15th August, The Blackest Day in our Independent History

[BD-Shardul]

Originally Posted by [B]Pundit{/B]
November 3rd - 3rd Blackest day in our independent history ?

It is blacker than 15th August for sure.

[cricket_pagol]

Shaad bhai, good post. Your description matches with stories that i heard from my father... My father was a big mujib supporter during the liberation war... all that changed when he became a vicitm of corruption courtesy of Mujib's relatives. According to him, one of the blackest day of life was when mujib unilaterally declared BAKSHAL and banned all political parties and newspaper... i don't think there is any plausible defense for these actions by mujib.

I remember reading archer blood's, US cosulate general of Dhaka during 1971, "the birth of a nation"... I don't remember his title but he was the senior most diplomat who broke the news of the genocide in bangladesh. His observation was that mujib was the sole leader of AL, he controlled everything... no responsibilites were delegated, in essence, mujib did not nuture leadership... so if he was removed there was nobody that could replace him in the party. For me this is not a sign of a great leader, he was more like a dictator within his party (unfortunately that culture has not changed in bangladesh yet)... Archer blood also raises his concern that Mujib's lack of administrative skills is likely to be a great drawback for his administration.

[Pundit]

Can someone make the effort to document all the Black days in BD history, since its inception in 1971, 16th dec.

I have given hints on the top 3 -

1. Bangabandhu hotta
2. Sheikh Hasina hotta opocheshta
3. Jail killings of the 4 leaders
4. Sheikh Hasina being robbed of the 1991 election ?
5. Rashed Khan Menon hotta opocheshta (which year was that)
6. Sheikh Hasina not allowed British Airways boarding
7. Sheikh Hasina robbed of election victory by Ershad - 1986 (?)
8. Sheikh Hasina arrest by CTG
9. Khaled Mosharraf hotta Nov 7
10. Taher hotta, 1976 (?)

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by shaad
I didn't post in this thread in order to simply malign Mujib, his family, or AL. I posted because, having lived through the date in question, I didn't think that August 15th deserved such a tagline. I don't have a high opinion of Khaleda, her sons, or Hasina either. But given that the subject of this thread was Mujib's assassination, I didn't feel the need to discuss their failings in this thread.



1) If you understand that I wasn't referring to the Hitler as a mass murderer in this analogy, then why do you consider it uncalled for? Hitler had an oratory and presence which resonated with the people of Germany (see some footage of his speeches, in Leni Reifenstahl's Triumph of the Will, for instance). The Treaty of Versailles at the end of the First World War had deprived Germany of various territories, demilitarised the Rhineland, imposed severely economically damaging sanctions, re-created Poland, which even moderate Germans regarded as an outrage, and also blamed Germany for all the horrors of the war, something which major historians considered to be victor's justice: most European nations in the run-up to World War I had become increasingly militarised and were eager to fight. The culpability of Germany was used as a basis to impose reparations on Germany. The German economy was so weak that only a small percentage of reparations was paid in hard currency. Nonetheless, even the payment of this small percentage of the original reparations (219 billion Gold Reichsmarks) still placed a significant burden on the German economy, accounting for as much as one third of post-treaty hyperinflation. The German people were demoralized, felt unfairly put-upon, and frankly, in dire straits economically. Hitler was initially felt by them to be a saviour, not only for his oratory, or the reconquest of territories that the Germans saw as theirs, but also for what he was able to achieve for them in the economic and civil arenas -- his regime oversaw one of the greatest expansions of industrial production and civil improvement Germany had ever seen, mostly based on debt flotation and expansion of the military, with the unemployment rate being cut substantially (coming close to full employment). And it wasn't just the Germans who viewed him in this light -- he had supporters in both Britain (among members of the the Royal Family no less) and in the United States (George Bush's grandfather Prescott Bush, for example). Of course, this saviour later turned out to be a monster with severe consequences for the German people. And that is the parallel that I am trying to push -- that people or nations have different needs at different times, and an individual who might have been perfect satisfying one particular need could prove disastrous when trying to tackle another.

You might also want to examine the parallel between how Mujib and Hitler both came to power (well orchestrated democratic campaigns), and subsequently dismantled the mechanisms of democracy to ensure that they couldn't be challenged (BKSAL and banning of all other political parties by Mujib; declaration of the Nazi party as the only legal party in Germany along with the banning and dissolution of all others by Hitler).

2)I notice that you didn't comment on the parallel I drew with Churchill, another competent orator and campaigner -- he became PM after Neville Chamberlain's resignation in 1940, and led Britain successfully through the Second World War. The British were perhaps smarter than us, for shortly after the war, he was defeated in the 1945 elections -- the British felt that the man who led them in war was not the man to lead them in peace. The truth of this was borne out during his second term as PM (1951-1955); it was marred by one foreign crisis after another, and against his wishes, the dismemberment and dissolution of the British Empire.



3)The fact that Sheik Kamal and his gun-toting friends were shot at and injured by the police in the vicinity of Bangladesh Bank on December 15 is a matter of public record -- Kamal was taken to the hospital afterwards. You seem already aware of one "affair" by one of his sons; in an environment where one could be "disappeared" by the Rakkhi Bahini (yes, even being a famous Freedom Fighter wouldn't save you -- I have already mentioned the torture and killing of Siraj Sikder), do you think most people would publicly bring charges of rape even when these "affairs" were coerced?

4)You said, "And when it comes to Army Vs Mujib, well we all know who the winner is." Do you? Do you think the Army was necessarily the winner? Are you aware of the coups and counter-coups that occurred shortly afterwards? Personally, I think the winners in the long run were we Bangladeshis ourselves; we did finally get our democracy, however flawed, back.




3) Interesting attempt at obfuscation by bringing up Tarique Zia here -- I don't hold him or his mother in high esteem either; but, as I have said earlier, the subject of this discussion was not their failings, but those of Mujib's regime. As for whether Sheikh Kamal and his brothers were dumb or not, I cannot say -- it seems to me, though, that they felt that there was an aura of superiority and entitlement about them, that having brought independence to Bangladesh, they considered themselves above others, and viewed all of Bangladesh as their personal patrimony. Note that I don't think Tarique was any different -- perhaps just a tad more sophisticated in his "looting".



