View Full Version : Dr. Humayun Azad stabbed

February 28, 2004, 05:45 PM
One of the notable writers of Bangladesh, Dr. Humayun Azad, is paying very
dearly for ridiculing the mindless Islamists of Bangladesh in his book
appropriately titled “Pak Sar Zamin Sad Baad (the first line of Pakistan national anthem)”.

That tune brings nothing but bad memories of yesteryears. I don't know how to type my feelings, but I could not check my tears when I read this news.

here is the news (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1055542.htm)

more about Dr. Humayun Azad (http://www.bangladeshinovels.com/Humayun_Azad.htm)

[Edited on 3-3-2004 by chinaman : Title changed.]

Carte Blanche
February 28, 2004, 05:59 PM
Yes I read the reports in several Bangla and English dailies. This is so pathetic. Azad has been controversial through out his career, but this kind of attack is preposterous. Dr. Kamal Hossain said it right "This is an attack on free speech".

February 28, 2004, 06:25 PM
Very sad indeed. Lets hope they can find these mindless idiots. But I highly doubt that. Its a sorry state of our social security.

February 28, 2004, 08:22 PM
Bd is truely turing into a fanatic religious country. no security of life, no freedom of speech. and most importantly if the news is accurate about why he was stabbed, i must say we have forgotton about 1971.

February 28, 2004, 10:50 PM
How many of you actually read any Humayun Azad, eh?

BTW, a similar fatal stabbing has happened here on this forum too. A thread was fatally stabbed to death by unknown assasins. :)

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Arnab]

February 29, 2004, 01:40 AM
I haven't read any of his stuff, but it is very sad nonetheless.. :(

btw, it says he is unconcious in hospital so the stabs haven't been fatal as yet. Finger's crossed that he pulls through. Seems like his family is still getting death threats though.

Below is a picture of where the incident happened. (Sorry didn't want to show the Hasina pic, but it is one image so can't remove it)

February 29, 2004, 03:28 AM
I have read only one of his book, called "PROBOCHON". Its a compilation of his verses on Bangladesh and Life overall. its a small book, I am sure you guys will enjoy.

Very sharp and terse. I also read an article on his new book, Take time to read (http://www.ajkerkagoj.com/2004/Feb29/5.html). If you have time, read article by Muhammad Jafar Iqbal (http://www.prothom-alo.net/newhtmlnews1/category.php?CategoryID=1&Date=2004-02-29&filename=29h3)

It's a shame that this is happeing so often now a days.

Waiting for those days, when:

1. Bangladesh cricket team will win more often than lose.

2. This kind of Mayhem will be only bitter past history.

February 29, 2004, 03:39 AM
What does reading his book have to do with condemning this brutality? Freedom of Speech boy!

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Orpheus : Grammar]

February 29, 2004, 08:05 AM
It is not just an attack. It is a systematic dismantling of a shaky secular society. Every sign, attachment to perceived non-islamic features of the society will be torn down to make way to a pure state.

Not read his books. However, since then I have personally encountered and heard people (in this very country) who said he deserved the attack because of his writings. I had to keep my mouth shut.
This is a disturbing turn of events and I am sorry to say to people who advocate more education and western model etc...that ain't gonna help.

Good old BD street movement that has shaped Bangladesh is what will happen

February 29, 2004, 10:39 AM
Well, I have read every single book he published till 2000, including his Bangla linguistics books back in the 70s.

I don't think you really realize the magnitude of this event. This guy could be (and IMO he IS) the greatest intellectual in the history of Bangladesh. Poeple like this are 'Khonojonma".

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Arnab]

February 29, 2004, 03:36 PM
Thanks cricketpagol for the link. Its very clear from ajkerkagoj article why he was the target. He makes these fundamentalists feel they are naked! They had to strike back.

It is really a very disturbing sign. I remember the attack on Shamsur Rahman and now this.

Why am I surprised? We have put them in the power and a notorious War crimial is our minister. He flaunts the flag of Bangladesh in his car...against which he fought and killed thousands of innocent bengalis.

They are just showing 1971 was not the end....

February 29, 2004, 11:11 PM
It really hurts to think that the efforts of so many lives in 1971 have simply gone down the drain...


March 1, 2004, 01:01 AM
A Big Baash from Mahfuz Anam (http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/03/01/d4030101044.htm)

Well said!:flag:

March 1, 2004, 05:55 AM
The time for silence is over. More later...

