Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh in Wikipedia

[Sohel]

Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh (a.k.a 'Jamaat') is the largest Islamist political party in Bangladesh. Jamaat collaborated with the Pakistan army to unsuccessfully prevent the independence of Bangladesh in 1971, was subsequently banned, then resumed activity in 1978 when President Ziaur Rahman came to power.

History of the party

British India (1941-1947)

The Jamaat-e-Islami was founded in pre-partition India by Syed Ab'ul Ala Maududi in 1941. Maulana Maududi moved to Pakistan from India after independence and the current party in Bangladesh originated out of the East Pakistan wing of the party. However, Jamaat had opposed the creation of a Pakistan as a separate state for the Muslims of India. While persisting in his Anti-Pakistan ideology, Maududi wrote in one of his books, *"If we have ever uttered a single word in the favor of creation of Pakistan, it must be proved with references." That is why Jamat-e-Islami also did not support the Muslim League, the largest Muslim party, in the core election of 1946.

Pakistan Period (1948 - 1971)

After the creation of Pakistan, Jamaat-e-Islami was divided into separate Indian and Pakistani organisations. The Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh originates from Jamaat wing in the then East Pakistan. Jamaat strongly opposed for an independent Bangladesh through means of war, which it saw as against Islam. However, Ameer Ghulaz Azam has stated many times that he was willing to support an independent Bangladesh through political means. At liberation war of Bangladesh Jamaat not only aided Paksitan army by providing information or pro-independent Bangladeshis but also itself created many militia organization such as Razakar, Al badr, as shams in order to capture and eventually kill freedom fighters. Thus the party is regarded to Bangladeshis as quisling of Bangladesh. Their chief activities as part of the Razakar militia involved extensive participation in the 1971 Bangladesh atrocities against Hindus and perceived "false Muslims" in Bangladesh in that period. In 1971 its top leader were ex-chief, Golam Azam,Matiur Rahman Nizami, Ali Ahsan Mujahid, Muhammaad Kamaruzzaman, Delwar Hossain Sayeedi etc.

One of Jamat's top leader, Mujahid’s statement on “Daily Sangram” on October 15th ,1971

“The youths of the Razakars and al-Badar forces and all other voluntary organizations have been working for the national to protect it from the collaborators and agents of India. But, recently it was observed that a section of political leaders like ZA Bhutto, Kawsar Niazi, Mufti Mahmud and Asgar Khan have been making objectionable remarks about the patriots.

Jamaat opposition of Bangladesh Independence

In his autobiography, Azem wrote the following:

26 March 1971:

First driver took me to Dhaka university area. Saw the brutal sceneray, mass killing of man-woman, child,livestock. Then went to NayaBazar , sometimes on the road and sometimes on rickashw there are dead bodies. Looks like an army are in war with enemy. I think to suppress the protesters only killing threat was enough instead of killing. But military advisors in reality have different view of suppress any protest. …Some questions came out in my mind. Will Bangladesh get the true independency after being separated from Pakistan by Indian help ? 7/8 days passed on this thinking.

3 April 1971:

Secretary General of Nezami Party, Moulavi Farid Uddin Ahmad called me and informed that he and kahaza naiuddin decided to meet General Tikka Khan. Tikkha Khan asked us to go meet him on 4th April. I surprisely asked about who was behind the meeting. He replied “we wants to meet and Tikka Khan also wants to meet leaders who believe in united Pakistan”.I talked with Dhaka city Ameer Khurram Murad and decided to go meet General Tikka Khan. We meet Tikkha khan and Rao Forman Ali there. Rao Foman ali told us that “Awami League wants to separte fro Pakistan and be servant of India. But we are unable to make people understand this. You are known leaders to people. If you speech people these , people will accept it. If you broadcast the speech on radio it will easily received by people. We have arranged the recording here. We can record and broadcast today. “Rao Formam Ali said all these on such a beautiful way that Nurul Amin instantly agreed to recorc his speech and so as two other of my accompanies. But I said , I need time to make the speech contents. Thus I took time to discuss with my fellows. After discussing with Khurram Murad, Provician Secretary abdul Khaleq, Centaral Nayeb Amir Abdur rahim we made a draft for speech without mentioning Awami League, Independence or any other army action. We mentioned that India can’t be our friend and India would conquer our country under current situation.

Rezakar Party,1971:

Rezakars used to guard where there is a threat of Mukti Bahini attacks. Mukti Bahini used to dynamite bridges to disturb movement of armed military. So, Rezakar party started to guard these areas. Mukti Bahini used to come at schools to convince students of joining Mukti Bahini, so Rezakars also started guarding schools to prevent of coming Mukti Bahini. Electric supply sources also guarded by rezakars. On last days of April, Peace Committee was formed in a meeting on Nurul Amin’s residence. There I told on the meting that we sincerely want to keep Pakistan united. With everybody’s agreement peace committee is formed.

My Feeling on 16th December,1971

Although BBC was giving news against Pakistan, I had no other source no get info from East Pakistan then BBC.On last days of Pakistan army’s surrender I became worried that because of Pakistan army’s surrender there would be no control on law and order. Indian army cannot restore law and order. Under this circumstances, secular, leftists Mukti Bahni would carry a mass-killing . In other cities they would carry further brutal actions. Those who are Islamic activists would be tortured by Mukti Bahini.

