Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

A critical commentary of Jamal Hasan's "Bangabandhu and BKSAL in perspective" b

15 views

Skip to first unread message

anamika_1971

unread,

Sep 7, 2001, 7:28:07 PM9/7/01

A critical commentary of Jamal Hasan’s "Bangabandhu and BKSAL in perspective"

'As Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote convincingly - "Political power is
merely the organized power of one class to oppress another," ' - as quoted from Jaffor Ullah

My esteemed colleague in his article, "Bangabandhu and BKSAL in perspective" has very laboriously tried to examine why "Bangabandhu (AKA Mujib) was out on a limb trying to forge a coalition among various political forces to come up with a united political system," so - as my friend has so eloquently described, the newly liberated Bangladeshi Republic can prosper. Reading this article - one might wonder, if not lost in the maze of irrelevant information and excuses, how this article attempts to examine its prophesied goals.

Such misconception decidedly cannot be the purpose of the distinguished author. Still there have been some arguments that can be presented as to discredit his unbiased observation.

As Mr. Hasan has delved into the "tangled tale" to try to narrate the history of the early years of the republic - perplexed critiques might wonder if our friend is trying to promote his own version of the history of Bangladesh in the post liberation war era. And more importantly perhaps to link Mujib, BKSAL and the political dynamics of those times in way to shield and protect Mujib from the hallmark acts that has discredited Mujib's administration and was eventually responsible for his assassination.

There have been a plethora of reasons presented as contributing factors in explaining the political dynamics of that time in regards to the environment that Mujib was the premier. However, at times one might have to really stretch their imagination to understand how Mujib as the leader of the infant republic and his political philosophy of BKSAL is intertwined into the narration. The reason for this observation is probably due to the fact that from the version that our esteemed friend have unabashedly presented has failed to show that Mujib was in any capacity involved or fully aware of what was happening during his administration.

Any inquisitive mind would be able to see that according to the author of this article, Mujib is mentioned as having a dream to unite the valiant republic and to make her prosper. Perhaps being overconfident of his own security; his dilemma as how to bypass the corrupt and nepotistic leadership of existing AL and his vision that Socialism would be the answer to all the ills of that society.

In the process, readers with mediocre understanding of logical deduction would notice that there has been a concerted effort by this author to delegate the blame and responsibility of Mujib's administration and portray Mujib as one who was not in control or even fully aware of all the atrocities that were committed in the country, either using his name or using the name of Awami League. Perhaps aware but unable to resist, as our fiery scribe Jaffor Ullah has documented, "The supreme leader knew this full well, however, he was helpless and reticent. His hands were literally tied behind his back. He saw the
cancerous growth of corruption among his trusted men but he could not take
any action."

As history of the human civilization has taught us that history repeats itself and that the victor writes the history. The only way for posterity to prevent something atrocious happening again is to perhaps learn from the mistakes. Perhaps a small moment in the history of mankind; nevertheless an important part in the process of promoting democratic virtues in the Bangladeshi political environment.

Perhaps in the spirit of preserving the truth or to enable future historians taking an interest in political discourse a closer look of this finely written article was required. And closer examination of the article has raised some questions regarding the way various events in the history of Bangladesh might be perceived by the masses.

To explore those questions further there have been an effort to present some affirmations, arguments and alternate explanations as to the events that Jamal Hasan introduced to the readers so articulately.

News From Bangladesh
August 21, 2001

FEATURE

Bangabandhu and BKSAL in perspective

By Jamal Hasan

Washington DC

"What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun?
... . . Or does it explode?

-- Langston Hughes, 'Harlem'

Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib had a dream for Bangladesh in the early seventies, which had to be deferred for various reasons. But what did happen to his dream? This short article examines why Bangabandhu was out on a limb trying to forge a coalition among various political forces to come up with a united political system so that the weak and malnourished child who was born in 1971 had a fighting chance to grow. Without much ado, let me delve into this tangled tale, which is not an easy one to narrate.

The political dynamics of Bangladesh puts the country in a unique position
in the world. This is so due to two reasons. Firstly, the nation was born
after defeating a ruthless genocidal occupation army. Secondly, within a
little more than two and half years the nation became captive of the
strategic allies of the brutal force who successfully convinced many as if
they were the ultimate guarantors of people's democratic aspiration in this
new republic of 75 million people.

Jamal Hasan has been so true when he mentioned how the nation and the political environment have changed. And so truly how AL, led by Mujib had the masses fooled by pretending to be the guarantor of the democratic aspirations of the citizens of the republic. The same party and the same leaders that have elected, in a landslide victory with 298 out of 300 seats, became the biggest tyrant. Shattering the dream to rebuild the country after the brutal war.

The country coming out of ashes of a bloody liberation war witnessed rampant
corruption and nepotism culminated during the short-term government ruled by
the party, Awami League, which was assumed to be the vanguard of liberation
movement.

There definitely was rampant corruption and nepotism. So was the level of corruption that after the 1974 famine, when questioned by BBC, then chairman of Red Cross and Mujib's family friend admitted by omission that he was stealing. If remembering correctly - his response was that he has helped Mujib's family when he was in jail. And this person repeated that same sentence twice as if that would justify him stealing when millions are starving to death all over the country.
As no one was immune from the rampant corruption of that time as crystallized by the actions of Mujib's own son Kamal. Or the fact that Jamal was selected for a scholarship at the Sand Hurst military school in UK over hundreds of military officers, many of them freedom fighters.

When the people were ready to sacrifice everything to build their
Sonar Bangla, they observed in disgust, a great majority of the Awami League
stalwarts were busy making money by hoarding, extortion and manipulating
commodity market by buying and selling license and permit which was easy to
obtain.

So eloquently and in such fiery language Mr.. Hasan describes how corruption became synonymous with the Mujib led AL during the early 70's. Anybody with a connection to AL thugs could become rich really easy. Morality, honesty, democratic responsibility, oath to public office, even the memory of the victims were forgotten as cherished political virtues as the greed and disrespect for democracy was diving the AL leadership.

Because of nepotism and favoritism a good percentage of the
opportunists happened to be "temporary Awami Leaguers," who were never
members of Awami League, but merely chameleons who changed colors in changed
circumstances.

Mr.. Hasan described a common problem that faced AL as any other political party in power - as we have seen with BNP and JP, AL also attracted opportunists. However, in all fairness, one has to admit that this environment existed because the most influential leaders of AL permitted this to happen by their own actions. Disagreeing with Mr. Hasan, a critique might question the validity of the argument presented. The reason being that contrary to what the esteemed author has described - in reality it is the other way around and "temporary Awami Leaguers" were interested of being a part of AL because they have seen how the "permanent Awami Leagures" were getting rich so quick by depleting the meager resources of this poor country. As these chameleons often are - they became part of the "permanent AL" leadership and shared the loots together. It would be futile to assume that the top leadership (presumed to be the "permanent Awami Leaguers") did not get their share of the loot from the "temporary Awami Leaguers".

As the BBC interview of the Red Cross chairman, who is part of the "permanent Awami Leaguers", and a very close family friend of Mujib, exemplifies how the distinction between permanent and temporary Awami Leaguers become blurred so quickly.

The shattered dream of the millions of Bangladeshis in the
post-liberation era gave the defeated force of 1971 a good opportunity to
maneuver. They had allies in the right wing of Awami League and of course in the army barracks of Bangladesh.

In addition to the defeated forces of 1971 getting a better opportunity to maneuver, the shattered dream of the millions of Bangladeshis also brought a realization that AL - led my Mujib has failed miserably to deliver what they have promised. From the love they have felt for Mujib and AL during the rebellious days of 1970 and 1971 was diminishing fast. Mujib's words and actions only have been able to worsen the situation.

