Saturday, August 08, 2009

FW: China's Public Enemy

[Here is a very good article on Rebiya Kadeer, once `China's fifth richest person`, now only an exile activist for her people. I hope you will enjoy it.]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204908604574334482235596544.html

China's Public Enemy
The alleged instigator of the Uighur riots doesn't talk like a terrorist. Demonizing her may backfire on Beijing.
Article Comments (26) more in Opinion »Email Printer
By HUGO RESTALL
Washington, D.C.

Rebiya Kadeer is undergoing a Chinese version of George Orwell's "Two Minutes Hate." Separatist, extremist, terrorist-China's state-run media has pulled out the rhetorical big guns to put her beyond the pale of civilized society. By condemning her as the mastermind of last month's riots that killed 197 people in the northwest region of Xinjiang, Beijing has transformed an exiled businesswoman and dissident into public enemy No. 1 for 1.3 billion people.

Even Ms. Kadeer's family in China has joined the campaign-under duress, she says. After blaming her for the loss of innocent lives, several of her children and other relatives exhorted her in an open letter, "Don't destroy the stable and happy life in Xinjiang. Don't follow the provocation from some people in other countries." In scenes reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, the signatories have appeared on state television to publicly disavow Ms. Kadeer.

This blood-stained image is hard to reconcile with the diminutive grandmother, dressed modestly in black, who bustles about a cramped, U.S. government-funded office a block from the White House. Ms. Kadeer may be hated by many Chinese, but the president of the World Uighur Congress inspires admiration among the nine million ethnically Turkish Uighurs in Xinjiang and two million-strong diaspora. An indication of why she inspires such strong emotions comes as she responds to the first question; she speaks with a startling intensity, perching on the edge of a folding chair.

First of all, Ms. Kadeer denies she instigated the July 5 protests in her home town of Urumqi: "I did not tell them to come out on that day or that particular time to protest. It was the six decade-long repression that has driven them to protest."

Ms. Kadeer's own life is a graphic illustration of that repression's ebb and flow. In the 1980s and early '90s, she and her fellow Uighurs benefited from Deng Xiaoping's loosening of controls in all areas of life. Like business pioneers around the country, she overcame obstacles created by Chinese officialdom to build a market stall into a business empire encompassing retail, real estate and international trade.

View Full Image

Zina Saunders
Just as difficult was overcoming the Uighur community's resistance to the idea of a woman taking the lead. Ms. Kadeer's nickname was djahangir, a word of Persian origin meaning one who pushes forward regardless of the consequences.

The Uighurs are a fiercely independent people who have eked out a living in the arid Central Asian lands along ancient caravan routes and converted to Islam in the 15th century. During the Qing dynasty (1644-1912), China's Manchu rulers managed to subjugate the Uighurs and other local tribes but had to fight off periodic revolts. After the collapse of the empire, the region briefly became the East Turkestan Republic before falling under the thumb of Mao's People's Republic. Many Uighurs still harbor dreams of eventual independence.

Once Ms. Kadeer succeeded in business, both the Communist Party and the Uighurs embraced her as a leader. In the mid-1990s she became China's fifth richest person, and the party gave her a seat in the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, part of the country's rubber-stamp legislature.

But the tide was already turning against the Uighurs and other minorities. New policies and appointees from Beijing led to campaigns to assimilate the Uighurs and root out all dissent. That prompted Ms. Kadeer to make a fateful choice about where her true loyalties lay. She became increasingly outspoken about policies preventing Uighurs from sharing in the fruits of economic development. Finally, in March 1997, she gave an impassioned speech before the legislature enumerating the burdens faced by her people.

Immediately the party struck back. It took away Ms. Kadeer's positions, then destroyed her businesses. Having once held her up as a model citizen, the official media tossed her accomplishments down the memory hole. Her rise from rags to riches is now said to be the result of "economic crimes," including tax evasion and swindles. In 2000, a court sent her to prison for divulging "state secrets" for trying to send newspaper clippings to her exiled husband in the U.S. In 2005 she was allowed to emigrate to the U.S. in return for a promise not to engage in politics, a promise she promptly broke.

Now Ms. Kadeer is trying to garner support for the Uighurs from that most elusive of friends, the "international community." Even as other parts of China continue to liberalize, she says, repression is intensifying in Xinjiang. She explains, for example, that there is new pressure to use Chinese rather than the Uighur language: "Even during the Mao years, he was a brutal dictator of course, but at least the Uighur people spoke their own language, and at least the Uighurs were free to live in their own courtyards." Today, the government is flooding the region with Chinese immigrants, making the Uighurs a minority in their own homeland.

Uighurs face discrimination in education, employment, religion and even the ability to move around the country or travel abroad. Farmers are losing their small plots of land and being forced into the cities. Downtown Kashgar, the Uighurs' cultural capital, is being demolished to make way for Chinese-owned real-estate developments.

But the final straw may have been a measure ostensibly designed to alleviate poverty: "Now the authorities force young, unmarried women to go to eastern China to work as cheap labor in sweatshops," Ms. Kadeer says. "And this is a really provocative policy because it is against Uighur people's culture, religion and way of life to send their unmarried daughters to far-away places they themselves have never heard of. This policy has tremendously backfired."

One such deportation (villages are required to fill a quota) provided the spark for the July 5 protests. In April, some 400 Uighur men and women were sent to work in a toy factory in the town of Shaoguan in Guangdong province. At the end of June, after a disgruntled Chinese worker circulated a rumor that the Uighurs had raped Chinese women, a mob killed at least two of the outsiders.

Video of the riot quickly circulated on the Internet within Xinjiang, along with comments by Chinese that more Uighurs should be killed, while the authorities failed to announce measures to bring those responsible to justice. The city of Urumqi, capital of Xinjiang, become a powder keg of discontent.

According to Chinese accounts, protests began at around 5 p.m. on July 5 in the center of Urumqi and only turned violent more than three hours later. Whether or not this shift was sparked by the police attacking protesters remains in dispute. What cannot be disputed is that Uighur rioters killed Chinese, smashed windows, and burned cars in a shocking orgy of violence.