Click here for more coverage and comments on Drishtipat.org (http://www.drishtipat.org/nuke/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=103&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0)

For Humayun Azad: Halla Bol (Raise Hell) (Score: 1)
by Naeem on Sunday, February 29 @ 04:07:35 EST
This piece has just been sent to DAILY STAR. Hopefully they will print it within next 2 days.

For Humayun Azad: Halla Bol (Raise Hell)
By Naeem Mohaiemen, Shobak.Org

Humayun Azad lies in a coma at CMH. Rumours fly about his situation. Dhaka University has exploded with rage, and the rest of the city looks ready to boil over. In a desperate back-pedal to avoid blame, the government claims ignorance about who Azad's attackers may be. The Home Minister has even said: "We are engaging all-out efforts to find out whether he was attacked for personal enmity or there were other schemes."

Everyone knows who is ultimately responsible for this grisly incident. Azaad's assassins were actively or passively created by the virulent religious hatred being promoted by Jamaat, Islami Oikkyo Jote and other Islamist parties. On December 12, members of Khatme Nabuwwot addressed a gigantic demonstration of anti-Ahmadiyya fundamentalists at Baitul Mukarram Mosque. At that gathering, fiery speakers demanded the arrest and trial of Professor Azad for his novel "Pak Sar Zamin Sad Bad". A month later, on January 25, a Jamaat MP demanded introduction of a Blasphemy Act in parliament to block the publication of such books. Can there still be doubt about who has encouraged this bloody attack?

A glance at Humayun Azad's recent book "Amra Ki Ey Bangladesh Cheyechilam? (Is This The Bangladesh We Wanted?)" reveal clear clues about the author's enemies.

Discussing the insertion of Islam as State Religion into our constitution, Azad wrote:

"[Constitution says] 'Absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah shall be the basis of all state actions.' This is a clever trick to deceive the common, God-fearing man. In this country, Muslims have always followed their faith, and always will-- no one is stopping them. But using religion as a tool is trickery, a ploy to give the people nothing. They will promise the people heaven, but will not give them economic self-sufficiency. From the time of Zia, all our government functions have become competitions of religious sermons. If using religion [in government] was useful, Bangladesh should have become the world's most holy and developed nation. Instead, it has become the world's most corrupt nation. The corruption of religious politicians has destroyed the country."

Turning his attention to the Jamaat and its allies, Humayun blasted those who opposed Bangladesh's liberation and feel nostalgia for "united Pakistan":

"Our fathers committed a deadly mistake, a crime-- they made Bengal Pakistan. We did not want to stay sons of slaves, so we created Bangladesh. Now, let us imagine Bangladesh never became independent, we were still East Pakistan. What would we see around us? We would see the flag with moon and stars, we would hear 'Pak Sar Zamin Sad Bad', the Ministers would all be Punjabis, the army would be filled with Pathan and Punjabi Generals. Those who roar around in Pajeros today-- they would be standing on the roadside shaking in front of those same jeeps. The Adamjis, Dauds, Bawanis, and Kabuliwalas would run this country. We would be happy to lick the dust off their feet."

From the 1970s, the BNP has actively rehabilitated the Jamaat and other Islamic parties. Today that party has grown into a snake that is preparing the groundwork to devour the entire nation. The attack on Azad represents a continuum of a growing menace that has expressed itself through attacks on Shamsur Rahman, Udichi, Ramna Botomool, Ahmadiyyas, Hindus and now the push for a Blasphemy Law. Where will it strike next?

Azad is not the first author to fall foul of religious extremists. In 1994, in a startlingly similar attack, a man plunged a knife into the neck of Egyptian Nobel winner Naguib Mahfouz. The assailant was quickly identified as a sympathizer of the militant Islamic group al-Gama'a al-Islam. Mahfouz had been a target of the religious fanatics since the 1959 publication of his novel "Awlad haratina (Children of Gebelawi )", in which key characters were modeled after historical religious figures. The attacker confessed before he was hanged that he had never read the book, but had been inspired by a sheikh's fatwa.

