From: mahmud-mehdi@CS.YALE.EDU (Mehdi Mahmud)
Subject: Re: Moving on from '71 (was Re: To Shakil)
Keywords: '71...Golam Azam...Shakil Ahmed...Biharies
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:04:17 GMT

In article <70182@ut-emx.uucp> medusa@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Don't bother me) writes:
>
>To Shakil and others who sympathize with him, it must be said that while rai-
>sing some not so naive questions about the justification of the popular 
>demand      
>of Fanshi of the T-B, the impersonal detachment that you show regarding recent
>history is admirable, if not outright astonishing! Several netters have
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        Whereas the literal interpretation of this might well be accurate,
the sarcastic interpretation fails pitifully. By your logic, impersonal
detachment (if it can be called that! I thought it was objectivity...)
implies sympathy?

>already replied, and that too quite satisfactorily, explaining the context
>of the Gana Adalat's sentencing the T-B to death. Anyone should be able to
>see through the symbolism and the significance of the whole affair now,
>in my humble opinion.

        Satisfactorily? According to whom? Obviously, I, for one, remain
unconvinced by the proferred explanation (and added threat)...or is it
simply (as you serenely point out in the following sentences) further
evidence of my ignorance of "the present political situation and its 
consequences in Bangladesh"?

>But again, may be unwittingly, the questions that you put
>forward with an apparent air of unbiased and innocent curiosity, I'm afraid,
>simply echo the attitude adopted by the Jamaatis since they surfaced
>after the war during Gen. Zia's rule. To have come up with such questions as
>these, one must really be unaware of the present political situtation and its
>consequences in Bangladesh,

        Ummm...gee, who do you suppose is the PM of Bangladesh?

>or just be trying to turn a blind eye to it, proving
>the success of years of the fanatic party's propaganda. With the active and
>passive support of all the Govts. after the assasination of BangaBandhu, the
>T-B's party has been trying to make a fool of the whole nation of Bangladesh.
>The very fact that they decided to bring the leader to the fore-front by
>formally making him the chairman, (by the way, he is probably the first
>'non-acting' chairman in the party's history after liberation) simply betrays
>their arrogance and defiance of the values and principles that made so many
>whole-hearted Bangalees sacrifice everything and go to the war in 1971. This
>defiance has had similar manifestations in the recent activities of organiza-
>tions like the ICNA in the mosques all over the USA. Therefore, you must
>understand and appreciate the sensitivity of the Bangalees on the issue and
>refrain from adding fuel to personal brawls that can be done without.

        ...and I do understand. Never, have I, even for a moment, disagreed
with fact. The bottom-line is this:

        Societies, indeed civilizations, are established on a specific set
of moral codes which determines, eventually, the relative success or failure
of that society or civilization. This does not answer the question of
whether one set of moral codes is superior to another; instead, put simply,
it answers the question of whether it is applicable to that society at
that time. Consequently, I (and the society that I know and treasure)
subscribe to the moral code of the 20th century (or am I misinformed?).
In this context, every human being is guaranteed certain unalienable rights,
one of which is the right to a FAIR trial BEFORE sentencing.

        The basic difference between us, therefore, lies in the definition
of a fair trial. You happen to believe that the Gono Adalat will suffice,
or perhaps, as some netters have conceded, you may believe that Azam should
be tried by a court of law but that the fashi must be carried out. I have
two objections: 1. The Gono Adalat is not an established court of law.
2. How can you advocate a fair trial when you choose to dispense judgment
*before* the trial?

        In such a stance, there is no compromise to be reached, and maybe I
am fortunate to be writing this in the US (as one netter diplomatically
pointed out)...but perhaps I have said too much already, and the same
opinions that led some netters to label me as an Ershad supporter might
lead to yet another distasteful label: "The Merry Man of Jamaat."

>
>-A. Lurker
-- 
~       Mehdi Asif Mahmud            | " If I had to choose between betraying ~
~       P.O. Box 688 Yale Station    |   my country and betraying my friends, ~
~       New Haven, CT 06520          |   I hope I should have the guts to     ~
~       Phone #(203) 436-1094        |   betray my country. "                 ~