The intensity of the anger says much about the pent-up resentment of the population, and seems to have taken the authorities by surprise: "After six decades of repression Chinese officials had become confident they had control, and they were shocked at how quickly they lost control," Ms. Kadeer says. "They realized what six decades of repression and fake autonomy could lead people to, and of course that's the failure of their policies . . ." The Party's unwillingness to accept that failure meant it needed Ms. Kadeer as a scapegoat.

The best evidence Ms. Kadeer did not instigate the riots paradoxically comes from the Chinese themselves. A documentary provided by the Foreign Ministry entitled "July 5th Riot and Rebiya Kadeer" makes it clear the Chinese were listening to Ms. Kadeer's phone conversations to China and Europe. The most damning evidence the government propagandists could come up with is that she telephoned her relatives in Xinjiang to warn them that something big was brewing.

It seems more likely the protests were organized among residents of Urumqi using cell phones and the Internet. Immediately afterward, the government shut down all telecommunications and is only now reopening the networks.

Ms. Kadeer denies having the ability to orchestrate events within Xinjiang, but she freely admits that she maintains contact with family members and friends. "Of course we have some influence, but we did not influence what took place. There is no organization there."

Two of her sons have been jailed, she says, in a bid to stop her from speaking out. "Because the Chinese government failed to silence me by imprisoning them, now they are blaming me for the protests to silence my voice in the world."

The same documentary contains a disturbing clip of Ms. Kadeer's forced confession on the eve of her release in 2005, a scene reminiscent of the war crimes confessions of American soldiers captured by the Chinese during the Korean War: "My motherland is like my parents. I was born after the Liberation, the Communist Party is an eternal benefactor. Whoever seeks to separate his country will be the enemy of his nation. . . ."

The government's insistence that any dissent is equivalent to separatism, which in turn is evidence of terrorism, explains why Uighurs have been driven to such desperation. "When Uighurs who are not happy about policies stand up to say something," Ms. Kadeer explains, "the Chinese label them as terrorists, separatists or extremists, and arrest them and in some cases execute them."

Yet she does not rule out Xinjiang remaining part of the Chinese state-so long as Uighurs have self-rule within a democratic polity.

Demonizing Ms. Kadeer as a separatist may end up backfiring on Beijing. Uighurs had failed to attract as much international support as Tibetans because they lacked a figure like the Dalai Lama to speak on their behalf. Now they have a spokeswoman who is attracting angry démarches from Chinese diplomats as she travels the world.

In the last couple weeks she has visited Tokyo and Melbourne, Australia. In Melbourne she spoke at a film festival where a documentary about her life, "The 10 Conditions of Love," was shown for the first time. After Beijing failed to convince festival organizers to withdraw the documentary, Chinese filmmakers withdrew their own movies in a move widely seen as government-orchestrated.

Ms. Kadeer is not phased by the pressure, and indeed her stubbornness is again coming to the fore. She seems to have drawn a lesson from the failure of the Dalai Lama's softly, softly approach: Beijing only respects strength. She is determined to stir the pot, not turn the other cheek, in order to force China to the negotiating table.

Asked whether Uighurs should wait for the advent of democracy in China, she answers that by that time they may have lost their cultural identity. As difficult as it may be, the onus is on her and other Uighurs abroad to pressure the Chinese government into talks on greater autonomy: "I urge peace to the Uighurs," she says, "they should remain peaceful no matter what happens, because the Chinese government will use any excuse to further crack down on them. So it is up to us, it is our responsibility to negotiate with the Chinese government to resolve the situation on the ground."


But the immediate outlook for the Uighurs looks bleak. as China's top government official, Nur Bekri, has promised to crack down with an "iron hand." Ms. Kadeer claims that 10,000 Uighurs were rounded up after the violence.

Perhaps even more frightening is the way in which the government's efforts to obscure the real roots of the riots are stirring up Chinese nationalism. The day after the Urumqi protests, a Chinese mob took to the streets looking for Uighurs. "The . . . Chinese government is indoctrinating its own people with ultranationalism," Ms. Kadeer says. "It used to be the security forces arresting and killing Uighurs. Now it is the Chinese mobs themselves [who] are after Uighurs, both in Shaoguan and Urumqi. They know they can kill Uighurs and the police will turn a blind eye and just say it is a clash between peoples."

Perhaps the worst-case scenario for China is the possibility that some other individual will emerge as the "mastermind" of the Uighur movement. As a religiously moderate and largely secular figure, Ms. Kadeer is somebody Beijing might negotiate with.

But Beijing's efforts to portray resistance in Xinjiang as another front in the war on terror could become a self-fulfilling prophecy if Islamic fundamentalism takes root among the restive Uighurs and the global forces of jihad begin to target China. The need to avert that tragedy is the best argument for China to acknowledge its past mistakes in Xinjiang and end the campaign to demonize Rebiya Kadeer.

Mr. Restall is the editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review and a member of the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal.

Friday, April 03, 2009

Our begums and their hair pulling still continues

You would think that enough has happened in the past two years and with all that is happening in the country, our begums (I call them our Pharaohs) might have superior things to do. Yet the `chul tana tani` continues.

None was to be surprised to see that the things in grand scale have not change a bit. With return of the Pharaohs to the throne, there come all the monsters crawling back to the capital. Some came just before the elections. Others, relatively more decorative monsters, came just after the election from their hiding place overseas. This was long predicted, no bingo moment there.


Even so, what's up with this petty leg pulling? Or Should I say girl's hair pulling fight? In local language it is called `chul tana tani`.


Apparently, over 300 roaring voice (or should I say ba ba) with over 90% majority in the parliament is not enough. Seeing two golden boys of her twin Pharaoh feeding away from country (in local language it is called `desh chara`) in their own merits is not enough. Must she be evicted from the home with memories of her late husband?


I hope this is just a girl fight. I hope this is not any deeper then that. I am very optimistic, but I have to confess that things are not looking good. Some are already seeing the Deja Vu of 1973 election. Here we see another Sheikh, another election with ultimate majority. Will Bangladesh face the same old fate? We will see.


