On Sunday, Bangladeshi police descended upon Drik Gallery in Dhaka to prevent the launch of a photo exhibition on Tibet. BDNews24 reports:

Dhaka, Nov 1 (bdnews24.com)—Police prevented Drik Gallery in Dhanmondi from launching an exhibition, titled ‘Into Exile: Tibet 1949 – 2009′, on Sunday.

The exhibition was organised by ‘Students for a Free Tibet’, and includes some very rare photos of the Dalai Lama’s journey into exile.

An hour before the launch, scheduled for 5pm, police shut the gates preventing public from entering the gallery, said Drik authorities.

Drik managing director Shahidul Alam said Bangladesh Police Special Branch spoke with him and asked him to stop the exhibition citing a “government order”.

Alam said, although the police officers could not produce any document of the order, they threatened to shut down the show by force if the organisers did not do so willingly.

According to DrikNEWS, representatives from the Chinese Embassy requested the the weeklong photography exhibition be cancelled.

Drik authorities said they came under pressure for last two days to close down the exhibition.

Alam told bdnews24.com, “The day before yesterday (Friday), two officers from the Chinese Embassy came and asked us to cancel the exhibition.”

“After that I also received a series of phone calls from the ministry of cultural affairs and from a number of MPs.”

“On Saturday, officers from the Special Branch of police came and exerted pressure to stop the exhibition according to a ‘government order’. I wanted a written copy of the government order but they refused to show me.”

The chief guest, who was to inaugurate the exhibition, was the chairman of Transparency International, Dr. Muzaffar Ahmed. I wonder if the government sees the irony in its police action.

This is the sad reality of Bangladesh. A country that has been ostensibly independent since 1971 uses its shock troops in the service of powerful foreign governments. The Bangladesh government has embarrassingly surrendered its sovereignty in order to appease its Chinese masters. Yet all of this is perfectly in line with the Bangladesh Constitution. Article 39 of the Bangladesh Constitution has a curious stipulation. Even though the Constitution guarantees freedom of thought and conscience, it is not so generous when it comes to freedom of speech, expression and press. Article 39 in it entirety states:

Freedom of thought and conscience, and of speech.

(1) Freedom or thought and conscience is guaranteed. Freedom of thought and conscience, and of speech.
(2) Subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interests of the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence- the right of every citizen of freedom of speech and expression; and freedom of the press, are guaranteed.  [Emphasis added by me]

So, according to the Bangladesh Constitution, a citizen can think whatever he or she wants, but he or she dare not say it, or express it, or publish it if it goes against the interests of “friendly relations with foreign states”. Bangladeshi citizens sadly are at the mercy of powerful states like China when it comes to exercising what they believe are rights they earned in 1971 at the cost of 3 million lives.

So, I feel bad for Drik and Bangladeshis who thought they could learn something about Tibet through the medium of art. But, sadly, they are working under an illusion of freedom. My friend and prominent Bangladeshi blogger Shada Kalo has written a post chastising the Bangladesh government for failing to “protect and follow the constitution of Bangladesh” in preventing the exhibition, but Shada Kalo has also been duped by this illusion. The government is sadly not in unconstitutional territory.

The illusion is the false promise of freedom in Bangladesh’s Constitution. It is incumbent on Bangladeshi citizens to demand this travesty be corrected. If not, it will not only be photo exhibitions that suffer.

(Click image to see all photos from the conference)

Last Sunday (18th of October, 2009) I attended a conference on the Bangladeshi Genocide. It was organized by the Human Rights Institute and the Bangladesh Genocide Study Group at Kean University. This was the second such conference at Kean. The first one, which I also attended, was held in December 2007.

The conference consisted of multiple panel discussions as well as the presentation of a documentary on the 1971 genocide. The focus was on eyewitness accounts, documentation and memorialization of the Genocide, and the upcoming Genocide trials in Bangladesh.

Mofidul Hoque of the Bangladesh Liberation War Museum – a privately funded effort in Bangladesh - kicked off the discussion in the morning with a presentation of the efforts of the Museum to preserve the history of the War and Genocide. He was followed by a speech from the Ambassador of Bangladesh to the United States, Akramul Qader. The Ambassador outlined the Bangladesh government’s plan to begin genocide trials to bring to justice those who have enjoyed impunity for their actions for nearly 4 decades. Following the Ambassador, a number of eyewitnesses to the genocide of 1971 presented testimony of their experiences.