5)Okay, let's talk about this a little. Time and again, in this thread and others, I have seen posters "assure" others that what they say is true, because they know some of [insert appropriate politician here]'s "closest people". What you have to understand is that given the nature of Bangladeshi economics and society, most of us with the access and leisure to post in this forum come from what, for lack of a better term, I will simply call the elite of Bangladeshi society. As such, most of us tend to have relatives and acquaintances with close associations with political figures and leaders from all political parties. But not all of us feel the need to brag about it. Hence, arguments based on this perceived notion of being closer to the major players and thus having one's opinions carry more weight or be privileged are simply flawed from the beginning. To reiterate, most of us have these close associations too. Yet, obviously, we disagree.



6)Yes, I would. In fact, I am actually surprised that you couch the question in a manner that suggests that one wouldn't. Do you not consider a head of state (or for that matter anyone in a position of leadership) to be responsible for all acts, good or bad, committed under his/her purview?



7)Yes, many of the Rakkhi Bahini were Freedom Fighters (though many Freedom Fighters simply returned to civilian life after the war was over), and it was ostensibly formed to recover arms from civilians after the war. In practice, though, this was a personal armed militia, pledging loyalty to Mujib himself, able to operate extra-judicially, and outside the authority of the army or the law. Tell me again why the nation needed this. You seem to think that the only people they killed were Biharis (not that even that would be excusable); on the contrary, the Rakkhi Bahini captured, tortured, and killed, i.e. "disappeared" people at the whim of Mujib.

7)There is a considerable difference between how one goes about training a professional army and how one goes about training a band of partisan guerillas. We have several knowledgeable posters from military families or with military backgrounds in this forum; they can expound on this theme if they want to. Suffice it to say that there are strict criteria for recruitment in a professional army, clear lines of command and responsibility, uniform codes of conduct based on the Geneva Conventions, defined requirements for promotion, etc., which precludes them (at least, in theory) from being utilized as just hired thugs or enforcers. With all due credit to the Muktijoddhas, without whom we would not be an independent nation, outside of members of the East Bengal Regiment, they were primarily civilians -- students, clerks, farmers -- who were given some rudimentary training in guerilla tactics. Why were they recruited into a separate militia after the war was over?

8)I don't know how old you are or what your experiences are. But I have lived through three authoritarian regimes in my country, those of Mujib, Zia, and Ershad. This is, obviously and by its very nature, a subjective opinion, but during both Zia's and Ershad's regimes, I did not see people being as nervous or as stressed as they were during Mujib's. They certainly did not seem "happy". I understand that you are trying to suggest that people were just as "happy" with the Rakkhi Bahini as they were recently with RAB; but were you around at that time? I was, and I distinctly recall people being afraid of the Rakkhi Bahini, not happy at their presence.



9) We shall see. By your argument, one would have expected to see throngs of people celebrating when Zia died too. I was around at that time too, and didn't see that.



10)We, as a people, fought for our independence, for the right to forge our own destiny in a democratic nation. And you don't think that the elimination of our democracy, the removal of the right to make our own decisions and to elect the representatives we wanted, and instead the establishment of what was essentially a tyranny, was a reprehensible act? We won a victory after sacrificing millions of souls for a "Shonar Bangla". Do you have any idea how demoralized people were when we saw that dream turn into just a personal fiefdom? You seem very dismissive about this BAKSAL "mistake" of Mujib's; but you didn't answer the question I raised previously -- if there were no democratic means for removing Mujib from power, and if people were dissatisfied with his regime, how else could they bring about change?

Hi Shaad, I am enjoying this debate. Before I come back to the points you mentioned I would like to assure you that neither am I a big supporter of the two ladies. However I am a big supporter of sheikh Mujib and not so much of Major Ziaur Rahman. Since now i have made my position clear i can start. And I agree with you, I shall not mention " He says, She says, Bull Crap"- Only documented facts. ( talking abt your your point 5)

1) I can understand where you are coming from with the Hitler and mujib comparison. But lets face it, you cannot compare one of the leading man of the liberation war with one of the most ruthless dictators. I can give you ten reasons of why one cannot compare the two men. However I will just try to point flaws from your own comparison. Yes hitler initially had some foreign allies but they all went against him eventually. The same cannot be said abt Mujib, his allies in 1971 was still his allies in 1975. Bakshal was his major mistake but give this guy a break, he wasnt systemetically slaughtering all his oppositions. Yes no other ruler ever tried to bring back baksal but wasnt Ziaur Rahman (i am guessing, your most favored leader post independence) was critisized for being ruthless to his opponents ? And please don forget the reason for 1/11, It only happened because one major party did not want to loose power and tried to hold a farce election run by a caretaker government of its own choice. That is not too different from bakshal and definately not democracy . Lets not even talk abt all the military rules post independence. We have hardly had the good fortune to reap the benifits of democracy post independence. While I am accepting Mujibs fault I am reluctant to accept that we experienced true democracy in action and Mujib is definately not solely responsible.

2) I did not complain abt winston churchill since i have nothing against such comparison. I am not here to dismiss all your points. Just the ones i feel are biased.

3) Now back to the Bank looting....
I am unable to accept that he was shot because he was trying to loot Bangladesh Bank and Mujib had full support in that. Before I give my reasons I am just going to tell that I for one know that he wasnt looting the bank however I am not going to state anything without documented facts. Since I could not find any documents that states that he did or did not rob the bank I will just use plain and simple logic.

Logic a) A presidents son looting the national Bank!! how absurd does that sound. Assuming he did , as you stated he was shot by the police. Can you imagine Tareq Zia shot by police trying to rob Bangladesh Bank. The police would open the doors for him if needed.

logic b) The simple fact that the police shot him states that Mujib had no role to play on the looting ( assuming your point that he was looting a bank).

logic c) what happened to the officer that shot him? Surely someone as ruthless as Sheikh Mujib( as you made people believe) will assassinate the person that shot his own son and his friends. Let me assure you that nothing like that happened.

The girl Mujibs son is accused of raping is also Army's wife ( the same person i was talking abt earlier). As i said he had an affair with the lady, didnt rape her. Its an armys wife and u are telling me that Army is scared to press charges...

Now comes the Great Siraj Sikder( please note my sarcasm). He formed the banned organisation "Sarbahara". He was responsible for launching an armed struggle against the government and establish the rule of the Sarbaharas. Sarbahara leaders are shot by RAB's on a regular basis. Just a few days back a doctor by profession and a sarbahara leader called "tapon" was shot by RAB. Its been less than a month. Whom are you kidding bro.