Babu Solaiman


[In the news]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jV7QZLkGTlgfTHaBmwDMBr3BaHwA

Bangladesh PM threatens to evict archrival

DHAKA (AFP) - Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has taken her feud with nemesis Khaleda Zia to a new level by threatening to evict the former premier from her home.

The two women, who have ruled the nation alternately for almost two decades, are frequently referred to as the "battling begums" for their longstanding personal animosity.

Hasina, who came to power with a landslide victory in December elections, told parliament late Wednesday that Zia was living in her house illegally.

"I will request her to leave her house in the (army) cantonment in Dhaka," the premier said.

"No member of parliament, no leader of the opposition should live in the cantonment. She should not keep the house ignoring the law. She should leave the house willingly."

The government would build apartments in the grounds around the house and give the homes to families of army officers who were slain in the February mutiny at another military base in the capital, Hasina said.

Zia, head of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, has lived in the army base since 1981 after her husband Ziaur Rahman, a former military chief and then president, was killed in an attempted coup.

Before the recent elections, Bangladesh was ruled for two years by a military-backed government which jailed both Hasina and Zia for a year on charges of corruption.

They were released on bail in deals with the army to ensure they took part in the elections.

The army took control because squabbling between their party supporters degenerated into deadly street violence.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

The tax deductible debate: I am sold, how about you?

When the idea first surfaced by WH, like many I was skeptical at least, stunned almost. You know that news about how ultra rich folks can get tax deduction on their charitable contribution. Obama wants to cut short the amount you can deduct by limiting the effective percentage of the contribution you can deduct. I was skeptical thinking about possible negative impact that may have on the amount those people will be contributing. Not fully, but almost stun thinking about how outraged our friends in the wrong side (not the right side, lol) with a big wallet will be. You know, people like Carly Fiorina. Of course, I was equally stunned when, just before 2008 election, she demanded absolution of progressive taxing system that we have for so long. Forget rollback of bush tax cut for the rich, she wants her tax rate to be same as Joe the fake plumber. So any tax cut or roll back issue, her dumb friends in Foxy Noise would argue “well, rich get more tax cut because they gave more tax in the first place”. I say, well, what gave “in the first place” is what we call progressive tax. That is well settle reality, there is no point going there.

 

But today in presidential press conference, Obama was asked the very same question. I had to shift focus from playing with my two year old to TV screen. Obama’s answer was to the point and in plain English, almost custom made just for me. Basically his point is, if Warren Buffet and his secretary both donate $100 to Red Cross, why would Warren Buffet get 39 dollars of it back, while his secretary get only say 20 dollars back? That is not fare, is that? I am sold by his argument. How about you?

 

Here is Obama's little long answer on the question from Politico's Mike Allen. Okay, I know, it is kind of long. By now we are getting used to this type of extended press conference form our new president. I know, he is trying to sell his product, but never the less I am enjoying it. It is better to here from the man in charge than those pundits in the Pandora box.

 

QUESTION: Mr. President, are you -- (takes mic) -- thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Are you reconsidering your plan to cut the interest-rate deduction for mortgages and for charities? And do you regret having proposed that in the first place?

 

PRESIDENT OBAMA: No, I think it’s -- I think it’s the right thing to do.

 

Where we’ve got to make some difficult choices -- here’s what we did with respect to tax policy. What we said was that over the last decade, the average worker, the average family have seen their wages and incomes flat. Even at times where supposedly we were in the middle of an economic boom, as a practical matter their incomes didn’t go up. And so (what/well ?) we said -- let’s give them a tax cut. Let’s give them some relief, some help -- 95 percent of American families.

 

Now, for the top 5 percent, they’re the ones who typically saw huge gains in their income. I -- I fall in that category. And what we’ve said is, for those folks, let’s not renew the Bush tax cuts. So let’s go back to the rates that existed back in -- during the Clinton era, when wealthy people were still wealthy and doing just fine. And let’s look at the level at which people can itemize their deductions.

 

And what we’ve said is let’s go back to the rate that existed under Ronald Reagan.

 

People are still going to be able to make charitable contributions. It just means if you give $100 and you’re in this tax bracket, at a certain point, instead of being able to write off 36 (percent) or 39 percent, you’re writing off 28 percent. Now, if it’s really a charitable contribution, I’m assuming that that shouldn’t be the determining factor as to whether you’re giving that hundred dollars to the homeless shelter down the street.

 

And so this provision would effect about 1 percent of the American people. They would still get deductions. It’s just that they wouldn’t be able to write off 39 percent. In that sense, what it would do is it would equalize. When I give $100, I get the same amount of deduction as when some -- a bus driver who’s making $50,000 a year or $40,000 a year gives that same hundred dollars. Right now, he gets 28 percent -- he gets to write off 28 percent, I get to write off 39 percent. I don’t think that’s fair.

 

So I think this was a good idea. I think it is a realistic way for us to raise some revenue from people who benefitted enormously over the last several years. It’s not going to cripple them.

 

They’ll still be well-to-do. And, you know, ultimately if we’re going to tackle the serious problems that we’ve got, then in some cases those who are more fortunate are going to have to pay a little bit more.

 

Full transcript:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/24/obama.news.conference.transcript/index.html

 

Cheers

Babu

 

 

Friday, March 20, 2009

Excerpts from the Conversation on Kashmir with Arundhati Roy

Here are some excerpts from the "Conversation on Kashmir with Arundhati Roy", an interview aired on February 4, 2009.

"I don't know if I need to keep on saying this because everyone knows it now, but still, for the record-more than half a million soldiers in the valley of Kashmir, which somebody in America wrote saying it was the equivalent of the entire U.S. Army and the entire Marine Corps deployed in Minnesota, sort of like that; 165,000 American soldiers in Iraq. Between 500,000 and 700,000 Indian security personnel in the valley of Kashmir."

"A lot of even liberal Indians say that the polls were free and fair. First of all, the first question you have to ask yourself is, when you have that kind of a densely deployed army, can you have free and fair elections? Is it at all possible?"

"In fact, the day I left Kashmir all these defeated independent candidates were having a press conference in this restaurant called Ahdoo's talking about how they had all been paid by the Intelligence Bureau sums of money to stand for election, and then some of them weren't given that money, so now they are disgruntled."

