted from
Bangabandhu's Government. If I press the deformed stomach of the
deformed child of that dysfunctional father then polluted and
corruption money still might come out of belley. THIS IS CALLED
NIMAKHARAMEE or MIRZAFFORI, MR. CIA SIDDIQY alias Shamim Ahmed Jhantu,
unworthy son of one Chowdhury Tanvir Ahmed (CTA)Siddiqy.
I wish you had decency to behave in a civilized way. But you did not
behave. How do you dare to taunt and insult others on the Internet?
Would you tell us how your father benefitted from Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman? What was his source of INCOME from January 1972 through August
14, 1975? How did your father finance your study abroad? I don't think
that the the palace like "Baliadi House" (about which you bragged on
the Internet without mentioning that house is now basically ridden and
infested with British and Pakistani cock roaches, cobras, lizards and
mouses) in the old part of Dhaka was enough to sustain the expenses of
a lazy and spoilt son like CIA Siddiqy. Nor the skimmed and embezzled
public funds from Baliadi Wakfa Estate was enough to sustain fun-loving
and hate-mongering son like CIA Sidiqy? I ask you, Mr. CIA Siddiqy, to
tell us how your father, CTA CHOWDURY, became a Minister of State
during BNP regime? Was he not raprimanded by President ZIAUR RAHMAN and
later by President Justice Abdus Sattar for his blatant corruption?
Tell us now: Why you, CIA Siddiqy, are upset with Ershad? Why did
Ershad imprision IMDU GOONDA and CTA Siddiqy? The whole world knows
that IMDU GOONDA was arrested and later hanged to DEATH because he was
the infamous killing machine of the then BNP regime. This INFAMOUS IMDU
GOONDA was arrested from a BNP minister's (Mr. QUASEM whom YOU
affectionaly call Quasem uncle). Why was CTA Siddiqy (father of CIA
Siddiqy) arrested and jailed? It is a verifiable fact that Chowdhury
Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqy was arrested and jailed by the military dictator
H.M. Ershad on the charges of blatant corruption and embezzlement (if I
am wrong, please correct me. I will apologize if I am wrong. after all,
I have nothing against your father. you are leaving me with no choice
but respond).
Who prepared the list of the most corrupted BNP Ministers and State
Ministers? Being completely frustrated and fed up with some of the
corrupt, power greedy opportunists and fortune hunters such CTA
Siddiqys of BNP and being constantly goaded by the then Army Chief H.R.
Ershad, it was Justice Abdus Sattar, the then legitimately elected
President of Bangladesh who actually prepared the list of CORRUPT
MANTREES and PRATI MANTREES. Immediately after the infamous coup led by
Biswa Behaiya Ershad, the "new" dictator put selectively some of those
corrupt Ministers and State Minister behind the bar. That's the sole
reason why a pervert son of a corrupt State Minister wants to hang
Justice Sattar, M.N. Huda and Ershad with the same rope. What a shame!
I hope that's enough. I will elaborate on this only if CIA Siddiqy
provokes me any farther. Thanks for your time. Regards, W.Zaman Manik
(Jan. 16, 2000)
man...@my-deja.com
Bangladesh. This article is reprinted from The Independent, June 25,
1999. This appeared in SCB on June 25, 1999. Thanks. W.Zaman Manik]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Six-Point programme: Our Charter of Freedom
by M. Waheeduzzaman Manik
It was on June 7, 1966 when a full-blown hartal was observed in support
of Six-Point program throughout the urban centres of the then East
Pakistan in defiance of oppressive and repressive measures of the
autocratic Government of Pakistan. People from all walks of life had
lent their spontaneous support to this hartal which was a mass response
to governmental repressive measures since the middle of February 1966
when Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had launched the
historic Six-Point movement.
Sheikh Mujib, the most volatile and articulate champion of "maximum
autonomy" for the then East Pakistan was already put in jail on May 9,
1966. Several dozen men were shot dead during hartal on June 7, 1966.
Hundreds of participants were injured. Thousands of Awami League
leaders and student workers were put behind bars without any trials.
Hulias (warrant of arrest) were issued on hundreds of Awami League
workers and student leaders. The Daily Ittefaq, the most popular Bangla
newspaper was shut down, its press was confiscated and its editor,
Tofazzal Hossain (Manik Mia) was put in jail. Yet, the Ayub-Monaem's
repressive police forces could not halt the march of Bangalees' quest
for Six-Point based maximum autonomy.