After a lunch break, the discussion moved to a number of expert panels on the genocide. Notable amongst these were a panel discussion on atrocities committed during the Genocide and the expert panel on prosecutable crimes during the Genocide. The panel on atrocities - with Dr. ABM Nasir of North Carolina Central University, Dr. Shelley Feldman of Cornell University and, via phone, Dr. Adam Jones of Gendercide Watch – brought into focus the dearth of source material on the Genocide available in the English language. This lack of material available in English has seriously hindered scholarly study of the 1971 Genocide.

The panel on prosecutable crimes consisted of experts on international law and war crimes. Dr. Keith Nunes, Coordinator of the Holocaust & Genocide Studies program at Kean, moderated the discussion involving Dr. David Matas, Senior Counsel of B’nai Brith of Canada and a member of Canadian delegations to conferences on the International Criminal Court and the Holocaust, Dr. Roza Pati, Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Intercultural Human Rights program at St. Thomas University, and Dr. Roger Clark of Rutgars University School of Law and a former member of the United Nations Committee on Crime Prevention and Control. The discussion focused on the 1973 International Crimes (Tribunals) Act which the Bangladesh government will use as the legal framework for the upcoming Genocide trials. It was pointed out by the panel that the 1973 Act defines genocide more broadly than the legal definition of genocide used in International Law. Specifically, the 1973 Act adds acts against a “political group” to the crime of genocide as defined by the 1951 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Given that the 1973 Act was passed after the crimes of 1971, there is a serious question as to the fairness of the trials if charges are brought against the perpetrators using the expanded definition of genocide beyond what is defined in International Law. In a subsequent conversation I asked Dr. Matas, given the problems with the 1973 Act, should the Bangladesh government go ahead with the Genocide Trials under the Act. He pointed out that it was important to get the process of the trials going, even with the flaws in the Act. He said as long as the charges stayed within the genocide defined in International Law, there was no need to rework the 1973 Act further to maintain the fairness and legitimacy of the trials.

Apart from a few minor hiccups, the conference was a success and a major step forward in the study of the 1971 genocide. I commend the organizers for their continued dedication to the important work that needs to be done. Important issues were raised at this conference. I hope these issues will be addressed.

The conference at Kean highlighted the embarrassing dereliction of duty by the Bangladesh government in preserving for posterity the history of the genocide of 1971. Apart from a wholly inadequate attempt in the early 1980s to bring together and document eyewitness accounts and historical records from the genocide, the failure of the government has been total. It should be a badge of shame for the government that it is left to private citizens to launch efforts like the Liberation War Museum to do what their government should have been doing. The government’s failure has been directly responsible for the distortion of Bangladesh’s history and for the lack of substantial scholarship surrounding one of the most concentrated acts of genocide in modern history. The conference at Kean was a clarion call to the Government of Bangladesh to do what it must do and should do to fulfill its obligations to its citizens and to those who gave their lives in the bloody birth of the country.

Another key takeaway from the conference is the importance of holding Genocide trials that are not only fair but that are seen to be fair as well. The Bangladesh government has a responsibility to the victims as well as posterity to see to it that it maintains the integrity of the upcoming trials. To this end, it should heed advice from international legal experts as it follows through with its obligation to try those responsible for the 1971 Genocide and to bring a measure of justice after nearly four decades of delay.

In terms of who the Bangladesh government intends to prosecute, a comment made by Ambassador Qader during his speech bothered me greatly. I did not get a chance to ask him to clarify his comments, so it is possible that he (I hope) misspoke. The Ambassador mentioned that the Bangladesh government only intends to bring charges against Bangladeshi citizens during the Genocide trials. He said that this decision was made so as not to “upset” foreign governments (read Pakistan and countries of the OIC). This, it seems to me, is a bizarre criteria to use in the pursuit of justice. I can understand the need to first bring to justice those that are within Bangladesh’s jurisdiction. But to exclude those that do not hold Bangladeshi citizenship is wrongheaded and legally unsound. It is well known that many perpetrators have either fled Bangladesh or were members of the Pakistan army. If Bangladesh government is indeed going to use this criteria for prosecution many key actors will continue to escape justice. Some of these perpetrators have taken shelter in Western countries, including the United Kingdom and the United States. To give these perpetrators of genocide continued impunity for their crimes is not only immoral, but will do nothing to convince future perpetrators that the world is serious about preventing genocide. In effect, the government of Bangladesh is saying this: that if you commit a murder or rape in Bangladesh, all you need do to escape justice is flee to another country and become its citizen. This stance will make a mockery of justice. I hope either the Ambassador misspoke or that the Bangladesh government will reconsider its ill considered stance.