Intellectual Killing

On December 14th, 1971, the Pakistan army, which collaborated with Jamaat during the 1971 war for Bangledesh's liberation , killed many top intellectuals/scholars of Bangladesh. December 14th today is known as Intellectual Killing Day in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh Period (1978 - present)

Jamaat was banned after victory of Mukti Bahini and its top leaders fled to West Pakistan. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman , first president of Bangladesh also cancelled the citizenship of Golam Azam, the leader of Jamaat. Azam then moved to London, and other leaders moved to the Middle East. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated in 1975, enabling army chief Major general Ziaur Rahman to seize power. With Rahman's coup, Jamaat again resumed political activities in Bangladesh. Rahman also allowed Azam to return to Bangladesh as the leader of Jamaat.

After the end of military rule in 1990, protests began against Azam and Jamaat under war criminal charges headed by Jahanara Imam, an author who lost her two sons and husband in the liberation war. Azam's citizenship was challenged in supreme court as he was holding a Pakistani passport. Due to lack of applicable legislation for war crimes, Bangladesh's supreme court had to allow Azam to have a Bangladeshi passport and continue its political activities. Imam died a few years later, and since then no protests against Jamaat alleging war crimes has occurred.

The Jamaat in Parliament Elections

1. 1973 Parliament Election: Party was banned because of its opposition of Bangladesh independence and collaborted with Pakistan army.

2. 1978 Parliament Election: Party was allowed to start political activities.

3. 1986 Parliament Election: Did not participate.

4. 1991 Parliament Election: Won 18 seats.

5. 1996 Parliament Election: Won 2 seats.

6. 2001 Parliament Election: Won 17 seats (took part by forming alliance with 3 other parties).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaat-e-Islami_Bangladesh

Razakars (Pakistan)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Razakars (Bangladesh))
Not to be confused with Razakars (Hyderabad).

Razakars was the name given to a paramilitary force organized by the Pakistan Army during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. The word, originating from Persian, literally means "volunteer". It was composed of mostly pro-Pakistani Bengalis and Urdu-speaking migrants to erstwhile East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). Initially, the force was under the command of local pro-Pakistani committees. But through the East Pakistan Razakar Ordinance (promulgated by General Tikka Khan on 1 June 1971) and a Ministry of Defence, Pakistan, ordinance (promulaged 7 September 1971), Razakars were recognized as members of the Pakistan Army. Razakars were allegedly associated with many of the atrocities committed by the Pakistan Army during the 9-month war (see 1971 Bangladesh atrocities).

Following the liberation of East Pakistan as the independent country Bangladesh, most of the leading Razakars, including Golam Azam, fled to Pakistan. Although Golam Azam maintains that he went to Pakistan to participate in the Annual General Meeting of his organization Jamaat-e-Islami, he remained overseas until General Ziaur Rahman allowed him to return in Bangladesh. Many of the lower ranking Razakars who remained in Bangladesh were killed in the course of reprisals immediately after the end of fighting while as many as 36,000 were imprisoned. Of the latter many were later freed mainly because of pressure from US and China who backed Pakistan in the war, and because Pakistan was holding 200,000 Bengali speaking military and civilian personnel who were stranded in West Pakistan during the war.

In 1992, after restoration of democracy, an unofficial “Court of People” (Bengali: গণআদালত Gonoadalot) “sentenced” Golam Azam and his ten accomplices to death for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Jamaat-e-Islami was already a part of the ruling four-party alliance in Bangladesh and so the “verdict” was ignored. Moreover, the then BNP government returned Bangladeshi nationality to Golam Azam, as it had been taken from him after the war. Subdued during the rule of Awami League from 1996-2001, Jamaat returned in full force after the next election in October 2001 in which a four party alliance led by BNP won a landslide victory. The new leader of Jamaat after Golam Azam’s retirement, Motiur Rahman Nizami, a Rajakar and among the ten people tried by the Gonoadalot, became an influential minister in the Government.

The word Rajakar today carries the meaning 'traitor' in common Bangladeshi parlance (similar to the usage of the word Quisling after the Second World War).

Top Razakars

Golam Azam
Abbas Ali Khan
Matiur Rahman Nizami
Delwar Hossain Sayeedi
Ali Ahsan Mujahid
Charmonai Piir: Maulana SM Fazlul Karim
Kamruzzaman
Abdul Alim
Abdul Kader Mollah
A S M Solaiman
Abdus Sobhan
AKM Yousuf
Ayen ud Din
Khalek Majumder
Moinuddin Chowdhury
Ashrafuzzaman Khan
Sazzad Hossain

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razakars_%28Bangladesh%29

Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh (JIB) is internally more "democratic" than any other political party is Bangladesh, save the Communist Party. Meaning you may "dissent" only within stringent ideological norms and guidelines of the party.

They take their time to extensively screen and indoctrinate prospective cantidates before registering them as members. JIB members directly create and amend the party platform, and elect their leaders at all levels, similar to major political parties in the US.

They don't need the type of "democratic reforms" parties such as the BAL, BNP and BJP are still falling far short of. The "democratic reforms" those parties are talking about don't go beyond the questionably "more democratic" totalitarian rule of "collective leadership" as opposed to the traditional crypto-fascist, semi-feudal, hereditary authoritarian rule they've accepted with notable glee in the not too distant past.

Back to the JIB.

