#bnp politics news

[nabanewsbd24]

Begum Zia will be Admitted to the London Clinic| Bangla English News | @...

[emselimahmed]

বিএনপি নেতারা কারাবন্দী সদস্যদের মুক্তির প্রতিবাদে নেতৃত্ব দেন রুহুল কবির রিজভী - সংবাদ তরঙ্গ

ঢাকা, জানুয়া��ি 15, 2024 — বিএনপি চেয়ারপারসন খালেদা জিয়া ও মহাসচিব মির্জা ফখরুল ইসলাম আলমগীরসহ কারাবন্দি নেতাদের মুক্তির দাবিতে একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ পদক্ষেপে, দলের সিনিয়র সদস্যরা রাজধানীতে বিক্ষোভ করেছে, যার নেতৃত্বে সিনিয়র নেতারা

[mariacallous]

Bangladeshis made history in July when a mass uprising, led by student protesters, toppled Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League’s government, which had become increasingly dictatorial over the course of 15 years in power. Before she fled to India on Aug. 5, Hasina oversaw the killing of thousands—at least 90 people were killed by the police on the day before her departure alone. Children were not spared.

The end of Hasina’s dictatorship has turned a new chapter in Bangladesh’s history. The country’s lone Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, now heading an interim government, called it Bangladesh’s second liberation. But Bangladesh has to step carefully over the mess Hasina has left behind���both in domestic and foreign affairs.

And the mess is huge. Historically, Bangladesh’s politics has been a game of pass the parcel played between Hasina’s center-left Awami League and Khaleda Zia’s center-right Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), with the two regularly exchanging power for years—until Hasina broke the norms of democracy in 2011. That was the year she abolished the caretaker government system, where neutral civil society leaders headed an interim government to conduct the elections in a free and fair manner. Since then, the country has witnessed one rigged election after another. The BNP said about half of its 5 million members faced legal charges.

The democratic institutions that have been destroyed over the years can’t be rebuilt overnight. In his first speech to the nation, Yunus talked about bringing back the “lost glory of these [government] institutions.” The country effectively has no police force left. Hasina used members of the Border Guard Bangladesh, who were supposed to be posted at the border, against the protesters. Now they are facing widespread public anger too.

The damage is everywhere from administration to law enforcement to the military. Nothing has been spared. Hasina destroyed the country’s judiciary by handpicking judges. In 2017, the chief justice of Bangladesh’s Supreme Court, Surendra Kumar Sinha—a Hindu in a Muslim-majority country—was forced to resign and seek asylum in Canada after being threatened by the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence, the country’s military intelligence service.

The economy is in tatters, and corruption is rampant. Hasina herself has said that her manservant is worth $34 million and commutes via helicopter. According to Transparency International, around $3.1 billion is laundered from Bangladesh every year, which is more than 10 percent of the country’s total national reserves.

With the Awami League now hated by most of the public, the only political force left this political vacuum is the BNP. Zia, the party chairperson, is 79—and she is now gravely ill and was hospitalized multiple times since this summer. Tarique Rahman, her firstborn child and deputy, is 56. Rahman, often seen as his mother’s successor and the future head of state, has been living in a self-imposed exile in the U.K. for the last 16 years and the extent he is in touch with the country’s new reality is a question up for debate. He faces a slew of corruption charges—although these may not stand up in a fair trial as they were trumped up by Hasina.

After 15 years of autocracy, most of the remaining politicians are greying, while the median age in Bangladesh is a little over 25. The uprising that saw Hasina’s rule crumble was spearheaded by mostly by members of Generation Z. Their leadership of these supposedly apolitical groups in the July revolution has caught the politicians off guard, proof that Bangladeshi politicians are not capable of reading the pulse of the young.

Amid this chaos, the West needs to start playing a far more positive role. One of the reasons Hasina’s rule lasted so long was because the U.S. turned a blind eye to her misrule. Months before the one-sided elections in January, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken threatened to “restrict the issuance of visas for any Bangladeshi individual, believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh.” But after the polls, no punitive measures materialized. On the contrary, U.S. President Joe Biden wrote a letter to Hasina, expressing his government’s wish to “work together on regional and global security” and “commitment to supporting Bangladesh’s ambitious economic goals.”

U.S. complicity depends in part on its desire for India, a close ally to Bangladesh, to contain China in the Indo-Pacific. According to the Washington Post, last month Indian officials told their U.S. counterparts, “This is a core concern for us, and you can’t take us as a strategic partner unless we have the same kind of strategic consensus.”

India supported successive Awami League regimes due to its own security and strategic concerns. India’s landlocked northeastern states, also known as the Seven Sisters, are linked to the rest of the country through the narrow 60-kilometre-long Siliguri Corridor. This tiny passage, known as the Chicken Neck, separates Bangladesh from Nepal and Bhutan. The strategically important Tibetan Chumba Valley controlled by China is only 130 kilometers away.

The Seven Sisters are inhibited by 220 ethnic minorities and are home to active insurgent groups, especially in Assam, Manipur and Nagaland. India also has the world’s fifth-longest land border with Bangladesh. All this gives India a potent stake in Bangladesh—but instead of making new friends or giving Bangladesh’s democracy a chance, India placed its chips entirely on Hasina and the Awami League. Anti-Indian sentiment now runs high in Bangladesh—the Indian Cultural Center in the capital was torched within three hours of Hasina’s fall.

India has a long way to go to win the hearts and minds of ordinary Bangladeshis, and blaming Pakistan and its intelligence agency, the ISI, for every problem won’t help. India’s old narrative is dead, and New Delhi must realize this.