Regarding the "defeated forces of 1971", more precisely are the genocidal Pakistan Army; local Mir Jaffor's like Rajakar, Al-Badar, Al-Shams and the other Para-military forces and other individuals that were involved in unspeakable atrocities during the liberation war.

Most important lesson for Mujib and AL was that Mujib provided amnesty to all of these criminals. An act that was motivated perhaps by nothing but sheer stupidity, complete insensivity to the emotions of victims and their family and AL foreign interest. If these criminals were charged for their crimes and then were disposed of as they have done onto others - the whole Bangladeshi nation would not have to live among killers and traitors. The guilty would have been punished and the posterity would not have been burdened with something that Mujib did.

Perhaps in retrospect, we now know about the level of corruption in AL that has forced Mujib to declare amnesty as a lot of those criminals had close ties with the existing AL leadership. And definitely had enough money to influence the decisions of the Mujib led AL government.

Alas! Mujib even compromised the last of his integrity and honesty when the Indian Army traded the Pakistani POW's for theirs without any consideration to demanding justice for the genocide that they have so recently committed.

Mujib and his family being absent in all of the 1971 period where they were arrested, guarded and better provided for by the Pakistani's, Mujib may not have had a understanding of the suffering that the people of Bangladesh had went through to install him as the prime-minister of the country. But unfortunately for Mujib, the masses remembered the suffering at the hands of the Pakistani Pigs. As Mujib paid with his life for his mistakes, we have learned of the indomitably resilient character of the Bangladeshis that fought the Pakistani Military to deliver freedom, is also brave enough to tearlessly cut off their feet if that is going to cause the whole body to wither.

However, a flaw in Mr. Hasan's statement needs to be pointed out before that becomes a cause for miscommunication. During that time it was not hard to find people who did not like AL. And the military is only a reflection of the society. Just as the general populace was outraged with AL corruption and nepotism, military was also displeased with Mujib led AL. But still most of the members of the military at that time experienced soldiers and freedom fighters. And these were the people who were the first to risk their lives for the Bangladeshi cause by deserting the Pakistan army and fighting to establish sovereign Bangladeshi land.

It is understandable if they were against Mujib, as it is a democratic tradition to disagree - but the notion that they were allies with the Mir Jaffor's of 1971, would be a wrong assumption. However, that distinction of being a traitor was also getting blurred as AL tried to discredit everyone that did not agree with Mujib as a traitor. It became harder to distinguish if one is called a traitor because they were one during the 1971 or because they have somehow disagreed or crossed paths with AL.

Although the whole Bengali nation got direct assault from the marauding
Pakistani army junta, the killers and collaborators found a new lease of
life because of Awami League's serious flaw in governing a newly emerged
country.

It is so truly said when Mr. Hasan has mentioned that the "killers and collaborators found a new lease of life." That is how Mujibs decision to declare amnesty has affected the country. And also in the corrupt leadership of AL, the failure of AL to try charges against rajakars, the unwillingness of AL to deal with these issues, to establish anything resembling the rule of law and the ability to be fair in administering justice. And in addition of the serious reason that Mr. Hasan has mentioned regarding AL's inability to govern a newly emerged state there was a leadership crisis. As many has felt that Mujib did not have the wisdom or vision to lead the country in a manner respectful to the citizens in the comity of nations.

The enemies of Bangladesh liberation got a propaganda victory by
saying, "oh, those were the good old days of Pakistani raj." The process of
national amnesia of Bangladeshis started.

One cannot help but agree with the author at the disgraceful process of national amnesia. Unfortunately, our leader in government and the political party entrusted with the machinery of the government have failed to unite the nation in achieving common causes.
The legacy of declaring amnesty to war criminals, letting the cowardly Pakistan army leave, the political purges against AL opponents - all has contributed for the peoples trust to diminish in the elected government and representatives.
Referring to the disgraceful state of national amnesia that has been described by the author cannot fail to stir the emotions of all Bangladeshis alike. In this context one has to remember the socio-political environment that has contributed for such deplorable attitude to surface.

One side we had the lawless state of affairs during the 1^stAL government regime; and on the other side there is hidden fifth column Rajakars and Mir Jaffor’s of the country. These people should have been prosecuted and punished to the fullest extent of the law. And given their crimes – death penalty would have been inevitable in the aftermath of such brutal genocide. Along with Pakistan Army should have been prosecuted as signatories of the Geneva Convention.

The fanatics and fundamentalists who should not gotten a “new lease of life”, as my learned friend has so correctly described - were banished from political life; –Mujib’s edict left these people in a very precarious position as disgraced citizens (whom we should have punished to begin with) with out any political identity. The only possible option was to transform into such a “fifth column”. Trying to sabotage the new republic.

As a reader would notice, both these factors can both be attributed to Mujib’s rhetoric.

Rhetoric from a prime minister Mujib might have been very effective in instigating purges and armed conflict with Shiraz Shikdar’s JSD – but complicated by the famine; popular outrage at Mujib’s corrupt government was at an all time high. As Muijb was the elected prime minister and was personally accountable to the masses – citizens expected him to establish the rule of law and deliver the dream. When this dream was lost, it became very easy for this “fifth column” to approach disgruntled citizens. Citizens who were wondering if they have fought and died and liberated their motherland just to trade the West Pakistani colonial rulers with a Mujib led AL regime.

And when on August 15, 1975, the
Pakistani evil force succeeded in toppling a government of its disliking,
hardly anybody noticed the sinister design, though.

As the tree of liberty failed to bear fruit; as the dreams that kept people alive started dying – there was this sense of great apathy among the citizens, betrayed and forgotten. A sense of great melancholy, that our competent friend Mr. Hasan has observed so accurately.

The blueprint of 1975's tragedy did not start on a single day. While
Bangabandhu was overconfident about his personal safety and security, he was presumably not fully aware that his tilting toward Soviet bloc resulted in a renewed alignment of Pakistani-Saudi-US Axis.

Pakistanis and Saudis were hostile to the nascent republic during all these years of Awami League rule.

It was hardly surprising that quite a few Bangladeshi Jamat-i-Islami
leaders, hounded for their heinous war criminal roles during the war of
liberation would find sanctuary in both of these countries.

Even after liberation of Bangladesh, USA did not detach itself from the
Nixon doctrine of 1971 periods. Soviet leader Brezhnev's continuous harping of "Asian Collective Security" was a real challenge to US policy makers.

Thus, the old bedfellows of 1971 reconnected among themselves with a mission to nip in the bud the prospect of encountering another Fidel Castro in South Asia. It goes without saying that the " Fidel Castro" was nobody but
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

As one explores further, along with the author some additional argument should be presented to give a better perspective of the international arena to any curious reader.

In the cold war era, Bangladesh under Mujib has shamefully failed to maintain her neutrality. As evident from Humayun Rashid Choudhury’s interview regarding the secret seven point agreement with India – Bangladesh was on the verge of becoming a battlefield for a proxy war between the super powers. As Indian Army left, they left the newly formed Bangladesh Army without clothes in their backs. Ironically, the Russians sent their navy and took over our ports in the name of minesweeping.

Whereas the shamed and disgraced Pakistanis conspired with their US masters, Mujib slowly delivered the country to the Indian hands as a market for supporting Indian Industries at the expense of the local enterprises.