Financially, JIB not is corrupt in the traditional sense. They exploit various loopholes and get financed through a wide variety of NGOs and "Islamic" banks with direct ties to various Wahabi and Maududi quarters in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, and of course, the spiritual center of Maududism in Pakistan. They work closely with anti-pluralist, anti-democratic, Islamo-fascist organizations like Hizbut Tahrir.

This money runs a wide variety of social programs for the marginalized, especially in the north of the country. This is where many of their regular cadres are recruited and trained. Colleges and Universities are places where future leaders are recruited and developed for a wide variety of missions designed to eventually undermine the Constitution of the People's Republic.

The Parliamentary mission is mere eyewash, a PR move. JIB conducts regular surveys and knows that they’re unlikely to get more than 20 seats in the Parliament, hence their more covert missions include infiltrating the Civil, Judicial, Military and Police services. Their disciplined membership "guarantees" an additional 50,000 plus vote in each one of our 300 constituencies, and it is those votes that make their involvement in election coalitions so alluring.

It is important to note that 201 of the 300 seats tend to change MPs in closely contested elections where those 50,000 votes can make all the difference. The BAL has won only 33 and BNP only 66 of the same seats out of 300 every time during the last 3 elections.

Active participation in government, and holding key portfolios such as Social Welfare, Agriculture and Industries facilitated more infiltration in a more deceptively transparent manner, as their "candidates" tend to be more than qualified as per "approved" standards. The current CTG is busy purging those public services of this illegal and carefully concealed element.

JIB's direct involvement with JMB is enough to call for the current "covert" investigation underway, and will eventually result in their much awaited demise. All of the JMB leadership are "former" JIB members. The trouble is, in reality there's no such thing as a "former" JIB member, especially from the Shathi level upwards.

The mainstream leadership of Nizami, Mujaheed and the English-speaking mouthpiece Barrister Razzak, tolerated these so called fringe elements in a manner so that it could maintain plausible deniability. Fringe groups can make a society ungovernable with obvious benefits to "law and order" outfits such as JIB and their moles in the public services, as the general public grows insecure and calls for a state of permanent emergency.

The JIB leadership didn't anticipate JMB spiraling out of control when it did and the efficiency with which they were defeated by the Army and RAB. They have been exposed and it's a matter of time before they're implicated the most serious crime of all - sedition. The punishment for sedition - which covers conspiracies to undermine the letter and the spirit of our Constitution - is death.

Edited and pasted from another thread ...

[Sohel]

Find out more about RAZAKARS and THE '71 ATROCITIES.

[MarufH]

thanks... very interesting read.

[Nocturnal]

Sohel bhai- Thanks.

[rubel_18]

Thanx for dis Sohel bhai

[Nafi]

I prefer a secular government

[HereWeGo]

for all I know...Jamaat should be banned from politics for ever. The day that happens i shall be the happiest man in this entire universe.

[shaad]

Also check out the cables and related documents from the US National Security Archive at this link.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by Nafi
I prefer a secular government

So do I; but part of having a secular, democratic government is allowing all parties (even those running on religious platforms) to participate.

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
for all I know...Jamaat should be banned from politics for ever. The day that happens i shall be the happiest man in this entire universe.

I'd be fine with banning those members for whom we have official records of taking part in or encouraging the atrocities. I would argue against banning the party itself, because at present we have a known organization where people with a particular religious/political leaning end up. If we were to ban it, many of these folk would be more likely to join more extremist underground (and thus hard to keep track of) organizations like JMB.

And let's not forget that Jamaat has not had any significant increase in number of seats won since they started taking part in Bangladeshi elections.

[Murad]

i don't like wikipedia. the articles from that site can be edited by anybody. you can add anything you like.

most of the professors don't give credits for the references made from wikipedia in our college. they say its fake.

[shaad]

Originally Posted by muradnyc
i don't like wikipedia. the articles from that site can be edited by anybody. you can add anything you like.

most of the professors don't give credits for the references made from wikipedia in our college. they say its fake.

Murad,

You can't cite Wikipedia as a primary source; however, many of the Wikipedia articles do cite primary sources as references. You can look those up yourself, and if those sources do indeed support your thesis, use them as references.

[Antora]

i've heard about this political party and i absolutely hate them! they should not do politicz.. those bl**dy rajakars!!!

any way thnx for the article uncle...

[Sohel]

Originally Posted by shaad
So do I; but part of having a secular, democratic government is allowing all parties (even those running on religious platforms) to participate.

I am certain that we’re not in disagreement here, but I honestly don’t think "secularism" as a Western concept is that important an issue. Religious culture, and "inclusive" slash "just" socio-political structures do not need to be mutually exclusive, ideologically or otherwise. It is important to note that Western secularism, as expressed in a wide variety of legal codes and practices that govern its institutions, is itself based on Anglo-American Common Law rooted in Judeo-Christian, i.e. religious morality. That said, I think fair and equal treatment under the law is the important issue at hand. Semantics …

As a Muslim, I do not find the Abrahamic morality as revealed in the Holy Quran to contradict that particular issue in any way, shape, or form. Maybe during this great Information Age of the New Islamic Revivalism, we are sowing the seeds of our own brand of "democratic secularism", albeit with predictably strong and occasionally violent opposition from the few who perhaps do not recognize the inherent indignity in speaking for others, and feel threatened by such dynamic and inevitable change. Only history will tell of the details of our new Al Andalus and how it came to be in the 21st Century.

Anyway, so much for that little tangent.