The U.S. must stop seeing Bangladesh through India’s eyes. Time and again U.S. policymakers have misread Bangladesh’s importance, looking at it as an extension of India instead of a state in itself. Bangladesh is potentially crucial to containing China in the Indo-Pacific. It has a young population who hold their ethno-religious identities close to their hearts but are pro-Western, too, with more than 13 million Bangladeshis living abroad.

Hasina herself was playing both sides, turning herself into China’s closest ally in South Asia. In July, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning described the relationship between Bangladesh and China as “good neighbors, good friends, and good partners.”

China dislodged India as Bangladesh’s top trading partner nine years ago. Bangladesh imports more goods from China than from any other country, and is in debt to China to the tune of $17.5 billion, which was mainly invested in white elephant infrastructure projects. After Hasina’s fall, China’s reaction, however, has been muted—hoping to build a relationship with whoever emerges afterwards.

The U.S. and the European Union have welcomed Yunus and his interim government. Mathew Miller, a State Department spokesperson, said last month the U.S. wants the interim government to “chart a democratic future for the people of Bangladesh.” The best way to do this is for the U.S. to offer support to U.N.-led efforts to support order and democracy in the country.

The interim government immediately needs to establish law and order. It can start by bringing the perpetrators of the July carnage to the book. A national office of missing persons should be established to look into all the incidents of enforced disappearances. It can seek technical support from the United Nations, which should lead an independent U.N.-led fact-finding program into the revolution and fall of the Hasina regime. Western nations should support the establishment of a new, fairer constitution that takes the range of Bangladeshi identities into account.

The presence of torture cells inside Dhaka cantonment and the alleged involvement of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence tells us that a section of the armed forces were involved in crimes against humanity. Bangladesh has been a major contributor to U.N. peacekeeping—but that needs to stop until responsibility for these crimes has been established.

The ongoing civil war in Myanmar is also an existential threat to Bangladesh’s national security. With Bangladesh’s security forces in disarray, the U.S. should support Bangladesh by setting up a temporary base that will provide the Bangladesh Armed Forces and intelligence agencies with arms, training and other logistical support, while maintaining a firm emphasis on the political neutrality of the army and its support of human rights.

Bangladesh has survived a dire time to potentially chart a brighter future. Washington should see it not as an extension of Indian interests, but as an independent country that is capable of making its own decisions, an important ally, and a partner in the Indo-Pacific.

[beardedmrbean]

Bangladesh's parliament has been dissolved, a day after prime minister Sheikh Hasina was forced from power.

Ms Hasina resigned and fled the country after weeks of student-led protests spiralled into deadly unrest.

The dissolution of parliament, a key demand of protesters, paves the way for establishing an interim government.

Bangladeshis are waiting to see what comes next, as the country's military chief is holding talks with political leaders and protest organisers.

According to local media, more than 100 people died in violent clashes across Bangladesh on Monday, the single deadliest day since mass demonstrations began.

Hundreds of police stations were also torched, with the Bangladesh Police Service Association (BPSA) declaring a strike "until the security of every member of the police is secure".

The group also sought to place the blame at the door of authorities, saying they were "forced to fire".

Overall, more than 400 people are believed to have died, as protests were met with harsh repression by government forces.

The protests began in early July with peaceful demands from university students to abolish quotas in civil service jobs, but snowballed into a broader anti-government movement.

Weeks of unrest culminated in the storming of the prime minister's official residence, not long after Ms Hasina had fled to neighbouring India, ending nearly 15 years of rule.

Bangladeshi leaders are under pressure to establish an interim government to avoid a power vacuum that could lead to further clashes.

Within hours of her resignation, Bangladesh's army chief Gen Waker-uz-Zaman pledged that an interim administration would be formed, adding on state television that "it is time to stop the violence".

Student leaders have been clear they will not accept a military-led government, pushing for Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus to become the interim government's chief adviser.

Mr Yunus, who agreed to take up the role, said: “When the students who sacrificed so much are requesting me to step in at this difficult juncture, how can I refuse?”

He is returning to Dhaka from Paris, where he is undergoing a minor medical procedure, according to his spokesperson.

Meanwhile, ex-prime minister and key opposition leader Khaleda Zia was released from years of house arrest, a presidential statement said.

She chairs the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which boycotted elections in 2014 and again in 2024, saying free and fair elections were not possible under Ms Hasina.

The BNP wanted the polls to be held under a neutral caretaker administration. This has now become a possibility after the departure of Ms Hasina, who had always rejected this demand.

Ms Zia, 78, served as prime minister of Bangladesh from 1991 to 1996, but was imprisoned in 2018 for corruption, although she said the charges were politically motivated.

She was not the only opposition figure to be released after years of detention.

Activist Ahmad Bin Quasem was also released from detention, according to his lawyer Michael Polak.

Rights groups say Mr Quasem was taken away by security forces in 2016, just one of hundreds of forced disappearances in the country under Ms Hasina's rule.

"There were many points during his detention that he was feared dead, and the uncertainty was one of the many tools of repression utilised by the regime," Mr Polak explained, adding they hoped the decision to release political prisoners "is a positive sign of their intentions".

"Unfortunately, the good news won’t be shared by all," he told the BBC, stating that a number of political prisoners had died in custody.

At least 20 other families of political prisoners gathered outside a military intelligence force building in the capital Dhaka earlier in the day, still desperately waiting for news about their loved ones, AFP news agency reports.

"We need answers," Sanjida Islam Tulee, a co-ordinator of Mayer Daak (The Call of the Mothers) campaign group, told the news agency.

Across the border in India, Foreign Minister S Jaishankar said he was "deeply concerned till law and order is visibly restored" in Bangladesh, with which India shares a 4,096-km (2,545-mile) border and has close economic and cultural ties.

He gave the first official confirmation that Ms Hasina made a request to travel to India at "very short notice" and "arrived yesterday evening in Delhi".

India also deployed additional troops along its border with Bangladesh.

