Fresh Poll : Bangladesh Election 2007 - Page 3

*reverse_swing* · #51 December 13, 2006, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thebest
The funny thing is that same thing happend in 1987 when Ershad caught Sk Hasina but could not catch Khaleda. History repeats
I would be happy if you explain those.
There would be no rebuttal from me.

You remember that famous long drive.

thebest · #52 December 13, 2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reverse_swing
You remember that famous long drive.

Yea I am old enough to particiapte in 1990. Good Old Days.

*reverse_swing* · #53 December 13, 2006, 08:42 AM

I mean Hasina Ershad long drive.

HereWeGo · #54 December 13, 2006, 10:50 AM

Sheikh mujib wanted to be the president of pakistan???!!!! Nice conspiracy theory dude.... one small problem, he never even wanted pakistan to exist....

Listen guys, u can brand me and BBgun as Al supporters although i am sure none of us are. We just hate when we see posts against one party only where as both parties are equally to be blamed for all the atrocities. I resent the fact that most of you guys don see the difference between SM and Jiaur rahman. And honestly i really don have ne interest to repeat history. U guys think Jiaur rahman declared independence ( Go ahead, think wat u want). U think Mujib loved living on pakistani jail, becuz he was too scared to fight ( again Go ahead). U can even celebrated ur Bday on the day he was killed if u want ( if that is how much u guys hate him), but i am sure u dont posess the same small mentality like our PM .

One more thing....if u don wanna go into any political debate y do u even ask????? Hmm Conspiracy..

Miraz · #55 December 13, 2006, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Sheikh mujib wanted to be the president of pakistan???!!!! Nice conspiracy theory dude.... one small problem, he never even wanted pakistan to exist....

Listen guys, u can brand me and BBgun as Al supporters although i am sure none of us are. .

Dude, either you are very young or you have never read history.

Denying one fact does not make the fact wrong.

And supporting AL is not something to be ashamed. Its no problem if you support AL.

HereWeGo · #56 December 13, 2006, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miraz
Dude, either you are very young or you have never read history.

Denying one fact does not make the fact wrong.

And supporting AL is not something to be ashamed. Its no problem if you support AL.

Lemme rephrase it, his motivation to fight a liberation war was not due to the fact that he wanted to be the president of pakistan. Infact he was supposed to be executed in pakistan jail. Again, i am not ashamed of supporting the rights from the wrongs, I resent some of the things that mujib himself wanted to do/or did ( ex bakshal, and pardon his son, or pardon the rajakars). But i still believe that he is the best leader bangladesh has ever had. finally i hate the rajakars and hate people who seek to shake hands with them for the motivation of power alone, and again a big No if u say i blindly support one party.

sensible · #57 December 13, 2006, 12:03 PM

Sheikh Muzib and AL took part in the elections in Pakistan and won the majority. Naturally, AL wanted to form the federal government (or the equivalent in Pakistan). (I personally am not sure how practical it was given the fact that AL was a provincial party after all!) However, leaders in the west such as Bhutto or Yahia did not let Muzib form the government of Pakistan. It was then Muzib had his 7th march announcement of independence and all. Until that time, the movement in the east Pakistan led by Muzib was for provincial autonomy within the joint Pakistan. What I understand is Muzib wanted greater rights to the states and less federal control. Am I wrong in any part of this history lesson?

I think it was Bhasani who wanted outright independence, not autonomy even before the election in 1970.

HereWeGo · #58 December 13, 2006, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sensible
Sheikh Muzib and AL took part in the elections in Pakistan and won the majority. Naturally, AL wanted to form the federal government (or the equivalent in Pakistan). (I personally am not sure how practical it was given the fact that AL was a provincial party after all!) However, leaders in the west such as Bhutto or Yahia did not let Muzib form the government of Pakistan. It was then Muzib had his 7th march announcement of independence and all. Until that time, the movement in the east Pakistan led by Muzib was for provincial autonomy within the joint Pakistan. What I understand is Muzib wanted greater rights to the states and less federal control. Am I wrong in any part of this history lesson?