7)Now Rakhi bahini again
your quote " In practice, though, this was a personal armed militia, pledging loyalty to Mujib himself, able to operate extra-judicially, and outside the authority of the army or the law."
How is it different from RAB? Again I think it was mujibs mistake since i do not support extrajudicial killing. But if people in Bangladesh are Ok with RABs than y not with rakhi bahini? RAb did murder couple of chatra league men under the direct order from the TOP. It is documented fact straight from the papers pulished by "Human Rights Watch". http://www.hrw.org/reports/2006/bangladesh1206/ Again if you support RAB than you also have to support Rakhi bahini. Only difference was that they did not have the black dress and bandanas.

4) I see that you support Mujibs assassination and think that it resulted in long lasting democracy. I can assure you brother, we never saw true democracy in action beside the elections may be. Not to mention that in all the election there has been vote rigging. Please note the same men that got rehabilitated by Ziaur Rahman, i mean the men that murdered Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, also murdered women and a child who was only 7 ( or 9) . Now please don support the murderers. We got democracy( or something like it) because theoverwhelming majority of bangladeshi people wanted it. Mujib was a democratically elected leader too. Army was not responsible for bringing democracy.

9) I am not a supporter of the assassination of Ziaur Rahman.I am happy that the nation condemned the act. Mujib never got a chance of public burial. His burial was done under tight security and in a hurry. Army i believe also imposed curfew after his death. I do believe that he also had his supporters and have them till this day. That includes me too.



8)As u said yourself "subjective"..... I agree with you only to the degree that Mujib had to start ruling the country from scratch, with nothing. Same cannot be said abt Zia or Ershad. The time was tough then...what did u expect.

6)Lemme tell you one small fact, most relief material distributed by the government never end up on the right hands. The situation only got a little better recently (thanks to the current regime). Mujib never got rich selling kombols. His men did a bad thing. Thats it, they never had mujibs approval. I don think K.Zia would also have approved Falu stealing "tin Sheets". I understand the involvement of the head of state if the accusation is made on some major Tender flaws where the most inexperienced company with highest cost is given the go ahead. Or on purchasing equipments that increase cost and decrease reliability, some shady deals... ( eg Sheikh Hasina buying MIG, or governement hand on "Niko" deal)

10) You can create Bakshal but such an attempt is always deemed for failiure if one does not have the public support or the millitary support. The people would have forced him out of his position if he was that bad. Certainly killing him wasnt the only option. Get real Shaad, when u are supporting his assasination you are also supporting the murder of innocent child and women. Demoralised?? Dude where were u right after his death? was there a democratically elected governement for the next few years?
How abt Ershads rule for 10 years, you should have been demoralised to the point that u wished to commit suiside. We had 3 democratically elected gvernemnts after that, but assuming free and fair election I still have to add that democracy is not bound to elections only. There was never any accountability from any group.

Finally I expect constructive critisism from your part. Please do not mention abt stories your father said abt Bangabandhu or u have heard from someone else without proper evidence. I don believe that Mujib said some of the things that he is accused of saying. So only facts please...

[cricket_dorshok]

Originally Posted by Pundit
Can someone make the effort to document all the Black days in BD history, since its inception in 1971, 16th dec.

I have given hints on the top 3 -

1. Bangabandhu hotta
2. Sheikh Hasina hotta opocheshta
3. Jail killings of the 4 leaders
4. Sheikh Hasina being robbed of the 1991 election ?
5. Rashed Khan Menon hotta opocheshta (which year was that)
6. Sheikh Hasina not allowed British Airways boarding
7. Sheikh Hasina robbed of election victory by Ershad - 1986 (?)
8. Sheikh Hasina arrest by CTG
9. Khaled Mosharraf hotta Nov 7
10. Taher hotta, 1976 (?)

I will vote no. 4 is the blackest day in the history of BD!

[Pundit]

Originally Posted by cricket_dorshok
I will vote no. 4 is the blackest day in the history of BD!

One can derive that its because of your hatred towards the winning party of 1991.

OR, due to your firm belief that had the AL won, democracy would have been firmy rooted in Bangladesh, under the leadership and vision of Sheikh Hasina and the AL ?

[shaad]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Hi Shaad, I am enjoying this debate. Before I come back to the points you mentioned I would like to assure you that neither am I a big supporter of the two ladies. However I am a big supporter of sheikh Mujib and not so much of Major Ziaur Rahman. Since now i have made my position clear i can start. And I agree with you, I shall not mention " He says, She says, Bull Crap"- Only documented facts. ( talking abt your your point 5)

HereWeGo, I will be quite blunt: I am not enjoying this so-called "debate". I play fair in arguments. You haven't; in your responses so far, you've avoided answering several questions I asked, shied away from difficult issues, and indulged in cheap rhetorical tricks. I generally abstain from pointing these out, but since you seem to want to indulge in a "debate", I will no longer refrain. Keep in mind that I bear you no malice, but if you want to debate, try to bring valid arguments, and address all the questions I raised.

1) I can understand where you are coming from with the Hitler and mujib comparison. But lets face it, you cannot compare one of the leading man of the liberation war with one of the most ruthless dictators.

Why not? My previous post pointed out several parallels -- oratory and shrewd campaigning, destruction of the means by which they themselves achieved power so as to prevent democratic challenges to them, and the fact that both Mujib and Hitler initially played roles that their nations by and large viewed as positive, and then took on roles that proved to the detriment of their people. Did you DISPUTE any of these parallels? No, you avoided addressing any of these parallels; your meagre attempt at rebuttal [see below] existed solely of saying that Mujib's foreign allies stood by him while those of Hitler didn't (an incorrect statement, by the way). You are the one who said he wanted a debate -- so play fair and prove my parallels wrong; don't just say that I "cannot compare one of the leading man of the liberation war with one of the most ruthless dictators."

I can give you ten reasons of why one cannot compare the two men. However I will just try to point flaws from your own comparison. Yes hitler initially had some foreign allies but they all went against him eventually. The same cannot be said abt Mujib, his allies in 1971 was still his allies in 1975. Bakshal was his major mistake but give this guy a break, he wasnt systemetically slaughtering all his oppositions. Yes no other ruler ever tried to bring back baksal but wasnt Ziaur Rahman (i am guessing, your most favored leader post independence) was critisized for being ruthless to his opponents ? And please don forget the reason for 1/11, It only happened because one major party did not want to loose power and tried to hold a farce election run by a caretaker government of its own choice. That is not too different from bakshal and definately not democracy . Lets not even talk abt all the military rules post independence. We have hardly had the good fortune to reap the benifits of democracy post independence. While I am accepting Mujibs fault I am reluctant to accept that we experienced true democracy in action and Mujib is definately not solely responsible.