The Awami League [AL] led Six-Point Movement in 1966 was the turning
point in our quest for "greater autonomy" and "self-determination."
Notwithstanding the stringiest repressive measures of Pakistan
Government, the Six-Point movement had seriously impacted and
conditioned the subsequent political development in Pakistan. The main
purpose of this paper is to assess the impact, implications and
relevance of 1966 Six-Point movement for maximum autonomy on the
subsequent political development in the then East Pakistan. This
appraisal is quite befitting at a time when 50 Years Anniversary of
Awami League's is being celebrated throughout Bangladesh. Once the main
contents of Six-Point plan are summarised, the nature and magnitude of
the Six-Point movement will be assessed. Aimed at substantiating and
validating the generalisations pertaining to the magnitude and impact
of the Six-Point movement, some scholarly observations will be cited.
Finally, some concluding remarks will be made on the relevance of the
historic Six-Point movement to Bangladesh's struggle for freedom and
independence.
Based on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's "6-Point Formula: Our Right to Live"
[March 23, 1966], main demands and themes of the historic Six-Point
plan may be summarised as follows:
Point # 1. "The Constitution should provide for a Federation of
Pakistan in its true sense on the basis of [1940] Lahore Resolution,
and Parliamentary form of Government with supremacy of legislature
directly elected on the basis of universal adult franchise."
Point # 2. The Federal Government of Pakistan "shall deal with only two
subjects, viz.: defence and Foreign Affairs, and all other residuary
subjects shall vest in the federating states."
Point # 3. "Two separate but freely convertible currencies for two
wings [of Pakistan] should be introduced;" or if this is not feasible,
there should be one currency for the whole country, but effective
constitutional provisions should be introduced to stop the flight of
capital from East to West Pakistan. Furthermore, a separate Banking
Reserve should be established and separate fiscal and monetary policy
to be adopted for East Pakistan.
Point # 4. The power of taxation and revenue collection shall be vested
in the "federating units and the Federal Centre will have no such
power." However, the Federation will be entitled to have a share in the
state taxes to meet its expenditures. "The Consolidated Federal Fund
shall come out of a levy of certain percentage of all state taxes."
Point # 5. There should be two separate accounts for the foreign
exchange earnings of the two wings with clear assurance that "earnings
of East Pakistan shall be under the control of East Pakistan Government
and that of West Pakistan under the control of West Pakistan
Government." And the "foreign exchange requirements of the Federal
Government [of Pakistan] should be met by the two wings equally or in a
ratio to be fixed. The indigenous products should move free of duty
between the two wings." The Constitution should "empower the units
[provinces] to establish trade and commercial relations with, set up
trade missions in and enter into agreements with foreign
countries."Point # 6. East Pakistan should have a separate "militia" or
"para-military" force.
The famous Six-Point Demand or Movement has been widely credited as the
charter of freedom' in the history of Bangalee's struggle for freedom
and independence from Pakistan's colonial domination. It was Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman who had personally submitted the Six-Point program to
the subject-matter committee of the All-Party Meeting of the opposition
parties of Pakistan in Lahore on February 5, 1966.
Instead of endorsing his legitimate demand for "maximum" provincial
autonomy, the mainstream leaders of the so-called opposition parties
for establishing democracy in Pakistan were not even willing to discuss
the merits or demerits of the of the proposed Six-Point demands. In
fact, no West Pakistani political leaders including Nawabzada
Nasarullah Khan, the President of All-Pakistan Awami League, were
willing to lend an iota of support to Sheikh Mujib's clarion call for
maximum provincial autonomy based on the proposed Six-Point program. It
is really appalling to recapitulate even after lapses of thirty three
years that the East Pakistani delegates to that conference from various
political parties other than Awami League did not support Six-Point
demand. Like their West-Pakistani counterparts, they also smelt an
element of "secession" or "disintegration" of Pakistan in the Six-Point
program. There is little wonder why Sheikh Mujib's Six-Point demand
could not be pried out of the "subject-matter committee" of the so-
called All-party conference.