"Our border guarding forces have also been instructed to be exceptionally alert in view of this complex situation," Mr Jaishankar said.

[dailyanarchistposts]

Conclusion

Recently new groups of National-Anarchists, recruited through Southgate’s internet activism, have made the leap from contemplating their idiosyncratic ideas on the internet into making them the basis of really-existing politics, by joining demonstrations in Australia and San Francisco. Web pages and blogs continue to pop up in different countries and languages.

The danger National-Anarchists represent is not in their marginal political strength, but in their potential to show an innovative way that fascist groups can rebrand themselves and reset their project on a new footing. They have abandoned many traditional fascist practices—including the use of overt neo-Nazi references, and recruiting from the violent skinhead culture. In its place they offer a more toned down, sophisticated approach. Their cultural references are the neo-folk and gothic music scene, which puts on an air of sophistication, as opposed to the crude skinhead subculture. National-Anarchists abandon any obvious references to Hitler or Mussolini’s fascist regimes, often claiming not to be “fascist” at all.

Like the European New Right, the National-Anarchists adapt a sophisticated left-wing critique of problems with contemporary society, and draw their symbols and cultural orientation from the Left; then they offer racial separatism as the answer to these problems. They are attempting to use this new form to avoid the stigma of the old discredited fascism, and if they are successful like the National Bolsheviks have been in Russia, they will breathe new life into their movement. Even if the results are modest, this can disrupt left-wing social movements and their focus on social justice and egalitarianism; and instead spread elitist ideas based on racism, homophobia, antisemitism and antifeminism amongst grassroots activists.

Glossary

Fascism: Fascism is an especially virulent form of far-right populism. Fascism glorifies national, racial, or cultural unity and collective rebirth while seeking to purge imagined enemies, and attacks both left-wing movements and liberal pluralism. Fascism first crystallized in Europe in response to the Bolshevik Revolution and the devastation of World War I, and then spread to other parts of the world. Postwar fascists have reinterpreted fascist ideology and strategy in various ways to fit new circumstances.

Third Position: Third Position politics are a minor branch of fascist thought. It rejects both liberal capitalism and Marxism for a kind of racially based socialism. Its main precursors are the National Bolsheviks, who were a fusion of nationalism and communism, and the Strasser brothers, key figures in the “left-wing” of the Nazi party. Third Positionists tend to support national liberation movements in the Third World, seek alliances with other ethnic separatists, and have recently supported environmentalism

Footnotes

[1] Chip Berlet, Right Woos Left: Populist Party, LaRouchian, and Other Neo-fascist Overtures to Progressives and Why They Must Be Rejected (Cambridge, MA: Political Research Associates, 1994).

[2] Jeffrey Kaplan and Tore Bjørgo, eds. Nation and Race: The Developing Euro-American Racist Subculture (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1998).

[3] For recruitment of counter-culturalists, see Nick Griffin, “National-Anarchism: Trojan Horse for White Nationalism,” Green Anarchy 19, (Spring 2005). On spreading National-Anarchist ideas to BNP members, see Troy Southgate’s comments.

[4] Roger Griffin, The Nature of Fascism(New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991), p. 38.

[5] Email from Tory Southgate to National-Anarchist listserve, message #26659. November 30, 2003.

[6] Jeffrey Bales, “ ‘National revolutionary’ groupuscules and the resurgence of ‘left-wing’ fascism: the case of France’s Nouvelle Résistance,” Patterns of Prejudice, v36 #3 (2002), pp. 25–26.

[7] Anti-Fascist Forum, ed., My Enemy’s Enemy (Montreal: Kersplebedeb, 2003), p. 31.

[8] Don Hammerquist, J. Sakai, et al., Confronting Fascism (Montreal: Kersplebedeb, et al, 2002), pp. 35–38.

[9] On the alliance between certain sectors of the antiglobalization movement and Islamist factions, see Andrew Higgins, “Anti-Americans on the March,” Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2006, p. A1. For an example of contemporary left-wing calls to openly tolerate antisemitism, see Rami El-Amine, “Islam and the Left,” Upping the Anti #5, October 2007.

[10] Troy Southgate, “Transcending the Beyond: From Third Position to National-Anarchism,” Pravda, January 17, 2002.

[11] Graham Macklin, “Co-opting the Counterculture: Troy Southgate and the National Revolutionary Faction,”Patterns of Prejudice 39, no. 3 (2005), p. 325.

[12] Macklin, p. 325.

[13] Troy Southgate, “The Case for National-Anarchist Entryism.”

[14] “Neo-Nazis Join Animal Rights Groups,” Sunday Telegraph, June 19, 2001.

[15] Macklin, p. 318.

[16] See URL.

[17] Cited in Roger-Pol Droit, “The Confusion of Ideas,” Telos 98–99, (Winter 1993-Spring 1994), p. 138. GRECE stands for the “Groupement de recherche et d’études pour la civilisation européenne” – the “Research and Study Group for European Civilization.”

[18] Martin A. Lee, The Beast Reawakens(Boston: Little, Brown & Co, 1997), pp. 168–83; Kevin Coogan, Dreamer of the Day (Brooklyn: Autonomedia, 1999), pp. 191–92. For Yockey’s influence on Southgate, see Macklin, p. 320.

[19] Lee, p. 450 n40. See also Southgate, “Transcending the Beyond.”

[20] Troy Southgate, Interview, “Interview with Troy Southgate, Conducted by Graham Macklin.”

[21] Macklin, pp. 303–4; Martin A. Lee and Kevin Coogan, “Killers on the Right,” Mother Jones 12, no. 4, (May 1987), p. 45.

[22] Macklin, pp. 317–18.