Do try not to make "guesses" about who my "most favored leader post independence" is, and you won't risk making a fool of yourself in public. There are many aspects of Zia's governance that I dislike extremely -- for instance, the addition of Article 2A and the omission of Article 12 from our Constitution (I am a strict secularist). But I feel obliged to point out that here again you are indulging in a cheap set of rhetorical tricks: you are trying to suggest that Mujib's abolition of democracy was not that terrible, because other leaders since have tried to hold on to power. Let's use an analogy here to point out the flaw -- it's akin to arguing that X committing a murder is not that bad, because Y and Z committed murders too.

2) I did not complain abt winston churchill since i have nothing against such comparison. I am not here to dismiss all your points. Just the ones i feel are biased.

"Biased" is a loaded word, HereWeGo. Either demonstrate how my parallels are flawed, or stop complaining about the analogy I drew with Hitler.

3) Now back to the Bank looting....
I am unable to accept that he was shot because he was trying to loot Bangladesh Bank and Mujib had full support in that. Before I give my reasons I am just going to tell that I for one know that he wasnt looting the bank however I am not going to state anything without documented facts. Since I could not find any documents that states that he did or did not rob the bank I will just use plain and simple logic.

Logic a) A presidents son looting the national Bank!! how absurd does that sound. Assuming he did , as you stated he was shot by the police. Can you imagine Tareq Zia shot by police trying to rob Bangladesh Bank. The police would open the doors for him if needed.

logic b) The simple fact that the police shot him states that Mujib had no role to play on the looting ( assuming your point that he was looting a bank).

logic c) what happened to the officer that shot him? Surely someone as ruthless as Sheikh Mujib( as you made people believe) will assassinate the person that shot his own son and his friends. Let me assure you that nothing like that happened.

Er, perhaps you didn't notice, but your arguments in "logic a" and "logic b" are contradictory. Either the police shot Sheikh Kamal attempting to loot a bank, or they didn't.

I will point out yet another cheap rhetorical ploy that you are using in "logic b". You are using it to suggest that I said earlier that Mujib was involved in looting a bank, when I did NOT. What I said, and I quote, was "[Mujib's] sons basically had carte blanche to rape and loot at will." Do try not to put words in my mouth. It's tacky and reflects poorly on you when shown up like this.

Finally, in "logic c", you ask, "[W]hat happened to the officer that shot him?" I don't know, and I don't believe it to be particularly relevant either. After all, we have you to "assure" us that the policemen in question did not face any consequences. Besides seeming to confirm the account of his being shot by the police, I have to ask: does this assurance come from knowing "Mujib's closest people"? As I have already discussed in my earlier post, such assurances simply do not carry much weight, and I thought you agreed (see you own comments at the very top of this post).

The girl Mujibs son is accused of raping is also Army's wife ( the same person i was talking abt earlier). As i said he had an affair with the lady, didnt rape her. Its an armys wife and u are telling me that Army is scared to press charges...

And, of course, here we are once again asked to trust your assurances that the affair wasn't coerced. Haven't we been through this once already? Yes, I am saying that even members of the army during that period would have been scared to press charges. The regime had indeed become that dictatorial and authoritarian. As I have said before, this forum has some members from military families and military backgrounds. You are more than welcome to ask them rather than just your trusted "Mujib's closest people."

Now comes the Great Siraj Sikder( please note my sarcasm). He formed the banned organisation "Sarbahara". He was responsible for launching an armed struggle against the government and establish the rule of the Sarbaharas. Sarbahara leaders are shot by RAB's on a regular basis. Just a few days back a doctor by profession and a sarbahara leader called "tapon" was shot by RAB. Its been less than a month. Whom are you kidding bro.

I don't support extra-judicial killings, whether it is done by RAB or Mujib's goons. I don't support torture either.

While I do not support Sharbahara's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist platform, I will point out that the reality was much more complex than Sharbahara just being a banned organization responsible for launching and armed struggle against the government. It was, after all, the Sharbahara Party that called for a total break from Pakistan as early as 1968, while Mujib’s programme for independence remained unclear until the Pakistan army crackdown forced the decisive break, and that the Party had already gone underground and started attacks against Pakistani institutions in 1970.

From Naeem Mohaiemen's "Kothai Aj Shei Shiraj Sikder (Where Today Is that Shiraj Sikder)?" Terrorists or Guerrillas in the Mist:

When war broke out, the group stayed underground and joined the battle against the Pakistan army. But as the fighting continued, the Indian high command expressed concern that leftists within the Bengali liberation army would link up with Indian guerrilla groups like the Naxalites, creating the dreaded pan-Bengal insurrection. To counter this possibility, the Awami League encouraged another faction to rise up inside the regular Mukti Bahini, this one imaginatively dubbed Mujib Bahini and tasked with sidelining the leftists within the guerrilla army. The Mujib Bahini was at various times accused of killing key leftist members of the Bengali liberation force, with the Indians quietly supporting these fratricidal struggles. The Sharbahara Party also lost members in these struggles, which hardened their enmity towards the Awami League.

So if you are going to be sarcastic about Siraj Sikder and the Sharbahara party, at least be honest enough to mention where much of their enmity and opposition to Mujib and the AL originated.

---

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
7)Now Rakhi bahini again
your quote " In practice, though, this was a personal armed militia, pledging loyalty to Mujib himself, able to operate extra-judicially, and outside the authority of the army or the law."
How is it different from RAB? Again I think it was mujibs mistake since i do not support extrajudicial killing. But if people in Bangladesh are Ok with RABs than y not with rakhi bahini? RAb did murder couple of chatra league men under the direct order from the TOP. It is documented fact straight from the papers pulished by "Human Rights Watch". http://www.hrw.org/reports/2006/bangladesh1206/ Again if you support RAB than you also have to support Rakhi bahini. Only difference was that they did not have the black dress and bandanas.

It would be amusing if it weren't so ironic -- the statement of mine that you have italicized, "pledging loyalty to Mujib himself, able to operate extra-judicially, and outside the authority of the army or the law," points out at least one major difference between the Rakkhi Bahini and RAB. The Rakkhi Bahini pledged loyalty to Mujib himself, and became in effect a personal militia. I don't see the RAB pledging loyalty to an individual.

For what it's worth, I will reiterate again that I myself do not approve of extra-judicial killings, whether carried out by RAB or Rakkhi Bahini. But you have tried to suggest that because many Bangladeshi's support RAB's activities currently, they would have supported Rakkhi Bahini's activities then too. This is a fallacy, because it is an attempt at reconstructing the past by analogy without demonstrating that (i) people's perspectives were the same, that (ii) their circumstances were the same, and that (iii) Rakkhi Bahini was identical to RAB (while we have already demonstrated that it was not).