Instead of embracing or supporting Awami League's concept of maximum
provincial autonomy based on the Six-Point charter, the veteran
Pakistani political stalwarts including Nawabzada Nasarullah Khan in
conjunction with their cohorts from East Pakistan had started a
slanderous propaganda campaign against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the
Awami League which was characterised by blatant falsehoods,
conjectures, distortions and innuendoes. Yet, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had
refused to be blackmailed or intimidated. In a press conference at
Lahore, on February 10, 1966, Sheikh Mujib had pointed out the
uselessness and irrelevance of the All-Party conference. He had clearly
articulated that the question of demanding genuine "provincial
autonomy" based on six-point program should not be misconstrued or
dismissed as "provincialism." He said that the proposed Six-Point
demand was not designed to harm the common people of West Pakistan. He
had pointed out that the 17-day war between Pakistan and India (1965)
made it crystal clear to the "East Pakistanis" that the defence of East
Pakistan couldn't be contingent upon the mercy or courtesy of West
Pakistan. Instead of relying on a distant land that was located one
thousand miles away, East Pakistan should be made self-sufficient for
the purpose of defending itself from external aggression. He made it
abundantly clear that his Six-Point plan for "maximum" autonomy
reflected the long-standing demands of the people of East Pakistan.
On his return from Lahore to Dacca on February 11, 1966, Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman, the then General Secretary of the Awami League, had provided
further clarification on his Six-Point demands in a press conference.
He explained why he had disassociated himself from the All-Party
conference in Lahore. He said that it was not at all possible for him
or Awami League to "betray the interests' of the deprived people of
East Pakistan. He had emphasised that the immediate adoption and
implementation of Six-Point demands "will be conducive to foster
durable relationship between two provinces." He had clearly stated that
the delegates from East Pakistan Awami League had rejected not only the
proposals passed by the All-Party Conference but also severed all ties
with the disgruntled leaders of this so-called conference of the
opposition parties. Sheikh Mujib had also provided both the rationale
and justification for proposing "maximum provincial autonomy" based on
his Six-Point plan.
After proposing his historic Six-Point program, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman
had invested all of his energies and resources in disseminating the
fundamental message of "maximum autonomy" for East Pakistan. As the
General Secretary of the party, he had submitted his Six-Point program
on February 21, 1966 to the Working Committee of the Awami League that
unanimously approved this formula for realising maximum autonomy. The
Council Session of the Awami League (March 18, 19, 20, 1966) also
unanimously endorsed the historic Six-Point program. This council
session of the AL had restructured the working Committee of the party.
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Tajuddin Ahmed were elected the President and
General Secretary respectively of the newly revamped Awami League.
The timing of first presenting and then starting a sustainable movement
for realising the professed goals of Six-Points was crucially
important. The economic and political demands as enumerated under Six-
Point program were the frontal assault on the foundation of Pakistan's
colonial and authoritarian modes of governance. Sheikh Mujib started
emphasising that the "the question of autonomy appears to be more
important after the [1965] war. Time is ripe for making East Pakistan
self-sufficient in all respects." In fact, the 17-day war in 1965
between India and Pakistan had sufficiently exposed the inadequacy,
irrelevance and uselessness of West Pakistan for the protection of East
Pakistan from the possible Indian attack. Sheikh Mujib's Six-Point
demand had reflected the legitimate grievances of Bangalees of the then
East Pakistan. Therefore, the six-point movement had gained spontaneous
mass support throughout the province from people of all walks of life.
However, the power elite of Pakistan at both the Centre and the
province took deliberate decision to suppress Bangalees' quest for
maximum autonomy. The Government started employing colonial types of
repressive methods and procedures to halt the march of Six-Point
movement. Ayub Khan, the autocratic President of the then Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, had condemned Sheikh Mujib's Six-Point based plan
for "maximum autonomy" in the harshest and filthiest possible terms.
The dauntless Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was quick to retort to Ayub Khan's
vile accusations and threats. In a mammoth public gathering at Paltan
Maidan, Sheikh Mujib, the charismatic leader of his people, thundered:
"No amount of naked threats can desist deprived Bangalees from Six-
Point demands."
Monaem Khan, the then infamous Governor of East Pakistan, had publicly
stated that "as long as I remain Governor of this province, I would see
to it that Sheikh Mujib remains in chains." Obviously, Sheikh Mujib,
the chief proponent of Six-Point program, had become the main target of
various forms of harassment, intimidation and fraudulent cases. Yet,
Sheikh Mujib, the greatest champion of Bangalees' rights for self-
determination, along with top leaders of Awami League kept on
addressing public meetings in the nooks and corners of East Pakistan.