[23] Troy Southgate, “Was ‘Fascism’ Outside of Germany and Italy Anything More Than An Imitation?”; “Revolution versus Reaction: Social-Nationalism & the Strasser Brothers.”

[24] Troy Southgate, “Enemy Within? Hizb-ut Tahrir, Al- Muhajiroun, & the Growing Threat of Asian Colonisation.”

[25] Chip Berlet and Matthew Lyons, Right-Wing Populism in America (New York & London: Guilford Press, 2000), pp. 269–70; see also Betty Dobratz and Stephanie Shanks-Meile, “White Power, White Pride!” The White Separatist Movement in the United States (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1997), pp. 262–67. On Miles, see Lee, pp. 340–41.

[26] Southgate says, “We also have an excellent relationship with National-Bolsheviks like the American Front (AF), who, despite the fact that they do not share our anarchistic tendencies, are basically working for very similar objectives.” “Synthesis Editor Troy Southgate, Interviewed by Dan Ghetu.”

[27] Berlet and Lyons, p. 267.

[28] The website for the “Anti-Globalism Action Network.” See also Center for New Community, “Neo-Nazi Infiltration of Anti-Globalization Protests,” Center for New Community, June 22, 2002; Anti- Defamation League, “Purported ‘Anti-Globalization’ Web Site Fronts for Neo-Nazi Group,” July 12, 2002. For the Washington, D.C. rally, see Anti-Defamation League, “Neo-Nazis Rally in Nation’s Capital,”; Susan Lantz, “Fascists Countered In D.C., ”Baltimore IMC, August 28, 2002; “Washington, DC: National Alliance Rally a Huge Bust,” Infoshop News, August 24, 2002.

[29] Bill White, “Anti-Globalist Resistance Beyond Left And Right: An Emerging Trend That Is Defining A New Paradigm In Revolutionary Struggle,” Pravda Online, November 2, 2001.

[30] folkandfaith.com is based in Idaho Falls, Idaho. bayareanationalanarchists.com/blog is based in California’s Bay Area. As unlikely as this location may seem, the NRF-affiliated fascist skinhead gang the American Front originated there as well. attackthesystem.com is another site sympathetic to National-Anarchists.

[31] See Griffin; The U.S.-based Green Anarchy is not to be confused with the UK-based Green Anarchist, despite shared ideology. Green Anarchy has explicitly denounced National-Anarchism.

[32] Roger Griffin, “Plus ça change! The Fascist Pedigree of the Nouvelle Droite,” draft, August, 1998; p. 5.

[33] “Plus ça change!” p. 4.

[34] Alain de Benoist and Charles Champetier, “The French New Right in the Year 2000,” Telos, no. 115, (Spring 1999), pp. 117–144.

[35] Many fascist intellectuals have held this view, including early Nazi leader Otto Strasser, Italian occult philosopher Julius Evola, U.S. Third Position theorist Francis Parker Yockey, and German Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt. For a discussion of “spiritual” versus “biological” race, see Coogan, 313 n38, p. 481. See also Lee, pp. 96.

[36] “Three Interviews with Alain de Benoist,” Telos, nos. 98- 99, (Winter 1993-Spring 1994), pp. 173–207.

[37] Dobratz and Shanks-Meile, p. 99.

[38] See Jeffrey Kaplan, “Leaderless Resistance,” Terrorism and Political Violence 9 no. 3, (Autumn 1997), pp. 80–95; see also Dobratz and Shanks-Meile, pp. 171–74, pp. 267–68. For the influence on Troy Southgate, see Macklin, p. 312. Beam’s essay is also reproduced on the Australian National-Anarchist site.

[39] “Three Interviews with Alain de Benoist,” p. 180.

[40] Pierre-André Taguieff, “The New Right’s Vision of European Identity,” Telos, nos. 98–99, Winter 1993- Spring 1994; p. 123.

[41] New Right Australia New Zealand Committee, “Statement of New Right on National-Anarchism and Australian Nationalism.”

[42] For the intellectual influence of the New Right on Southgate, see Macklin, p. 306.

[43] Telos nos. 98–99, Winter 1993 – Spring 1994.

[44] Tamir Bar-On, Where Have All the Fascists Gone? (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007).

[45] See New Right Australia New Zealand Committee.

[46] “Synthesis Editor Troy Southgate, Interviewed by Wayne John Sturgeon,”; see also Macklin, pp. 312–13.

[47] Southgate, “Blood and Soil.”

[48] Troy Southgate, “The Guild of St. Joseph and St. Dominic.” On the link between German Nazis and ecology, see Janet Biehl and Peter Staudenmaier, Ecofascism: Lessons From the German Experience (San Francisco: AK Press, 1995).

[49] Southgate, Sturgeon interview.

[50] Southgate, Sturgeon interview.

[51] “A smear salad: Nick Griffin, Green Anarchy, and a concoction of fallacies,” Bay Area National-Anarchists, October 7, 2007.

[52] Troy Southgate, “Manifesto of the European Liberation Front, 1999.”

[53] Southgate, Sturgeon interview.

[54] Troy Southgate, “Oswald Mosley: The Rise & Fall of English Fascism Between 1918–45.”

[55] “Welf Herfurth On Kameradschaft.”

[kanmom51]

The is a difference between lying and not saying the whole truth or keeping some things to yourself.

Truth told by V and JK in ITS: We're not as close right now as we were years ago. People change and it's okay.

Omitted info: Why?

It's personal and none of our business. Luckily it looks like that talk was good for them and they started getting closer again.

Truth told by JK: ARMY is for Army and the crown and J is for JK.

The ARMY one is pretty obvious. And J being for JK is new, but that does not mean it's not the truth. He said so himself.

Omitted info: Why it's placed over the M, when it's connected to the crown? Especially considering him sometimes referring to Jimin as JM (including in the new live and RUN).