Perhaps it would be fair to say that a majority of Muslims continue to seek common ground in order to endeavor for justice and peace in an increasingly smaller and "complex" world, all the while trying to understand the differences that separate all of Allah’s creations as best as they can as individuals, perhaps without too much external coercion. Some appear to do more erudite job than others and that is nothing new in the 1500 years of Islamic traditions. Early Muslim scholars found common ground in Socrates, Plato and Aristotle in order to better understand the overwhelming evidence of Allah’s system, as many modern Muslim scholars find common ground in Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr and Michel Foucault among others.

Then again, there are those Muslims who advocate the separation of people from each other and regard "difference" as a threat that must be contained or destroyed. This creates a legacy of fear, divisions, mistrust, conflict and finally an incessant and perverse "war" of all against all. Such a "war" serves only their original, unresolved fears, and reinforces all subsequent inadequacies and insecurities in a perpetuation of pain and suffering at the hands of the very impiety and injustice that often result in such heartbreaking, unkind and dangerous behavior.

When all is said and done, all those who don’t break their covenant with Allah will be victorious, if they keep in mind that it is the very liberating act of the struggle itself, rather than the its eventual outcome that may lead to our salvation.

"We have decreed that the believers will be victorious." (30:47)

"GOD will support with victory those who support Him. GOD is powerful, Almighty." (22:40)

"GOD will surely defend those who believe. GOD does not like any betrayer, disbeliever." (22:38)

"O you who believe, if you support GOD, He will grant you victory, and strengthen your foothold." (47:7)

A critical part of that covenant with Allah is the practice and cultivation of piety and justice. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, pluralism, direct representation and tolerance are good expressions of a sense of piety and justice.

The spirit of democracy within that context is not at all contradictory to Islam unless one decontextualizes and twists Islam to fit into their pathological quest to "control" what ultimately cannot be controlled within the incessant generation of spontaneous differences, and the overall multiplicity of our heterogeneous and symbiotic universe in various states of constant flux. Even when such delusions of "control" seem real, they never last as long as the delusional mind would like them to, and never without terrible consequences in this life and the life to come. At the end of the day, only Allah can exercise such powers of ‘control’ in His Omnipotence.

The trouble with JIB is not difficult to gauge. Their Maududi ideology clearly advocates the following concept: -

“theo-democracy," in which three principles: tawhid (unity of God), risala (prophethood) and khilafa (caliphate) underlie the Islamic political system.

Maududi asserts that Islamic democracy is the antithesis of secular Western democracy which bases hakmiya (sovereignty) on the people. In an Islamic democracy the sovereignty of God and sovereignty of the people are mutually exclusive.

Maududi maintains that an Islamic government must accept the supremacy of Islamic law over all aspects of political and religious life.

First of all, it is indeed sad to see fellow Muslims who feel a need to justify Allah's "sovereignty" through socio-political means at their earthly disposal. As a Muslim, I need Him and need to submit willfully to the "way" revealed in the Holy Quran for my own benefit and that of this world. In my humble opinion, He does not need us validate His sovereignty. As a Muslim, I believe that we need to submit willfully to Him, as per the revelation in the Holy Quran to the best of our good faith ability as sentient individuals, for our own happiness in this life and the life to come. Period.

The Quran alone for me is the COMPLETE Word of Allah - revealed for ALL of mankind and not just the elite few - and contains all the inspiration and guidance I need to express and cultivate that personal submission. The Holy Quran is DIVINE revelation that supercedes, and therefore is the unifying root of submission with as many branches as there is variety in Allah's creations. It CANNOT be any individual branch of any given human endeavor - no matter how noble, important and valuable that endeavor may be - while at the same time being the positive light in CAN BE in transforming those endeavors into something truly worth our while as Allah's creations.

That is my humble and almost instinctive view on Islam and politics. My Muslim brothers and sisters in JIB and other similar parties - and I do not use the words 'brothers" and "sisters" sarcastically - do not share my view. Here are a few relevant verses before I move on: -

“'Shall I seek other than God as a judge when He has sent down to you this Scripture fully detailed?'” Those to whom We have given the Scripture know it is sent down from your Lord with truth; so do not be of those who have doubt." (The Message 6:114 )

"Say: 'Which is the greatest testimony?' Say: 'God is witness between me and you, and He has inspired to me this Qur'an that I may warn you with it and whomever it reaches, that you bear witness that along with God are other gods!' Say: 'I do not bear witness!' Say: 'He is only One god, and I am innocent of what you set up!'” (The Message 6:19)

"And We have come to them with a Scripture which We have detailed with knowledge; a guide and a mercy to those who believe." (The Message 7:52)

"We have revealed to you the Scripture with truth that you may judge between the people by that which God has shown you, and do not be an advocate for the treacherous." (The Message 4:105)

"And the Day We send to every nation a witness against them from themselves, and We have brought you as a witness against these. And We have sent down to you the Scripture as a clarification for all things, and a guide and mercy and good tidings to those who have surrendered." (The Message 16:89)

"And We have sent down to you the Scripture with truth, authenticating what is present of the Scripture and superseding it. So judge between them by what God has sent down, and do not follow their desires from what has come to you of the truth. For each of you We have made laws, and a structure; and had God willed, He would have made you all one nation, but He tests you with what He has given you; so strive to do good. To God you will return all of you, and He will inform you regarding that in which you dispute." (The Message 5:48)

"That is because God was not to change anything He bestowed to a people, unless they change what is in themselves. God is Hearer, Knowledgeable." (The Message 8:53)

Now to my fellow Muslim brothers and sisters who have their own view when it comes to the matter of Islam and the exercise of political power.