Similar to today's Bangladesh, Egypt saw a rapid growth of religious parties, and an associated growth in violence in the 1990s. In 1992, the Gama'a al-Islamiyya launched violent attacks on the minority Coptic Christians. These attacks were linked with a campaign for Islamic rule in Egypt, resulting in pitched street battles with the police. This is a direct parallel to recent anti-Ahmadiyya agitations in Bangladesh and street warfare between members of Khatme Nabuwwot and the police. In Egypt, al-Gama'a soon upped the ante, assassinating secular intellectual Farag Foda and taking over the working class neighborhood of Imbaba and declared it an "Islamic Republic." In December 1992, 14,000 Egyptian troops stormed and occupied Imbaba, putting an end to the "Republic." Driven underground, Al-Gama'a redirected its attention towards high-profile terrorist attacks, massacring hundreds of foreign and local tourists between 1993 and 1997.

The attack on Naguib Mahfouz was a watershed, turning the majority of public opinion against the extremists of al-Gama'a and Islamic Brotherhood. When the Interior Minister was assigned the task of rooting out Muslim militants, Mahfouz told him from his hospital bed, "You are leading a battle in defense of true Islam. This incident is an opportunity to ask God to make the police defeat terrorists and to plead for the country to be purified of this evil in defense of people, liberty and Islam."
Gamal Ghitani, editor of Akhbar al-Adab, wrote, "This attack defames Islam and Arabs in a way that the worst of our enemies have not been able to inflict upon us." An Egyptian literary critic added, "When the assailant stuck the knife in the neck of our Nobel Laureate, Naguib Mahfouz, it wasn't just an attack on our country's most prominent literary personage, but an assault on Egypt itself."
Most significantly, even religous leaders joined the outcry, with Grand Mufti Sheik Said Tantawi pronouncing, "The sharia forbids a Muslim from pointing a weapon at his fellow Muslim, not to mention using this weapon in killing."

Faced with a decisive government crackdown, the militant groups slowly disintegrated. Today, an uneasy stability prevails in Egypt, but militant Islamic groups are no longer tolerated or supported by the government. Rather than silencing Naguib Mahfouz, the 1994 attack made him more determined. Suffering from nerve damage as a result of the attack, Mahfouz can no longer write. But each week he dictates his column to his friend Mohamed Salmawy. Since the incident, the government has also relaxed its unofficial ban on "Awlad haratina." The book has now been serialized in newspapers, broadcast on radio and published in its entirety. Even the authorities at al-Azhar mosque-university recommended its publication so that it could be read and debated by people.

Can we hope for a similar positive result from this tragic incident? Will the Bangladeshi people finally rise up in outrage and demand accountability from both the BNP and the AL? It is time to reign in those who play politics in the name of religion. Time to remove Jamaat ministers from their powerful posts, remove the ban on Ahmadiyya books, strike down the proposed Blasphemy Act, and remove the Enemy Property Act. To quote Safdar Hashmi, the Indian playwright murdered by government thugs in 1973, "Halla Bol (Raise Hell)". And get results!

March 1, 2004, 04:57 PM
Arnab, can the Jamaat ever be dismantled as a political party in BD ?

As long as they exist as a party, will their actions be representing the desire of the people who voted them to power (or the share of power ?)

What % of popularity do they have ? Is it right behind the 2 larger parties ?

Please help me understand !!

Thank you.

March 1, 2004, 05:40 PM
I remember they had like 6-8% of the votes in the first two elections in 1991 and 1996.

Can they EVER be dismantled as a political party? I don't know.

As long as they exist as a party, will their actions be representing the desire of the people who voted them to power (or the share of power? Maybe. I don't know for sure if the majority of Bangladeshi people vote based on rational examination of crucial issues or just plain emotional support.

I know from watching my family members, who hold higher education degrees, that it's more likely to be blind party support than anything else that influences their choice. I am not sure if that gives you any indication of what I think of the rest of the voting population.

To be frank, I have lost interest in Bangladesh politics since 1999.

[Edited on 1-3-2004 by Arnab]

March 1, 2004, 08:29 PM
I never read his book. Just got one from Queens local library "manush hishabe amar oporadh"

Started reading it.

March 1, 2004, 08:59 PM
Nasif, try to get this novel, "Kobi Othoba Dondito Opurush" (The poet or the Condemned Eunuch). One of the best I have read of Azad so far.

March 1, 2004, 09:45 PM
They only have few in this library. Can't complain, its just amazing that they have Bangla book section. Another one I saw there is "Chhappanno hajar borgo mile"

After reading 30 or so pages, I must say his flow of writing is quite unusual. Coming from someone who thinks Sharat's shadhu bhasha flows quite smooth. I am not saying its bad or good, just unusal. But its not wise to comment on a writer after reading only few pages. I am liking his style so far.