Without wasting a moment, the entire Awami League and its student front
(East Pakistan Students' League) were geared toward mobilising and
motivating the general masses in favour of demanding self-government
and autonomy based on Six-Point program. Indeed, the six-point movement
had generated spontaneous mass enthusiasm throughout East Pakistan. The
entire nation was galvanised throughout February-March-April-May-June,
1966. In retaliation, the Government had intensified its policy of
repression and persecution against Sheikh Mujib and his followers.
For example, while Sheikh Mujib was touring various districts in April
1966, he was arrested in almost all important places on flimsy and
fraudulent charges. Dr. Anisuzzaman, a distinguished literary figure of
Bangladesh, has summarised the nature of the repressive measures which
Sheikh Mujib had to confront for starting and sustaining historic Six-
Point plan at a critical juncture of our history: "During that period
[from the middle of February through May 9, 1966], there was hardly any
place where Sheikh Mujib was not arrested [on false charges] for
addressing public meetings to enlist mass support in favour of Six-
Point program. Today in Jessore, tomorrow in Khulna, day after tomorrow
in Rajshahi. And on the following days in Sylhet, Mymensingh, and
Chittagong. Once he was released on bail in one place, he rushed to
another place. He had no time to waste. The only time wasted was in the
process of posting bail for his release. Arrested once again. Being
released once again, and then immediately move to another place (to
address the public meetings)." (Freehand translation is mine). [
Anisuzzaman, "Bangabandhu in the Context of History," in Mreetoonjoyee
Mujib (Immortal Mujib), Dhaka; Bangabandhu Parishad, 1995, pp.11-12].
Dr. Talukder Maniruzzaman succinctly summarised the magnitude of the
mass enthusiasm vis-à-vis the governmental repressive measures of that
period as follows: "To say that this [Six-Point] programme evoked
tremendous enthusiasm among the people of East Bengal would be an
understatement. Encouraged by overwhelming popular support, Sheikh
Mujib convened a meeting of the AL council [In fact, that meeting of
the Awami League Council was held at Eden Hotel from March 18 through
March 20, 1966] at which his [Six-Point] programme was unanimously
approved and he was elected President of the [Awami League] party. With
a phalanx of organisers from the Student's League, Sheikh Mujib then
launched a vigorous campaign. For about three months (from mid-February
to mid-May) the urban centres of East Bengal seemed to be in the grip
of a mass revolution,' prompting the Central Government to arrest
Sheikh Mujib and his chief lieutenants (Tajuddin Ahmed, Khandokar
Mustaq Ahmed, Mansoor Ali, Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury, and others) under the
[infamous] Defence of Pakistan Rules and put down a complete general
strike in Dacca (June 7, 1966) by killing 13 participating strikers"
[Maniruzzaman,
The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath, UPL, 1988. P. 25]. Instead
of fully redressing the genuine demands of Bangalees, the autocratic
rulers of Pakistan started using repressive tactics to suppress the
Six- Point movement. The ruling coterie of Pakistan was not at all
interested to deal or negotiate with Awami League on the issue of
provincial autonomy even though Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had publicly
stated that he was willing to negotiate his six-point plan for maximum
autonomy with anyone in good faith provided meaningful autonomy is
ensured for East Pakistan. As noted by Dr. Md. Abdul Wadud Bhuyain,
"the Ayub regime's policy towards the Six-Point demand of AL was one of
total suppression. It showed once again that the regime failed to
respond to the political demand" [Md. Abdul Wadud Bhuyain, Emergence of
Bangladesh & Role of Awami League, New Delhi: Vikas Publishing, 1982,
p. 104].
At the behest of Ayub Khan, the Government of Pakistan had implicated
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the fraudulent Agartala Conspiracy Case. It is
now apparent that the principal goal of the so-called Agartala
Conspiracy Case was hatched out to destroy Bangalees quest for autonomy
and self-determination once and for all. Given the fact the Sheikh
Mujib was the chief force behind launching a credible mass movement for
realising maximum autonomy for East Pakistan, the ruling elite wanted
to hang Sheikh Mujib as a "traitor." In other words, the Government of
Pakistan wanted to eliminate Sheikh Mujib for the purpose of
maintaining a status quo in the form of colonial rule in East Pakistan.