Problems begin when they create a list of their preferred "rightly guided scholars" often based on a set of traditional, valuable but nevertheless self-attesting guidelines that may or may not take the letter and spirit of the Quran and the all realities presented by this Information Age into proper account, while often violently rejecting or "blacklisting" other views as the "blasphemous" utterances from "deviant imposters" and "Kaffirs". According to some traditional Quranic interpretations, the only time a Muslim can call another a "Kaffir" is when in fact he or she has been accused a being one him or herself. Such is the inevitable way all hypocrites are exposed. I have posted an interview of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf at the very end of this post on this and other matters. Parts 3 and 5 address the K-word well. The Sheikh is a respected Muslim scholar and a central figure in the course of my life. I humbly suggest to all those interested in the matter to take the time and listen closely to what he has to say in its entirety.

Anyway, the exclusionists anoint the politically convenient scholars of their choice who according to their absolutist, "infallible reasoning" are "supremely qualified to interpret the intent of the Law Giver" as guardians or de facto partners and intermediaries between Allah and an individual’s salvation in various acts of "shirk" clear to everyone.

Everyone except of course, themselves and those sad, brokenhearted and sorrowful souls who seek the ultimately false sense of security in their dogma and "discipline" which feed the engine of fear and paranoia, exclude and vilify others, and seek to impose and exercise sectarian power unilaterally without the possibility of a role reversal or genuine dissent. In a not at all unexpected or unforeseen irony, they either "reject" or "accept" Quranic revelation only in terms of their own power-relation dynamics and dogma instead of the other way around. Intellectual dishonesty, deliberate decontextualizations, the emotionally manipulative art of doublespeak, and the insatiable thirst to have the "input" match the "expectation" keep the fire of the sectarian zealotry burning, and the crypto-Fascist hierarchies intact.

"Say: 'O My servants who transgressed against themselves, do not despair of God's mercy. For God forgives all sins. He is the Forgiver, the Merciful.'" (The Message 39:53)

"And who is more wicked than one who is reminded of his Lord’s verses but he turned away from them, and he forgot what his hands had done. We have made veils upon their hearts from understanding them, and a deafness in their ears. And if you invite them to the guidance, they will never be guided." (The Message 18:57)

"And when God Alone is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter are filled with aversion; and when others are mentioned beside Him, they rejoice!" (The Message 39:45)

Another story, but before moving forward, let me state clearly that I think the problem is not with the Islamic scholars or their traditional scholarship, but the value we assign to their work, and the manner in which we use that work for political gain. It is often not the scholar but the "follower" who uses the scholarship in order to exclude and hate those who disagree with their views, and resist their will to impose those views by coercion and force.

Having said all that, Islam inspired democracy in Bangladesh, or democracy in the traditionally pluralist and anti-sectarian Islamic religious culture of Bangladesh, must continue to rise above the urge to "bite the rabid dog" and recognize its citizens' right to be wrong, and protect those rights from in Jefferson’s words, "the tyranny of the majority" provided that they do not break the laws of the land and trample upon the rights of their compatriots.

The late Maolana Bhasani, despite all of his political and human shortcomings, understood this clearly. A man deeply inspired by Islam to do politics, he understood the paramount importance of keeping Islam out of the inevitably corrupt influences of political technologies of power. He understood in his own way, as do the overwhelming majority of the devoutly Muslim population of Bangladesh, that politics has no purpose other than the continued preservation and strategic growth of the "normalizing" technologies of coercion at its disposal, and socio-political exercise of those coercive powers upon the masses irrespective of ideological rationale.

Since Bhasani, organized Islamic politics in Bangladesh has been largely reactionary, anti-pluralist and all too often Pakistan and Saudi-centric. Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan and other outfits such as Hizbut Tahrir remain the "spiritual" slash "ideological" center of their politics of exclusion and deception, in a manner similar to the almost deified value attached Soviet and Chinese Communist Parties in relation to Bangladeshi Communist politics from the not too distant past. In order to understand JIB better, one also needs to understand the connections between JIB and all of their allies, including the Taliban in Afghanistan. Please feel free to click away at those links ...

It is again ironic that they seek to subvert and undermine the very Constitution and laws that provide them with such protection in line with the true letter and spirit of the Quran, and subsequent cultivation of piety and justice that is the best possible expression our collective submission as a society and nation.

We as submitters must believe that Allah is indeed Omniscient and Omnipotent, and that only He knows what is truly in the hearts of His creations. As an authentic expression of our faith, we must therefore fight for the fundamental human rights of all, including those amongst His creations who disagree with us. An integral part of that fight also implores us to remain equally vigilant and passionate about defending those rights against all adversaries foreign and domestic hell-bent on their destruction.

Originally Posted by shaad
I'd be fine with banning those members for whom we have official records of taking part in or encouraging the atrocities. I would argue against banning the party itself, because at present we have a known organization where people with a particular religious/political leaning end up. If we were to ban it, many of these folk would be more likely to join more extremist underground (and thus hard to keep track of) organizations like JMB.

Absolutely.