Seriously, historians rarely reconstruct by analogy, preferring historical accounts themselves. I notice that you blithely ignored the question of whether you were around during Rakkhi Bahini's time. I was, and the subjective impression I got (I make no bones about calling my impression subjective, because as I said, I play fair), was that people were far more afraid of the Rakkhi Bahini then than they are of RAB currently. RAB is still (mistakenly or not) viewed as targetting criminals, while Rakkhi Bahini was seen as often being used to satisfy Mujib's whims or settle grudges. As I have mentioned, there are other members on this forum, as old or older than me, who were around during Rakkhi Bahini's heyday. Why not ask them their impressions of how Bangladeshis felt about Rakkhi Bahini?

And here is an excerpt from Banglapedia to emphasize the points I made.

Initially the [Rakkhi] Bahini showed some positive results, especially in recovering a large quantity of arms and smuggled goods and restraining the hoarders and black marketeers; but it soon started losing people's confidence as it became apparent that it was being used for political purposes. Acting like storm troopers the members of the Bahini would often surround a whole village combing for arms and "miscreants". In the process, they tended to commit serious excesses with no regulation to control their conduct or to make them accountable to authorities. They were also accused of torturing people for obtaining their confessions apart from resorting to looting and extortion.

When public criticism of the role and activities of the Raksi Bahini reached its height and the newspapers started reporting their excesses, the government promulgated on 18 October 1973 Jatiya Raksi Bahini (Amendment) Ordinance 1973 to confer retrospective legality on the activities of the Bahini and providing that no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings would lie against any member of the Bahini for anything done in good faith or intended to have been done so.

Finally, stop squirming about and answer the point I previously raised. Why was a personal militia formed, when a professional army existed? Why were those Muktijoddha who weren't ex-army recruited into this militia, when they could have returned to civilan life?

B]4)[/B] I see that you support Mujibs assassination and think that it resulted in long lasting democracy. I can assure you brother, we never saw true democracy in action beside the elections may be. Not to mention that in all the election there has been vote rigging. Please note the same men that got rehabilitated by Ziaur Rahman, i mean the men that murdered Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, also murdered women and a child who was only 7 ( or 9) . Now please don support the murderers. We got democracy( or something like it) because theoverwhelming majority of bangladeshi people wanted it. Mujib was a democratically elected leader too. Army was not responsible for bringing democracy.

HereWeGo, once again you are indulging in the reprehensible act of putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said I supported Mujib's assassination. What I asked in both my posts was the question which you have never answered. As I said, I didn't press much earlier, but this time I will ask you to stop evading, and actually answer. Quotes from both of my previous posts, asking the very same unanswered question, follow:

Originally Posted by shaad
...if people were dissatisfied with this state of affairs, what could they do? Depose Mujib by bringing another political party to power in the elections? The one-party BAKSAL rule had already put paid to that idea. Coups and assassinations are grisly affairs indeed, but given that he couldn't be removed from power by democratic means, what other alternative was there?

Originally Posted by shaad
You seem very dismissive about this BAKSAL "mistake" of Mujib's; but you didn't answer the question I raised previously -- if there were no democratic means for removing Mujib from power, and if people were dissatisfied with his regime, how else could they bring about change?

---

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
9) I am not a supporter of the assassination of Ziaur Rahman.I am happy that the nation condemned the act. Mujib never got a chance of public burial. His burial was done under tight security and in a hurry. Army i believe also imposed curfew after his death. I do believe that he also had his supporters and have them till this day. That includes me too.

It is nice to hear that you are not a supporter of Zia's assassination. But I never suggested that you were; on the contrary, you were the one who accused me, without any evidence, of being a supporter of Mujib's assassination. It might, presumably, have been an attempt on your part to avoid answering the question I raised (and reposted in my quotes above), but we all see through that now, don't we?

8)As u said yourself "subjective"..... I agree with you only to the degree that Mujib had to start ruling the country from scratch, with nothing. Same cannot be said abt Zia or Ershad. The time was tough then...what did u expect.

I, and other citizens of Bangladesh, expected much better, not excuses for the use of Rakkhi Bahini as a political tool, nor the demolition of our nascent democracy. Times were tough then is not an excuse; if you aren't competent enough to govern without a personal militia, or without abolishing democracy, then you aren't competent to govern, period. Note that this doesn't absolve Zia or Ershad either.

6)Lemme tell you one small fact, before organisations like Brac and other major NGO's; most relief material never used to end up on the right hands. The situation only got better recently ( 10-15 years back). Mujib never got rich selling kombols. His men did a bad thing. Thats it, they never had mujibs approval.

"That's it, they never had mujibs approval." Is this another of your "assurances" based on your knowing some of "Mujib's closest people"? But let's take your words at face value. Are you suggesting then that Mujib was a doddering old incompetent fool who couldn't keep his men under control? I am sorry, but that still makes him culpable. And either way, that doesn't reflect favourably on him. HereWeGo, I don't know what it is you do, but many of us on this forum work in positions where we have subordinates who report to us. And yes, we are considered responsible for any errors or mistakes they make. That is what leadership entails.

You began your post by saying that you were "a big supporter of sheikh Mujib and not so much of Major Ziaur Rahman." I am not a big supporter of either (although, as Kabir pointed out pithily in this thread, most Bangladeshis seem to believe that you can't be critical of a particular party or leader without being a supporter of the other). I think both Mujib and Zia made positive contributions to our nation. And I think both made errors, sometimes grievous ones. I think we can appreciate their contributions and be critical of their errors without necessarily indulging in hero-worshipping or myth-making. In fact, I think that if we are to move forward as a nation, we really need to get over being mired over supporting one leader or the other, or be hooked on labelling one day or another as our blackest day, and simply get around to doing what needs to be done.

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by shaad
HereWeGo,1) I will be quite blunt: I am not enjoying this so-called "debate". I play fair in arguments. You haven't; in your responses so far, you've avoided answering several questions I asked, shied away from difficult issues, and indulged in cheap rhetorical tricks. I generally abstain from pointing these out, but since you seem to want to indulge in a "debate", I will no longer refrain. Keep in mind that I bear you no malice, but if you want to debate, try to bring valid arguments, and address all the questions I raised.