Again this might be personal and poeple are allowed not to say everything. Especially if the whole truth could hurt them.

They say the truth and keep info to themselves in EVERY interview. Everyone does that on a daily basis, without being a superstar with a big chunk of their country's BNP on your backs. That does not mean, that what they are NOT saying is not also the truth. It just means we don't know all of it and that's how the world is.

I will never call any of the members liers. I just accept that everyone keeps personal stories and info to themselves and doesn't have to share everything. I don't do that myself, so why expect it from them?

Have a lovely day 💜😘

PS. Just my personal opinion of cause.

Your personal opinion very well put.

An opinion I tend to agree with, as I have stated in my posts following the first round of lives we had from JK.

As you said, we all omit stuff, it's personal, it's ours not to share with others if we don't feel comfortable enough to do so.

But in their case, these two young men, whom we love and believe are in a closeted long term loving queer relationship, two young men that are at the top of the world fame-wise, they have everything to lose if they are outed.

With their level of worldwide fame there are those that forget at times where they actually come from, the societal pressures they are under. SK isn't an LGBTQ+ friendly country (not that in friendly ones it would be that much easier). Korean society is very conservative, and if we thought things were going somewhere prior to 2022, well the 2022 elections kind of sealed the deal on that one (without going into the politics). They are also just about to be enlisting to MS, where queer relations are not only unwarranted they are illegal, a law that is being challenged but yet to be cancelled.

And as you know, the bigger you are, the greater the fall. I would love to live in La La land and believe that them coming out would be accepted and celebrated. That the fandom would be happy for them, for being themselves, for finding love. That the society they live in would celebrate their bravery and that they would champion the LGBTQ+ cause in SK.

But those are all dreams.

Unrealistic dreams.

Because the fandom, they won't accept it. Look at how they behave now when JK shows even a smidge of queerness. Our latest little example the reactions to him singing Unholy. And SK society, well look at Holland. Yes, if they ever decide to come out it will have, I feel, an immense effect on the LGBTQ+ cause, if only by giving it the back wind and exposure it might lack at the moment. A celebrity at their level, someone that is loved and adored so much, admitting to being queer, it will definitley have an effect. But the price to pay for them will be a great one. It's up to them, together, to make that decision if and definitely when. And the when is also definitely not now.

God, I have a point here, I promise I do, even though this feels like me just going on and on and on with stuff already said in the past.

My point is, as I've made clear in several posts now, that JK in his live could NEVER admit that the J and M together are meant to be JM.

Not out loud.

Not for everyone to hear.

That would be literally outing himself, and most likely JM as a consequence as well.

Because seriously, EVERYONE knows what that would mean.

JM tattooed on to his ring finger. For eternity.

Why do you think army came up with the convoluted theory about Army plus J being for all the members? Because everyone knew exactly what that JM meant.

So, admitting to it was not an option.

And yet, he wanted to explain his tattoos. He wanted to tell us what Army stood for, what other tattoos stood for, and he couldn't just ignore the J. So he gave us an answer. But like I've said, and like you have too, he didn't give us a full one.

But you know what?

This super intelligent young man who made a conscious decision to add the J tattoo on his ring finger, placing it right over the already existing M, while he knows that many of us aren't stupid either, is aware of the fact that if he gives us a plausible explanation most of the fandom will latch on to that, because they would prefer to believe anything at all rather than even toy with the thought that perhaps he is queer (re: the army is the members idiotic theory).

[warningsine]

“Inni, we are independent!” my 26-year-old cousin chanted from Shahbagh, a neighbourhood in Bangladesh’s capital Dhaka, as millions joined a major protest march on Monday to the country’s Parliament House.

Soon after, social media was flooded with news of “a new independence” – a free Bangladesh reborn after the autocratic leader of over 15 years, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, fled the country in the face of defiant public demand for her resignation.

It was the startling culmination of weeks of unrest that resulted in some 300 deaths and thousands of arrests.

Now, the young protesters who instigated the protests have a real opportunity to contribute to the political discourse in a previously discriminatory system of government. Will the interim government listen – and bring real change to the country?

What’s been happening in recent weeks?

The student protests erupted last month over a quota system that reserved 30% of government jobs for Bangladesh’s 1971 liberation war veterans and their relatives. The students demanded a merit-based system, deeming the current one unfair and biased.

As the protests grew, Bangladesh’s faux democratic regime totally broke down. The government cut mobile internet, imposed a nationwide shoot-on-sight curfew, and deployed the army and police to the streets.

The government’s violent response quickly transformed the demonstrations into a full-fledged “people’s uprising” aimed at toppling Hasina and her Awami League party.

After days of intense clashes between student protesters, police and ruling party activists, the Supreme Court reduced the quota to just 5% of jobs for veterans and their relatives. Despite this concession, protesters continued to demand accountability for those killed in the weeks of unrest.

The government tried to deflect blame, claiming the demand for Hasina’s resignation had been orchestrated by the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the now-banned Jamaat-e-Islami party.

The prime minister labelled the protesters as criminals to be dealt with harshly, leading to a severe erosion of political trust. When Hasina offered to meet with student leaders on Saturday, a coordinator fervently refused.

Sunday marked one of the deadliest days in Bangladesh’s history of civil unrest, with at least 98 people killed and hundreds injured.

Anti-government sentiment spread rapidly, fuelled by accusations the government was intimidating protesters, denying medical care to the injured and arresting thousands for exercising their democratic rights.

As the unrest grew, Hasina’s grip on power weakened until she was finally forced to flee.

Deep-seated inequality and anger

While the student protests initially targeted the quota system, broader public discontent quickly emerged. Bangladeshis were angry over the repressive political climate, the weakening economy and the government’s inability to tackle pressing issues, such as inequality, youth unemployment and high inflation.