March 1, 2004, 11:09 PM
One good thing is that this incident might make people notice the brewing danger of fanaticism in our country. It also makes H Azad ever more popular and people would be now more interested to know what he said. "Pak Sar..........." is gonna be best seller I bet but that is little consolation.

March 2, 2004, 12:06 AM
Sounds like an interesting writer !

Sounds also like his work is full of subtle indoctrination !! Too bad, only very few intellectually superior writers from East Bengal can ever put down their pen and write without indulging in the almost ritual exercise of a Paki bashing preface.

I wish all the Mujib-baad socialist goras and Jamaatee Topee-walas alike could for once take their fight somewhere outside of the country...Gangtok India or Bora Bora Afganistan, maybe !!

March 2, 2004, 12:14 AM
While I am at it, let me fire away with full salvo...

Bangla_amar, which people are you referring to in your first sentence...your newly found friends in the CIA, the same folks who pounced and lacerated your Leninist, Stalinist, Mao-istm Basu-ist...now defunct good for nothing socialist idealogue.

Ok guys, tell me where I have sinned again ???

March 2, 2004, 01:01 AM
Dear Mr. Pundit,

Whether you like it or not, 1971 is the key factor that changed our life and society. With the rise of Jamat and neo-fundamentalism, the movement to create secular bangladesh is not over yet. So it's not surprising that the writers mention that in their book. This has nothing to do with mujib-baad (as you claimed).

So called mujib supporters once lead the nation to get freedom form Paki invaders. One should know the difference between Mujib and Jamat; and should not compare Mujib-baad (I am not supporting the present AL activities) and Jamat as same type of fanatic.

Humayun Azad wrote around 70 books. It’s obviously premature decision on him after reading only couple of books. He is indeed a dynamic personality. He is a famous professor of Bangla department in DU and he also served as the head of the department. He is a living legend and probably the most knowledgeable linguists of both Bangladesh and West Bengal. Along with novelsand poems, he wrote several research books on bangla grammar and linguistics. As far as I know, his book is used as a text in famous Jadavpur and Kolkata University.

He does not only write against Paki, but also writes against religious cults. He is a known human right activist and feminist. If you ever have the chance, then please read his book “Nari”, in which he depicted the misery of women in human society. He was also a front liner against the military dictator ‘Ershad’. His book ‘Sappano Hajar Borgo Mile’ was one of the best sellers in Ekhushe Book fair.

[Edited on 2-3-2004 by Kana-Baba]

March 2, 2004, 07:29 AM
Seems like our Pondit has a sheer infernal alergy about socialism and it's thoughts. His desperate mumbo-jumbo attempt to mix up every issue with socialm reminds me of a childhood story: A kid at grade 5 revised an essay about cow and this was the only essay he knew about quite good. Now everytime the teacher asked him to write an essay on different topic, he used to end up writing on cow. Wonder if our Pondit was also effected like that kid, or why does he sniffs the ghost of socialism in almost every topic? Funny :)

Btw, Kana-baba, I was quite surprised to read Azad's "Naree" and "Ditiyo Lingo", since both these two books remind me of Kate Millet's "Sexual Politics". Humayun Azad was surely influenced by Millet and to my judgement, he should have put a note of gratitude to Millet in his Naree and Ditiyo Lingo. Nevertheless, these two works are probably the first ever theoritical feminist writing in Bangla published in Bangladesh.

March 2, 2004, 10:29 AM
Kana-Baba -

Thank you for your patience while writing-up a wonderful explanation. While it is very likely that I may never read the books you have mentioned (that will require another thread of explanation by itself), I very much sympathize with the bereaved family of the Professor. No one has has to suffer in the manner he is suffering right now.

Maybe this is where I disagree with the most of you -

No doubt there should be a mix of all kinds of people in our society, regardless of their credance. And ofcourse, we all should be grateul of '71. How can it ever be otherwise. However, my "issues" have been primarily with 1) groups who go out and inflict physical violence on others, & 2) groups who use other more subtle mechanisms to create an atmosphere that is more conducive to their external master's agenda.

In regards to the 1st, we know that unfortunately all political parties contribute to it. That is the biggest shame we live with.

In regards to the 2nd, these are simply the more "niche" segments existing within the parties. Both the Jamaat and the various extreme left wing socialist arms of the AL have these niches. I am against both kinds, regardless of whether they preach "deviant Islam" or "glorified feminism in the name of progress, and stuff likewise."