2) Why not? My previous post pointed out several parallels -- oratory and shrewd campaigning, destruction of the means by which they themselves achieved power so as to prevent democratic challenges to them, and the fact that both Mujib and Hitler initially played roles that their nations by and large viewed as positive, and then took on roles that proved to the detriment of their people. Did you DISPUTE any of these parallels? No, you avoided addressing any of these parallels; your meagre attempt at rebuttal [see below] existed solely of saying that Mujib's foreign allies stood by him while those of Hitler didn't (an incorrect statement, by the way). You are the one who said he wanted a debate -- so play fair and prove my parallels wrong; don't just say that I "cannot compare one of the leading man of the liberation war with one of the most ruthless dictators."



3)Do try not to make "guesses" about who my "most favored leader post independence" is, and you won't risk making a fool of yourself in public. There are many aspects of Zia's governance that I dislike extremely -- for instance, the addition of Article 2A and the omission of Article 12 from our Constitution (I am a strict secularist). But I feel obliged to point out that here again you are indulging in a cheap set of rhetorical tricks: you are trying to suggest that Mujib's abolition of democracy was not that terrible, because other leaders since have tried to hold on to power. Let's use an analogy here to point out the flaw -- it's akin to arguing that X committing a murder is not that bad, because Y and Z committed murders too.



4)"Biased" is a loaded word, HereWeGo. Either demonstrate how my parallels are flawed, or stop complaining about the analogy I drew with Hitler.



5)Er, perhaps you didn't notice, but your arguments in "logic a" and "logic b" are contradictory. Either the police shot Sheikh Kamal attempting to loot a bank, or they didn't.

6)I will point out yet another cheap rhetorical ploy that you are using in "logic b". You are using it to suggest that I said earlier that Mujib was involved in looting a bank, when I did NOT. What I said, and I quote, was "[Mujib's] sons basically had carte blanche to rape and loot at will." Do try not to put words in my mouth. It's tacky and reflects poorly on you when shown up like this.

7)Finally, in "logic c", you ask, "[W]hat happened to the officer that shot him?" I don't know, and I don't believe it to be particularly relevant either. After all, we have you to "assure" us that the policemen in question did not face any consequences. Besides seeming to confirm the account of his being shot by the police, I have to ask: does this assurance come from knowing "Mujib's closest people"? As I have already discussed in my earlier post, such assurances simply do not carry much weight, and I thought you agreed (see you own comments at the very top of this post).



8)And, of course, here we are once again asked to trust your assurances that the affair wasn't coerced. Haven't we been through this once already? Yes, I am saying that even members of the army during that period would have been scared to press charges. The regime had indeed become that dictatorial and authoritarian. As I have said before, this forum has some members from military families and military backgrounds. You are more than welcome to ask them rather than just your trusted "Mujib's closest people."



9)I don't support extra-judicial killings, whether it is done by RAB or Mujib's goons. I don't support torture either.

10)While I do not support Sharbahara's Marxist-Leninist-Maoist platform, I will point out that the reality was much more complex than Sharbahara just being a banned organization responsible for launching and armed struggle against the government. It was, after all, the Sharbahara Party that called for a total break from Pakistan as early as 1968, while Mujib’s programme for independence remained unclear until the Pakistan army crackdown forced the decisive break, and that the Party had already gone underground and started attacks against Pakistani institutions in 1970.

11)From Naeem Mohaiemen's "Kothai Aj Shei Shiraj Sikder (Where Today Is that Shiraj Sikder)?" Terrorists or Guerrillas in the Mist:


So if you are going to be sarcastic about Siraj Sikder and the Sharbahara party, at least be honest enough to mention where much of their enmity and opposition to Mujib and the AL originated.

---



12)It would be amusing if it weren't so ironic -- the statement of mine that you have italicized, "pledging loyalty to Mujib himself, able to operate extra-judicially, and outside the authority of the army or the law," points out at least one major difference between the Rakkhi Bahini and RAB. The Rakkhi Bahini pledged loyalty to Mujib himself, and became in effect a personal militia. I don't see the RAB pledging loyalty to an individual.

13)For what it's worth, I will reiterate again that I myself do not approve of extra-judicial killings, whether carried out by RAB or Rakkhi Bahini. But you have tried to suggest that because many Bangladeshi's support RAB's activities currently, they would have supported Rakkhi Bahini's activities then too. This is a fallacy, because it is an attempt at reconstructing the past by analogy without demonstrating that (i) people's perspectives were the same, that (ii) their circumstances were the same, and that (iii) Rakkhi Bahini was identical to RAB (while we have already demonstrated that it was not).

14)Seriously, historians rarely reconstruct by analogy, preferring historical accounts themselves. I notice that you blithely ignored the question of whether you were around during Rakkhi Bahini's time. I was, and the subjective impression I got (I make no bones about calling my impression subjective, because as I said, I play fair), was that people were far more afraid of the Rakkhi Bahini then than they are of RAB currently. RAB is still (mistakenly or not) viewed as targetting criminals, while Rakkhi Bahini was seen as often being used to satisfy Mujib's whims or settle grudges. As I have mentioned, there are other members on this forum, as old or older than me, who were around during Rakkhi Bahini's heyday. Why not ask them their impressions of how Bangladeshis felt about Rakkhi Bahini?

And here is an excerpt from Banglapedia to emphasize the points I made.



15)Finally, stop squirming about and answer the point I previously raised. Why was a personal militia formed, when a professional army existed? Why were those Muktijoddha who weren't ex-army recruited into this militia, when they could have returned to civilan life?



16)HereWeGo, once again you are indulging in the reprehensible act of putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said I supported Mujib's assassination. What I asked in both my posts was the question which you have never answered. As I said, I didn't press much earlier, but this time I will ask you to stop evading, and actually answer. Quotes from both of my previous posts, asking the very same unanswered question, follow:





---



17)It is nice to hear that you are not a supporter of Zia's assassination. But I never suggested that you were; on the contrary, you were the one who accused me, without any evidence, of being a supporter of Mujib's assassination. It might, presumably, have been an attempt on your part to avoid answering the question I raised (and reposted in my quotes above), but we all see through that now, don't we?



18)I, and other citizens of Bangladesh, expected much better, not excuses for the use of Rakkhi Bahini as a political tool, nor the demolition of our nascent democracy. Times were tough then is not an excuse; if you aren't competent enough to govern without a personal militia, or without abolishing democracy, then you aren't competent to govern, period. Note that this doesn't absolve Zia or Ershad either.



19)"That's it, they never had mujibs approval." Is this another of your "assurances" based on your knowing some of "Mujib's closest people"? But let's take your words at face value. Are you suggesting then that Mujib was a doddering old incompetent fool who couldn't keep his men under control? I am sorry, but that still makes him culpable. And either way, that doesn't reflect favourably on him. HereWeGo, I don't know what it is you do, but many of us on this forum work in positions where we have subordinates who report to us. And yes, we are considered responsible for any errors or mistakes they make. That is what leadership entails.