——–

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

[Read posts by Mashuqur Rahman]

When we were being silenced, he lent us his voice. When we found freedom, he came to us.

A generation later I want to say thank you.

Today Senator Edward Kennedy took a courageous stand against the excesses of an imperial president. Behind him stand the majority of the American people whose voices have thus far been ignored. Senator Kennedy lent us his voice today.

Thirty five years ago when the Pakistani military was slaughtering my people by the millions, President Richard Nixon quietly offered arms to continue the killings. Along with Senators Frank Church and William Fulbright, Senator Kennedy took to the floor of the United States Senate and spoke out against the atrocities. His was one of the lonely voices in the United States government that defended the right of the Bengali people to exist. He spoke out against the massacres, the rapes, and the persecution when the Nixon administration chose to look the other way.

On August 11, 1971 Senator Kennedy visited Bengali refugee camps in Calcutta, India. There he visited with some of the 10 million Bengalis who had fled the massacres in East Pakistan. Kennedy was scheduled to visit East Pakistan but was refused entry by the Pakistani government. Nevertheless, with his visit, Senator Kennedy helped shine the world’s spotlight on the ongoing genocide. With his visit, he became a friend of the Bengali people.

On December 16, 1971 Bangladesh was liberated from Pakistan. On Valentine’s Day the following year, Senator Kennedy visited the newly formed nation. Kennedy arrived in the capital city, Dhaka, as the crowds shouted “Joi Kennedy!’ (Victory to Kennedy). He was mobbed everywhere he went. He made his way to Dhaka University, where the Pakistani killing spree had begun less than a year ago:

About 8,000 people crowded into the university courtyard and jammed lecture hall balconies and roofs, to hear the most popular American among Bengalis tell them what they have been telling themselves since their war for independence began last March.

“Even though the United States government does not recognize you,” Kennedy said, “the people of the world do recognize you.”

…

In his speech, Kennedy drew parallels between the liberation of Bangladesh and the American Revolution. He said America had prospered despite people who predicted it would collapse following independence, and so would Bangladesh.

Kennedy’s early support for the Bengalis’ fight  against Pakistan’s army has made him a symbol of the friendship with the United States which the Bengalis desperately want. When criticizing President Nixon for supporting Pakistan, Bengalis invariably mention Kennedy as the example to prove that the American people sympathize with their cause.

Over the next thirty five years Senator Kennedy has remained a friend of the Bengali people. Like his brother Bobby, who shook the foundations of apartheid with his courageous speech at Cape Town University, Edward Kennedy symbolized to nearly a hundred million Bengalis the best of America and American ideals.

In the decades since his 1972 visit to Bangladesh, Senator Kennedy has invariably stood with the voiceless and has given them voice.

On June 8, 1968 Edward Kennedy eulogized his brother Bobby at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City. With his voiced breaking with emotion, he said of his brother:

My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.

Those of us who loved him and who take him to his rest today, pray that what he was to us and what he wished for others will some day come to pass for all the world.

As he said many times, in many parts of this nation, to those he touched and who sought to touch him:

“Some men see things as they are and say why.
I dream things that never were and say why not.”

Edward Kennedy too is “a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.”

Thank you, Senator Kennedy, for what you did for Bangladesh in 1971 and for what you do for America today.

[Writer's NOTE (1/10/2007 2:55 pm): I cross posted this at Daily Kos. The post climbed to the Daily Kos "Recommended Diary" list and as a result there is a very lively discussion ongoing in the comments there. Please visit to participate in the discussion.]

[UPDATE (1/10/2007 11:00 pm): Senator Edward Kennedy graciously commented today on my diary at the Daily Kos. Here's a link to his comment.]

Mash -

Thank you for this thoughtful and beautifully written diary. I read it this morning and am grateful for your words. You have reminded us all to be mindful of battles of the past as we fight to change the current course of history.

With warm regards,
Senator Edward Kennedy

—-
Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

[Read posts by Mashuqur Rahman]

Consider the April 5, 2009 article by “Sunita Paul” in the American Chronicle entitled “DPRK: Missile-Satellite Controversy” – one of the very few articles not focused on Bangladesh. The article is about the North Korean missile launch. But as I read it, it felt very disjointed and parts of it were vaguely familiar. It read very much like an article written by Helene Cooper of the New York Times. This article was first published on April 5th with Helene Cooper’s byline and then was later augmented with reporting by David Sanger and published on the front page of the April 6 edition of the New York Times. I remembered the article because it caused quite a buzz when it came out. The original article, with only Helene Cooper on the byline, is still available online.