I think it was Bhasani who wanted outright independence, not autonomy even before the election in 1970.

Agreed....Sorry for not being able to put it right.... by the way u do sound sensible..

Special 1 · #59 December 13, 2006, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sensible
Sheikh Muzib and AL took part in the elections in Pakistan and won the majority. Naturally, AL wanted to form the federal government (or the equivalent in Pakistan). (I personally am not sure how practical it was given the fact that AL was a provincial party after all!) However, leaders in the west such as Bhutto or Yahia did not let Muzib form the government of Pakistan. It was then Muzib had his 7th march announcement of independence and all. Until that time, the movement in the east Pakistan led by Muzib was for provincial autonomy within the joint Pakistan. What I understand is Muzib wanted greater rights to the states and less federal control. Am I wrong in any part of this history lesson?

I think it was Bhasani who wanted outright independence, not autonomy even before the election in 1970.

I guess you are right about mujib's stance in 1970. And he did not even want independence on 7th March. He said that he doesnt want the country to be divided into two, but said that Bangladeshis should get their fair share of gains.
He tried his best too keep the country together and only when it failed he declared independence. (Altho, there are so many versions of this its hard to decipher which one is true)

Special 1 · #60 December 13, 2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thebest
BBGun and Here we go Bhai,
I do not want to go in a political debate (specially with BAL supporter as it seems to me you two are). Can you explain me two things
1. Sk Mujibur Rahaman declared independence on 7th March 1971এ বারের সংগ্রাম মুক্তির সংগ্রাম.....আপনাদের যা আছে তা নিয়ে ঝাপিয়ে পড়ুন. What he was doing till 25th of March after declaring independence on the 7th and it was not a non-violent declaration ?
My explanation (this is purely my opinion)
He never wanted Bangladesh. He declared that socalled 'declaration of independence' by the presure of DUCSU leaders. He wanted to be the prime minister of 'Islamic Republic of Pakistan' under Yahiya Khan.
2. When all the leaders could escape the clutch of Pakistan Army on the night of 25th, why he and Dr Kamal can not? Remember Dr Kamal was not as prominent as Tajuddin. Pak army would have more interest in catching Tajuddin then Dr Kamal.
My explanation
They were not foresighted enough or he was fool enough to believe that Army would do nothing. The funny thing is that same thing happend in 1987 when Ershad caught Sk Hasina but could not catch Khaleda. History repeats
I would be happy if you explain those.
There would be no rebuttal from me.

He did not declare independence on the 7th of march. So, i dont know what you are talking about.
But he did want to be leader of Pakistan and was not an advocate for two seperate country in the begenning. But I dont see a problem with it.

Listen Mujib was a very proud man. I do not think he would flee even if he knew that they were coming. Yes he was stubborn but it doesnt say anything about his foresight.

Special 1 · #61 December 13, 2006, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoorFan
Not unless they ( leaders ) deserve or anyone think so.

So the circle goes on ... ?! sure they deserve to be ridicule one way or another.

Dude i dont see the point of writing this post.

I do agree both hasina and khaleda had reasons to publicize zia and bongobondhu and they went way overboard. But if you do not care to find out what the latter leaders did it is best not to ridicule them. Well you can ridicule both Hasina and Khalada for what they are doing though.

Miraz · #62 December 13, 2006, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
finally i hate the rajakars and hate people who seek to shake hands with them for the motivation of power alone, and again a big No if u say i blindly support one party.

Just one query..

Do you hate Sheikh Hasina for the same reason when she shook hands with Jamaat in 1996 for the same reason.

HereWeGo · #63 December 13, 2006, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miraz
Just one query..

Do you hate Sheikh Hasina for the same reason when she shook hands with Jamaat in 1996 for the same reason.

If she did, than yes i do hate her.....