Implementing the laws of the People’s Republic - especially those laws related to violent crimes past and present as well as sedition - through an independent Judiciary diligently enforcing due process to the best of its ability, is sufficient to bring all those who seek to undermine our Constitution to justice. There is no need to ban any political party.

That said, one must clearly distinguish between terrorist, paramilitary outfits such as the JMB, including all of their foreign and domestic patrons, and a political party that abides by the laws of the People’s Republic irrespective of its political views.

Originally Posted by shaad
And let's not forget that Jamaat has not had any significant increase in number of seats won since they started taking part in Bangladeshi elections.

Spot on.

The wisdom of our pluralist religious-cultural fabric and the "common" Bangladeshi voter continues to recognize what they are and reject them at the polls decisively as they have in the past. Despite all the socio-economic exploitation and resulting poverty, they still cannot be coerced into believing that some of the politically motivated charity is anything other than coercion itself.

That sort of political growth however, will not stop them from taking full advantage of what is being offered at the plate in spite of the ulterior motives that fool no one. They see passionate demonstrations against free speech blown out of proportion, while the complicity of silence rules that political roost when it comes to addressing incredible socio-economic injustice and class-based, often Muslim on Muslim violence that result from that injustice at home.

Hizbut Tahrir with JIB, IOJ and KH support can advocate violence when it comes to a conceptually plagiarized cartoon, but say nothing about the BDT 10 "Iftaar Allowance" demanded by exploited factory workers as promised by some of their blood-sucking owners. These matters are not lost on anyone other than those using Islam as a coercive means of imposing their exclusionary views and attempting to gain a cheap and easy political foothold within the Bangladeshi Muslim psyche which continues to reject them at the polls, and reject them comprehensively.

Our people have no trouble recognizing - especially in light of our history since 1971 in general, and the last 20 odd years in particular – those who do what they do only out of the conviction of their own vanity and narrow self gain at the expense of others. The act of wallowing in self-admiration carries with it a shine and a stink they no longer have trouble recognizing as the evil it truly is, was, and always will be.

Our people are smart, skilled, hardworking folks who manage to survive the socio-economic violence and inequities of our class system with a smile on their faces, and make nothing less than noble sacrifices for their families and communities without compromising the traditional values at the root of our peaceful culture. They do this everyday despite all of the subsequent adversities presented by such a disparate, unequal playing field of real economic opportunities kept that way by the desensitized vanity of a ruling class which has strayed far from the spiritual center of those values, and consequently its own moral fiber.

More power to our people who will take the money that belongs to them anyway, but not vote for you when the time comes. Who says you can’t have your cake and eat it too? …

Peace, Sohel

PS: Sheikh Hamza Yususf interview.

Part I: Creed … plus


Part II: Theology and Intellectual Traditions … plus


Part III: Faith … plus


Part IV: Knowledge and Action … plus


Part V: Creed of Imam Tahawi and Inclusivism … plus


Part VI: Anger and Scholarship … plus

[Sohel]

Originally Posted by shaad
Murad,

You can't cite Wikipedia as a primary source; however, many of the Wikipedia articles do cite primary sources as references. You can look those up yourself, and if those sources do indeed support your thesis, use them as references.

Spot on. Wikipedia is as a good place to START as any ...

[Fazal]

Top Razakars

Golam Azam
Abbas Ali Khan
Matiur Rahman Nizami
Delwar Hossain Sayeedi
Ali Ahsan Mujahid
Charmonai Piir: Maulana SM Fazlul Karim
Kamruzzaman
Abdul Alim
Abdul Kader Mollah
A S M Solaiman
Abdus Sobhan
AKM Yousuf
Ayen ud Din
Khalek Majumder
Moinuddin Chowdhury
Ashrafuzzaman Khan
Sazzad Hossain

If they are the top, who are the bottom (Razakars) then?

[Sohel]

Originally Posted by Fazal
If they are the top, who are the bottom (Razakars) then?

According to a list compiled by RAW after Independence, a list obtained from the Pak Army, there were close to 74.000 Razakar "combatants". A majority of them were conscripts from EP Ansars, but the entire political slash military leadership came from Jamaat and "Islamic" parties, including the Muslim League, most notably in Chittagong. We also need to remember Jamaat's close connections with Yahiya and his men within the Pak Army.

Today, most of that leadership is still with the same parties under the now-defunct "protection" of both BNP and BAL at the thana level of party politics.

[HereWeGo]

Today Mr. Mujahid, the Founder of Al Badr claimed that there are no war criminals in Bangladesh. How much more lies and deciet are we to tolerate from our politicians. The murderers and the liars, unfortunately they seem to represent the face of Islam in Bangladesh. I ask everyone to raise your voice and protest against these people. We must protect our religion and our cuntry from getting tarnished by these people.

[ialbd]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Today Mr. Mujahid, the Founder of Al Badr claimed that there are no war criminals in Bangladesh. How much more lies and deciet are we to tolerate from our politicians. The murderers and the liars, unfortunately they seem to represent the face of Islam in Bangladesh. I ask everyone to raise your voice and protest against these people. We must protect our religion and our cuntry from getting tarnished by these people.

HereWeGo bro,

I think we should put this news in the Joke of the Day thread. This simply doesnt suit anywhere else......

[layperson]

I strongly support the CTG's move to try and prevent war criminals from contesting in the national election. I have read Mr mujahid's statement and these people need a kick up their backside to refresh their memories. The best answer we can give them is to ban them from taking part in elections.