In fact, the success of Six-Point movement had prompted the arrogant
and debased Pakistani regime to falsely implicate him in Agartala
Conspiracy Case that in turn had created a genuine cause and the much-
needed momentum to create an anti-Ayub movement. Subsequently, the
Agartala Conspiracy Case, as noted earlier, had to be dismantled and
Sheikh Mujib had to be unconditionally released. However, the Six-Point
movement had far reaching effects on the subsequent political
development in Pakistan. The origins of both the Agartala Conspiracy
Case and the 1969 student-mass movement can be traced back to Six-Point
movement. In his seminal assessment of the role of Awami League in the
political development of Pakistan, ["The Awami League in the Political
Development of Pakistan," ASIAN SURVEY, Vol. 10, No. 7, JULY, 1970; pp.
574-587; University of California, Berkeley], Dr. M. Rashiduzzaman
succinctly summarised the significance and impact of Six-Point program:
"The impact of the six-point demand of the Awami League was felt far
and wide. The central government [of Pakistan] dubbed it as a demand
for the separation of the Eastern Wing from the rest of the country,
and launched a propaganda campaign, which called for a strong central
government and decried the autonomists. On June 7, 1966, there was a
province-wide hartal (strike) in East Pakistan sponsored by the Awami
League to press the demands embodied in the six-point program. Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman, along with several lieutenants, were again put into the
prison. [Sheikh Mujib was put in jail in early May, 1966]. The
government also blamed foreign interests' in the agitation led by the
six-pointers.. ----- After about a year, several East Pakistani civil
servants and military officers were arrested on the charge that they
had conspired to separate the East Wing by violent means in collusion
with India. Eventually, the so-called Agartala Conspiracy case' was
initiated against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and 31 others for alleged high
treason." About the impact of six-point program on 11-point charter of
1969 student-mass movement, Dr. Rashiduzzaman observed: "For all
practical purposes, the eleven-point student program was an expanded
version of the Awami League's six- point demand for autonomy.''
It needs to be recognised that when Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had launched
Six-Point movement in early 1966 for achieving "maximum autonomy" for
East Pakistan, he was at best regarded as the top leader of the Awami
League. He was not yet regarded as the "undisputed leader" of all
Bangalees of East Pakistan. Nor was he called Bangabandhu in 1966. In
fact, there were other top leaders even within his party with
impressive credentials and tested commitment to the pursuit of full
autonomy for our people. There were more senior political leaders in
other parties including Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhasani, the founder
of Awami League, who were quite vocal for greater provincial autonomy
for East Pakistan. Being disgusted with West Pakistan's colonial
domination and exploitation of East Pakistan, Maulana Bhasani had said
"Assalamalai-kum" to West Pakistan --- nine years before Sheikh Mujib
launched his historic Six-Point movement. Yet, it was Sheikh Mujib's
fearlessness and relentlessness that gave birth to the Six-Point
movement for full autonomy. His "relentlessness" for achieving maximum
autonomy differentiated him from other contemporary autonomists of the
then East Pakistan. His "fearlessness" also made him the most volatile
champion of "full provincial autonomy." Only a courageous leader of
Sheikh Mujib's stature could come up with Six-Point plan for full
autonomy for East Pakistan at a time when Ayub Khan's brute regime had
consolidated its grip over the entire power structure of the country.
Although the people of East Pakistan were exposed to the idea of
"provincial autonomy" during the provincial election in 1954, the Six-
Point movement of 1966 had fully awakened the deprived and repressed
Bangalees for pursuing maximum autonomy. This six-point movement also
aroused a true spirit of "Bangalee nationalism" in the minds of general
masses of East Pakistan. This new nationalistic consciousness among the
people provided a favourable environment to successfully stage the
historic student-mass movement in 1969 that compelled the autocratic
regime of Pakistan to rescind the fraudulent Agartala Conspiracy case
against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Although the 1969 student-mass movement
was a spontaneous response from general public to Pakistan's ruling
elite's oppressive and repressive policies and methods, the experience
of 1966 Six-Point movement had provided both the rationale and
justification for launching a mass uprising in 1969.
The impact of the Six-Point movement on 1969 mass movement was also
evident when we saw the clear incorporation of Six-Point demand into
11- Point charter of 1969 student-mass movement.
It is entirely possible that Sheikh Mujib would have remained a top
Awami League leader in the absence of a bold provincial autonomy plan
in the form of Six-Point program. Had there been no Six-Point movement,
there is every doubt if Agartala Conspiracy Case would have been
hatched out against Sheikh Mujib. Had there been no Agartala Conspiracy
Case in 1968, there is no reason to believe that the student-mass
movement of 1969 would have exclusively focused on Sheikh Mujibur
Rahman.