Special 1 · #64 December 13, 2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miraz
Just one query..

Do you hate Sheikh Hasina for the same reason when she shook hands with Jamaat in 1996 for the same reason.

Was there any formal agreement between Jamaat and BAL in 1996?

Alien · #65 December 13, 2006, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBgun
Was there any formal agreement between Jamaat and BAL in 1996?

But why shake hands with the rajakars and then fight with them 10 years later? Formal agreement or not.

Miraz · #66 December 13, 2006, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBgun
Was there any formal agreement between Jamaat and BAL in 1996?

Yap, if you are old enough to remember. Hasina formally met with Golam Azam and they decided to move together to topple BNP government in the caretaker issue.

Jamaat got only 3 seats in the election but they gained the recognition of BAL which was their main aim.

sensible · #67 December 13, 2006, 05:59 PM

http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2006/...a-shobai-raja/

Interesting pictures....to refresh memories...

layperson · #68 December 13, 2006, 06:15 PM

BTW, All the people participating in this debate, how old were you guys during 71? If not at least old enough to understand politics then all your arguments are based on second party information. The how can you guys shout so surely that the facts you are putting forward is right and the ones the others are putting are wrong ? Bottom line is both Zia and Mujib had a hand in our independence and I am not in a position to decide whose contribution is greater nor do I care. To me you guys are arguing about a topic that is 35 years old instead of focussing on the current issues at hand.

PoorFan · #69 December 13, 2006, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBgun
Dude i dont see the point of writing this post.

I do agree both hasina and khaleda had reasons to publicize zia and bongobondhu and they went way overboard. But if you do not care to find out what the latter leaders did it is best not to ridicule them. Well you can ridicule both Hasina and Khalada for what they are doing though.

Sure you don't see the point ...

In simple you said ... "if you don't care ( difference of ) those leaders ... don't ridicule them" ... though you put "it is best" to make it soft.

My point is otherwise, only those people can ridicule them, who don't 'worship' them, unlike some of us here. If we got two people worshipping one on Mujib and other on Zia, then same thing can be said by Zia worshipper what you said on Mujib's picture ( see those 2 quote in my post ), that's like a never-ending argument goes on from both side.

Mujib did good thing, so did Zia, as well as Mujib did wrong thing and so did Zia. I don't see way one should not ridicule them for their wrong did. It's never matter which one ( those leaders ) deserve more or less credit or discredit, while any people expressing his mind.

PoorFan · #70 December 13, 2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miraz
Yap, if you are old enough to remember. Hasina formally met with Golam Azam and they decided to move together to topple BNP government in the caretaker issue.

Jamaat got only 3 seats in the election but they gained the recognition of BAL which was their main aim.

LOL!! after so many many debate but still seems pretty ignorant! Or that word 'formally' has something to say?

thebest · #71 December 14, 2006, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Sheikh mujib wanted to be the president of pakistan???!!!! Nice conspiracy theory dude.... one small problem, he never even wanted pakistan to exist....

Listen guys, u can brand me and BBgun as Al supporters although i am sure none of us are. We just hate when we see posts against one party only where as both parties are equally to be blamed for all the atrocities. I resent the fact that most of you guys don see the difference between SM and Jiaur rahman. And honestly i really don have ne interest to repeat history. U guys think Jiaur rahman declared independence ( Go ahead, think wat u want). U think Mujib loved living on pakistani jail, becuz he was too scared to fight ( again Go ahead). U can even celebrated ur Bday on the day he was killed if u want ( if that is how much u guys hate him), but i am sure u dont posess the same small mentality like our PM .

One more thing....if u don wanna go into any political debate y do u even ask????? Hmm Conspiracy..