Shadowed my Indian and Russian influence, Mujib has failed to convince the democratic world as to his intention of becoming anything but a authoritarian dictator. Be it pro-western or pro-Russian; but definitely a dictator. Playing with the dangerous notion of cold war politics and siding with Russia further alienated other Muslim nations. Alarmed that one of the most populous Muslim nation is going to restrict religion in the Russian model. Carried away in his dream to promote secularism, Mujib walked a very narrow line, if not violated the religious freedom of the citizens.

As Mujib failed to punish the so called “fifth column” – they were once more able to server their Pakistani masters, albeit secretly due to political banishment – but definitely benefiting from Mujib’s inability to maintain neutrality and failure to establish positive diplomatic relations with countries other than the once previously mentioned.

Although the architects of BKSAL (Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League)
dreamed of redefining the political landscape of Bangladesh in socialistic
model, one important thing they totally ignored. True implementation of
socialism may achieve some results with a dedicated cadre who could take the
bold steps of coming out of petty bourgeois mindset.

Awami Leaguers to the grassroots level had middle-class affinity.
Traditional Awami League politics taught them anything but socialistic
values.

Moreover, during the two years after liberation many of the party
workers in rural areas to urban centers got the taste of "easy money" with
corrupt practices. It was not realistic to expect to reach a socialistic
goal with such misguided party cadres.

Along with Mr. Hasan’s competent observation regarding the philosophical concept behind the inception of BKSAL and the problems with that approach; there are a few some additional issues that should be discussed to complete the observation.

Just as the grassroots level workers have the biggest asset of AL during 1970, in the post liberation era the integrity of those same workers were substantially lowered.

Taking a example from Mujib and his own family’s involvement in corruption and nepotism – top officials down to the lowest ranks.

The people that has only a few years ago elected him the prime-minister of Pakistan, gave recognition as the undisputed leader of the fighting republic; and more importantly brought him back to offer premiership after the liberation of the country – were just forgotten in the wake of the AL corruption.

The dedicated cadre of AL - the permanent or the temporary type - was of “petty bourgeois mindset.” As Mujib led a popular uprising against the Pakistani Regime, he never really had a vision of government that would work. Mujib’s controversial arrest by the Pakistan Army before the war and his family’s comfortable living in the care of the Pakistani Junta had made him detached and far away from his constituents.

As the leader of the country and also of AL, Mujib has failed to recognize and correct the problem of corruption, as my esteemed friend has observed. His unbiased observation also makes a reader realize so lucidly, that if BKSAL was to be created with the Al leadership with Mujib and his family on the top of the pyramid – then BKSAL would be another tool to drain the national resources and economically drain the country.

One of the major differences between BKSAL and the existing political system was that BKSAL would effectively narrow the national political arena to an AL dominated all-powerful party. At the top of the totem pole Mujib was also prepared. He had Kamal to take care of his private political army RakhiBahini along with his legion trusted gundas like Aurongo, Kader Siddqui, etc. On the other hand Mujib had Jamal to finish his training at Sand Hurst perhaps dreaming to see his son installed as the chief of the National Army.

This political process would have had the potential to selectively narrow down the ruling class to Mujib ‘s family and people of his choosing. Voice of dissent would be successfully squashed. With the help his personal army RakhiBahini he had the new power to enforce his fatwas independent of the government institutions like judiciary, law enforce and national security agencies.

As the fiery scribe Jaffor Ullah has so correctly observed in Marx and Engels writing "Political power is merely the organized power of one class to oppress another," So true as to Bangladesh’s transition to an independent state and also in the formation of BKSAL.

Nonetheless, formation of BKSAL antagonized a number of political forces in Bangladesh. They were as follows:

As the distinguished author has so correctly mentioned there were political forces that were against the formation of BKSAL – the most important of them were perhaps the voting citizens who were very understandably saw and suffered the effects of Mujib’s leadership in the national life. And now they were witnessing the consolidation of the national government and the elimination of the electoral process in Mujib’s favor.

1. A coterie of the Awami League right-wingers who were sympathetic to
US-Pakistan Axis during war of liberation. It is true that many of them
believed in multiparty democracy. But the way BKSAL was formed made them apprehensive of the rising tide of Soviet lobby in Awami League itself.
Among these factions, a fringe group was determined to reverse the process even if that needed to eliminate the Bangabandhu from the picture.

One cannot help but wonder in the contradiction on words that the author has mentioned here were sarcasm or not. A “Coterie of Awami League right-wingers” sympathetic to the US-Pakistan Axis during the war of liberation seems to be a little harsh to judge the AL leadership perhaps. In all fairness perhaps some of them were more Democratically oriented than Mujib or the other factions within the AL under Mujib.

As the nation was shocked at the prospect of loosing their democratic rights, some AL leaders can also be very understandably against the creation BKSAL. In the mindset of some of those leaders was guilt that they are retracting their promise to deliver democracy to their constituents. In addition to that the soviet version of governance was perceived as a threat for the pious Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and all others as the established model of post Stalinist Russia did not provide those rights to her citizens.

If elimination of Mujib for that goal was not a conscious thought for most of the AL leaders – they were at the least open to that possibility as Mujib was irresponsibly alienating his constituents by his authoritarian rule.

2. True democrats in Bangladesh who were devastated with the suspension of
all political activities and formation of a single party entity. They
believed in democratic pluralism but as champions of morality they could not
think of supporting bloody toppling of the new political formation or siding
with the Pakistani lobby. Their ultimate motto was to wait and see.

As the eminent author have so correctly observed the plight of the true democrats of Bangladesh in the Mujib era. Faced with the prospect of decidedly suspending democracy and he democratic process under the authoritarian rule of Mujib and proposed BKSAL – the people were devastated and felt betrayed. Lost dreams of democracy were never realized. For he most ardent champions of democracy, as Mr. Hasan himself were perhaps still trying to grapple with the chilling realization that Mujib was going to kill democracy in Bangladesh for good.
After the assassination of Mujib – the democracy loving people were left as choice less as before, if not ignored. Mujib and AL have already proven to have failed as champions of democracy, the Pakistan lobby is unmentionable in this context as those low lives are not worth consideration as political allies and can only belong behind bars if not hanged already – despite Mujib’s insensitive declaration of amnesty. And definitely supporting the Faruk-Rashid coalition was morally wrong, despite their valiant attempt to restore democracy – as democracy cannot flourish in an environment where a government draws it’s legitimacy by killing and oppressing the citizens, be it Faruk-Rashid gong or RakhiBahini.

3. A group of Bangladeshi army officials who did not abandon the old values
of Pakistan where pro-westernism and Islamism mixed in a platter which would
be combative to global communism, especially of Soviet variety. Multi-party
democracy or democratic pluralism was not their cup of tea as great majority
of them were groomed under Pakistani military dictators like Ayub Khan or
Yahya Khan. They were alarmed at the possibility of emergence of Soviet
style socialism in Bangladesh and they were ready to stop the process at any
cost even if it resulted in bloodshed.

Aside from this group, there were other army officials who had become
disgruntled with Awami League's continued policy of benign neglect of
cantonment and emphasis of Rakkhi Bahini. The grievance of the latter group
gave the former enough strategic inspiration to change the course of
history.

For such an observant and unbiased author like Mr. Hasan, it is only expected that he would be able to bring attention to such serious concerns. There definitely was an influence of military dictatorships to emerge where democratic process has so long been neglected.

The author is also correct in mentioning that there was a group of army officials who cherished the democratic values practiced in the western countries. Despite the shameful involvement of US government in the liberation war – there still was some admiration at the way the US constitution and democratic process attempted to guarantee civil rights to her citizens.

Brought up in the democratic tradition of the British government, albeit a 2^nd class citizen – there was the respect for democratic process. There can be argument among these officer’s as to what democratic model would be perfect for Bangladesh; a great majority of these soldiers were also freedom fighters.