"But, then again, I don't think that it will always be possible to manage it, because eventually I do think that the price of holding down the Kashmir valley, which was being paid mostly by Indian soldiers, who are mostly poor people from India who don't count, was suddenly being paid by the Indian elite in five-star hotels in Bombay. That puts a totally different spin on things."

"It makes us complicit in the holding down by military force of a people, it makes us complicit in the propaganda, it makes us complicit in the lies. And eventually it makes us people who are unable to look things in the eye."


"So if you were to question the average Indian, the only thing they know is that there are terrorists in Kashmir. They wouldn't be able to tell you that 60,000 or 70,000 people have died in this war. They wouldn't be able to tell you about the dubious morality of India holding on to this place. They say Kashmir is an atut ang, which means an inseparable limb of India."


"And I did sense that there wasn't any possibility of the Indian state-and it's wrong for me to just say the Indian state, because Indian society in places like Gujarat and Maharashtra or even in Bombay-to continue to marginalize such a vast majority-only in India can 150 million people be a minority, 150 million Muslims in India-and to continue to bulldoze this population in Kashmir. Eventually all that can come out of it is destruction. All that come out of it is people wanting to take you down with them. If you push them to a stage where there is no possibility of any access to justice, even if 99% of them decide to put their heads down and suffer, 1% is enough to destroy life as you knew it."


Conversation on Kashmir with Arundhati Roy and David Barsamian
http://www.radioproject.org/archive/2009/0509.html

Full transcript:
http://www.radioproject.org/transcript/2009/0509.html

Audio:
http://www.radioproject.org/sound/MakingCon_090204.mp3

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

The rush to `resist the effort to group us`

By now you probably came across some of the media lambo jumbo on Rush Limbaugh, the presumed `head of republicans party` or at least the `conservatives`. Not too bad, what you say? After Sharah the dumber and Joe the fake plumber, what else do you get?

However, one thing he said gave me a re-look on the whole idea about these `conservatives` or so called `religious right`.

On defining conservatives, Rush has said following.

"But we do understand, as people created and endowed by our creator, we're all individuals. We resist the effort to group us."

Later I found out, this is one of the core ideas behind conservatism. The conservative individualist philosophy is a conservative worldview that glorifies hyper-individualism.

As he said "when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups".


Some times we get confuse on how I can define me. Are we conservative or liberal? Are we conservative leaning or liberal leaning? Especially when you mix few sprinkle of religion on the mix, it become very confusing. Or that is what I thought!

So conservatives love the idea of individuals and want to `resist the effort to group us`. Wow! That is a polar opposite on where I stand.

That is not what my leader told us. Instead, in his last sermon, he told us that we are like brothers to each other. He told us that we from one brotherhood.

That is not what my God told us. Instead, He told us that we all are in a single entity, `a single brotherhood` (21:92) and (49:10). He told us that we `are protectors and supporters one of another` (9:71). He warn us by saying `be not like those who are divided amongst themselves` (3:105)


So, dare to be in `We resist the effort to group us`? That's your choice.

Thanks,
Babu

Monday, March 09, 2009

ClimateWire's Flooding, Food and Climate Change in Bangladesh

LISA FRIEDMAN is writing a series of stories on Bangladesh and climate migration for ClimateWire. Here are some excerpts from first two installments of that series.

Thanks,
Babu


Bangladesh endures ugly experiments in 'nature's laboratory'
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/03/09/09climatewire-ugly-experiments-in-natures-laboratory-10035.html


"Bangladesh, one of the poorest countries on earth, has almost no control over the cause. Here, the average person emits about 0.3 tons of carbon dioxide each year -- compared to about 20 tons annually for the average American."

"But when it comes to seeing the effects of climate change, Bangladesh has a ringside seat."

"Already, hydrologists in Bangladesh say, catastrophic floods that once were expected every 20 years are happening almost every four years."


The road from growing rice to raising shrimp to misery
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/03/09/09climatewire-the-road-from-growing-rice-to-raising-shrimp-10034.html

"Water risks are a part of life in this low-lying country dominated by the reaches of the Ganges, Brahmaputra and Meghna rivers. But scientists and environmental activists said the September flood, which happened during a lunar high tide, was deeply unusual for the time of year."

"For many years, floods have been bringing saline water further inland, destroying the rice fields that once sustained the villages. Shrimp farms, many built with World Bank investment, have rapidly replaced the rice paddies."

"But residents say the shrimp farms employ a fraction of the people needed to harvest rice. At the same time, a cheap form of food, rice, is being replaced with a pricey one. The Bangladesh government earns more than $400 million annually in shrimp exports, but few Bengalis can afford to eat it themselves."

"Now villagers in Gabura and parts of flood-prone southwest Bangladesh say it might finally be time to leave for good. Dozens of families interviewed along the coast said they have lived the close-knit village life for generations, and they're familiar with the rhythm of temporarily moving along when things get bad. The difference now, they say, is that brothers, husbands and uncles are leaving for the cities in greater numbers than ever before -- and this time, they're not coming home."

Sunday, March 08, 2009

Breaking news: 2 more army officer killed in helicopter crash in Tangail

I did not see the whole news yet. Bangladeshi cable TV channel is showing text news in the bottom of the screen.


Army helicopter crashed in Tangail. Three army officers killed. Two of them are Major General Rafiqul Islam (GOC of Jessore) and lieutenant colonel Shahid.

Okay, now it is showing: Two army officer killed and one taken to the hospital.

Is this the beginning of the end?

Thanks,
Babu

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Sorry that we did not help you

When we were threatened and ask your help

You put your life in the line

You came to rescue us

But when you were threatened inside that building,

And ask for `our` help

We did n0t go;

No one went in to rescue you

We played politics

SORRY

Justice?

Hmm, how could we talk of justice with any confidence?

We are under the rules of Pharaohs

We seek justice from no one, but God Almighty

And be sure, He will provide

Please forgive us

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Dude, Where's My 'Alubokhra'?

It's funny that I just started reading "Dude, Where's My Country?" by Michael Moore. (Yeah, I know, kind of late). With all my luck, here come this news. I wonder, what would Mr Moore have faced? Good thing he only wrote about `the leader of the free world`. Better yet, good thing that he wrote it in here, not there. Don't you think?