20)You began your post by saying that you were "a big supporter of sheikh Mujib and not so much of Major Ziaur Rahman." I am not a big supporter of either (although, as Kabir pointed out pithily in this thread, most Bangladeshis seem to believe that you can't be critical of a particular party or leader without being a supporter of the other). I think both Mujib and Zia made positive contributions to our nation. And I think both made errors, sometimes grievous ones. I think we can appreciate their contributions and be critical of their errors without necessarily indulging in hero-worshipping or myth-making. In fact, I think that if we are to move forward as a nation, we really need to get over being mired over supporting one leader or the other, or be hooked on labelling one day or another as our blackest day, and simply get around to doing what needs to be done.

Let me make one thing clear Shaad, I like debating with people who are fair with their judgement . Apparently you are not. If you don like replying to my post than dont reply; I never forced you to. You have accused me of making comments without evidence. None of my earlier comment on the previous post was based on what someone else had told me. It is however funny that U kept on accusing Mujibs son for raping and looting without much proof of your own and you expect people to believe that. What credibility do you hold? Since there is no documented evidence of any looting or raping so I just had to use logic to disprove it. If you call me a rapist without even saying whom I raped or when I raped there is no way I can disprove it , that doesnt mean it is true. Please stick to documented facts.

When you ask question like " what other way was there to overthrow Mujib from power?" it clearly indicates that u personally believe that killing him was the only option ( since that happened) .I am not putting words into your mouth. I am sorry if my analogy seems incorrect to you. You can definately ask for a third opinion, I am willing to accept my mistake if the third neutral guy believes otherwise.

If you read my post you would have noticed that I said that i do not support extrajudiciary killings myself, hence i think what Muib did was wrong regarding Rakhi bahini . However it was not done with the intention of systemetically kiling all his opponenets ( if you don agree than lemme know) . As i said on one of my post that the analogy of RAB and Rakhi Bahini is not made by me but by human rights organisations( namely Odhikar). Again if maority of Bangladeshis like the existance of RAB ( i can statistically prove that from a published material if you want...pls let me know) then y not Rakhi Bahini ( cuz they didnt have bandanas?? ). Rab is governed by the Home ministry ( previously Lutfuzzaman babar), they never did nething to the son of Shah Alam( accused of murdering) under strict command from Babar. I italicised "Mujib" because it was a continuous sentence and i did not want to add nething. Replace Mujib with Babar( or tarique) and u got urself the new Rakhi bahini. I thought u were smart enough to figure that. RAB never touched any of the leading political figure inside BNP government even though we all know their misdeeds hence RAb definately worked according to the will of the government.

U can compare hitler with Mujib or whoever ..... Please ask for a neutral opinion if the comparison sounds right.
Even Ziaur Rahman was a great orator ( like hitler) and he was accused of being ruthless to his opponents ( again like hitler), Ziaur Rahman was also responsible for promoting Nationalism (just like hitler) . Ziaur Rahman also increased the size of the military force significantly ( again like hitler). However I am not gonna dare compare him with Hitler cuz it just shows ur hatred and lack of proper focus. Plus Ziaur Rahman is a celebrated person in our nations history and I have no intention to demean him. ( Now pls don try to prove that Ziaur Rahman was also like Hitler just because i have drawn a few parallels). Is your question answered?

About the relief materials...Ask any of your relatives to visit "new Market" and ask for an imported American edible oil ( assuming you are living abroad) . Then check the marking on the oil container. Please do that....that was 1974, this is 2008.
Sorry for just stating my opinion abt Mujibs disapproval. All I can positively state is that he had enough "kombols" for himself and his family. If you visit his Rd 32 house in dhanmondi than u would have noticed that he did not have a lavish lifestyle. He was accused of stealing money also but even after countless tries no one could prove any existance of bank account or any of his investments. Thats all I know.

I am happy to note that u believe in Secular Bangladesh. I am not hero worshipping Muib either, however i have no intention to demean him. I cant write a lot now. Got work to do. May be i will get back to the points i have missed.

[Zunaid]

Here we go again....

Shaad, you should know better from the ancient SCB days that logical discussions are so often futile on the net. Personal biases often cause people to read between lines lines you have not wrtiten. They may not intentionally be manufacturing a strawman to tear down, but the effect is the same.

[billah]

Just kidding guys, please don't take it seriously.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Shaad, you should know better from the ancient SCB days that logical discussions are so often futile on the net. Personal biases often cause people to read between lines lines you have not wrtiten. They may not intentionally be manufacturing a strawman to tear down, but the effect is the same.

I know, Zunaid. My original reason for posting in this thread was simply to point out that not all Bangladeshis necessarily saw August 15th as the blackest day. Subsequent posts were largely because some debaters seemed to dismiss the establishment of BKSAl and the banning of all other parties as just a trivial mistake, not as an act with major repercussions.

I am retiring from thread now, unless something interesting and novel comes up.

BTW, nice picture, billah. I always suspected HereWeGo and I were somehow "special".

[billah]

Originally Posted by shaad
I know, Zunaid. My original reason for posting in this thread was simply to point out that not all Bangladeshis necessarily saw August 15th as the blackest day. Subsequent posts were largely because some debaters seemed to dismiss the establishment of BKSAl and the banning of all other parties as just a trivial mistake, not as an act with major repercussions.

I am retiring from thread now, unless something interesting and novel comes up.

BTW, nice picture, billah. I always suspected HereWeGo and I were somehow "special".

Same here. Well, after all, that point is pretty much proven on this thread. A nation, deeply divided on this issue.

[Pundit]

Originally Posted by billah
Same here. Well, after all, that point is pretty much proven on this thread. A nation, deeply divided on this issue.

I do not understand - if 50% of the people do not agree to a notion, then how can a nation adopt it?

Or maybe they do not count. Who ever said we needed Democracy, when we can get Bakshal...that too over and over again, ad infinitum.

[Pundit]

Originally Posted by shaad
I know, Zunaid. My original reason for posting in this thread was simply to point out that not all Bangladeshis necessarily saw August 15th as the blackest day. Subsequent posts were largely because some debaters seemed to dismiss the establishment of BKSAl and the banning of all other parties as just a trivial mistake, not as an act with major repercussions.

I am retiring from thread now, unless something interesting and novel comes up.