[PoorFan]

Originally Posted by layperson
The best answer we can give them is to ban them from taking part in elections.

And how exactly is it possible? certainly not by force I guess? or is it by a legal action ( legal prosecution )?

Since both BAL and BNP never went ( court ) for any sort of legal action ( judicial settlement such as their action, identification, conviction, restriction etc.), I don't see a peaceful settlement no matter how much we scream for the ban of their political activity at this moment. And most surprisingly all these days after independence, our 'brilliant' politicians were not even able to make their leaders hold responsible ( for wrongdoing ), nor any apology to the people! Not a single leader of razakars yet! let alone their political party to be ban or not!

Yet again, BAL & left wing politicians showing their knee jerk reaction towards EC ( instead of going to court! ). I wonder how miserable losers are these people could be! In the mean time BNP people seems enjoying circus! All they are asking is to 'seed' another harmful and long due socio political conflict this way ( without having judicial settlement ). Shouldn't they go to court for a 'lawful' settlement ( even now its not late ) if they really feel BD people deserve justice? and they are 'truly' representing BD people?

Having said all above, I think we should bring those razakars leaders to justice first, let them go through prosecution, let them prove themselves to public. As a result, it doesn't matter if they proved guilty or not, but the 'due process' that has been taken will be the history towards justice and settlement, and that is most important IMO. Only this way we can kick them out of politics, power, and earn 'official' apology ( from each of the leaders ) towards people, be it 'truth' or 'heartless'.

[shaad]

Read this Daily Star report:

What Jamaat leaders said in '71
Hasan Jahid Tusher and Ashfaq Wares Khan

Jamaat-e-Islami was directly involved in war crimes in 1971 as part of the Razakar, Al-Badr and Al-Shams groups and peace committees, inciting killings of Liberation War supporters and collaborating with the Pakistani occupation force, according to speeches and writings in 1971 by the then Jamaat leadership and the party's current amir and secretary general.

In 1971, Golam Azam was the Jamaat amir while Motiur Rahman Nizami, the present amir, was the president of Islami Chhatra Shangha and Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed, the present Jamaat secretary general, led its Dhaka unit.

Their speeches and writings published in Jamaat's mouthpiece, the daily Sangram, during the Liberation War in 1971 chronicle their direct involvement in supporting the Pakistani occupation force, their leadership in collaborating with the army, and their activities to incite and encourage annihilation of the liberation forces.

On Thursday, Mojaheed denied Jamaat's involvement in war crimes and with the Razakar, Al-Badr and Al-Shams groups. He claimed that Jamaat did not work against the Liberation War in 1971 and that there is no war criminal in the country.

"In fact, anti-Liberation forces never even existed," Mojaheed told reporters after Jamaat's dialogue with the Election Commission on electoral reforms.

As a response to the Jamaat secretary general's claims, following are selections from the reports published in the daily Sangram and documents of the then West Pakistan government:

Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed, president of Dhaka unit of East Pakistan Islami Chhatra Shangha (ICS), directed his party workers to build Al-Badr Bahini to resist freedom fighters, according to a "Fortnightly secret report on the situation in East Pakistan" the political section of the then East Pakistan home ministry used to send to the head of the government General Yahya Khan.

Mojaheed at a meeting of the ICS in Rangpur on October 17 directed the party workers to build the Al-Badr Bahini. He told the meeting that anti-Islamist forces must be resisted. He also emphasised organising youths to join Al-Badr.

Al-Badr day was observed in Dhaka on November 7, 1971 and Mojaheed announced a four-point declaration that said, "We do not believe in any map of Hindustan on earth. We will not rest until the name of Hindustan is erased from the world.

"From tomorrow, you will not be allowed to sell, publicise or keep at libraries books either written by Hindus or written in their support," according to a report published in the daily Azad on November 8, 1971.

The Al-Badr was assigned a variety of combat and non-combat tasks, including taking part in operations, spying against the Muktibahini, interrogation, working as guides for the regular army, assassination, detecting and killing Bangalee intellectuals, looting and supplying women and children to rape, according to Wikipedia.

Continued in the original article...

[shaad]

I tend to agree with PoorFan's views in this matter. And, as I've mentioned earlier, allowing Jamaat to exist as a political party provides a forum where many radical fundamentalists may end up (and thus be kept track of), instead of going underground in more radical (read terrorist) organizations like JMB or HJB.

[Sohel]

Dear Shaad,

Once again I'm in agreement with you 100% for the reasons I've echoed in post #13 of this thread.

However, after Mujahid and his banker's outrageous comments recently, there is a strong populist upsurge to ban "Islamic" politics altogether. I don't think that is good for the growth of democracy in Bangladesh, especially in light of the fact that they continue to be rejected decisively at the polls, and we have ample laws to punish violent criminals irrespective of particular rationale used during the course of their crimes, "political", "religious' or otherwise. Special "national and public security commissions and tribunals" can speed up the legal process with regards to sedition and especially violent crimes such as war crimes, political terrorism, and torture and violence against women and children at all levels already at our disposal.

Here's a dig you've probably seen already: -

Law doesn't allow Jamaat politics
Shakhawat Liton

The existing laws do not allow Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh and other Islamic political parties to run their activities in the name of or on the basis of religion but the parties have been doing these for the last three decades due to non-enforcement of the laws.