Thanks,

------------ --------- --------- --------- -

'Alubokhra'?Amar Desh 2009/02/24 (First page)
http://www.amardeshbd.com/dailynews/detail_news_index.php?NewsID=213178&NewsType=bistarito&SectionID=home&VJF=QBZRZZFZ&oldIssueID=2009/02/24



Bangladesh official loses plum job over fruit jibe
"Bangladesh' s top information official was sacked Monday for ridiculing the country's founding leader in a poem which compared him to a dried plum"
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5icULUoHMVHS-S3q6q8OsFOfrzd0g



Bangladesh on Monday sacked its top information official for penning a poem comparing the country's founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to a "dried
plum".

Newspaper published excerpts from his 2006 poem that compared Rahman with a "dried plum"

The publisher of the book has already closed its outlet at the annual Ekushey Book Fair on the Bangla Academy premises in Dhaka.

Bangladesh sacks official for alleged remarks against Mujibur
23 Feb 2009
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Bangladesh-sacks-official-foralleged-remarks-against-Mujibur/articleshow/4179153.cms



Two sedition cases were filed yesterday against the force-retired information secretary on charges of writing a satirical verse on Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his family members and publishing malicious remarks subversive to the state.

One case was also filed against the publisher of the book 'Baganey Phutey Achhey Anek Golap', accusing him of publishing a controversial book about a great leader and his family.

In the book, the writer referred to Bangabandhu as Latifur Rahman and also called him 'Alubokhra' (plum), he referred to Sheikh Kamal as Kamalakoli, Sheikh Jamal as Jamtoli and Sheikh Russel as Roskoli, the complainant said.


(No respite for Abu Karim, Wednesday, February 25, 2009)
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=77353



(Amar Desh, 2009/02/25 First page)
http://www.amardeshbd.com/dailynews/detail_news_index.php?NewsID=213355&NewsType=bistarito&SectionID=home&GCT=AVNBHWKT


Monday, February 23, 2009

What's for dinner? Ask Dipu and Hasan

What's for dinner? Ask Dipu and Hasan. It looks like they are cooking up something. I hope it will be delicious.

Is Bangladesh backtracking from long held position? Are we willingly and foolishly admitting (without any sort of intelligence) that BD is involved? I remember when THE ADVISOR of current Prime Minister visited bay area few years back. He said Bangladesh is involved in almost all of the international T activity. Is this the implementation of that theory?

"Bangladeshi minister for foreign affairs Hassan Mahmud has hinted that terrorists, who launched the November 26 Mumbai attacks, may have
used Bangladeshi soil." What?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2611-Bangladesh-minister-hints-at-Dhaka-link/articleshow/4155682.cms


Foreign Minister Dr Dipu Moni is comparing Bangladesh-to-India with Mexico-to-USA. What? She is also giving up a long held position of Bangladesh on push-in issue.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/stopping-illegal-migration-to-india-tough-bangladesh/85558-2.html

Few days back, Dipu Moni has agreed that Banladesh is a buffer state of Pakistan. AL spokesperson later tried to undermine that issue by saying Dipu may not have understood what a buffer state is. Give me a break. I am from her constituency. I can assure you with full confidence, what ever she might be, she is not a dumb girl. No sir, she is not.

I see a consistent propaganda from BD's own ministry (what used to be India's talking point). Is BD's Foreign Ministry now India's forward taking point?

Bangladesh's position in international policy arena will be diminished before you know yet.

She is saying "joint taskforce" more often then she is saying her own name. This is a very serious issue. What will that force be look like? Will Indian Army enter in BD? Will Indian air force round BD's air? Will their missile hit BD targets? If Dipu/Hasan continues to talk like this, in a few days, even I will start to agree with her, YES BRING THEM IN.

Am I being too skeptical? Could it be just a conspiracy theory? You may say that and I hope and pray that you are right. What if you are not?

Thanks

Back to the past and bipartisanship - Bangladesh style

"She said the media should compare neutrally and honestly the present situation with the post-election situation in 2001. After the 2001 election, she alleged, the winning BNP-Jamaat alliance carried out killings, grabbed lands, and occupied student dorms."


Yeah, we are doing it mutually. I did it, she did it, he did it, we ALL did it. So we are doing it. We will be fine.


That is what I call a true bipartisanship. Let us try to be happy!

Thanks


Student politics: a collection of reports and opinions
http://www.prothom-alo.com/sp.news.details.all.php?sid=OTI=


Eyewitness report: Photo of Police as a friendly neighbor
http://www.prothom-alo.com/archive/news_details_home.php?dt=2009-02-17&issue_id=1194&nid=MjE5ODY=


Jahangirnagar University
http://www.prothom-alo.com/archive/news_details_home.php?dt=2009-02-17&issue_id=1194&nid=MjE5ODU=


Chair @ Paltan Maidan
http://www.amardeshbd.com/dailynews/detail_news_index.php?NewsID=212409&NewsType=bistarito&SectionID=home&VVT=HLKSFBBC


Minus two, dakhol and bedokhol
http://www.amardeshbd.com/dailynews/detail_news_index.php?NewsID=212408&NewsType=bistarito&SectionID=home&QXS=WZFCHHSE


Aladin vs inheritance
http://dailynayadiganta.com/fullnews.asp?News_ID=129818&sec=1



JU BCL continues to defy central leaders
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=76581&cid=2


BCL dissolves JU unit, expels 2 leaders
http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=76587&cid=2


Truck looted by Dinajpur 'BCL men'
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=76552


BCL leader harasses DU teacher
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=75832

BCL factional clash leaves 8 hurt at CU
http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2009/02/08/news0715.htm


Activists of Bangladesh Chhatra League, student wing of Awami League, also attacked the agitating students and issued threats to them.
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=73245

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

FW: BANGLADESH: Report blasts primary school education

To me, this is a very significant development. Around 70% of our 6th graders are "unable to read, write or count properly", that's a real problem. Most of the reasons behind this are known. We know that we have "Inadequate qualified teachers". We know that "many poor students come to school half-fed". We know that many classroom are "open air" or under the tree. In a country where 33% live under dollar-a-day poverty line and 66% live under 2-dollars-a-day poverty line, these are really tough hurdle to overcome.