Like I said, Sheikh Mujib and clan have the kutu-kutu effect on some. Their lives are an offshoot of the agrarian mind-set of the 50s and 60s, when lifestyle was dominated by revolutionary thoughts (9 out of 10 revolutions are merely due to people not having anything better to do in life), newspaper reading, drinking tea all day and adda mara.

The clan and discussions around them bring out the worst in them. Good thing for all of us is that we see know more of it than what is captured in words, here on the internet.

But the poor souls who want peace in our country, and actually live their...our politicians have given nothing but hot air to them over the past 37 years.

AND THEY STILL DO PUJA FOR THEM.

[nsd3]

Originally Posted by Pundit

But the poor souls who want peace in our country, and actually live their...our politicians have given nothing but hot air to them over the past 37 years.

AND if there is any election coming up - people are said have set to re elect the same culprits in power. After so many events in neighbouring Pak a man such as Zardari is standing up to become a President. Bangladeshi people are seen to vote a mayor, who is actually in Jail! More are coming up. The Dream of having somehting new after 1/11 is perhaps coming to an end now with fading hopes.

[thebest]

Shaad Vai,
my experience shows me that it is infutile to argue with AL sympathizer or supporter. They do not follow logic; they follow emotion. So better to retire.
nsd bhai,
I always belive A NATION GETS LEADER IT DESERVES. It is true for USA ( Bush, McCain Yes we hear it here First), true for Pakistan (Mr 10%, Mr Bigot, Mr Bush Puppy and the circle run again), Bangladesh (Yo-yo between Apa and Vabi).
On the other note, I do not think 15th Aug is the blackest day in our history. It must be 4th of November when we allowed killer in our safe custody.

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Here we go again....

Shaad, you should know better from the ancient SCB days that logical discussions are so often futile on the net. Personal biases often cause people to read between lines lines you have not wrtiten. They may not intentionally be manufacturing a strawman to tear down, but the effect is the same.

Personal bias
Funny u say that....

just want to add a few small points, I personally do not believe that 15th Aug is the darkest day in our independent history, however the way of proving it is not by insulting the person whose positive contribution cannot be denied in history. I have admitted that I am biased towards Mujib but pls guys I am NOT an AL supporter. Atleast I have the courage to speak for what i believe is right. I do not hide behind the veil off neutrality when most of your writings prove otherwise ( you can again accuse me for reading between the lines, but for once take a third neutral opinion if that exists).

"it is pointless to argue with an AL sympathiser" is not an arguement. It is hiding away from facts. Whom are u kidding?

One more thing Zunaid, Pls don think that i am referrin to you on all the points above...

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo

One more thing Zunaid, Pls don think that i am referrin to you on all the points above...

Then you really should not respond to a post of mine and use the pronoun "you", hein? What are people going to think...

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by Zunaid
Then you really should not respond to a post of mine and use the pronoun "you", hein? What are people going to think...

Sorry abt that than. I am feeling too lazy to quote everyone. Anyways "Here we go again"was clearly meant to mock me. I like the sophisticated nature of the banter. (Y)
I just felt that you are clearly supportive of one guy and totally dismissive of the other. I recognise the fact that u are entitled to your own opinion however accusing someone of bias while showing the same character in your own writing is ......"What are people going to think" :-)

[billah]

HereWeGo: My long experience with Doc (Zunaid) has been different than what you are saying here. He's always been the ruthless, heavy handed, cold, cruel, "opinion-suppressing" marauder
equally to everyone here. He is sorta like OUR big Z. Don't know why, this guy always gets totally bent out of shape at the sight of us slinging political or religious mud. Ain't no fun.

Damn you, Doc ! Khelum na koitachi....

[Zunaid]

Originally Posted by billah
HereWeGo: My long experience with Doc (Zunaid) has been different than what you are saying here. He's always been the ruthless, heavy handed, cold, cruel, "opinion-suppressing" marauder
equally to everyone here. He is sorta like OUR big Z. Don't know why, this guy always gets totally bent out of shape at the sight of us slinging political or religious mud. Ain't no fun.

Damn you, Doc ! Khelum na koitachi....

Billah. You know me so well.

[thebest]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Personal bias
"it is pointless to argue with an AL sympathiser" is not an arguement. It is hiding away from facts. Whom are u kidding?

If the dig towards me, you have answered in typical AL sympathiser/ supporter way - attacking the messenger instead of the message. You did not answer any of the question Saad Bhai asked. Can you please tell me what are facts I am hiding? Does asking questions against AL leadership means that I am AL hater (or as AL prefered Jamati). For your info, I am not AL hater( you can call me I am Jamat hater) which does not mean I am BNP lover . I am what you american call INDEPENDENT .

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by thebest
If the dig towards me, you have answered in typical AL sympathiser/ supporter way - attacking the messenger instead of the message. You did not answer any of the question Saad Bhai asked. Can you please tell me what are facts I am hiding? Does asking questions against AL leadership means that I am AL hater (or as AL prefered Jamati). For your info, I am not AL hater( you can call me I am Jamat hater) which does not mean I am BNP lover . I am what you american call INDEPENDENT .

I did answer his questions...on August 23rd 8:00 pm....read the post above. Before joining the bandwagon pls read the posts carefully. The fact is that I did not get any response for that post (instead of the other way around). It is not my fault if the messenger is providing out dated messages. Finally I will still stick to the fact that "it is illogical to argue with an Al symphathiser" as a very rude statement( and extremely illogical). Again I am not an AL sympathiser however i am a Mujib symphathiser.

[Tigers_eye]

One party rule > Democracy.
One party rule - is the only thing that BD people needs.
One party rule - will bichi golai felbey of other nations, NGOs, Human-rights groups; who may challenge.

Only if you guys make me the party leader. By the way, my bahini will be rog kata bahini.

+++

Pondit bhaijan,
I protest!! amar mama'r name'a ei shob abol-tabol bolben na. Parley tarey vote'a haran giya!! Ershad, who never lost an election can not even win at his (Rashed Khan Menon) place, garanteed. Let alone Hasina (who lost to jodu, modu kodu).

+++
Shaad bhai,
College Football niya apnar shatey ami debate kortey chai. Ar kisu tey parbona. Apney ki "Jeopardy" gasen kokhono?

+++

For obvious reasons, I stayed away from posting on this thread. I was too young to remember the liberation, however, I remember few things during '74 and up!!

For me, May 30th was the darkest day of Bangladesh's history.

[Pundit]

What happened on May 30th ? A full day of solar ecclipse ? The Greenwich alamanac has no such record.

Joy to your Mama Menon though - I was referring to his shooting, not any election loss.