March 2, 2004, 11:53 AM
Yeah Navarene...Pundit brother rather think straight for a moment....forget about Mujib-baad,extreme right or left....

Just take a moment to think in terms of good and evil!

March 2, 2004, 12:33 PM
Same to you Bangla bhai, same to you !

We know what happens to the true betrayers of Banglar matee, now don't we !!


March 2, 2004, 02:44 PM
all bhais: who is to say who betrayed whom, but what we do know is they all get fat and happy or they die brutal deaths.

I would like to see if it is possible for Bangladesh's Islamist parties to separate themselves and their platform from anti-1971 and therefore anti-Bangladesh positions. Religion based politics, as much as you may hate it or it may be controversial, does have every right to exist.

Unfortunately all the right wing Islamist parties in BD are run by remmnants of the gang of war criminals from the 1971 era. So being anti-war criminals somehow make people anti-Islamic parties and that may not be the case for many. Correspondingly, those seeking an Islamist political platform don't have any choice but to join parties led by war criminals. What I am getting at is that there is this equation between anti-1971 and religious right that does not have to be. ie you don't have to support glory days of United Pakistan in order to be a good Muslim or even a member of a Islamist party.

There are at least two assaults going on by the the right wing elements: one is an assault on Bangla language, culture, customs because of the belief that this should be subservient or replaced simply by generic Islamic culture, values, norms. This is very controversial and does not have a black and white answer. At the core is the concept of whether you can be deeply religious and spirutual and still have your own culture. I would hope that religion and culture can co-exist. In France they decided that culture must superceede religion so they have banned religious symbols such as jewsih skullcaps (yes that's true, the jews are persecuted as well) and islamic hijabs and sikh turbans from schools. We have existed in a muti-religious culture for centuries, why the need to dramatically shift that now?

The second assault from the right is purely motivated by self-preservation. As war criminals and anti-Bangladesh elements have been reinstated into society over the years, they now challenge all aspects of our history and overtly go about changing it. Putting the blame on politicians for allowing this to happen, while correct, is not the objective here. Quietly, significant portions of the population are being educated on some very anti-liberation and therefore anti-Bangladesh doctrines. By infiltrating BNP and the ruling alliance, the ringmasters have now exploded on to the center stage. You see their orchestrated activities everywhere - bomb blasts at cinema halls, beatings and imprisonments, attacks on minorities including anti-Ahmadiya movement, fatwas and proposed Blasphemy laws, attempted murder of pro-1971 educators such as Prof Azad, etc.

These activities are very much on a local level. People are fixated on what connection, if any, there are between these Islamist groups and international jihadist groups like Al Queda. Whatever that connection may or may not be, the real danger is that these guys are not out there to change the world towards their brand of Islam, they are simply trying to change Bangladesh.

All of this is news for people in the influential classes in Bangladesh. They have been happily disco-ing in Bangkok, saree shopping in Kolkata and opening trendy restaurants in Gulshan. They could care less about Jihadists because in their own world, they are oblivious to everything and are under the impression that the good times will last forever.

Then you have the politicians, who look at every crisis from rather contorted lenses, seeking to create an ounce of advantage. Even those descendants of the freedom fighter Ziaur Rahman who are in power now (sad to say he did much to open the door) are probably perplexed by the rapid rise of the right wing. There must be a strong belief among them that everything will be OK, that these elements can be controlled and nothing will get out of hand.

That leaves the rest of us, struggling to make a living wherever we are, and for the most part genuinely interested in moving past the bad blood in Bangladeshi politics. We all want good things for Bangladesh, we all want diversity, culture, religion, independent thinking. But we too are in a state of disbelief, because surely this cannot be happening. People in Bangladesh are not radical - we put all our faith in that and move to the next topic. It doesn't take all people in Bangladesh to be radical, it only takes a few, just like anywhere else.

So we have to draw the line somewhere and fight back. Some people who cannot understand the need to do that may once their own way of life is threatened. Rather than brushing these topics under the carpet or avoiding discussion because we are afraid of arguments and, in Bangladesh, of retribution, I wish there was more open and positive debate and action in our communities around the world and in Bangladesh itself.

March 2, 2004, 04:29 PM
Rafiq, good post.

I sympathise with your concern about the presence of collaborators in the various so-called Islamic parties. However, in my opinion the real threat is the premature/prenatal collapse of democracy in Bangladesh, not just secularism.