Dude pls read through the line carefully. I wrote SM wanted to be the PM under Yahiya . I never mentioned he wanted to be the president of Pakistan . Even he wanted that was not the option he have. If he did not want Pakistan to exist what he was doing till 25th of March? Bhasani in 1958 said 'As salamu Alaikum'. Even during 'Agartala Consipiracy' he fiercly contested the accusition that he is trying to break Pakistan. He proudly pronounced his allegiance to Pakistan. Recent documents released by USA shows that it might be true but Sk. Mujib never involved.

When i mention the speech of 7th March, did not I recognize he declared independence. Otherwise why I was saying that he did not want but forced. Anyway I did not get any of my answers for the two question I ask.

SM is a great leader (unfortunately opposition), orator but not a statesman. I have great respect for him for the way he lead in 1970. Never in the history, 70 million people prepare to sacrifice their life to save one single soul. So there must be something in him. But I am not old enough to see his charisma. But it does not blinded my view to ask the questions about the quality of his leadership, foresightenss. If he was foresighted enough 'operation searchlight' might not take place. At least one million soul would have been saved. BBGun vai mentioned that SM was stubborn. I do not consider stubborn as a quality and for a leader it is a no no. Foolisness and stubborness is two sides of same coin. I would rather say that his ego failed him to lead the greatest war that the people of the land that now known as Bangladesh?

BB gun vai, which world are you living? Did you hear 7th March speech of SM. There was no ambiguity that the speech was 'Declaration of Independence'. এই বারের সংগ্রাম স্বাধীনতার সংগ্রাম,এই বারের সংগ্রাম মুক্তির সংগ্রাম আপনাদের যা যা আছে তা নিয়ে ঝাপিয়ে পড়ুন This is a ending line of the speech. To me this a perfect 'Declaration of Independence and 'Declaration for liberation war'. Only a fertile mind like some Awami intellect (?) could invent such BS like SM send a telegram/radioed Mr Hannan or BNP intellect(?) that he did not but Zia declared it. Without nullyfying the impact or importance of Zia's call (even if Mr Hannan made it before, but most people hear Zia's one) the first call was made on 7th March 1971.

Regarding political debate. Debate can be contested with the people who are open minded and logical not with blind supporter. Unfortunately, I am yet failed to meet one BAL supporter who is logical and open minded.

Regarding BAL leaders, I would suggest every one to read মূলধারা ৭১. the book writer is Maidul Hossain (or Hasan). He was PS of Tajuddin during the first goverment formed in MujibNagar. You could find how the present BAL leadership (Tofael, Rajjak) behaved in 1971. I have not find any one contested those accounts. Another good book is 'The Fall of East Pakistan'. I forgot the name of the writer. But in 1971. it is an UPL publication. he was DC of Rajshahi. He described how BAL leadership at Rajshahi behave in 1971 at Rajshahi.

Sorry for long post

Miraz · #72 December 14, 2006, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoorFan
LOL!! after so many many debate but still seems pretty ignorant! Or that word 'formally' has something to say?

PoorFan, are you pointing me?? or someone else whom I was answering?

pls clarify.

PoorFan · #73 December 14, 2006, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miraz
PoorFan, are you pointing me?? or someone else whom I was answering?

pls clarify.

Definitely the later one, sorry my post was bit confusing, I didnt noticed back then.

**Nasif** · #74 January 4, 2007, 03:05 PM

Heard in nTV news that LDP has split (forgot who spit what), but the new split party is called BDP (Bangladesh Democratic Party).

This is so funny.... hahaha. In th end LDP turned out to be nothing different from any other party.

billah · #75 January 4, 2007, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nasif
Heard in nTV news that LDP has split (forgot who spit what), but the new split party is called BDP (Bangladesh Democratic Party).

This is so funny.... hahaha. In th end LDP turned out to be nothing different from any other party.

LDP has been breaking up for several weeks now. The first group held a press conference, said they wanted to escape the family politics, but there was too much family involvement by Dr. Bodruddoza and Oli's families.

The second group, the Islamic faction, had similar complaint. This new party has been in the works for sometime now. You can expect some other big names (non-LDP) to join them soon.