Party Loyalty Trumps Politeness – Friend Hurls Abuse, Makes No Statement

Dear Nadeem,

I was delighted to receive the string of abuse that you have thought worthy of flinging my way – I really didn't know you cared.

But first, the preliminaries: you have not made any statements. Let's go over your four sentences.

1) "Are these info the product of your deranged mind, Ifti?" This is a question: questions, as any logician will tell you, are neither true nor false, and so make no statements;
2) " Take a break;" : this is an imperative, and imperatives too make no statement, being neither true nor false;
3) "go back to your literary practices;" : another imperative
4) "stop being a paranoid conspiracy theorist!!" : yet another imperative (although this one conjoins several adjectives, so it is not clear whether you want me to continue to be a conspiracy theorist so long as I am not paranoid; or to continue to be paranoid so long as I am not a conspiracy theorist).

Therefore, you have not said anything, made no statement; forgive me if I do not return abuse for abuse: the dearth of gentlemen in Bangladesh seems to imply that we should all descend into the same cesspit – but I see no reason to follow where others lead.

You enjoin me to "go back to your literary practices": shouldn't that be "go forward to your literary practices"? Isn't literature a higher calling than blogging and reportage? I see you hold literary practices in less esteem than these more recent pastimes. De gustibus non disputandum.

So I have decided to take your advice (command is too harsh a word) and have just started to read a poem by Geoffrey Hill, who enjoins me to

"strive/To recognize the damned among your friends."

Yours truly,

Iftekhar


Are these info the product of your deranged mind, Ifti? Take a break; go back to your literary practices; stop being a paranoid conspiracy theorist!!

Nadeem


On 4/1/09, Iftekhar Sayeed wrote:
Iftekhar Sayeed has sent you a link to a blog:

The tanks arrived 32 hours too late because the prime minister would not give her assent - finally General Moeen ordered them sent anyway, and, to appease the PM, 'punished' the Savar cantonment commanding officer by sending him to a lesser post. PLEASE FORWARD

Blog: Iftekhar Sayeed
Post: Why the tanks arrived 32 hours late
Link: http://isayeed.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-tanks-arrived-32-hours-late.html

PSYCHO

The prime minister again defends her record on the ground that, had the army been sent in, there would have been "civil war".

Suppose that's true – the cure would then have been worse than the disease. Let us concede Hasina her point. Then the question arises: could not the whole diabolical episode have been prevented?

For as Colonel Kamruzzaman (who is suffering from severe post-traumatic stress disorder) relates (and Hasina never refutes) the PM had been apprised long before any violence began – by the BDR chief himself. She said help was on its way – if help had arrived in the next thirty minutes, none of the murders and rapes would have occurred.

Why didn't she send assistance?

In these recordings, we have the testimony of Dr. Kabir, who was saved because he was on leave but nonetheless inside the compound with his family. The jawans came for his family, and called them "sons and daughters of whores" repeatedly.

Later, when the families had been gathered together, Dr. Karim says, the jawans came to the women and said, "The Punjabis impregnated you with Punjabi babies, we will impregnate you with BDR babies." At this point, the file breaks off...leaving the horror of the next moments unsaid yet described in detail.

Sahara Khatun, the home minister, did not even bother to inquire about the families, but left with a few arms.

Hasina delivers a sob story about how her family had been killed in 1975 (what relevance that has here escapes me); and she adds that the killers were rewarded for their deed; indeed, I was fifteen at the time, and I remember the nationwide jubilation at the murder of the Mujib family. These are facts.

She complains that she and her sister were not allowed into the country for six years – because, no doubt, she was deemed a menace to the nation, which she has indeed proven to be (the army didn't lock her up, with the other banshee, for two years for traffic violation).

This time, the nation was not delighted – only Awami Leaguers are delighted. They cannot forget that the army had held their "beloved leader" in jail for the past two years.

This sort of personality cult, so redolent of North Korea, passes for democracy in Bangladesh.

Indeed, it is absurd to expect Sheikh Hasina to handle a situation like that – or even to value human life – when young student politicians belonging to her party are dropping like flies, and she – just doesn't care. Yesterday, a student politician was thrown off the second floor of a building, and he died a painful death. With so much murder in the ranks of the ruling party, why should it spare a thought for human life or dignity?