Islamic parties are only the tip of the problem. Yes, they will never accept true democracy but a lot of the other left wing parties, who incidentally participate in elections, have hidden agendas just like their islamic counterparts. If they cannot stomach sitting next to an atheist in parliament then forget about accommodating them. You can only go ahead and root out the anti-liberation forces, if and only if, you are sure that the so-called homegrown islamists are willing to accept the “give and take” in a democracy.

At this point in time I am not worried about all the collaborators and anti-liberation remnants. They will fade away as the new generation will find it hard to identify with Pakistan and the historical connection. In short, they don’t have a political base. On the other hand, true islamists and new found communists can nurture a base. The challenge will be to curb these rogue elements that refuse to change and participate in democratic environment. Added to this dilemma is the fact that there is no force strong enough to promote a democratic agenda. The one and only force (however much you despise it) that has the means and could change circumstances, i.e the army, is deep in collusion and at best is ambivalent. That is why I am pessimistic. Unlike Pakistan, Algeria or Turkey we don’t have an army with the political or self-preservation will to check the rise of militants.

The only logical conclusion for these spate of attacks is more violence and the next step is formation of armed militias taking up low level authority. I would’nt be surprised if we have a major “Haiti” problem in our hands. That is why I am forced to conclude that the future can only be shaped by vision and backed up by will, not just leaving matters to fate.

[Edited on 2-3-2004 by oracle]

March 2, 2004, 04:44 PM
What I don't get is Pundit's irritation for "subtle indoctrination."

Dude, what literary work DOESN'T include a bias towards a certain doctrination, particularly to the one the author is biased to? As if there is a class of writers who are "dhoa tulshipata". I have news for you: there is no writer like that.

Look, if some writer had some "subtle indoctrination" thing going on which coincided with the ideology of our Pundit here, I can bet you will hear nothing from Pundit about him.

So, the question is what makes Pundit think that his worldview, if he has any at all, is the most preferable one there is?

[Edited on 2-3-2004 by Arnab]

March 2, 2004, 05:03 PM
Subtle indoctrination catering to the desires of his/her foreign masters' agenda.

[Edited on 3-3-2004 by Pundit]

March 2, 2004, 05:36 PM
Excellent post Rafiq bhai.

I disagree with Oracle...Fundametalism is the CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER for our country.

March 2, 2004, 05:42 PM
Awwww, how so cute !!!

From being a Communist to being a US bootlicker !! All in the space of a decade. Show your true color Bangla Amar ?

Ooopsee, you don't have one !

March 2, 2004, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by Pundit

Subtle indoctrination catering to the desires of his/her foreign masters' agenda.

I am not gonna go into the "foreign master" conspiracy theory thing, because, frankly, I don't think Bangladesh, the poorest, resourceless, and the most corrupted country in the world, will be on the priority list of a "foreign master", even if such "foreign master" existed.

[Edited on 3-3-2004 by Arnab]

March 2, 2004, 06:24 PM
bangla_amar, well, Oracle was not so much disagreeing, but rather adding to the points. Indeed democracy is a ridiculous shambles - how can we even call that a democracy - just because we have had elections every 5 years for the last 3 times? OK, that was great but let's move on. Even with that look at the turmoil with caretaker govts, agitations to topple the govt about 18 months before elections, and what not. All we have is what Louis Kahn helped give us - a wonderful parliament building. I am almost afraid these idiots will attack the parliament with battering rams one of these days and tear it down! But I exaggerate and digress..

I can't understand where the BNP will draw the line with these parties. It was one thing to loot and plunder the country - we all happily obliged while all political parties and military dictatorships did this right from independence. It is another thing to be so completely enamored by them that there is no way to pull back the beast.

Something the Islamists have done well is educate and get their message out. Those of us with a different and more progressive concept for the country have sat around writing intellectual books, articles, emails that sell well in Dhaka, while these guys are out there passing on their doctrine one student at a time, one madrashah at a time.

I don't know if we will become Haiti. But in the longer term, the battle is for the minds of the younger people and if anyone joins this fight, put your efforts towards that.

March 2, 2004, 08:40 PM
Arnab, I ofcourse meant with you doing anything but hounding me !!

But wrt the venerable professor at his deathbed, I digress no more.

March 2, 2004, 09:04 PM
Hats of to Oracle for a truly excellent post devoid of any selfish inneuendo.