These were the very first to organize and fight back in the face of Pakistani aggression in the beginning of the war. Even before the whole nation was aware that Pakistani army’s genocidal intentions and the elected leadership were able to reorganize and take political leadership – some of these soldiers were there already in full battle gear fighting with the Pakistani Army. There was a new republic declared by an anonymous soldier named Major Zia from a captured Radio Station in Chittagong, and to his credibility he has taken control of sovereign land in the name of this newly claimed republic. And history has documented the valiant courage that the Bengali people have shown to protect their freedom.

Reflecting the popular disgruntlement of the citizenry, military were discontent and felt betrayed by the BKSAL concept. Contrary to what Mujib has promised the nation before the bloody liberation war coming across to Bangladeshi’s as blatant lies. And as every soldier can attest, they have seen their comrades still laying in unmarked graves along with the freedom fighters who have died under their command. There was a feeling that the sacrifices of their fallen friends are being betrayed by Mujib’s incompetent leadership, prevalent corruption and finally the declaration to form BKSAL. All of these were also made more complex by Mujib’s open favoritism towards his private army of RakhiBahini and the diversion of the scarcest of resources towards this political wing where the national army has already proved their loyalty to the new nation in a brutal war.

Where as most of the army was reluctant to involve themselves in politics, though treated as stepchildren by Mujib – there was kinds of Faruk-Rashid-Dalim gong.
Faruk for his part was the only qualified tank commander in Bangladesh had only and handful of broken tanks under his command. In the aftermath of the Indian army requisitioning all the left over military hardware from the Pakistan army he was left over with a few that were not feasible to take to India. His judgment was clouded when he saw the tanks donated by the Egyptian government were being assigned to the politically motivated RakhiBahini as opposed to the legitimate national army.

Dalim for his part was disgruntled and approachable by the Faruk-Rashid as he along with other officers felt insulted when Kamal, - along with his drunken friends were harassing Dalim’s wife amidst a social event organized for officers and their wives. When brought to Mujib’s attention they were ignored and reprimanded and logically prime candidate to become a threat to Mujib.

4. The defeated forces of Bangladesh, i.e., The Fifth Columnist. They
included all the Islamist parties like Muslim League, PDP, Jamat-i-Islami,
Nezam-I-Islami, etc. And also the auxiliary forces of Pakistani Army,
namely, the former members of Razakar, Al Badr and Al-Shams. It is true that
many of these elements saved their skins because of the nepotism policy of
Awami Leaguers. But they perceived Awami League to be their eternal enemy
and blamed the party for their ill fate. They realized that if BKSAL got
full control of the country, they could never make the situation favorable
to their ideology.

As mentioned before by the author – these “fifth columnists” were not prosecuted or punished. They were under forced banishment from the democratic process and were forced by AL to take their heinous activities under ground. When AL leadership and workers started using the term Rajakar to discredit not only the real ones but also others who were in odds with AL for whatever ideological, personal or commercial interest. As AL started blurring the definition of the word “Rajakar, ” the real criminals found it easier to once again mingle in the society.

5. Pro-Chinese political parties and ultra-left parties scattered around the
country. Many of these party members openly sided with Pakistani Army and were adversaries of freedom fighters. After the country became independent, some of those ultra-leftists went underground and were active in secret killings of Awami Leaguers and rural landlords. For them, Pakistani influenced politics was far better than Soviet influenced BKSAL. As a significant portion of those ultra-leftists believed in the bloodshed,
inevitably they were in favor of a bloody ouster of BKSAL regime.

As AL started blurring the definition of the word “Rajakar, ” the real criminals found it easier to once again mingle in the society. With the classic example that our friend has provided here, it should be clear the way opposition leaders were treated during the Mujib Regime. In judging the merit of such accusations - one would notice the way "some" party leaders being siding with the Pakistan Army became a reason to perhaps unleash the propaganda machine, the local AL/BCL armed cadres.
At the face of AL aggresion and opposition - smaller, a many of them leftist went underground. As rural grass-root AL workers were also benifitted from the corruption goin on in the national level. For the radical elements of the society - killing corrupt AL leaders and other Rajakars protected by AL were justified by their desire to become Robin Hood's and perhaps cause a communist revolution to take over the country in the face of Mujib and AL's corruption in all levels of government.

Like everybody else in the country these people were also against a a BKSAL that is designed to keep Mujib and AL in power. Like a lot of other people that were disenfranchised by Mujib and AL and were positive to an idea that would rid Mujib from the consolidating power and legalizing autocracy in the form of BKSAL. Much more than a Pakistani influence, there were other valid reasons for the armed conflicts to happen during the Mujib regime.

6. Last but not the least, the formidable enemy of Awami League, namely,
Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal. This party was getting enough clout in educational
institutions across the nation. In the village level its underground fronts,
namely, Gono Bahini and Bangladesher Communist League were gathering experience in killing Awami Leaguers and confronting Rakkhi Bahini. Although JSD was proponent of "Scientific socialism"whatever it means, it was not thrilled to see a left wing metamorphosis of Awami League. This party was ready to push the country to a bloody civil war with the clear ambition of eliminating Awami League from the political power.

JSD would be a party worth mentioning during the Mujib regime, despite the shortfalls of the party in the later days, and Mr Hasan has done so very splendidly. The resons and the rhetoric that Mujib had used before the liberation war and the rights that he promised to the people, were literally repeated merely 8 months after the liberation war. Progressive leaders of JSD noticed, just like one our fiery scribe has accurately described to the masses, "Political power is merely the organized power of one class to oppress another."

Ironically this political concept of scientific socialism, as Mr. Hasan has mentioned, for whatever it is worth were later picked up SCL. During the late 1980's and early 1990's graffiti's in the streets of Dhaka boasted of this socalled "Scientific Socialism" to be in the AL/BCL political tradition. JSD strongholds were and is mostly educated college and university students. Historically these are the first to shed their blood first in the face of government, be it Pakistan Junta or the Mujib Regime.

Mujib was raising the RakhiBahini as a persoanl political army - diverting valuable resources away from the National armed forces, and like many other political parties of that time the implications were clear to the JSD leadership as well. A national army alongwith BDR and the Police always did exist with clearly defined responsibility - whereas the Bangladeshi government were forced to Pay secuity or law enforcement Coming back and after the liberation war, these freedom fighters felt betrayed by Mujib and hurt by AL corruption .

Just as our author rightly referred to dreams being deffered, younger freedom fighters were eager to see the fruits of the liberation war. Mujib's autocratic ways along with the creation of RakhiBahini in the model of SS, Stasi or KGB forced a lot of this betrayed youth to violence. Among the few parties that were able to operate in the Mujib regime , JSD bveing one of them, with its younger leadership and lofty idealogy were very attractive to the younger generation who were disheartened and betrayed by Mujib. In the political system where the opposition were not necessarily granted a voice - political armies were being formed to safeguard the rights of the citizens against the authority and atroicities of Mujib sponsered RakhiBahini.

The spirit that the Bangladeshi people have shown when fighting for liberty, the same spirit was seen again as political idelogists like Shiraz Shikder and JSD fight back the AL regime. This time not for freedom from the Pakistanis but from Mujib and AL. Protect democracy in the face of AL totaliranism.

Some critics of BKSAL often give the reasoning that one-party-system would
wreak havoc in Bangladesh as it was against democratic pluralism. The fact
is after the liberation, Bangladesh had faced immense difficulty in building
democratic institutions. Already the legacy of Pakistan under successive
military regimes of Ayub and Yahya kept the Bengalis in dark about the
essence of democratic values for more than a decade.