"Hasina, in fact, has been the biggest disappointment for even AL supporters. Throughout her term she showed incredible tolerance to her party-men, who virtually unleashed a reign of terror all over the country. She did not ask any of her cabinet members to resign even after knowing about their criminal activities. The student wing of AL the Chhatra League carried on the legacy of their predecessors, the Chhatra Dal, with equal zeal, occupying the university halls, controlling tenders and spreading crime across the country. One group became famous for their serial rape spree in Jahangirnagar University where a Chhatra League (interestingly former Chhatra Dal) leader celebrated his 100th rape on campus. Again Hasina remained silent." http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2004/03/04/coverstory.htm (As usual, the Daily Star is wrong: Hasina never ever disappointed her supporters: no matter what the crime, she receives blind support from her devotees: like a queen, she is never wrong.In the 2001 election, despite a horrendous spate of violent crime like the one described above, her party still won 40% of the vote, and would have won if the election had not been rigged.)

How can a sane nation expect that a psychopath would try and save officers and their families? Only a person who has an atom of respect for human life would begin to make an attempt to bring succour to the distressed. I am amazed that the nation can even believe that this woman tried to save lives...to her, lives are as drops of water. This alone answers the query raised above: why didn't she send assistance right away?

As for the nation itself, this is not the first time such heinous acts have been perpetrated since 1990– we have forgotten the rapes at Jahangirnagar University, the rape and suicide of Mahima, the rape and death of Tahura Begum, the decapitated bodies, the disarticulated remains....This time, the unspeakable has occurred in one place over a compressed period of time.

We lost our humanity a long time ago. Al-Ghazali would have blamed us for our rebellion in 1990, for, defending autocracy wholeheartedly, he said, "Sixty years of tyranny are better than an hour of civil strife".

These new audio files shed further light on evil - if that's possible

Why the tanks arrived 32 hours late

I have repeatedly queried why the tanks arrived 32 hours late – the mere sight of them (or news of their arrival) was sufficient to strike terror into the hearts of the 'mutineers' at Bangladesh Rifles in Pilkhana on 26th February.

Now, we have the answer.

It appears that the commanding officer of Savar cantonment – where the tanks came from – has been 'punished' with a transfer to a lesser posting. His offense? That he sent the tanks without the army chief's say-so.

Of course, that won't wash. Without the army chief, General Moeen's, command the officer would not have been rash enough to send in the tanks and risk court martial.

It seems, then, at the eleventh hour, General Moeen tried to redeem his honour and humanity by not consulting the prime minister, and sent in the tanks off his own bat.


An irate prime minister – who, in keeping with her psychopathic personality – became furious with the general, and the general appeased the lunatic by transferring the officer he had commanded to send the tanks.

And to think that all his could have happened 32 hours earlier – if the general hadn't listened to the maniacal prime minister, whose agenda appears to have been to draw the whole sordid tragedy out as long as possible: and then blame it on Islamic extremists.

And with the American ambassador breathing down the general's back to protect 'democracy', there was scant room for manoeuvre for General Moeen.

Another horror made in Washington, DC.

A Tale of Two Psychos

Several years ago, I spent an unfortunate evening with a very – very – senior police officer. I say unfortunate because anyone who has spent a few minutes with a police officer comes to regret the experience – for some reason, their ranks are not chosen from those of gentlemen.

Nevertheless, tolerating the chap paid off.

We got around to discussing our two banshees – otherwise known as our two begums. Now, he was, as I observed, a very – very – senior officer; yet something made him voluble that evening (no, we weren't boozing).

He said that our two leaders were insane.

He didn't exactly use that word; the words he used were "not normal". And why were they not normal?

"They have both lost someone close in bloody murders," he explained. "That has affected them. We know: we have to deal with them, and there are things they do that we cannot communicate to anyone else."

He certainly didn't communicate them to me.

But it stands to reason. Sheikh Hasina lost almost her entire family in a hail of bullets, and Khaleda Zia's husband was gunned down in machine-gun fire.


Now, most politicians are abnormal to start with (no one in his or her right mind would choose such a profession: "all political careers end in failure" observed a failed politician; and some, fortunately, end in assassination).

Therefore, we are ruled alternately by two psychopaths. During the resent massacre at BDR, neither psycho evinced the slightest sense of regret at the loss of lives and, in the case of some ladies, of honour as well.

They are unable to empathise with human sorrow (maybe they have soft spots, like Europeans, for lower forms of life, but none for humans). Yet we are at their mercy: at the mercy of psychopaths.

Many of us have seen the films SAW I, II, III, IV, V....Imagine yourself locked up in a tiny cell and Hasina or Khaleda looking on to see how painfully you are going to die or hurt yourself. Well, Bangladesh is that cell, and each of us is alone, and anything may befall us at anytime.