The Helene Cooper article consists of 13 paragraphs. “Sunita Paul” lifted 11 of the 13 paragraphs from Helene Cooper’s article and included them in her American Chronicle article. Nowhere in “Sunita Paul”’s article is Ms. Cooper or the New York Times given credit. Now, it is possible that the New York Times and Helene Cooper decided to waive copyright and give the entire contents of their original work to “Sunita Paul” to publish as if the words were written by her, but I very much doubt that. It is much more likely that “Sunita Paul” has plagiarized the New York Times article and tried to pass it off as her own writing.

Since pretty much the entire article was plagiarized, I will not reprint the entire New York Times article here. Instead, I will offer a few examples to illustrate the plagiarism. The reader can compare both articles to see the 11 paragraphs that were taken from the New York Times article.

Below is a paragraph from “Sunita Paul”’s article:

The U.S. president also said that he still plans to continue with plans to pursue missile defense, but tied the need for such a system to any Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons. Russia opposes locating a defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, as current plans call for, and Mr. Obama said in a letter to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev two months ago that if Russia is able to successfully help the United States stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, there will be no need for a missile defense shield in placed in Eastern Europe.

Here is the original paragraph from the New York Times article:

Mr. Obama also said that he still planned to continue plans to pursue missile defense, but he tied the need for such a system to any Iranian acquisition of nuclear weapons. Russia opposes locating a defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, as current plans call for, and Mr. Obama said in a letter to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev two months ago that if Russia were able to help the United States stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, there would be no need for a missile defense shield in in Eastern Europe.

Here is a paragraph from “Sunita Paul”’s article:

The issue has particular resonance here in Prague, since the now-collapsed government of Prime Minister Marek Topolanek went to bat against popular opinion here to support the missile shield, only to have the Obama administration begin to walk back from the plan.

Here is the original paragraph from the New York Times article:

The issue has particular resonance here in Prague, since the now collapsed government of Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek went to bat against popular opinion here to support the missile shield, only to have the Obama administration begin to walk back from the plan.

Here is a paragraph from “Sunita Paul”’s article:

That North Korea fired a rocket over Japan and into the Pacific just hours before President Obama´s speech lent his message an added urgency, He said, although White House officials disputed any suggestion that the secretive government in the North timed its rocket launch to coincide with the U.S. President´s speech.

Here is the original paragraph from the New York Times article:

That North Korea had fired a rocket over Japan and into the Pacific just hours before Mr. Obama’s speech lent his message an added urgency, Mr. Obama said, although White House officials disputed any suggestion that the secretive government in the North timed its rocket launch to coincide with Mr. Obama’s speech.

As you can see from the above examples, the plagiarism is blatant.

In response to my op-ed in the Daily Star, “Sunita Paul” published in the American Chronicle a scathing ad hominem attack on me. Leaving aside for the purposes of this post the libelous vitriol contained in that article, I found the following passage in the article to be of great interest:

Mashuqur Rahman calls me a plagarist and cheat. He did not cite one example behind such nasty allegation. I have never violated any copyright of any publication, ever. Wherefrom he invented this plagarism theory?

As the reader will recall, I documented in detail the paragraphs “Sunita Paul” plagiarized from my articles. Yet, she now claims she has never plagiarized or violated copyright. Interestingly, the article that I had linked to at the American Chronicle has mysteriously disappeared after my op-ed came out. However, the article, though now deleted, lives on in Google cache as testimony of her plagiarism. The offending article is also still available, for now, on Global Politician and Priyo.com. For more on “Sunita Paul”’s attack on me, read Shada Kalo’s excellent post.

So, it is likely that this new article by “Sunita Paul” may also mysteriously disappear since the plagiarism has been exposed. However, it will live on in Google cache.

As I have noted before, plagiarism is dishonesty. As more evidence of plagiarism arises, the level of dishonesty becomes self-evident.

-

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

[Read posts by Mashuqur Rahman]

Sunita Paul is a “journalist” who has recently been publishing a series of sensational articles about Bangladesh. She has caused quite a stir because her articles make extraordinary claims, based on anonymous sources, about the political situation in Bangladesh. Extraordinary claims without much factual support however require a significant leap of faith by the reader. Her articles, whether they should be believed, depend on her credibility.

I find that when a journalist is engaged in plagiarism, that is when a journalist makes false claims of authorship, the remainder of that journalist’s work should be viewed with extreme suspicion. Plagiarism is dishonesty. And Sunita Paul is a plagiarist.