This discontent has come despite the fact Bangladesh has achieved significant economic success since Hasina came back into office in 2009, largely fuelled by the garment industry.

Bangladesh has become one of the fastest-growing economies in the region. Per capita income has tripled in the last decade and over 25 million people have been lifted out of poverty in the past 20 years.

However, the economic fruits have been unevenly distributed, favouring the rich, who tend to support the Awami League. The wealthiest 10% of the population control 41% of the nation’s income, while the bottom 10% receive just 1.3%.

The country’s economic success failed to meet the aspirations of the younger generation, in particular. By 2023, 40% of those aged 15–29 were classified as “NEET” – which means “not in employment, education or training”. University graduates have faced higher unemployment rates than their less-educated peers.

Rising inflation, reaching nearly 10%, and increased living expenses have compounded these hardships. Utility costs soared as the government raised electricity and gas prices three times in a single year.

The root causes of the quota protests, therefore, ran deep. And this anger was especially pronounced for the disenchanted and politically marginalised youth. Their demands were clear: they wanted fair elections, government accountability and the restoration of democratic norms.

Bottom-up transition to democracy

In all senses, Bangladesh has not been a democracy since its 1971 independence war against Pakistan. The country has been plagued by corruption, the suppression of free speech and the press, and flagrant repression of the opposition. This has included politically motivated arrests, disappearances and extrajudicial killings.

Elections have also not been free and fair. The highly controversial election in January that returned Hasina to power for a fourth consecutive term, for instance, was boycotted by her main opponents. Many of their leaders were jailed.

But the recent protests have offered hope of a bottom-up transition to democracy.

Young people have played a pivotal role in bringing down Hasina’s government through their sheer numbers, as well as their spirit, resilience, defiance and solidarity. They were tech-savvy, too, ingeniously navigating the internet and mobile data crackdowns to mobilise protesters, both at home and abroad.

However, a true democratic transition in Bangladesh now requires competitive elections and a new form of governance. While the army has promised an all-party inclusive interim government, it remains unclear if and how youth leaders will be invited to the decision-making table.

Despite being highly educated and committed to democracy, young Bangladeshis – especially young women – have been marginalised by traditional, hierarchical and patriarchal political structures. In 2022, for example, only 0.29% of parliamentarians were under 30, and 5.71% were under 40.

The current power vacuum presents a significant opportunity to politically empower the country’s youth. The underlying economic and social ills that led to the protests are largely youth issues. Without adequate political representation and participation, there is a risk of further marginalisation, increased distrust in the political process and potential democratic collapse.

While the road ahead is fraught with challenges, Bangladesh’s youth have demonstrated their readiness to fight for their rights and their future.

[metamatar]

[From 15 Dec 2023]

me when im against fascism:

Its predecessor, the party (Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan), strongly opposed the independence of Bangladesh and break-up of Pakistan. In 1971, paramilitary forces associated with the party collaborated with the Pakistan Army in mass killings of Bangladeshi nationalists and pro-intellectuals.[14][15][16][17][18][19][20]

Upon the independence of Bangladesh in 1971, the new government banned Jamaat-e-Islami from political participation since the government was secular and some of its leaders went into exile in Pakistan. Following the assassination of the first president and the military coup in 1975, the ban on the Jamaat was lifted and the new party Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh was formed. Exiled leaders were allowed to return. Abbas Ali Khan was the acting Amir of Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh. The Jamaat agenda is the creation of an "Islamic state" with the Sha'ria legal system, and outlawing "un-Islamic" practices and laws. For this reason, it interpretes their central political concept "Iqamat-e-Deen" as establishing Islamic state by possession of state power

Upon the independence of Bangladesh in 1971, the new government banned Jamaat-e-Islami from political participation since the government was secular and some of its leaders went into exile in Pakistan. Following the assassination of the first president and the military coup in 1975, the ban on the Jamaat was lifted and the new party Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh was formed.

[...] In 2010 the government, led by the Awami League, began prosecution of war crimes committed during the 1971 war under the International Crimes Tribunal. By 2012, two leaders of the BNP, one leader from Jatiyo Party and eight of Jamaat had been charged with war crimes, and by March 2013, three Jamaat leaders had been convicted of crimes. In response, the Jamaat held major strikes and protests across the country, which led to more than 60 deaths (mostly by security forces.)

The former leader of Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh's largest Islamist party, was sentenced to 90 years in jail for crimes against humanity on 15 July 2013. [...]

In 1973, the government cancelled his citizenship for allegedly co-operating with Pakistani forces during the independence war.

Azam lived as an exile in Pakistan and the UK but returned to Bangladesh in 1978 when the country was led by Gen Ziaur Rahman - the assassinated husband of the country's current opposition leader [of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party] Khaleda Zia.

Minority community leaders, rights activists and liberal personalities have raised concerns over the call by acting chief of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Tarique Rahman, who stands convicted in a number of cases, for party men to mobilise on the streets for "regime change" on 28 October [2023].

[...] Rana Dasgupta said, considering the violent attacks orchestrated by BNP in the past, "this latest threat by Tarique is deeply concerning for the minorities in Bangladesh".

"Any political party that complies with the basic tenets of democracy should refrain from issuing such threats publicly," Dasgupta, general secretary of Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Oikya Parishad, added.

In the run-up to the 2014 national election, violence on the streets coupled with targeted attacks on minorities across the country still traumatise the victims, he observed

[feckcops]

No, Pride isn’t for cops too

“In Britain last year, activists from Lesbians and Gays Support the Migrants (LGSM) broke through the barriers at London’s Pride march to stage a die-in. Holding funeral bouquets and draped in pink veils, they held up the march for twenty-three minutes — one minute for each person that had died in police custody since 2020 — to protest Metropolitan Police officers joining the parade. One participant in the protest, Ink, explains, ‘I watched friends cheer on the police at London Pride, despite understanding their role in oppressing queer people. In the wake of Black Lives Matter, the presence of police at pride became especially unconscionable and we felt it was important to reclaim Pride as a space hostile to the presence of the state and its violence.’ ...

