Mr. Shah Abdul Hannan
So you had a choice and you didn't join BAKSAL.
In essence, you have agreed that joining BAKSAL was not
compulsory for the government employees, en mass.
General Zia had the same choice, but he promptly accepted
the invitation and joined BAKSAL: Perhaps, to prove his
(fake) loyalty to Mujib and thus get a quick promotion ....(sheer
opportunism !) .......where was his moral high ground at that time!
I am neither a supporter nor a opponent of BAKSAL or Awami League.
My information on BAKSAL is only through secondary sources.
No one denies the fact that BAKSAL was based on Communist
model and was authoritarian in nature. [The social costs and
benefits (if any) of authoritarianism and regimentation is
debatable and can be discussed in a different thread].
As far as I have understood by studying the history of Bangladesh,
the BAKSAL system was an experiment with socialism as its main
objective. May be, it was utopian in the socio- political context of the
then Bangladesh .
But, it remains little puzzling to me as to what would have prevented
the rise of crony capitalism and the rise of a parasitic compadore classes
in Bangladesh . Ms Dina Khan and Mr. Adikhari's writings on the matter
has some valid points.
BTW, I have been told by one researcher in Bangladesh Studies
that Bangladesh Observer published a list of government officials
who responded to the invitation letter for joining BAKSAL on or
about 25th of July 1975. The complete list at that time only
consisted only 57 names [Military & Civil Service officials]. The
back-issues of Bangladesh Observer is available in Microfiche at
Widener Library of Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Dearmembers and Mr Syed Aslam,Assalamu Alaikum.Yes. I was a mid-level officer at that time.All departments, all Heads of offices received letters from the government to ask all officers under them to become members of BAKSAL.I am writing this from memory.I never wanted to be member of a political party as a government official.I was all the time praying so that I may not have to be a member. Unlike many others I delayed the matter.In the meantime the regime changed and I escaped the dis-honour and shame of becoming a member of a political party as a government official( as is the case of communist states).Shah Abdul Hannan----- Original Message -----From: Syed AslamSent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:54 PMSubject: Re: [khabor.com] Re: General Zia's joined BAKSAL voluntarilyn - Attention Mr. Mohiuddin Anwer
Mr. Shah Abdul HannanCan you show us some documentary evidence to prove that every government employees were required to become member of the then single party BAKSAL?So far I understand: before BAKSAL ammendment [Fourth Amendment to the constitution of Bangladesh.] state employees were not permitted to member of any political party. Under the Fourth Amendment (Article 117A), the government employees were allowed to join the political party BAKSAL.. But it was not compulsory for every government servants to join BAKSAL.Only a handful of opportunist, career seekers and sychophants, amongst the government officials, joined BAKSAL voluntarily during the two and half monthsof BAKSAL's life-span. That includes General Ziaur Rahman.Stounchly anti-Mujib, self-proclaimed Baksaler Zom Mr. Mohiuddin Anwar, himself has admitted this in many of his postings in Vinnomot, Mukto-Mona andKhabor. The most recent one can be seen in:By the way, I far as I have read from you postings in differentYahoo Group messages, you were a Government Officer in 1975. Just be honest and tell us if you had joined BAKSAL? If so, how and when did you join? Was there an application form? Have you taken any oath while joining? [Like you did when you joined Islami Chattro Shangha, the predecessor of Sibir] .Tell us the details of the processes through which the employees of the Bangladesh Government became BAKSAL members in 1975.It is very important to know the camillions who jumped into theband-wagon of BAKSAL and quickly chaged their colors soon after it's collaspe.An honest answer would be your real contribution to study of current events and contemporary history! So, please don't evade the question and justify that as a taqia as many Jamatis do.RegardsSyed AslamOn 9/12/07, S A Hannan <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com > wrote:
Dear members,Assalamu Alaikum.It is not very important who was member of BAKSAL or not because, the authorities saw to it that every government officer becomes member of the then single party .It was difficult at that dictatorial time to refuse to become member of that party.Shah Abdul Hannan----- Original Message -----From: parvez_imhkSent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:30 PMSubject: [khabor.com] Re: General Zia's joined BAKSAL voluntarilyn - Attention Mr. Mohiuddin Anwer
--- In khabor@yahoogroups.
com , "Engr. Shafiq Bhuiyan" <srbanunz@...>
wrote:
>
> Mr. Parvez,
>
>
>
> If you do not know this simple and primary information - facts of
> initial period of Bangladesh Krisok Sromik Awami League (BAKSAL),
> then how do you make silly comments on Bangladesh Krisok Sromik
> Awami League and also other detail, complex and knowledge based
> items of Bangladesh Krisok Sromik Awami League?
Why unnecessarily engage in such nonsense? There is no heaven
cracking knowledge base or complexity involved in Bakshal - the most
nasty and notorious chapter in the history of the nation.
Now my question is back again: Is there any credible documentation
to suggest that ZIA was a member of Bakshal? To my knowledge, it is
an outright NO. You can produce some credible documents if you
think I am wrong.
>
> So, please study, read more, do proper research than make comments.
>
I just asked a question and did not make any comment. Looks like it
provoked you way beyond it actually should. I am amused!
>
>
> There are plenty of documents, paper posting, books where those
> simple and primary information & facts, history are available and
> where your requested answer is also mentioned.
This is nothing more than hand waving.
Quote me any credible evidence before I buy your theory. I did not
see any evidence anywhere to suggest that Ziaur Rahman was a memebr
of Bakshal. By all evidence, Ziaur Rahman was not a member of
BAKSHAL and you are engaged in fallacy, falsehood and propaganda.
Geneal Shafiullah was a memebr of Bakshal but that was as Chief of
Staff and not in a personal capacity. The then BAKSHAL regime made
it mandatory for chiefs of the of the armed forces to join BAKSHAL.
>
> Gen Zia, the then deputy COS, requested some Awami League
> ministers, MPs & leaders to join Bangladesh Krisok Sromik Awami
> League.
This is incredible. A mlitary officer asking political authority to
join a political movement! This will beat even funny fairy tales!!
For argument's sake -even if it is true- couldn't the Awami
politicians commit suicide before they got their politial directive
from a military officer?
Even if he did, that does not automatically mean that he was a
member of BAKSHAL as such.
> So, think before ink!
You caused me to think enough...
Show me evidence and I will buy your theory. Otherwise it is
falsehood and fabrication.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Shafiqur Rahman Bhuiyan (ANU)
>
>
>
>
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.13/998 - Release Date: 9/10/2007 8:48 AM
* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