I think too many folks just use Islam to forward their own unaccommodating views associated forever with out glorious independence.

Funny thing is that '71's legacy is for all of us to bear, and to have opinions of. Its not the trademarked product that many attempt to make of it, with their relentless opinions that frankly sound like a broken record.

The bottom line is that had most Bengalis agreed with them, then they would have run the country longer than others. Most Bangladeshis (realise this, not Bengalis) know that, and that is why they are no more than a cantencourus (sp) minority who advance violence like no other way when their opportunity comes.

Also, if Bangladeshis were able to fight off a whole army of war mongerin' bullocks, then they most certainly can take care of their eir own home grown fundus.

March 2, 2004, 10:27 PM
Pundit moshai, you must be referring to AL thinking the 71 war is all their own. You're right it is not just their's but everyone's, yours too. You see that is what independence means - everyone enjoys the fruits, whether or not they worked for it. But you may be a freedom fighter, so I can't say whether you actively or indirectly worked for it or not. Anyway, thanks for agreeing with the gist of all our points!

March 3, 2004, 09:49 AM
Humayan Azad is fighting for his life and did not die as some earlier reports suggested. It would be courteous and factually correct to modify the title of this thread. thanks

March 3, 2004, 12:16 PM
What do you suggest?

March 3, 2004, 12:30 PM
title is ok I think

March 3, 2004, 01:00 PM
Here are two extremes -

1) University professor critically injured after sustaining blows from unidentified pedestrians

2) Acclaimed University professor, National Intellectual, Male Feminist, struggling with life after being critically maimed by identified terrorists with Al-Qaeda ties

Either way, I'm sure the esteemed professor could care less. Just another seemingly futile exercise similar to 99% of the debates around '71.

March 3, 2004, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Pundit
Here are two extremes -

1) University professor critically injured after sustaining blows from unidentified pedestrians

2) Acclaimed University professor, National Intellectual, Male Feminist, struggling with life after being critically maimed by identified terrorists with Al-Qaeda ties

Either way, I'm sure the esteemed professor could care less. Just another seemingly futile exercise similar to 99% of the debates around '71.

Dear Pundit,

You lost me here, man.

March 3, 2004, 01:37 PM
i meant to say "fatally" should be dropped

March 3, 2004, 02:43 PM
Chinaman bhai - not sure why you said that ?

But basically, all I was trying to say in so many words is that we replace "fatally" by "critically" or something alike (life threatening).

March 3, 2004, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by Pundit
Chinaman bhai - not sure why you said that ?

But basically, all I was trying to say in so many words is that we replace "fatally" by "critically" or something alike (life threatening).

Dear Pundit

I was lost between what you were trying to say and what you said.

March 3, 2004, 03:43 PM
Chinaman I don't blame you, that pundit gets us lost most of the time...

May be we are just lesser mortals ;)

March 3, 2004, 03:53 PM
Its because of my 3 legged pet dog, actually ! A British Labrador Retriever chew it off.

March 3, 2004, 04:38 PM
Here The Pundit goes again.........

March 3, 2004, 04:50 PM
Bangla_amar, you're really drawing me into making "Arnab type" responses !!

Sigh !!

Sometimes not understanding things says something of the individual as well.

I always thought the bangla professor's 3 - legged dog story was well known !!

March 3, 2004, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by rafiq
Religion based politics, as much as you may hate it or it may be controversial, does have every right to exist.

Rafiq, your thoughts are nicely put. I totally agree with you that religious politics have every right to exist. But is it also not the task of our progressive political thinkers to give a conceptual fight against this evil force in Bangladesh? To my surprise, I see all they are capable of is to yell and shout with an emotional outburst instead of negating them politically.

Let me express my thought in this regard.The way our leading politicial parties teach us about 'Democracy', it is impossible to seperate the islamic forces from Bangladesh's main stream "customary" politics. Why? Because the definition of democracy of our customary politics are:
-- that there should be multy political parties in a country
-- that they should be given the right to express and propagate their respective political opinion and ideology
-- that the parliament election should be seen in after a every certain period
-- that this way the winning political party will form and govern the state mechanism

This is the concept of democracy our customary politics own in Bangladesh. And this is what our customary politicians teach us what "democracy" is. How can we then oppose the right of the fundamental Islamic parties, namely Jamayat-i-Islam, when they express and propagate their political ideologies? According to our customary definition of democracy, we have no valid right to show enmity if Jamayat wants to establish the reign of Allah and to slaughter the 'Kafirs'.