The 1972 constitution banned formation and functioning of any association or union or political parties on the basis of religion. The provision for ban was later repealed.

But the Special Powers Act (SPA) 1974, still in force, provides for such ban and punishment for violation of the provision.

All successive governments since the August 1975 changeover used the SPA to suppress opponents but turned a blind eye to the ban on political activities in the name of or based on religion.

Legal experts say the government does not need to enact new laws to ban use of religion for political purposes. It can enforce the SPA provision in this regard, if it wants.

Activities of Jamaat-e-Islami and such other Islamic parties were banned under the constitution of 1972 but they resumed their activities on a large scale following repeal of the constitutional restriction in 1976 during military rule.

"Every citizen shall have the right to form associations or unions, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of morality or public order: Provide that no person shall have the right to form, or be a member or otherwise take part in the activities of any communal or other association or union which in the name or on the basis of any religion has for its object, or pursues, a political purpose," says Article 38 of the 1972 constitution.

But in 1976, the military government led by Ziaur Rahman repealed the restriction by issuing a martial law proclamation, allowing formation and functioning of organisations based on religion. Since then the relevant article of the constitution says every citizen shall have the right to form associations or unions, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of morality or public order or public health.

The military regime however did not repeal the SPA provision that imposed restriction on formation or operation of any association on the basis of religion.

"No person shall form, or be a member or otherwise take part in the activities of, any communal or other association or union which in the name or on the basis of any religion has for its object, or pursues, a political purpose," says Sub-section 1 of Section 20 of the SPA.

The SPA also states the procedure of taking actions against such association and union formed on the basis of religion.

Sub-section 2 of Section 20 of the SPA says where the government is satisfied that an association or union has been formed or is operating in contravention of the provisions of Sub-section (1), it may, after hearing the person or persons concerned, declare, by notification in the official gazette, that the association or union has been formed or is operating in contravention of the provisions of Sub-section (1), and upon such declaration, the association or union concerned shall stand dissolved and all its properties and funds shall be forfeited to government.

"Any person who, after the dissolution of an association or union under Sub-section (2), holds himself out as a member or office bearer of that association or union, or acts for, or otherwise takes part in the activities of, that association or union, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both," says Sub-section 3 of Section 20 of the Act.

Since the constitutional ban was repealed in 1976, Islamic political parties and organisations have mushroomed in the country.

No one knows the number of such parties and other organisations as neither the government nor the Election Commission (EC) has any accurate figures on them.

Government intelligence agencies' records however showed existence and activities of about 100 Islamic political parties and organisations since repeal of the ban, and of around 11 in between 1964 and 1971, sources said.

Of the existing parties and organisations apparently based on Islam, some have been identified as militant outfits. And the government banned four of them -- Shahadat-e- Al Hiqma, Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh, Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh and Harkat-Ul Jihad -- during 2003 to 2005. Some organisations were accused of patronising the militant groups.

DS LINK

[Sohel]

Jamaat is worried and Major Hafiz, BB speaks his mind ... the heat is ON ...

[Sohel]

Quader Mollah sued for 'sedition'
Star Report

A 'sedition' case against Jamaat-e-Islami Assistant Secretary General Abdul Quader Mollah was filed in Madaripur yesterday, accusing him of involvement in activities against the country's sovereignty and independence.

District Bar Association leader Obaidur Rahman Kalu Khan filed the case with the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madaripur.

The case statement said, "Abdul Quader Mollah is a cheat. He is engaged in activities against sovereignty and independence of the country and is active in destroying peace and discipline of people through his statements."

A situation, thanks to his activities, has been created in the country where safety of life, resources of the citizens in both home and abroad, and sovereignty of the country are threatened, the statement said.

Quader at an occasion at National Press Club in the capital said: "Some took part in the Liberation War for lust for beautiful women, some for looting assets of the Hindus and some for serving the interests of India."

The news on his comments was published in the daily Ittefaq on October 31.

Court sources said six have been made witnesses in the case. They are Ittefaq editor Anwar Hossain, acting editor Rahat Khan, publisher Saju Hossain, the news editor, the staff reporter, and Zakir Hossain of Madaripur Notun Shahar.

The case statement further said Quader condemned the creation of Bangladesh and wants destruction of her sovereignty.

It also demanded that Quader make a public apology to the nation for his audacious remarks. All the freedom fighters have felt insulted by his remarks, which threatened the peace in people's mind across the country, it added.

It also said the complainant filed the case as the Central Muktijoddha Sangsad or the state did not take any steps in this regard.

The complainant, advocate Obaidur Rahman, said he filed the case under the section 123 (ka) for making criticism of the Liberation War and under the Penal Code 504 for breaking public peace.

Asked about the witnesses in the case, he said, "As the news report was published in the daily Ittefaq, the individuals concerned are surely aware of it. That is why they will give their depositions as witnesses.

"Besides, an individual, Zakir Hossain of Madaripur, has also been shown a witness."

Madaripur Chief Judicial Magistrate AFM Mahbubul Haque accepted the case and sent it to Sadar Police Station for investigation.

The chief lawyer of the complainant is advocate Pradip Chandra Sarkar, who along with 24 other lawyers has signed to fight the legal battle.

DS LINK

Interesting case as the ball starts rolling over to the courts. As much as I support the effort, I don't think the charge of 'sedition' will hold up in light of some of the free speech issues. Looking forward to see this one unfold with great interest.