Thus the Six-Point movement, Agartala Conspiracy Case and 1969 student-
mass movement had provided the much-needed ground and context for the
emergence of Sheikh Mujib as Bangabandhu (Friend of Bengal).
Subsequently, the Bangalees had vested their full trust in their
Bangabandhu in the general election of 1970 that made him their
legitimate sole spokesperson and undisputed leader. Indeed, it was
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the undisputed leader of his people,
who had spearheaded our struggle for independence. Therefore, it is
fair to suggest that the Awami-League led Six-Point movement is a
milestone in our struggle for freedom and independence.
The Six-Point Movement for Maximum Autonomy, Agartala Conspiracy Case,
the Student-Mass Movement of 1969, withdrawal of infamous Agartala
Conspiracy Case, removal of Monaem Khan, collapse of Ayub Regime, 1970
General Election on the basis of adult franchise, landslide victory of
Awami League in 1970 general election, 1971 Liberation War, and finally
the emergence of independent Bangladesh on December 16, 1971. These are
the hallmarks or milestones in the history of Bangladesh's struggle for
freedom and independence. The name of the common thread that connects
them is Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
[The Independent, June 25, 1999. It also appeared in SCBs on June 25,
1999]
In article <85rudl$24u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
vigil...@my-deja.com
to Germany before he left the scene disgracefully. But nobody is
eulogizing Hitler for his earlier work now after what he did finally.
And nobody is trying establish him as a hero now. May be the skinheads
are doing it a little.
Mujibur was a great hero for the Bengalis for his contribution to East
Bengal before he left the scene disgracefully. But some people are
eulogizing Mujibur for his earlier work now after what he did fianlly.
They are trying to establish him as a hero now notwithstanding the
crimes he committed against the Bengalis. May be they are the skinheads
of Bangladesh.
How can one justify honor for a murderer simply because he did some
good thing at one time? How can one demand that we have to ignore the
grave crimes of a person like Mujibur because of his popularity at one
time? Mujibur's place in history is fixed by his audacious crimes
against humanity during 1972-75. He was no father to us, he was only a
godfather to his mafia gang. Any attempt to salvage his image is
ridiculous and can never succeed. All can be done is to spread lies and
mislead people about Mujibur when the Awami sychophants are in power.
That is only temporary.
Jhontu
In article <85t3l2$q8j$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
man...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Let the readers find out what Bangabandhu SMR did for the emergence of
> Bangladesh. This article is reprinted from The Independent, June 25,
> 1999. This appeared in SCB on June 25, 1999. Thanks. W.Zaman Manik]
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Six-Point programme: Our Charter of Freedom
>
> by M. Waheeduzzaman Manik
>
> In article <85rudl$24u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
man...@my-deja.com
vigil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hitler was a great hero for the Germans for his tremendous
contribution
> to Germany before he left the scene disgracefully. But nobody is
> eulogizing Hitler for his earlier work now after what he did finally.
> And nobody is trying establish him as a hero now. May be the skinheads
> are doing it a little.
>
> Mujibur was a great hero for the Bengalis for his contribution to East
> Bengal before he left the scene disgracefully. But some people are
> eulogizing Mujibur for his earlier work now after what he did fianlly.
> They are trying to establish him as a hero now notwithstanding the
> crimes he committed against the Bengalis. May be they are the
skinheads
> of Bangladesh.
>
> How can one justify honor for a murderer simply because he did some
> good thing at one time? How can one demand that we have to ignore the
> grave crimes of a person like Mujibur because of his popularity at one
> time? Mujibur's place in history is fixed by his audacious crimes
> against humanity during 1972-75. He was no father to us, he was only a
> godfather to his mafia gang. Any attempt to salvage his image is
> ridiculous and can never succeed. All can be done is to spread lies
and
> mislead people about Mujibur when the Awami sychophants are in power.
> That is only temporary.
>
YOU, CIA SIDDIQY ALIAS SHAMIM AHMED JHANTU alias ARTHONITIBID, better
read and respond what I wrote on you earlier this morning. Your
diversionary tactics and hate-mongering will not stop the readrers from
confronting. You are worse than a pick pocket. If you hasve an iota of
self-respect, take a bite on what I write. Don't hit atround the bush.
No shameless and characterless two-legged pornographer can scare from
behind the veil. You are not the one who can worry about Banglasdesh
and Bangabandhu. (W.Z. Manik):