“Corporations and the state use diversity and inclusivity to wash themselves clean. At this year’s Pride in Washington DC, arms industry giant Lockheed Martin drove a sponsored float through the city, much to the disgust of socialists and queer activists. This year in London, big oil was the target of protests as activists picketed the annual LGBTQ awards sponsored by BP, Shell, BNP Paribas, HSBC, Santander, Amazon, and Nestlé. Days later, this July 1, five activists from Just Stop Oil were arrested after jumping in front of BP’s float and halting London’s Pride parade, reminding onlookers that there will be no pride on a dead planet ...

“In 2019, as preparations were underway for the fiftieth anniversary of the Stonewall riots, activists in New York City organized an opposing Queer Liberation March instead. The official parade ran for twelve hours because there were so many corporate floats, notes Paul Nocera from New York’s Reclaim Pride Coalition. He told Jacobin how activists had become disillusioned with Pride — and the way acceptable queerness was policed by letting in some people and shutting out others: ‘The barricades don’t just contain people, they set up an entertainment dynamic where the people on one side are the audience and the people on the inside are the entertainment. This is a march, we’re not the entertainment,’ he explains ...

“Over in England, Sheffield Radical Pride (SRP) took things a step further and organized the city’s only Pride march this year, scheduled for July 22 to coincide with Tramlines music festival when tens of thousands descended on the city. In 2018, the previous organizers declared the event was a march of ‘celebration, not protest.’ They banned political groups from taking part and demanded banners and placards be inspected for approval ... A month before the march, SRP announced cops and corporations were banned. ‘It’s exciting and it’s fun ... I’m glad that we have the opportunity to make Sheffield’s only Pride one that is genuinely radical and one that is free of corporations and cops,’ says Alex, one of the organizers.”

[liam-twatter]

it's always funny when we see the new blinded fankids ruined by the politically "correct" media, posting photos saying Liam looks like a girl, or Gallaghercest sick bullshit etc. Ehrm no, this nationalist parka is not a woman dress, was accused of nazism in July 2002... (but in good company of Bowie etc). The German Army iron cross was used in music videos, videogames etc 'cause it wasn't possible to use a swastika. Oasis president has always been a huge fan of swastika symbolism. And other little "details" I let you discover... Obviously they weren't even born, their age on the blogs is usually maximum 17, 18... Do you mean Liam Gallagher, the womanizer with sons around the world, the betrayer, the violent twat, the ignorant man who never read a book, also recently using even disabled people to insult and often menacing of death etc etc is gay ? ok, if you say so... you're probably right about what's the fascist dictatorship nowadays... you probably WOULD LIKE him to be, that's different. He's a hysterical one who's always had psychiatric problems and used to tell "f*ggot" to everybody he hates, and always been on drugs, still sees a doctor... with your posts you're a huge laugh to Oasis historic fans (you'd be to Noel too), you problably didn't realise yet you chose the wrong "role model" (you'll be disappointed when you wake up or if you ever get to know celebrities in person... "new LiaR", the sellout, seems to accept lgbt stuff 'cause he needs "new fans" to pay the songs to Noel and corporations but go and tell him he's a gay in front of him...), but says a lot you have a sick one as an idol... so keep them coming

*parka : MILITARY clothes, if you were soldiers like us, you'd know 2 or 3 things about that... in fact, we didn't need to buy it, we already owned it before Liam... parka fashion is from mod film Quadrophenia, the director said Jimmy would've voted BNP............. Politically correct is NOT Oasis...

[agapewizard]

➝ THE PLUTOCRACY CARTEL 🚨

AN ENTRENCHED GLOBAL ELITE OF VAST WEALTH HAS SPREAD ITS TENTACLES OVER THE EARTH WIELDING EXTRAORDINARY POWER OVER WORLD AFFAIRS.

A wealthy and powerful oligarchy of banks, corporations, and dynastic families and institutions, runs the world. This elite group exercises control through interlocking boards of directors and stock ownership, acting through private clubs, societies and institutions, dominating national governments, both democratic and authoritarian.

Behind a facade of wealth and privilege, the octopus arms of the Plutocracy Cartel embrace every region of the globe, generating obscene profits from its activities, including weapons trafficking, funding wars and controlling the global trade in drugs. And, as they accumulate more and more wealth and power, they undermine democracy, exploit the weak and vulnerable, ruin lives, and kill hope for millions.

The endgame of this plutocracy is global financial domination and world government.

We seeks to expose this hegemonic global shadow government that dictates to presidents and prime ministers, directs economic and foreign policies, controls the value of money, oversees drug trafficking, and funds wars.

DYNASTIC FAMILIES AND INSTITUTIONS EUROPEAN DYNASTIC FAMILIES

HOUSE OF WINDSOR (Great Britain) NETHERLANDS BELGIUM LIECHTENSTEIN LUXEMBOURG SPAIN DENMARK NORWAY SWEDEN MONACO

THE PLUTOCRACY CARTEL OWNS OUTRIGHT OR CONTROLS

CENTRAL BANKS LARGEST PRIVATE BANKS CORPORATE MEDIA (AND MUCH OF THE ALTERNATIVE AND PROGRESSIVE MEDIA) MOST INLFUENTIAL TAX-EXEMPT FOUNDATIONS MOST INFLUENTIAL THINK TANKS MAJOR UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER EDUCATONAL INSTITUTIONS MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS POLITICIANS AND POLITICAL PARTIES NATIONAL ECONOMIES NATIONAL CURRENCIES MAJOR STOCK MARKETS LARGEST TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS LARGEST INSURANCE CORPORATIONS LARGEST PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATIONS LARGEST ENERGY CORPORATIONS MAJOR ENERGY RESOURCES INCLUDING OIL AND GAS GOLD, DIAMOND AND ESSENTIAL MINERAL MINING AND DISTRIBUTION CARTELS AGRICULTURAL LAND WATER AND WATER SYSTEMS LARGEST WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS DRUG-MONEY LAUNDERING NETWORKS INTERNATIONAL DRUG TRAFFICKING NETWORKS