Why do we still claim that the fundamental Islamic forces in our country are undemocratic? Why should we still have to call jamayat as an undemocratic? Where is the error of our customary practice and definition of Democracy which severely fails to justify jamayat as an undemocratic political party? In the light of our typical definition of democracy, how can we even prove these Islamic elements as undemocratic?

The problem of our so called intellectuals and the progressive thinkers is that they challange the fundamental forces pretty emotionally rather than politically. There is no place of emotional whinning to fight against these evils. They should be challanged in terms politics. Let me add a few words in this context.

In fact, the customary definition and the daily basis idea of democracy is simply confined within the 'code of practice' ; hence this code of practice tells nothing about the essence and inner significance of democracy. To cast votes or perform election are not democracy. It is rather one of the customs of how to practice democracy. I think we must not forget this thing, or we will never be able to realize as to where our customary politics do the mistake in particular. This politics fails to differentiate between "democracy" and it's "way of pratice". If there is no democracy at all, then what on earth we will do with it's practice? Our customary politics never understand the fact that the gist and essence of democracy must be established before implimenting it's 'way of practice'.

Now What is democracy? What is the essence of this perticular ideology? The essence of democracy is that Man Is Sovereign. Sovereignty of individual is the bottom line of democracy. We can put it in another was as 'People Is Sovereign'. Not the state, not the government, not any political party, not any damn one but only mass people is the owner of sovereignty.

Let's turn our attention to the Islamic forces of Bangladesh, especially to jamayat-i-Islam. Why should we claim that Jamyat is not a democratic party? Because they don't believe in the essence of democracy(that people is sovereign). Jamayat believes that only Allah is sovereign. Hence Allah is the only authority to compile and to make constitution, law, administrative lesiglation etc. In fact, we will never understand how Jamayat depraves and vitiates Islam if we fail to figure out the term 'sovereignty'.

Allah is of course sovereign in terms of religion. In other words, he is the stipulation of our existance ad of the universe. But he, at the same time, gave mankind the freedom of free thinking and freedom of conscience. He created us with the ability of being inquisitive and of the urge to discover the secrets and misteries of this universe. He named human as 'ashraful makhlukat' and gifted the sovereignty to use our conscience and free thoughts. If not, then it would have proved that what we do in every day life was the 'Act' of Allah. Had I NO sovereignty of my conscience and free thinking, what I do in every moment would have been the 'wish' of Allah. Even my doing of good and evil! Jamayat's perversion will be unveiled if we are able to understand this simple logic.

Islam doesn't consider Allah as 'sovereign' the way the free thinking and conscience of human being is meant to be sovereign. To mix up the sovereignty of mankind with Allah's sovereignty is an islamic crime, a Shereki (arabic word). jamayat is guilty of this shereki. Since Islam accepts the sovereignty of man's free thinking and conscience, law and administrative legislation written by man is also gladly acceptable in Islam.

Why Jamayat compares and mixes up Allah's sovereignty with mankind's? It's only because they simply wants to burden us with a self-made explanation of Islam. What Jamayat means as the "law of Allah" is actually the "law of Jamayat-i-Islam" itself. The only shrewd reason they use the term 'sovereignty of Allah' is simply because they have the evil stratagem hidden in their sleeves to wrap the 'dhormo bhiru' mass people with their own proposed rules. legislation and ideology.

Now that Dr. Humayun Azad is still at the juncture of life and death, it is time again to give a political fight against the undemocratic Islamic forces in Bangladesh.

P.S. Please ignore the gramatical mistakes if there is any.
P.P.S. the topic of this thread can be changed as Rafiq suggested

[Edited on 3-3-2004 by Navarene]

[Edited on 3-3-2004 by Navarene]

March 3, 2004, 06:07 PM
Bangla_amar, you're really drawing me into making "Arnab type" responses !!


March 4, 2004, 03:17 AM
LOL... he does have a point you know!!!

March 5, 2004, 02:29 PM
Hasib, you are 16/17, right?

March 8, 2004, 06:11 PM
I think "Arnab type Answer" is much more soothing compared to "Pundit type Answer".

March 9, 2004, 02:51 PM
Bangla Amar, I find that hard to believe.

You did take 5 days to reply, after all !!

But anyway, I will remember what you just said.