The legacy of the Pakistani military rulership has always haunted Bangladesh and her citizens right to democratic practices. After the liberation war - faced with the immense challege of delivering democracy - Mujib and AL faltered. Having no idea about democratic practices nor virtues and failed to realize the necessity to establish rule of law to protect and nurture the democratic process.

When Mujib and AL leadership were exposed for their nepotism, corruption and inability to maintain law and they very resonably lost as their face as the leaders who are going to establish democracy or rule of law. The political landsape was further complicated by Mujib's totally failure to curb corruption when the country was suffering from famine; and the affluency of the AL leadership outraged the starving people that were by the hundreds everyday. A government that is unable to correct itself even in a so called democracy is potentially much more dangerous when the model of governance is an authoritarian on without any accountability to the citizens.

As Mr. Hasan does a splendid job of describing Mujib’s failure to rule the new republic, though the citizens trusted him enough to follow him through a civil war.
Continuing with this notable authors description of various other factors that have contributed to Mujib’s demise – it is becoming redundant to comment further on the fine writing ability of Mr. Hasan.

Just as some things cannot be described but has to be experienced. The readers have to use their own sense of logical reasoning and trust in their own intellect to explore further and fully realize the legacy of Mujib, AL and their attempt to curb democracy in the name of BKSAL. And how in the process Mujib led AL have lowered the respect for civil government and democratic process in Bangladesh and so vulnerable to military abuse for so long.

In conclusion one will express deep admiration in the observations of Jamal Hasan and hope that readers will be blessed with more of his insightful work

Not only that, prior to Ayub Khan's ascension to power, a few palace cliques
and intrigues deprived the Bengali masses of being active partners in the
political process. It is also noteworthy that after liberation, because of
Awami League's absolute majority representation in a national parliament,
voice of dissent was not a common-scenario. The parliament became almost a
rubber stamp institution. And Awami League hooligans' muscle power and their
regular clash with the rival parties' muscle men was nothing close to a test
case of democratic pluralism.

Most newspapers decided not to rock the boat for fear of reprisals. They
showed a symptom of subtle appeasement of the ruling party. Probably only
paper, Haq Katha, a tabloid of the National Awami Party (Bhashani) was
staunchly critical of Awami League and its party members. So, when BKSAL was
formed, the average citizens did not miss much. After all, pre-BKSAL
Bangladesh was not an epitome of democracy, as some critics would like to
argue.

Expecting democratic pluralism on the basis of simply multi-party system is
not always pragmatic. The Institutional Revolution Party of Mexico ( PRI)
ruled that country for more than seventy years. The ruling party made sure
winning in the election is guaranteed for decades. There was corruption at
the highest level; there was drug trafficking and secret killing. The people
were living in a less than civil society and the ruling elites amassed
amazing wealth.

During PRI's draconian rule, how the election in that US's neighbor was
stolen is now an open secret. The PRI oligarchy was prudent enough not to
antagonize the northern neighbor so the continuity of rule went unabated.
Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and General Suharto of Indonesia ruled
their countries with iron grip. Both the authoritarian leaders appeased
western allies so that a constant cash flow could be secured. The urban
middle class was typically not very unhappy with this arrangement. These
"less then democratic" rulers ruled their respective countries for years to
come hardly facing serious challenge at home and abroad. The ousted
President Alberto Fujimori of Peru showed the world how autocracy thrived in
a multi-party democracy. The record of Fujimori may pale many authoritarian
rulers' misdeeds all around the world.

During the time of Cold War, U.S. administrations supported a number of
right wing military dictators in the Latin and Central America. From
Paraguay to Chile, Argentina to Brazil, Nicaragua to El Salvador, Uruguay to
Guatemala, the countries were shadowed by unsavory regimes.There were numerous instances of human rights violations while most of the
regimes were corrupt to the teeth. Death squads were formed to suppress
political dissidents. Civilians' accused of being sympathizers of left
politics disappeared in the middle of the night. Death squads acting like
the Nazi German Gestapo or East German Stassi were active in their evil
designs. Today's unclassified documents in archives around the globe are
showing horrific evidence of the dark days of Cold War.

These documentations are enough to disclose that some democratic nations do
not always promote democracy. In Bangladesh, in the post 1975 time, two
successive military rulers with western and Islamist leanings proved that
infusion of hard cash could make miracles. With a relatively satisfied urban
middle class, the iron men from the barracks played Houdini with ease. Both
the right wing military dictators ostracized Bangabandhu and the concept of
BKSAL as vestiges of totalitarianism. They acted as if they were the
ultimate saviors of western style democracy.

In reality, they had iron grip in all matters of state power that included
executive and judiciary bodies. During election, their manipulative acts
gave them startling results of 80 to 90 percent supports, which is rare in
pluralistic democracy. They made sure they would not be ousted by ballot
forever. Because of their commitment to thwarting Soviet influence in this
South Asian nation, the Bangladeshi military dictators obtained significant
support from not only the proponents of western democracy but also from
theocratic regime such as the Hashimite Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Bangabandhu's dilemma was how to bypass the already proven corrupt and
nepotistic Awami League hierarchy to significantly change the political
dynamics. He was gradually coming closer to pro-Moscow Communist Party of
Bangladesh and its front organizations. In a CPB conference, Bangabandhu
told the party leaders that he considered them (the Communists) real
patriots as his own party men were drowning in corruption. It could be
attributed to be just a lip service or a public relations ploy. But the
construction of BKSAL proved to be his inclination to the Soviet line
politics in Bangladesh.

The experiment of forming Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League was not
well received by many old Awami Leaguers who felt that that was tantamount
to decimating Awami League. Moreover, decentralization of administration and
the concept of agrarian reform were far from the traditionalist Awami League
philosophy.

If BKSAL was formulated like the Iranian mullah's Supreme Council without
any socialistic goal, may be Uncle Sam would not be so much perturbed. If
BKSAL incorporated notable Razakars, Al Badrs, Jamats and if the newly
formed party had an Islamic agenda and insignia, Saudi recognition to
Bangladesh would have come immediately. Maybe within a few months after the
formation of Islamic BKSAL, Bangladesh would have been flooded with
petrodollars.

BKSAL came as a radical concept when the country already passed the stage of
"radicalism" of Bangladesh liberation. I am using the term radical in this
context because the liberation war itself was too radical for most Awami
Leaguers who were used to constitutional form of politics.

Secondly, BKSAL gave power to many well-known corrupt Awami Leaguers in
certain areas while they would become little emperors in their domains.
Thirdly, BKSAL included most of the notable pro-Soviet Communist party
leaders (their student fronts and labor fronts) in its high command. Wasn't
it enough to ring an alarm bell in certain countries' capitals where
democracy and antipathy toward Soviet hegemony were the everyday mantras?

Bangabandhu was a leader at the time of living dangerously. In the era of
superpower rivalry, the birth of Bangladesh occurred rather quickly as a
result of consistent effort of Soviet bloc countries and India. And these
guardians of the infant country did not have the resources to feed the
millions. Like many radical Third World leaders, Bangabandhu thought
socialism would be the panacea to all ills and he worked in that direction.
In the process he alienated a vital power of the world comity of nations. He
was walking on a razor's edge and thus it almost becomes an academic
question whether his early demise was a historical inevitability.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------

Jamal Hasan writes from Washington DC. Comments should be directed at
po...@hotmail.com

- Secret Agreement between Mujib's Governemnt and India -

1. Govt. employees who did not directly take part in the liberationwar would be dismissed; the vacant positions would be filled in by the Indian nationals.