Unlike a psycho, they have a major advantage: they cannot be held accountable. They are irreplaceable; one is the daughter, the other the wife, of national heroes. And they know that they can never be replaced, and are above all law and all morality.

Could any despotism be worse than our predicament?

It wasn't the butler...

Well, it wasn't the butler - ie, the JMB.

Suppose the JMB did it: why then didn't the prime minister send the army right after the first call from General Shakil, when he sensed a mutiny in the ranks?

Second, why did it take the tanks 32 hours to get from Savar to Dhaka?

Third, how did 7,000 people escape the precincts of the BDR?

Fourth, who turned off the lights so they could escape?

Fifth, when the officers grilled the PM, they said nothing about the JMB - they are not fools, you know.

They blamed only one person - the prime minister (and General Moeen the previous day).

Sixth, Director General of RAB, Hasan Mahmud Khondoker, when asked about possible militant involvement firmly dismissed the idea: "Religious militancy in Bangladesh is under control of law-enforcing agencies at the moment (Bangladesh Observer, 12 March 2008, p 8).

However, a Daily Star report of the same day, by its journalist Anwar Ali ("back from Bagmara, Rajshahi") says: "At least four of the mutineers of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) are believed to have been active members of Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) before they joined the paramilitary force."

And according to the Hindustan Times, Commerce Minister Lt Col (Retd) Faruq Khan said: "...some JMB connections have been found.(http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=e9430d03-4297-4b5f-a48a-27e547872d91&Headline=Dhaka+sees+terror+link+in+BDR+mutiny)"

And the Daily Star, in the same issue, was quick to confirm the militant's hand in the article: "Terror struck back at its buster" (the Star covers up its poor syntax and grammar with exuberantly mysterious headlines). Translation: Colonel Gulzar, who had been instrumental in subjugating the JMB, was among the officers dead and so mutilated that it took a DNA test to identify his body; ergo, the JMB did it.

Yet in the 4th March issue, the Star had already said: " 4 more bodies identified
3 others await DNA test; 5 army officers still missing; investigators rummage through BDR HQ for evidence."

Indeed, in the 12th March issue, after describing how Colonel Gulzar's father had been killed in 1971 by the Pakistan army, the report goes on to say: " There were five unidentified bodies rescued from mass graves or sewers. These bodies bear the marks of severe brutality. Only a DNA test could confirm who is who. Gulzar's family could not say if one of those bodies was his.

"Organic samples from these bodies were collected and close relatives of the missing army officers also gave blood samples for the DNA testing. Samples were cross-checked with Gulzar's 14-year-old daughter Zahin Tasnia's genetic imprint.

"On Tuesday, two of the DNA test results popped up, one identifying Lt Col Elahi Monjur Chowdhury and the other Gulzar."

Therefore, Colonel Gulzar's body wasn't the only mutilated body found – therefore, the killers did not single him out for special mutilation.


To sum up: we have the DG Rapid Action Battalion categorically denying any militant involvement (Observer, March 12, p8); the Daily Star observed: " When asked about the involvement of Islamist militant outfits and the United Liberation Front of Assam (Ulfa) in the mutiny Rab DG averted the query and said the Islamist militants are now under complete control of the law-enforcement agencies.(12th March, p1)."

But, the Commerce Minister insinuates that there were "some" JMB links. Why was he speaking about a pending investigation in the first place?

As to intelligence failure, that's no surprise. A few years ago I was speaking to a government officer, and I was told that the intelligence branches were now totally occupied in assessing the loyalty, not only of army officers but even junior level government officers, to the two political parties.

"When would they get the time to do any intelligence work?" he asked me, rhetorically.

Many of the army's top brass are Awami League loyalists: they are leaning hard on the investigators to cover things up and lead the inquiry into another direction. Like every institution, the army is highly politicized: those loyal to Sheikh Hasina will never allow an open investigation, so it is alleged. Hence the JMB red herring, which, in fact, started off in the Indian newspapers.

"The Jamaat-e-Islami, which would suffer the most in any 1971 war crimes trial, is believed to be the main conspirator with the shadow of Pakistan, whose president has appealed to Hasina to defer the trials, lurking. ...