On February 6th of this year, Sunita Paul published an article in the American Chronicle with the breathless headline “Ruling party getting set to try Bangladesh Generals.” Now, if the claim in the article’s headline were true, this would be big news. So, my interest was piqued when I came across this article. However, the article was thin on backing up the main charge in the headline. As I read further through the long article, though, I came across a number of paragraphs that seemed very familiar to me. In fact, they sounded like something I had written in 2007. As I read them carefully, and checked back on my earlier published posts, I realized the paragraphs were exactly what I had written in two articles about General Moeen Ahmed and his involvement with Trust Bank.

In Sunita Paul’s article, you will find the following passage about the Trust Bank affair:

General Moeen and his brother, Iqbal U Ahmed, are both on the board of directors of Trust Bank. This appears to violate Bangladesh Bank regulations that state “not more than one member of a family will become director of a bank. For this purpose family members shall include spouse, parents, children, brothers and sisters of the director and other persons dependent on him/her.”

General Moeen points out that his brother was already the Managing Director of the Bank when General Moeen became Chairman of Trust Bank. However, in November 2006, while General Moeen was Chairman, his brother was reappointed Managing Director of Trust Bank. This appears to violate the Bangladesh Bank regulations which state that the above “restriction shall apply to appointment/ reappointment of the directors”.

General Moeen and his brother, Iqbal, on Trust Bank´s board of directors, they are borrowers of large sums of money from the bank. According to a prospectus filed by Trust Bank before its IPO, General Moeen had a loan with an outstanding balance of Tk. 9,969,215 at the end of 2005. By the end of 2006, the outstanding amount had been reduced to Tk. 3,315,323. His brother, the Managing Director, had an outstanding loan balance of Tk. 1,775,242 at the end of June 2006. At the end of 2005 General Moeen´s loan amount was by far the largest loan given to any director or senior executive of Trust Bank.

The ownership of Trust Bank, before the IPO, consisted of 7,000,000 shares, with 6,999,920 shares held by Army Welfare Trust. Of the remaining shares, General Moeen owned 10 shares. His brother, Iqbal, owned no shares. Each share was valued at Tk. 100. Therefore General Moeen owned Tk. 1000 worth of shares. According to Bangladesh Bank regulations he was entitled, with the approval of the board of directors, to get a loan for an amount up to Tk. 500. In other words, at the end of 2005 General Moeen had a loan Tk. 9,968,715 in excess of the amount allowed by the law.

The reason the Bangladesh Bank regulations are in place is to guard against abuse of power by directors of private banks – that is to say, to prevent corruption.

In the article, she writes the above passage as her own. She does not cite me as the author of those words, nor does she put the passage in quotations.

Now compare the first two paragraphs that I noted above to these two paragraphs from my post entitled “A Matter Of Trust” published on October 20, 2007:

Viewer Discretion Strongly Advised

Video of the aftermath of a massacre in a village near Dhaka. 75 villagers – men, women, children – were killed by the Pakistani army. Many bodies were burned, women were raped, and babies were bayoneted before the village was burned.

As the Pakistan army started to lose its grip on Bangladesh in late November of 1971, more and more foreign reporters started to venture into the country. As reporters began to enter villages and towns in Bangladesh, they discovered the aftermath of the massacres by the Pakistan army. The full extent of the genocide began to emerge in the following months.

[Click for high resolution video]

—

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

Cartoon by Arifur Rahman http://www.cartoonstudio.tk/

About a year and a half ago I uploaded three videos to YouTube. For more than three and a half decades these videos, and the truth they held within them, remained largely hidden from the Bangladeshi people. Few had read about these videos and fewer still had actually seen them. A generation of Bangladeshis has grown up not fully grasping the brutality that had been visited upon the emerging nation in 1971. For decades these videos lay hidden in dusty archives and in the purview of scholars and academics. The truth in the videos, and the larger truth about the genocide of 1971, was muddied by successive rewritings of Bangladesh’s history by those who ruled its people by force. Bangladeshi history and the genocide of 1971 became a playground for genocide deniers.

Some of us have been fighting back to reclaim our history. In this fight, the Internet and YouTube have been our weapons. As part of this fight, I uploaded the three videos.

I uploaded a NBC News report from January 7, 1972 that showed chilling video of Pakistani soldiers executing students, professors and workers at Dhaka University on March 26, 1971. This was video taken by a university professor that was kept hidden until the end of the war. It documented the killing spree that began the genocide that would eventually take up to 3 million Bengali lives.

I uploaded a CBS News report from February 2, 1972 that showed evidence of mass graves and widespread killings in Khulna district that took approximately 100,000 lives.