2. Required number of Indian soldiers would remain deployed in Bangladesh after the war. Starting from November of 1972, bilateral meetings will be held to re-evaluate the situation at hand on an annual basis.

3. Bangladesh will not maintain its own military force.

4. A para-militia force will be created out of the Mukti Bahini (Freedom Fighters) to maintain domestic law and order.

5. Free market economy will go in effect between the two countries.

6. Foreign policy of Bangladesh will be determined after consultation with the foreign ministry of India.

7. Bangladesh Freedom Forces will come under the command of Indianarmy during any unforeseeable Indo-Pak war.

Humayun Rashid Choudhury confessed about the signing of this agreement to journalist Masudul Haque. Choudhury was the Mission-Chief ofBangladesh in India during the liberation war. His interview divulging this seven-point secret agreement appears in Masudul Haque's book "Bangladesher Shadhinota Juddey RAW Ebong CIA" (Role of RAW & CIA in the Liberation War of Bangladesh), on pages 163-166. After considering the grave consequences of it in the long run, the then-acting President Syed Nazrul Islam got fainted soon after signing of the agreement.

Jaffor Ullah

unread,

Sep 8, 2001, 8:58:14 PM9/8/01

Re: INFORMATION ON ALLEGED WAR CRIMINAL ASHRAFUZZAMAN KHAN, resident of New York City (now heads the Queens branch of ICNA -Islamic Circle of North America).

Dear Friends,

I am not sure whether who have following information:

On 24th September 1997, a complaint case ( case no. 115/1997 Ramana Thana) was filed agains ASHRAFUZZAMAN KHAN, now resident in USA, and others, for alleged crime committed by him in 1971 during the Bangladesh Liberation War.

Mrs. Farida Banu, sister of martyred intellectual Professor Giasuddin Ahmed, filed the case at the Ramana Police Station in Dhaka under the Penal Code of Bangladesh ( Sections: 120(b), 448, 364, 302, 201, 34, 114).

In the complaint, it was reported that on 14th December 1971 morning , Professor Giasuddin was abducted by Asrafuzzaman Khan, Chowdhury Mueen Uddin ( now resident in London) and others. He was disappeared since then, and his dead body was finally found at Rayar Baazar killing Fields on 5th January 1972.

For detail news: Please see Dainik Sangbadh 25th September 1997 Dhaka.

For further information:
Contact with your nearest Bangladesh Embassy/High Commission & Ministry of Home Affairs, Bangladesh

YOU COULD USE THIS INFORMATION TO LOBBY WITH BANGLADESH EMBASSY AND OTHER CONCERNED OFFICIAL IN WASHINGTON/ NEW YORK. YOU CAN SEND A LETTER OF CONCERN TO US OFFICIAL TO KNOW WHETHER THEY HAVE RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION OR REQUEST OF EXTRADITION FROM BANGLADESH GOVERNMENT.

I believe to create pressure on Bangladesh authorities we should send letter of concern / urgent appeal to relevant authorities in Bangladesh/ aboard.

With best regards.

Zaved H. Mahmood

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON ALLGED WAR CRIMINAL ASHRAFUZZAMAN KHAN

SOURCE: http://www.shobak.org/bangla_nuremberg/ashrafuzzaman_khan/

Genocide'71 - an account of the killers and collaborators", Published in Dhaka Page 189: Segment where Ashrafuzzaman Khan (now in New York, and head of Queens branch of ICNA) is cited.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia is serving as a sanctuary for some of the leading Al-Badrs (leaders of death squads in 1971). Here we would like to give the example of Ashrafuzzaman Khan, one of the Al-Badr high command. Ashrafuzzaman Khan, was one of the chief Al-Badr executioners. It has been clearly proved that he himself shot to death 7 teachers of the Dhaka University in the killing fields at Mirpur. A certain Mofizzuddin, who drove the vehicle which took these helpless victims of Ashrafuzzaman to Mirpur, has clearly identified Ashrafuzzaman as the "chief executer" of the intellectuals.

After Liberation, Ashrafuzzaman's personal diary was recovered from 350 Nakhal Para where he resided. On two pages of the diary, the names of 19 teachers of the University have been entered, as well as their addresses in the University quarters. The name of the Dhaka University Medical Officer, Mohammad Murtaza, has also been noted down in this diary. Of these 20 persons, eight were missing on December 14: Munier Chowdhury (Bengali), Dr. Abul Khair (History), Ghiasuddin Ahmed (History), Rashidul Hasan (English), Dr. Faizul Mohi (I. E. R) Dr. Munaza (Medical Officer).

From the confession of Mofizuddin, it has been learned that Ashrafuzzaman shot these people with his own hands. As a result of Mofizuddin's confession, the decomposed bodies of these unfortunate teachers were recovered from the marshes of Rayer Bazar and the mass grave at Shiyal Bari at Mirpur. There were other names in the diary including the following: Dr. Wakil Ahmed (Bengali), Dr. Nilima Ibrahim (Bengali), Dr. Latif (I. E. R), Dr. Maniruzzaman (Geography), K. M. Saaduddin (Sociology), A. M. M. Shahidullah (Mathematics), Dr. Sirajul Islam (Islamic History), Dr. Akhtar Ahmed (Education), Zahirul Huq (Psychology), Ahsanul Huq (English), Serajul Islam Chowdbury (English), and Kabir Chowdhury.

On another page of the diary there were the names of 16 collaborating teachers of the University. Apart from these there were also the names of Chowdbury Moinuddin, the man in charge of the operation to kill ntellectuals, Showkat Imran, a member of the central Al-Badr command, and the head of the Dhaka Badr forces.

Apart from the names of the slain intellectuals, the diary also contained the names and addresses of several other Bengalis. All of them lost their lives at the hands of the Al-Badr. On a small piece of paper the name of the Member Finance of the Pakistan Jute Board, Abdul Khaleq, had been written down, along with the name of his father, his Dhaka address, as well as his permanent address. On December 9, 1971, the Al-Badr took away Abdul Khaleq from his office. They demanded Taka 10,000 as ransom. The Al-Badr then went to Abdul Khaleq's house carrying a letter from him in which he asked that the money be paid to his kidnappers. Abdul Khaleq's wife was unable to give more than Taka 450 at the time. She promised that she would give them
the rest of the money later, and pleaded with them to return her husband. But Abdul Khaleq never came back.

Ashrafuzzaman has also been implicated in the murder of some journalists. It was Ashrafuzzaman who kidnapped the shift-in- charge of the Purbodesh, and the Literary Editor, A. N. M. Gholam Mustafa.

Ashrafuzzaman Khan, was a member of the Central Committee of the Islami Chhatra Sangha. After liberation he went to Pakistan. At present he is employed in Radio Pakistan.

Update: Since publication of this book, Ashrafuzzaman Khan has moved to New York and now heads the Queens branch of ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America)
=====
Zaved Hasan Mahmood
PhD Candidate
School of Law University of Nottingham
NG7 2RD UK
Tel : +115 951 5700 +115 951 4659
Fax : +115 951 5696
email (school): llx...@brn9.reg.nottingham.ac.uk
____________________________________________________________

"anamika_1971" <anamik...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:SBcm7.60537$aW5.8...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...