What is eye opener for me is the comment, "the government placed emphasis on enrolment without concentrating on the quality of primary education". I never think of this way, but that's make sense. We made huge progress in enrollment (percentage is as high as high-90s). UN officials going around other poor nations and citing Bangladesh as an example is brilliant. This is praise worthy achievement over last couple of decade. Even our high female enrollment (thanks to our array of affirmative actions) amused our neighbors. To me this is a great advantage. Going around villages and making people understand that `education is the only way out` is a monumental job. That is done, we did it! However, that's only the beginning.

We must concentrate on the quality now. The task is twofold. First is how can we reduce drop out? There are significant developments going in this area. For example, early marriage is a significant reason for female drop out. There are laws in place to deter this, but law is not enough. Parent and community education on the issue are needed. Good thing that I see an increasing number amount of publicity are now aimed on the issue, and we are beginning to see the results. Government provided financial incentive for school attendee also paid up in big. However, there are no parallel programs aimed at boys. This is mostly because male drop out is very much tied up with poverty and child labor, and there is no near term relief in sight. If we can come up with a financial incentive program for boys that would definitely help.

The second task is how we can improve the quality of those who are able to stick around and graduate from primary school. I know that the resource is inadequate. But if 70% of the graduate is unable to read, we must have a structured institutional problem. I am sure there is opportunity for improvement even with limited resources. Educators and researchers need to concentrate on this and review existing structure. More importantly a comparative analysis is needed where we compare similar data from other neighboring countries. Where does Bangladesh stand on the quality of primary education among south Asian nations? Figure out what we are missing and where we can improve.

Thanks,
Babu


-----Original Message-----
Subject: BANGLADESH: Report blasts primary school education


DHAKA, 11 February 2009 (IRIN) - Around 70 percent of children in Bangladesh who complete their primary education are unable to read, write or count properly, according to an internal report by the Department of Primary Education (DPE).

Sixty-nine percent of students who had completed five years of primary school were unable to read news headlines in Bangla newspapers properly, while 87 percent of pupils failed to do simple mathematical calculations, the study, entitled National Assessment of Pupils of Grades Three and Five - 2006, said.

Conducted by the Second Primary Education Development Programme (PEDP-II) - a donor-assisted programme to ensure quality primary education for all children - the study reported that 72 percent of children were unable to write a short composition in Bangla - the mother tongue of over 95 percent of the population.

The report also found students "pitiably weak" in English, which plays a key role in day-to-day life, particularly in business, higher studies and technical education.

The quality of education in remote rural areas was far worse than in urban areas, largely due to a scarcity of English teachers and the predominance of religious schools (`madrasas') where English is not taught, the study said.

The report said students in the fifth grade completed only about 56 percent of the Bangla syllabus, 46 percent of the mathematics syllabus and 47 percent of the English syllabus.

Weak institutional framework

The PEDP-II study identified the weak organisational and institutional framework of primary education and the lack of a proper physical environment at school as leading causes of poor performance.

"Inadequate qualified teachers, lack of devotion on the part of the teachers, [and] poor support and monitoring from family largely contribute to the causes of weakness," Rawshan Ara Begum, head teacher of Chakhar government primary school in southern Barisal District, told IRIN.

"Many poor students come to school half-fed. They cannot pay attention to their studies in the afternoon classes as thirst for knowledge is replaced by hunger for food," she said.

According to Badrul Alam Tarafder, secretary in charge of the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education (PME), the government placed emphasis on enrolment without concentrating on the quality of primary education.

Insufficient contact hours

The PEDP-II study recommended that contact hours between teachers and students be increased and more attention paid to mathematics and literacy.

According to the DPE, children get only 500 hours annually to interact with their teachers in grades one and two. This increased to 700 hours from the third to the fifth grade.

This compared unfavourably to an international standard of 900 contact hours per year for grades 1-5.

One reason for the fewer contact hours was the running of double shifts in most government schools due to a lack of classrooms.

The low teacher-student ratio was another factor keeping contact hours down.

The study recommended that at least 90,000 new teachers be recruited and 60,000 new classrooms be built to enable the existing number of students to attend in a single shift.

Fewer holidays?

Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC), a private research organisation, in its annual report for 2008 entitled Primary Education Halkhata (State of Primary Education), recommended reducing holidays.

"The future of the nation is dark because primary students lack adequate academic knowledge," said renowned academic Zillur Rahman Siddique. He attributed the low contact hours to long holidays.

At present in government primary schools, pupils get nine days holiday during the two Eid festivals, 15 days for the summer vacation and 20 days off for Ramadan. The report suggested seven days for the two Eids, five days in summer and 10 days for Ramadan would be more appropriate.

Some 200,000 teachers educate close to 19 million students in about 38,000 government primary schools country-wide. Teachers are paid by the government which also supplies free text books. At least 40 percent of students receive financial assistance based on their performance, attendance and the level of family poverty.

Hoirani?

http://www.amardeshbd.com/dailynews/detail_news_index.php?NewsID=212282&NewsType=bistarito&SectionID=home&TTX=YWQSKZEE

Hmm... I am still thinking about Spitzer. Now that Democrats got "landslide" victory in House-Senate- POTUS, can we declare that a "hoyrani" and drop the case? How about Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick?

Or may be if Republicans got a "landslide" victory in 2012, we can unhook our beloved Ted Stevens. No?

Ohh, no, I forget. This is not Bangladesh. No queen or princess (aka Pharaohs) would come to rescue the monsters.

[No offence intended. Have fun.]

Thanks

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Good thing there‘s a new president in office, right?

