From: ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu (Shakil Ahmed)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: Countering the rise of fundamentalism.
Date: 12 Jan 1993 11:13:08 -0500
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: curie.systemsy.cs.yale.edu


In article <1993Jan12.055543.23189@vela.acs.oakland.edu>, mkaziz@vela.acs.oakland.edu (KHALED AZIZ) writes:

> anti-Bangladeshi activities.  I think some very straightforward evidences
> are available against many leaders of Jamaat, which should be sufficient to
> prosecute them.  And it should be done before it is too late.
> 
> 	One more point: I think it is possible to take actions against
> Jamaat even according to the constitution as it is. Although a bill was
> passed by Ershad that declared Islam as the state religion, the
> constitution still gives the right to any individual to practice his/her
> own beliefs.  According to the constitution, minorities have the right to
> maintain their cultural heritage and carry-on their religious practices.
> Jamaat leaders do make open statements against the Hindus and call them
> Kafirs.  I myself heard some leader of Jamaat speaking in a public meeting
> saying "it is a shame that we allow worship of other gods in an islamic
> country" or something like that.  A statement like this is clearly against
> the constitution and thus an offense against the state. My point is, there
> is no excuse that can keep the GOB away from taking actions against
> Jamaat.  It is possible even without modifying the constitution. 

It would seem to me that the same argument could and should be used
against elements who desire an autonomous Chakma state.  Is the right
to secede a part of our constitution?  Aren't the Shanti Bahini and
other such groups engaging in anti-Bangladeshi activities?  Surely we
should apply these standards consistently?  It doesn't make sense to
isolate the Jamaat in this context -- all anti-Bangladeshi activities
should be targetted.

But while we're on the topic of "anti-Bangladeshiness," how
Bangladeshi are the hartals that most major political parties keep
calling, where millions of Takas worth of damage is done, not to
mention the many lives which are lost in the general anarchy that
reigns during the riots?  How "Bangladeshi" is it to burn government
buses which are purchased from the dwindling foreign currency
reserves?  And how "Bangladeshi" is it to unleash a reign of terror on
the universities, thereby rendering ineffective our very stepping
stones to development?  Are there any parties that are innocent of all
these displays of concern for the "well-being" of our nation?  How do
we distinguish?  As far as I'm concerned, all these thugs should be
locked up, regardless which party they may come from...

-- Shakil Ahmed
=======================================================================
Dept. of Computer Science     INTERNET: ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu
P.O. Box 2158, Yale Station   BITNET  : ahmed-shakil@yalecs.bitnet
New Haven, CT 06520-2158      UUCP    : {ucbvax,harvard,...}!yale!ahmed
=======================================================================

Xref: sparky soc.culture.bangladesh:7346 soc.culture.indian:42951 soc.culture.pakistan:19216