A critical commentary of Jamal Hasan’s "Bangabandhu and BKSAL in perspective"
'As Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote convincingly - "Political power is
merely the organized power of one class to oppress another," ' - as quoted from Jaffor Ullah

<Rest deleted for brevity>

Asif Hasan

unread,

Sep 9, 2001, 3:46:13 PM9/9/01

Mir Jaffor Ullah,
enough is enough!
You are a LIAR THE GREAT.
In fraud lecture you are next to no one,even your mentor Mir Jaffor
Ali Khan
should be jealous of your fraudulent spell. Sorry, you are no genuine
or real man Mr. Fake, you are worse than a chameleon. Readers: Jaffor
Ullah - the great internet freedom fighter(actually ass in lion's skin
)usually keeps telling the following bull story for some times now.
The liberation war broke out just after 560 days since Mir Jaffor's
arrival at the United States and he started morally supporting the
cause of a secular Bangladesh.
Readers,is that what Jaffor wants us to believe?
1.Then who the fuck was the member of Islamic Chhatra Sangha in the
Mymensingh Agricultural University in 1962-68 period?
(In one of the articles by Mac (Singer Maqsoodul Haque) in NFB this
hint was very sharp and clear, but thick skin Ullah just swallowed
it.)
2. What was your ideology and role in Islami Chhatra Sangha? What were
you doing in the breeding ground of what you call razakars? Dreaming
of a secular Bangladesh in the heart of a communal organization Islami
Chhatra Sangha?Your Mirjaffori was par excellence from the juvenille
days it seems Mr. trickster.
3.Another so called war activist Jamal Hasan. Does he know that the
war
criminal Ashrafuzzaman Khan (sheltered in NY city) he is haunting for
was your party comrade, role model and central boss in the Islami
Chhatra Sangha (now called Islami Chhatra Shibir)?
4. If you think India is so much of a safe heaven for good people and
freethinker secularists like you why did your parents after all come
to Bangladesh (it was not even Bangladesh it was then Islamic republic
of Pakistan) after all? Why did (could) n't your 14 generation stay
back and live happily ever after in India? Who invited/imported these
great nimak harams to Bangladesh (then Islamic republic of Pakistan)?
WHO BEGGED YOU TO COME?

(Readers please note that Jaffor was born in India and settled in
U.S.A but he is sermonizing on issues related to Bangladesh.)
Is it not an indication that the situation prevailing was not very
favorable for Muslims that your 14 generation of freethinkers came
to beg a future even in an Islamic republic -when you develop skin
rash on any thing that has to do with Islam?
Clear answer, no bullshitting, no deflecting the question, this time
Jaffor!!
VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATION,ANSWER THEM.
I have reasons to believe that your dad's immigration to Pakistan,
your concomitance with Islami Chhatra Sangha and current convenient
ultra-secular posture, all have been and are self serving and
bhondami(pretense)!!!

Can such Nimak Haram and bhondo be the gatekeepers of democracy and
patriotism?
But his sick ambition has sky rocketted, he is busy on pelting stones
on others leaving in a glass house.

for example,
Zia's valiant role in the liberation war and later leniency to the
collaborators was a policy issue. Like any other policy it might have
been very right or absolutely wrong,or anything in between .. only a
rigorous academic study will reveal that,we leave it to the posterity
fr now. But it is certainly beyond the comprehension of a fraud like
you(who
does everything he does with some petty, immediate, interest) what are
the challenges a statesman has to face to strengthen the national
unity, restore the public order, consolidate the post war revolution
in a war ravaged country.

In a country where Shah Azizur Rahman(BNP), Khan A Sabur (ML),
Salahuddin Qader Chowdhury (Various parties), Fayzul Haque(AL), Nurul
Islam(AL),Engineer Mosharraf Hussain(AL) get routinely elected, a
smart statesman can easily figure out what is the public notion about
the so called Razakars. The nation better face the truth sooner than
the later, rather than hiding it under the table.

Zia's policy merits of course discussion, but he certainly did not
make Shah Aziz PM for plundering national wealth.

Zia was not a radical leader,he always wanted to side with the
traditional framework than anything else, he led the petty burgeois
middle class as a military ruler and later as a politician. He had
limitations, however he was relatively successful. Zia was right of
the center politican believing in non alliance- he was never a Hindu
basher Pakistan chamcha Islami Chhatra Sangha worker, or Muslim basher
Markeen chamcha ultra -secularist like YOU. As a nationalist his
"Bismillah" and Islam was not that radical in nature as he did not
believe in Pan Islamic unity. in his own words: a Muslim must be a
patriot, in result he was a God fearing yet nationlistic leader.

Look at you, you were an Indian born refugee to an "Islamic republic"
which you hate to its death, you were a self serving Hindu basher
Pakistan pasand Islami chhatra Sangha worker in the 1960's, now you
have become a Muslim basher 'phoren educated Markeen chamcha'
ultra-secularist.

you are always extreme, always hateful to people and harmful for the
society.Always going in a phase lag of about 90 degree. Where national
interest is at stake you are sabotaging it further.

What a metamorphosys? is there any parallel to this in our everyday
life?

You have all kind of bad track records under your belt, Hindu bashing,
Muslim bashing, you name it. Don't you see that Mr. old man?
Oh I forgot one thing... forget belts you don't have even your pants
on.
Where are your pants Jaffor? Shakil Sarwar knows the answer.
Shakil can you help this nyangta (undraped) Jaffor?

Jaffor Ullah

unread,

Sep 9, 2001, 7:22:47 PM9/9/01

"Asif Hasan" <asif_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df51654a.01090...@posting.google.com...

> Mir Jaffor Ullah,
> enough is enough!
> You are a LIAR THE GREAT.
> In fraud lecture you are next to no one,even your mentor Mir Jaffor
> Ali Khan
> should be jealous of your fraudulent spell. Sorry, you are no genuine
> or real man Mr. Fake, you are worse than a chameleon. Readers: Jaffor
> Ullah - the great internet freedom fighter(actually ass in lion's skin
> )usually keeps telling the following bull story for some times now.
> The liberation war broke out just after 560 days since Mir Jaffor's
> arrival at the United States and he started morally supporting the
> cause of a secular Bangladesh.
> Readers,is that what Jaffor wants us to believe?
> 1.Then who the fuck was the member of Islamic Chhatra Sangha in the
> Mymensingh Agricultural University in 1962-68 period?
> (In one of the articles by Mac (Singer Maqsoodul Haque) in NFB this
> hint was very sharp and clear, but thick skin Ullah just swallowed
> it.)
> 2. What was your ideology and role in Islami Chhatra Sangha? What were
> you doing in the breeding ground of what you call razakars? Dreaming
> of a secular Bangladesh in the heart of a communal organization Islami
> Chhatra Sangha?

Woe betide Asif Hasan if you're spreading miasma again in this newsgroupe
with unsubstantiated claims!

This is utterly funny when a neophyte (more like a Orbachin to me) writes in
this forum telling everyone I was a one-time Jamaat activist in my college
days. First, in the 1960s, there weren't any political parties' student
wing at BAU, Mymensingh. There were two parties: one very progressive one
by the name Agradoot where students with leftist leaning came and joined the
party. The other one was a conservative party by the name Probhati. This
party had hodgepodge of members from Awami League, Muslim League, and what
not. I was a founding father of Agradoot. Go find someone in BAU who could
tell the happenings of 1960s. I was also a vocal opponent of Ayub Khan's
Basic Democracy. Going to Mosque was not my pastime activity. It never was
and never will it be. That is for sure. Also, I came to America in
September 1969 for my doctoral studies. How did I get time to fly over to
Mymensingh to do Razakari activities as reported by a fellow name Aprakash
Chowdhury? It is funny and utterly hilarious. It is even funnier when the
Obachin cites Razakar.Com's reference. I thought he was more intelligent
than that. But they say that fine feathers make fine birds!

>Your Mirjaffori was par excellence from the juvenille days it seems Mr.
trickster.
> 3.