"If Jamaat's role in the massacre is conclusively established, Islamic radicals will risk the army's wrath. That's not bad for Hasina. Hopefully, the mutiny won't make her back out on the war crimes trials and cases related to the Sheikh Mujib murder and Chittagong arms seizure. If she doesn't go all out to decimate her Islamist rivals politically, she could be looking at another conspiracy." This was published in – of all papers – the Times of India (TOP ARTICLE Clear and Present Danger, 10 March 2009 http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=e9430d03-4297-4b5f-a48a-27e547872d91&Headline=Dhaka+sees+terror+link+in+BDR+mutiny

So, the JMB-militant-Jamaat theory emanated from – where else? – India, and that's the direction the Awami League, aided by its generals and newspapers like the Daily Star, in turn backed by the western donor community, will take us – up the garden path (or is it down?).

Meanwhile, the army so despises General Moeen that even majors are reluctant to salute him. If he resigns in the next few days, he will retire with a modicum of honour. Otherwise he'll go down in ignominy in the sorry annals of this sorry nation.

It wasn't the butler that did it, though – it was the maidservant.

The Dual Dictatorship

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Dual-Dictatorship-by-Iftekhar-Sayeed-090309-281.html

(click link above for article)

Western donor governments, especially America, have created civil wars in several Muslim countries by imposing democracy: in the next few months, Bangladesh will probably be added to the list.


Excerpt:

" But the unholy alliance between the army and the two politicians has been forged under the watchful eyes of the western donors. They saw it happening: true, they tried to get rid of the two 'begums' (banshees, rather) in a minus-two formula (exile or jail), but such was the tenacious loyalty of the followers (especially of Hasina's), that it proved impossible. Where, prior to 1991, we had one dictator, now we were destined to be blessed with two."

the lying media of Bangladesh exposed by the internet

http://thedailystar.net/magazine/2009/03/01/index.htm

(The lying document can found above)


The Daily Star lies like Pinocchio - and something worse!

"Eye witness testimony said the DG Major General Shakil spoke to the Prime Minister by phone immediately after the first shots were fired outside the Darbar hall." This according to the Star Weekend Magazine.

Now, thanks to the MP3 files circulating throughout the net, we know that General Shakil had contacted the army long before a single shot was fired. In fact, he had told the PM that a section of his soldiers were mutinous. She had said that she was sending the army.

She didn't send them.

The trouble with lying is that you become incoherent.

Tanya Yafta Chowdhury, wife of the late Colonel Elahi Manzoor, is quoted as saying: "I was told that help was on its way. I kept praying for the sound of the army rolling in. But nothing happened. I don't understand why it would take so long for troops to get to the pilkhana from the cantonment? Does it take hours? You tell me?"

The Star says: "The sequence of events clearly demonstrates that both the government and the army were aware of the fatal attacks by 9.30 AM."

But why should we go by the sequence of events?. We know from oral source what was said at the Senakunja to the PM: why didn't she send the army after General Shakil had warned her of an impending mutiny, long BEFORE the first shots were fired. Indeed, it was 1:00 pm before the mutineers could even get organized.

'Speaking to the Star, Col. Syed Quamruzzaman, GSO of the BDR headquarters described the harrowing scene. “The jawans asked us to come out and said we wouldn't be harmed. We walked out with the DG in the middle. They told us to walk in single file. We fell in line with the DG leading the way. They started firing at close range…”

So the star had access to Col. Zaman's testimony before the Senakunja grilling of the PM.


No, that's not what he said: he said four men came from outside and shot four bullets into General Shakil....Misreporting as usual, or deliberate falsification of what Col. Zaman himself saw?

"It has been suggested that an outside group might have assisted in the massacre. Since this episode has seriously weakened both the army and the BDR -- tactically and strategically -- mutterings about a conspiracy cannot be ignored. But talk about an outside group should not distract from the failings within the BDR, the army, the intelligence community, and indeed, the administration."

According to Col Zaman, the first killers did indeed come from outside.

The Star raises several questions, but never the question about how thousands of personnel could melt away into the city.

In the Star report, we find no criticism of the government at all. Instead, we find such incredible sentences as: "The PM, who has to handle such a big crisis on the 50th day of her tenure, has taken some widespread measures."

Poor PM! One's heart positively aches for the PM's onerous duties - surely the tragedy could have occurred on the 100th day, or better still, 150th day of her tenure! How inconvenient! How callous that she had to behave like a leader on her 50th day in office! Poor woman!

"There is no doubt that the crisis has been one of the toughest challenges that any new elected (sic) [leader] would want to see itself embroiled into (sic)."

Isn't that what governments are for? To handle tough challenges? And didn't this government deliberately, and with the aid of the media like the Star, fail the nation?

But, of course, since she is the member of a political dynasty, - the daughter of the "father" of the nation - she is above reproach - give me a monarchy any time!

Listen to the army and the prime minister