I uploaded a NBC News report from February 20, 1972 that showed interviews of pregnant Bengali women and girls who were victims of genocidal rape. Some of the girls were as young as 13.

NBC News anchor Gerrick Utley, reflecting on the rapes and massacres of the 1971 genocide, said in his February 1972 report:

“We Americans are aware of what is happening in Cambodia and South Vietnam because this country has a big stake there. But, Bangladesh is a different case. There is no major American involvement or commitment there – nothing that approaches the needs of that young and impoverished nation. And so, the memory of what happened there may already be growing dim in many of us. But, what did happen there will never be forgotten by the people of Bangladesh, especially the women.”

It is a national shame for Bangladesh that much of what happened in 1971 has been forgotten, distorted or buried under the weight of lies and genocide denial. A generation of Bangladeshis has grown up denied access to their history.

So, I uploaded these videos hoping someone, some young Bangladeshi, would see and learn what they did to us. Since I uploaded these videos, Bangladeshis by the thousands have watched – most for the very first time. The three YouTube videos have been watched by over 300,000 people. The videos have been downloaded and reposted by many others – on YouTube and on other video hosting websites on the Internet. The videos have been reposted on social media sites like Facebook, and they have been emailed countless times to Bangladeshis who were watching for the first time what they did to us.

That is the power of the Internet. And that is the power of YouTube. What was once hidden away in dusty archives is now available for all the world to see.

After seeing the videos, a commenter wrote on my blog:

Thank You. Thank You for shocking me again after all these years. Thank you for making me cry. Thank you for making me angry. Thank you for making me feel that feeling. Thank you for making it real, once again.

Thank you for reminding me again how it had felt the first time I had seen these footages, many, many years ago.

Thank You for giving me few precious moments to share with my twelve-year-old and explain why Baba has trouble using his Muslim identity to overlook some inconvenient truth from his past.

Thank you for restoring my faith on the Internet and reminding me that just the plain truth sometimes can be the most powerful equalizer and our greatest weapon against all things evil – whether appearing in the guise of an affable general or a well-published scholar.

It is our history. For us to carry. For us to preserve and pass on to our children.

Unfortunately, the Bangladesh government has now banned YouTube to try to block an inconvenient audio tape that was leaked to the public. In so doing, the government has also blocked access to those three videos I uploaded and many others like them that tell our story, that expose the truth of our past, and that shame the genocide deniers. These same genocide deniers thrive on ignorance and on hiding facts and evidence. Censorship and disinformation are the tools of their trade.

The Bangladesh government needs to rethink its policy of censorship. It needs to ask itself who benefits from such censorship, and who suffers.

To illustrate the point, I invite Bangladeshi government officials, members of the Bangladesh military, and Bangladeshi citizens to watch the three videos below – all hosted on YouTube:

NBC News (1/7/1972): Dhaka University Massacre
Video of Pakistani soldiers executing students, professors and workers at Dhaka University on March 26, 1971.

CBS News (2/2/1972): Khulna Massacres
Evidence of mass graves and widespread killing in Khulna. Approximately 100,000 people were killed in Khulna.

NBC News (2/20/1972): Rape Victims
Genocidal rapes of Bangladeshi women and girls during the Bangladesh Liberation War. The report interviews pregnant girls held at Pakistani army barracks and repeatedly raped. Some of the girls are as young as 13.

—

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

A Cartoon by Arifur Rahman http://www.cartoonstudio.tk/

It is now confirmed that Bangladesh has blocked YouTube and some other file sharing websites after audio of a meeting between the Prime Minister and a large gathering of army senior officers was leaked and posted on YouTube. The AFP reports:

Bangladesh has blocked the video sharing website YouTube for hosting a recorded conversation between the newly elected prime minister and the country’s powerful army officers, officials said Sunday.

Internet users were unable to access the site after it hosted the audio tape, which appeared to show angry officers shouting at Sheikh Hasina over her handling of a bloody mutiny that has threatened Bangladesh’s recent return to democracy.

The violence in the capital Dhaka 10 days ago left at least 74 people dead including 56 army officers who were butchered and buried in shallow graves by mutinous border guards.

…

A senior government official told AFP the site has been blocked after it hosted “contents subversive to the state.”