Hey Bangalee Orbachin, please positively do enroll in any of the ESL classes
offered in your kindergarten before you pick up your pen to scribble
something in the newsgroup or in any forum. You'll do yourself a big favor.
There is no such word in English language call "per excellence." However,
there is such a compund word - "par excellence." Perhaps a difference of
"a_ or "e" hardly matters to you. But your Master's thesis committee may
have a fit.Don't give Bangalees a bad name. We had enough of that already.
The other alternative is to write in Romanized Bangla. I hope his Bangla is
not of Dhakaia type!

What happened to your earlier version of this near identitical post where
you wrote:

"Zia's policy may be wrong, but he certainly did not make Shah Aziz, PM for
any personal or material gain,Shah Aziz was elected from his constituency."

Dear newsgroup readers, this Orbachin is a true Chameleon who changes his
color every minute!!!

> Zia was not a radical leader,he always wanted to side with the
> traditional framework than anything else, he led the petty burgeois
> middle class as a military ruler and later as a politician. He had
> limitations, however he was relatively successful. Zia was right of
> the center politican believing in non alliance- he was never a Hindu
> basher Pakistan chamcha Islami Chhatra Sangha worker, or Muslim basher
> Markeen chamcha ultra -secularist like YOU. As a nationalist his
> "Bismillah" and Islam was not that radical in nature as he did not
> believe in Pan Islamic unity. in his own words: a Muslim must be a
> patriot, in result he was a God fearing yet nationlistic leader.
>
> Look at you, you were an Indian born refugee to an "Islamic republic"
> which you hate to its death, you were a self serving Hindu basher
> Pakistan pasand Islami chhatra Sangha worker in the 1960's, now you
> have become a Muslim basher 'phoren educated Markeen chamcha'
> ultra-secularist.
>
> you are always extreme, always hateful to people and harmful for the
> society.Always going in a phase lag of about 90 degree. Where national
> interest is at stake you are sabotaging it further.
>
> What a metamorphosys? is there any parallel to this in our everyday
> life?
>

What was Zia then? He killed a whole bunch of his own men in uniform.
Didn't he? Wasn't he the one who maimed Bangladesh Constitution? Didn't he
pushed for that infamous Indemnity Bill to save the heads of Dalim and his
vile gang? Wasn't he the one who conspired with the Junior Army Officers of
Bangladesh to "Do Something" for "Saving" the nation? Mind you, he also
pushed for a bill, which he got it, so that no one could take him to SC of
Bangladesh for illegally grabbing the power. We had eager-beaver SC Judges
who colluded with General Ziaur Rahman to make sure that he stays in power.
So, what do you say to these allegations, my dear Orbachin?

> You have all kind of bad track records under your belt, Hindu bashing,
> Muslim bashing, you name it. Don't you see that Mr. old man?
> Oh I forgot one thing... forget belts you don't have even your pants
> on.
> Where are your pants Jaffor? Shakil Sarwar knows the answer.
> Shakil can you help this nyangta (undraped) Jaffor?

So, that accursed Aussie lad is going to help you out, huh? They say, "Birds
of a feather flock together." All the Razakar (children of Muslim Leaguers)
of Bangladesh origin should unite together to fight the secularists, huh?
Why do you guys not publish your magnum opuses in newspapers? Scared stiff,
my dear Orbachin? Newsgroup readers may see how Shakil Sarwar is abusing the
Internet by using profanity to demean secularist writers of Bangladesh
origin. All these detractors lack the most basic common sense. Without
slightest of the provocation, they hurl epithets right and left
indiscriminately. This has happened to S.E. Jamil, Jamal Hasan, Shabbir
Ahmed, Abul Kasem, Narayan Gupta, fatemollah, Syed Kamran Mirza, and me too.
I don't know how long this will continue. However, one thing is for sure and
that is if these vile Bangalees think that they can stop the secularists
from writing in the Internet, then they are dead wrong. I am yet to see any
sensible writing coming out the key strokes of Asif Hasan and his execrable
gang of neo-Mullahs (they sound more like kids coming of Razakar families
who opposed freedom-loving Bangalees in 1971). They say that - once a
Razakar, always a Razakar. The genes run deep in the chromosome. One or two
generations of dilution in genetic makeup won't do justice and that is for
sure. What is needed to be done with this odious gang is to send them to
reform school. In the mid-1970s a horde of South Vietnamese bureaucrats who
sided with Americans were sent to reform school in Hanoi and elsewhere in
Vietnam. That is precisely what is needed to be done in the case of deviant
Bangalees whose denizen is this newsgroup. This devilish group is bent on
fouling the cyber space with their excrementitious postings. Therefore,
watch out!

Jaffor Ullah

unread,

Sep 9, 2001, 7:22:47 PM9/9/01

"Asif Hasan" <asif_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df51654a.01090...@posting.google.com...

> Chhatra Sangha?

Woe betide Asif Hasan if you're spreading miasma again in this newsgroupe
with unsubstantiated claims!

>Your Mirjaffori was par excellence from the juvenille days it seems Mr.
trickster.

> 3.

>Another so called war activist Jamal Hasan. Does he know that the war

What happened to your earlier version of this near identitical post where
you wrote:

"Zia's policy may be wrong, but he certainly did not make Shah Aziz, PM for
any personal or material gain,Shah Aziz was elected from his constituency."

Dear newsgroup readers, this Orbachin is a true Chameleon who changes his
color every minute!!!

> Zia was not a radical leader,he always wanted to side with the

> traditional framework than anything else, he led the petty burgeois
> middle class as a military ruler and later as a politician. He had
> limitations, however he was relatively successful. Zia was right of
> the center politican believing in non alliance- he was never a Hindu
> basher Pakistan chamcha Islami Chhatra Sangha worker, or Muslim basher
> Markeen chamcha ultra -secularist like YOU. As a nationalist his
> "Bismillah" and Islam was not that radical in nature as he did not
> believe in Pan Islamic unity. in his own words: a Muslim must be a
> patriot, in result he was a God fearing yet nationlistic leader.
>
> Look at you, you were an Indian born refugee to an "Islamic republic"
> which you hate to its death, you were a self serving Hindu basher
> Pakistan pasand Islami chhatra Sangha worker in the 1960's, now you
> have become a Muslim basher 'phoren educated Markeen chamcha'
> ultra-secularist.
>
> you are always extreme, always hateful to people and harmful for the
> society.Always going in a phase lag of about 90 degree. Where national
> interest is at stake you are sabotaging it further.
>
> What a metamorphosys? is there any parallel to this in our everyday
> life?
>

What was Zia then? He killed a whole bunch of his own men in uniform.

Didn't he? Wasn't he the one who maimed Bangladesh Constitution? Didn't he
pushed for that infamous Indemnity Bill to save the heads of Dalim and his
vile gang? Wasn't he the one who conspired with the Junior Army Officers of
Bangladesh to "Do Something" for "Saving" the nation? Mind you, he also
pushed for a bill, which he got it, so that no one could take him to SC of
Bangladesh for illegally grabbing the power. We had eager-beaver SC Judges
who colluded with General Ziaur Rahman to make sure that he stays in power.
So, what do you say to these allegations, my dear Orbachin?

> You have all kind of bad track records under your belt, Hindu bashing,

> Muslim bashing, you name it. Don't you see that Mr. old man?
> Oh I forgot one thing... forget belts you don't have even your pants
> on.
> Where are your pants Jaffor? Shakil Sarwar knows the answer.
> Shakil can you help this nyangta (undraped) Jaffor?

So, that accursed Aussie lad is going to help you out, huh? They say, "Birds

0 new messages