Here is Rachel Maddow's treatment on a news, see if you like it. In case you missed it lst night.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#29129616

MADDOW: And now it is time for another installment in our thankfully very infrequent series, the RACHEL MADDOW SHOW melodramatic re-enactment. First the setting. The Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in San Francisco . The occasion, a case involving the alleged transport and torture of five terrorism suspects who were picked up as part of the CIA‘s extraordinary rendition program.
The context here, the Bush administration‘s Justice Department getting the case dismissed last year using one of Mr. Bush‘s favorite tactics, claiming state secrets. They made the argument that even talking about this case in court, even with sensitive information excluded, would jeopardize national security.
Good thing there‘s a new president in office, right, with a new Department of Justice in place for when those five prisoners appeal that dismissal, right? Right? Because there‘s no way that the Obama administration would repeat the blanket state secrecy invocation, right? Right?
Let‘s take a look at what was actually said by the lawyer and a judge in the San Francisco courtroom yesterday. We now join the hearing already fake in progress.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENT JONES, POP CULTURIST (on camera): May it please the court. I‘m Douglas Letter for the United States Department of Justice, which has intervened in this case to urge affirmance.
MADDOW (on camera): When was the district court decision?
JONES: Hmm, about a year ago, February.
MADDOW: About a year ago? Yes. Is there anything material that has happened since that decision in terms of historical stage that has any bearing here?
JONES: No, your honor. No.
MADDOW: The change of administration has no bearing?
JONES: No, your honor.
MADDOW: The government‘s position is the same?
JONES: Exactly, your honor. The positions that I‘m arguing have been thoroughly vetted with the appropriate officials within the new administration and these are the authorized positions.
MADDOW: So you represent that you are conveying the views of the present Justice Department?
JONES: Exactly, your honor. Absolutely. Absolutely.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That scene is probably the closest we will ever get to seeing a federal judge, or at least a fake federal judge, doing a spit take.
Like most people who were conscious during the last election cycle, Judge Schroeder probably assumed that the person who spent the better part of two years campaigning against Bush-era secrecy and Bush-era detention, interrogation and torture policies, the man who is now president, Barack Obama, would not go use the exact same state secrets defense that the Bush administration used as a blanket shield from accountability.
A defense that means the government can do whatever it wants. It can break the law. It can avoid accountability by hiding behind state secrets. This provision intended to protect individual classified documents, but ballooned and mass-produced by the Bush administration to get entire cases preemptively dismissed.
Did that really just happen like we think it did? Or did Kent and I make it seem way worse than it really was?
Joining us now is Ben Wizner, the ACLU attorney who argued on behalf of the five plaintiffs and against the Obama Justice Department, and who will hopefully forgive me and Kent for acting out that hearing like idiots. Mr. Wizner, it‘s nice to meet you. Thank you for coming in.
BEN WIZNER, ACLU ATTORNEY: Thanks for having me and thank you also for not having somebody play me in the reenactment. I appreciate it.
MADDOW: We thought about it.
WIZNER: Yes.
MADDOW: And we realized you‘re going to be here in person. You might be mad.
Let‘s understand the context. Who are your five clients and why did you take this case?
WIZNER: These are five foreign citizens who were abducted off the streets of various countries, who had their clothes sliced off by CIA black renditions teams. These are people dressed like ninjas head to toe, who were chained to the floor of airplanes, dressed in diapers and flown to dungeons literally around the world.
Some of these were CIA black sites that were operated by our government. Some of them were prisons in countries like Egypt and Iraq that are absolutely notorious for their torture. And these flights were facilitated and organized by a private corporation that we sued in this lawsuit.
This isn‘t the first time that we‘ve tried to bring the administration into court on behalf rendition victims. We brought a lawsuit earlier on behalf of an innocent German citizen named Khalid al-Masri that was similarly thrown out on these bogus state secrets grounds.
We were hoping on Monday to have a different kind of experience with a new administration. But as you saw and as you reenacted, this is just a kinder and gentler version of “trust us.”
MADDOW: I know that the arguments in this case, the briefs had been fully prepared by the time that the Obama administration walked in the door here. All that was left to them was to do the oral arguments here. But did Obama really just take this and run with it? Did they have another option here? Couldn‘t they even just have asked for more time to come up with a different plan?
WIZNER: That would have been the obvious thing for them to do.
Remember, this is a motion to dismiss filed by the Bush administration. The basis for this motion to dismiss our lawsuit was a declaration filed by Michael Hayden, the current head of the CIA for maybe a few more days. I don‘t know how much longer.
And that declaration says that the CIA‘s detention and interrogation program is one of most vital tools in our war against terrorists. That if we let this case go forward, it will reveal classified interrogation techniques that will train enemies on how to resist it.
But on January 22nd, the actual president of the United States essentially ended that program. He banned those techniques. He closed the CIA prisons. He said that from now on, we‘re going to comply with our treaties that prevent transfer of prisoners to countries that exercise torture.
And so the question was, what is the Justice Department doing defending a declaration like that?
MADDOW: Right.
WIZNER: And why are they standing in the way of accountability? And I do want to say here that there is no moral equivalent between the two administrations. You know, we have the benefit no longer to have our country run by war criminals.
And it is terribly significant that the administration ended so-called enhanced interrogation. It‘s shutting down Guantanamo and the extraordinary rendition program. Where we differ is on another critical issue and that‘s the question of accountability.
And I think that this administration would prefer to sweep the last seven years under the rug and move on and get along. The problem is not a single torture victim, and there are hundreds, has yet had his day in court.
And you did a segment on prosecution - I understand that‘s a controversial issue. The other side of the coin is civil liability. And if torture victims aren‘t going to be able to go into court at all - and bear in mind these victims can‘t go into court. I don‘t know which victims will be able to go into court.
Then, really, you‘ll have an immunity regime for the perpetrators, for the violators and it will be impossible really to enforce the prohibitions that are in those executive orders and in our laws.
MADDOW: This is really important stuff. Ben Wizner, attorney with the ACLU National Security Project, who argued for these five plaintiffs in yesterday‘s hearing. I hope that we helped get the word out about this. It seems incredibly important to me. Thank you for working on the case.
Thanks for joining us.
WIZNER: Thanks for having me on, Rachel.

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

FW: Tom Daschle Withdraws as Obama's Health Secretary Nominee

Can anyone imagine a parallel scenario to this in Bangladesh? Can anyone block a nominee from madam/apa and still keep his head attached to his neck in following morning? Would anyone in BD withdraw? Was there even a question of block or withdraw?