“The government can block any site that contains anti-state or subversive contents, which may cause unrest. We took the measure temporarily. It will be lifted soon,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

I guess the army is embarrassed because the audio from the meeting showed the senior staff to be undisciplined and angry. On the audio, army officers can be heard shouting at the Prime Minister, demanding she answer their questions, and generally conducting themselves badly. The officers are especially angry because the government did not allow the army to launch an ill-advised assault on the BDR headquarters compound during the recent hostage crisis. This is not the image of the disciplined army that the top brass would like the Bangladeshi citizen to fear and respect.

Since the massacre at BDR headquarters that took the lives of over 70 people, majority of whom were army officers, there has been fear in Bangladesh of another army coup. The government and the media have been bending over backward to praise the army for its “restraint”. In other words, the army is being praised for doing what armies are supposed to do: maintain discipline and obey the civilian government. However, in Bangladesh, that is no small task – the army has a habit of taking over when it feels it necessary. The army has just recently returned to the barracks after ruling for 2 years. Democracy in Bangladesh is conducted at the mercy of the army.

Now, the leak of the audio tape threatens to test the army’s mercy. So, in true Third World fashion, they have decided to cut off YouTube to prevent the spread of this audio. Of course the audio has been out for a week now and many people have already downloaded it and listened to it. No matter. If you want to be feared in the Third World, you have to take action against the Internets.

So much for democracy in Bangladesh. They say the Pakistan army tolerates civilian governments only if they “play within the wickets”. It appears that the Bangladesh army also wants to umpire this game of cricket. Two months after the restoration of democracy in Bangladesh, the civilian government is playing nicely within the wickets.

For those of you who may be YouTube challenged at the moment, listen to the audio at Live Leak (until the Bangladesh government decides Live Leak is also “anti-state”). For those of you who do not understand Bengali, shouting sounds the same in any language. Listen below:

Link to part 1 of audio:

Link to part 2 of audio:

Link to part 3 of audio:

Update (March 8, 2009 2:18PM): Via BDNews24, a Bangladesh government official defends blocking of YouTube and eSnips:

Dhaka, Mar 08 (bdnews24.com)—A top regulatory official has defended blocking of Websites to Bangladeshi visitors in the national interest, saying it is permitted by law.

Popular video site YouTube and blog site esnips.com could not be accessed by visitors from Bangladesh territory in the last two days, leading to reports that the Websites might have been blocked by the authorities.

“Nothing has been done which is beyond the jurisdiction of the government,” BTRC chairman Zia Ahmed told bdnews24.com, when asked to confirm the reports.

An audio on the proceedings of the Mar 1 meeting between prime minister Sheikh Hasina and hundreds of army officers at the Dhaka cantonment in the wake of the Feb 25-26 BDR mutiny was posted on both the sites, and visitors passed on the links through emails.

Some newspapers also carried abridged versions of the texts of the audio, leaked apparently by rogue intelligent agents.

“The government can take any decision to stop any activity that threatens national unity and integrity,” said retired brigadier general Zia Ahmed.

Update (March 8, 2009 9:04PM): MediaFire.com also appears to be blocked in Bangladesh at the BTTB gateway (thanks Ehab for the hat tip). At this rate, the government will have to block all peer-to-peer activity as well, not to mention a growing list of web servers that are hosting the audio files. I’d recommend they spend their time finding out who recorded and leaked the audio from the meeting. I am guessing the suspect list is finite and is limited to all the army officers there, the Prime Minister, her military advisor, and one civilian minister who attended. Trying to stop the audio file from being distributed after it has already been out there for a week is foolish. The government’s censorship attempt is making more news than the original audio files did.

—

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

The above is a Google Earth image of the sprawling BDR headquarters at Pilkhana in Dhaka [click the image for a larger image]. Pilkhana is a sprawling compound surrounded by densely populated neighborhoods of Dhaka. Take a moment and ponder the size of the BDR compound.

After a 33 hour standoff with the government, the so-called BDR mutiny came to an end earlier this week. During the standoff, according to newly lowered estimates from the Bangladesh army, at least 59 army officers were killed by those inside the BDR compound. It is estimated that about 4000 heavily armed BDR soldiers were inside the compound holding, it was assumed, around 160 hostages. It is not known exactly when the army officers were killed, but reports from surviving officers suggest that they were killed within the first hour of the BDR soldiers’ rebellion.

The government, seeking to avoid massive bloodshed in the middle of Dhaka city, chose to hold talks with the BDR soldiers inside the compound. This led ultimately to the release of the remaining hostages and the end of the standoff after 33 hours.

Now, however, it is being argued by many in Bangladesh, within and outside the military, that the government should have allowed the army to launch an assault on the BDR headquarters. It is being argued that such an assault may have saved the lives of the army officers who were killed. Apparently, the government’s failure to order an assault caused the deaths of the army officers.

I am no expert in hostage rescue, but it seems to me that an assault with 10 or 12 tanks of the army, APCs, anti-aircraft weapons (!), and other assembled weapons of war against a heavily armed force of 4000 holding up to 160 hostages in a sprawling compound (in the middle of a densely populated city) would be neither quick nor easy. It seems to me that such an assault would have been a mass casualty event. I would think an assault on such a large target without knowing where the hostages were or what their condition was would require a great deal of planning – planning that would not be measured in minutes, but in hours and perhaps days. As a reference, one can look at the many long hours it took Indian army commandos to flush out only a handful of lightly armed terrorists from three buildings, an area of operations that is dwarfed by the BDR headquarters (and its many buildings). These things are only quick within the span of a 2 hour movie. In real life, it takes a little longer.

So, take a look at the image at the top of this post again. Does it look like an easy take down?

—

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.

Thousands of people join a candlelight vigil this evening in a park opposite BDR Headquarter. The vigil was organized in memory of the departed souls of those who were killed in the BDR mutiny. Photo - Amdadul Huq, DRIK News, Dhaka, Bangladesh. March 1 2009

When a crisis strikes in a country like Bangladesh, the civilian government usually faces two main challenges. First, it must deal with the crisis itself. Second, it must deal with the ever present possibility that the army may intervene and take control of the government. The latter challenge is no theoretical concern: in its short history as a nation, the army has intervened at least three times.

In the latest crisis that has struck Bangladesh, up to 170 army officers have been massacred at the BDR headquarters in Dhaka. The tragedy has been termed a mutiny by the BDR soldiers against their superior officers. However, it is far from clear what motivated the actual killings, and for that matter who planned and carried out these killings. The only thing we know for certain is where the killings took place and who were the victims.

What is noteworthy about the massacre at the BDR headquarters is that it merges the two challenges faced by the government. The crisis itself involves the army. It is the army that has suffered the brunt of this attack, with many of its officers now murdered. Added to the concern that the army may move on its own to restore “order”, there is now a desire for revenge within the army’s ranks. Public sentiment in Bangladesh is one of outrage and shock. There is justifiably tremendous sympathy for the army officers for the great loss of life and for the shattered families left behind in the wake of this tragedy. It is also no small matter that the killings have taken place at Pilkhana – a site of slaughter that launched the 1971 genocide against the Bangladeshi people. Pilkhana is embedded in the national consciousness.

There is tremendous pressure from within the army to act, and in turn, pressure on the government from the army. In the face of this pressure, the army chief Moeen U Ahmed has declared publicly that the army remains “subservient to the government.” Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in a bid to quell rising army anger, went to the army headquarters in Dhaka to discuss the situation face to face with army officers. Perhaps as a result of those discussions, comes this news:

The government today decided to deploy the members of the armed forces across the country to arrest the fugitive rebels of Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) and seize missing firearms.

A home ministry official preferring anonymity said the troops would be deployed in aid of the civil administration under the ‘Operation Rebel Hunt.’

“Army will help the police to arrest the rebels and seize their arms,” the official told The Daily Star last night.

He said the army would be withdrawn after having the situation under control.

The decision came hours after the meeting of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina with army officers at Sena Kunja at Dhaka Cantonment.

This is a very troubling development. The army is being deployed for law enforcement purposes across the country on a mission to hunt down those that have killed the army’s own. This holds the potential for further bloodshed. Whether the civilian government can keep control of the army once it is out of its barracks and amongst the population remains to be seen. Whether the army chain of command holds or can restrain the lower ranks remains to be seen. In an atmosphere where the army ranks are in a mood for revenge, putting them in charge of hunting down the perpetrators is ill advised. The urge for revenge combined with the natural and historical urge of the army to take control make for a volatile situation.

The government of Sheikh Hasina dealt with the initial crisis in a measured way designed to prevent further bloodshed. Some government officials, most notably the Home Minister Sahara Khatun, risked their own lives to bring the crisis to an end. It is the kind of bravery Bangladeshis have seldom seen from their rulers in recent years. The government’s performance in dealing with the initial crisis should be commended.

Now, however, the government faces the second challenge that all crises bring to Bangladesh. The fate of her government and that of democracy in Bangladesh depend on how she manages to navigate this challenge.

—-

Mashuqur Rahman [http://www.docstrangelove.com] is one of the highest read Bangladeshi-American bloggers. Critically acclaimed for his incisive analysis on Bangladesh, US foreign policy and dedicated advocacy of human rights.