The more I watch the political and governance process in US, the more I feel a growing respect. But more than that, a strange feeling trembled inside me. I find no words to describe it. Where did these guys come from? Where did I come from? Where did the leaders on BD that I supported or opposed come from? Did we born in the same world?

Do we live in the same world?

Why then we could not do a single thing to derail the Pharaohs and Monsters?

Moment like this invoke me to accept one conclusion. We are not even the same species. We may look like same, but we are not. I am convinced now. Why bother? Hakuna matata!

Thanks,

Tom Daschle Withdraws as Obama's Health Secretary Nominee
Obama Accepts Daschle's Withdrawal After Daschle Admitted He Failed to Pay Taxes.
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Feb. 3, 2009-


In a stunning setback for President Obama, Tom Daschle abruptly withdrew his nomination to become secretary of Health and Human Services today, following an admission that he failed to pay about $140,000 in back taxes.

In a joint Obama-Daschle statement, Obama accepted Daschle's withdrawal "with sadness and regret."

"Tom made a mistake, which he has openly acknowledged. He has not excused it, nor do I," Obama said.

Daschle, a former Senate majority leader from South Dakota, who had been one of Obama's closest advisers throughout his presidential campaign, said his tax problems meant he had lost the faith of the American people and was therefore unable to serve.

"This work will require a leader who can operate with the full faith of Congress and the American people, and without distraction," Daschle said in a statement released by the White House.

"Right now, I am not that leader, and [I] will not be a distraction," he said.

In addition to being nominated to be HHS secretary, Daschle was also slated to lead Obama's healthcare initative as health czar, a post from which he also withdrew.

Daschle's retreat raises questions about whether Obama can keep his promise to make more affordable healthcare one of the cornerstone of his agenda in his first 100 days in office.

Daschle's decision to quit the nominating process was surprising because Democratic senators had rallied around him Monday and Obama said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle.

Obama's backing didn't stop criticism of Daschle's fitness to join the White House cabinet. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said Obama was "losing credibility" by continuing to support Daschle. "Part of leadership is recognizing when there has been a mistake made and responding quickly," DeMint said.

Daschle's withdrawal came just hours after Nancy Killefer, Obama's nominee to be chief performance officer, withdrew her nomination following the revelation that she had a $946.69 lien on her property in 2005 for failure to pay taxes.

A third Obama Cabinet pick, Tim Geithner, admitted to Congress that he had owed and paid back more than $40,000 before he was confirmed as Treasury secretary last week, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson withdrew his nomination as Commerce secretary over questions about state contracts.

The setbacks are likely to embarrass Obama, who announced a "new era of responsibility" at his inauguration and are likely to embolden Republican opposition to the president and his agenda at a time when Obama struggles to get his economic stimulus plan through Congress.

After a closed-door session before the Senate Finance Committee Monday, Daschle apologized and said his failure to pay taxes was unintentional.

"I deeply apologize to President Obama, to my colleagues and the American people," Daschle said. "I would hope that my mistake could be viewed in the context of 30 years of public service."

The failure by the former Senate majority leader to pay taxes on the free use of a car and driver for several years was first reported by ABC News.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/President44/story?id=6795650&page=1

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Proposed Teacher/Stuff quota system in BUET admission

Recently a buzz is going on about a quota proposal to BUET admission system. The two option proposal is to add 2% of `normal intake` seats or 10% of an all new `evening program` intake seats as a quota reserved for BUET teachers (if unused can be forwarded to `officers and other staff`).





I deliberately abstain from forwarding the opinion piece so you won't be affected by a particular view. May be you can just read the original proposal yourself and form an opinion of your own. (Please see the attachment)



Also, I neither verified the authority, nor the validity of this presented documents. So if we have a current faculty member in this list, please enlighten us.



Page 1:





Page 2:





Page 3:





Page 4:






Thanks,
BB













Monday, January 05, 2009

'Try Not to Cry'

'Try Not to Cry'
(A song by Outlandish)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpUC45vugdY


You, you’re not aware
That we’re aware
Of your despair
Don’t show your tears
To your oppressor
Don’t show your tears

CHORUS:
Try not to cry little one
You’re not alone
I’ll stand by you
Try not to cry little one
My heart is your stone
I’ll throw with you

Isam:
‘Ayn Jalut where David slew Goliath
This very same place that we be at
Passing through the sands of times
This land’s been the victim of countless crimes
From Crusaders and Mongols
to the present aggression
Then the Franks, now even a crueller oppression
If these walls could speak,
imagine what would they say

For me in this path that I walk on
there's only one way
Bullets may kill, bones may break
Still I throw stones like David before me and I say

CHORUS

You, you’re not aware
That we’re aware
Of your despair
Your nightmares will end
This I promise, I promise

CHORUS

Lenny:
No llores, no pierdas la fe
La sed la calma el que haze
Agua de la arena
Y tu que te levantas con orgullo entre las piedras
Haz hecho mares de este polvo
Don’t cry, don’t lose faith
The one who made water come out of the sand
Is the one who quenches the thirst
And you who rise proud from between the stones
Have made oceans from this dust

Waqas:
I throw stones at my eyes
’cause for way too long they’ve been dry
Plus they see what they shouldn’t from oppressed babies to thighs
I throw stones at my tongue
’cause it should really keep its peace
I throw stones at my feet
’cause they stray and lead to defeat
A couple of big ones at my heart
’cause the thing is freezing cold
But my nafs is still alive
and kicking unstoppable and on a roll
I throw bricks at the devil so I’ll be sure to hit him
But first at the man in the mirror
so I can chase out the venom

Isam:
Hmm, a little boy shot in the head
Just another kid sent out to get some bread
Not the first murder nor the last
Again and again a repetition of the past
Since the very first day same story
Young ones, old ones, some glory
How can it be, has the whole world turned blind?
Or is it just ’cause it’s only affecting my kind?!
If these walls could speak,
imagine what would they say
For me in this path that I walk on
there’s only one way
Bullets may kill, bones may break
Still I throw stones like David before me and I say

CHORUS

lyrics: Isam Bachiri, Waqas Qadri, R. Lenny Martinez, Sami Yusuf, Bara Kherigi & Omar Shah