INTERNATIONAL BANKING DYNASTIES

ROTHSCHILDS ROCKEFELLERS KUHN LOEB WARBURG LAZARD GOLDMAN SACHS ISRAEL MOSES SEIF LEHMAN

INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT BANKS

ROTHSCHILD BANK OF LONDON ROTHSCHILD BANK OF BERLIN WARBURG BANK OF HAMBURG WARBURG BANK OF AMSTERDAM LAZARD BROTHERS OF PARIS ISRAEL MOSES SEIF BANK OF ITALY KUHN LOEB BANK OF NEW YORK GOLDMAN SACHS OF NEW YORK J. P. MORGAN CHASE BANK OF NEW YORK LEHMAN BROTHERS OF NEW YORK (filed for bankruptcy in 2008)

CENTRAL BANKS

BANK OF INTERNATIONAL SETTLEMENTS FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF ENGLAND CENTRAL BANKS OF MOST NATIONS

GLOBAL BANKING CONGLOMERATES THE WORLD'S 25 LARGEST BANKS (2012)

HSBC BNP PARABIS INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINA MITUBISHI CREDIT AGRICOLE BARCLAYS GROUP ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND JPMORGAN CHASE BANK OF AMERICA CHINA CONSTRUCTION BANK MIZUHO FINANCIAL GROUP BANK OF CHINA CITIGROUP AGRICULTURAL BANK OF CHINA ING GROUP BANCO SANTANDER SUMITOMO MITSUI FINANCIAL GROUP SOCIETE GENERALE UBS LLOYDS BANKING GROUP GROUP BCPE WELLS FARGO UNICREDIT CREDIT SUISSE DEUTSCHE BANK

MONEY LAUNDERING BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (a partial list)

HSBC BANK OF AMERICA JP MORGAN CHASE CITIGROUP WELLS FARGO WESTERN UNION AMERICAN EXPRESS BARCLAYS UBS BNP PARABIS SOCIETE GENERALE DEUTSCHE BANK ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND LLOYDS BANK CREDIT SUISSE BANCO SANTANDER ING GROUP STANDARD CHARTERED AND MANY OTHER INTERNATIONAL BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS (a partial list)

LOCKHEED MARTIN - USA BAE SYSTEMS - BRITAIN BOEING - USA NORTHROP GRUMMAN - USA GENERAL DYNAMICS - USA RAYTHEON - USA EADS/AIRBUS - BRITAIN/FRANCE UNITED TECHNOLOGIES - USA FINMECCANIA - ITALY THALES - FRANCE

SOCIETIES , CLUBS AND ORGANIZATIONS

UNITED NATIONS WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO) WORLD BANK INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF) COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR) TRILATERAL COMMISSION (TC) BILDERBERG GROUP CHATHAM HOUSE / ROYAL INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS (RIIA) CLUB OF THE ISLES PILGRIMS SOCIETY CLUB OF ROME

THINK TANKS

CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (CSIS) BUSINESS ROUND TABLE EUROPEAN ROUND TABLE OF INDUSTRIALISTS (ERT) INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (ICC) WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM WORLD BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WBCSD) BROOKINGS INSTITUTION RAND CORPORATION HERITAGE FOUNDATION AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE

"There is a shadowy group of Plutocrats running multinational corporations, controlling the media narrative, manipulating the money supply, influencing governments, generating chaos, and provoking wars in order to further their agendas.

These people are very real and extremely dangerous. They operate in the shadows, safely out of the light of public scrutiny. They manage by proxy, using cut-outs to do their bidding, never allowing themselves to get their hands dirty?

Politicians are used and discarded, giving the illusion that they are the ones in control. The controllers' identities are hidden through a corporate shell game of holding companies and secret banking tax havens, in places like the Cayman Islands and Luxemburg. A thirst for publicity and a lust for the spotlight are liabilities if you want to excel in this endeavor. Better to rule from the shadows where your identity and intentions are unknown.

... The people running the show are mostly driven, professional, sociopaths with no discernible traces of compassion. ... Some of our best-known leaders and public figures are actually psychopaths, and what makes a psychopath most effective is their overall lack of empathy. They simply do not have the ability to imagine or feel someone else's pain, and this frees them up to cross boundaries that the rest of us would never dream of crossing. They can operate without limits, giving them an advantage over everyone else. They are professional liars and damn proud of it.

... You do not make it to the top of the food chain by being nice, honest and fair; you get there by force, deception, and influence. You get there through violence, if necessary. You get there through blackmail and extortion. It takes planning and funding, patience and practice, and a mastery of how to use fear to control other people. Those running the world are playing a much different game than the rest of us, and the way they see it, there are no rules. Or at least the rules do not apply to them.

... Their plan is to change society in every country in a way that provides them a reason to impose a world government. The creation of a world central bank and an electronic world currency, in conjunction with the elimination of cash, would allow them complete control to dictate financial policy around the globe. Their policies would be enforced by their world army, and a micro-chipped population would live in fear of having their electronic currency deleted if they ever crossed the world government." ~Charlie Robinson, in his book "The Octopus of Global Control"

[mariacallous]

The Spectator asked me to write about George Galloway’s victory in Rochdale. I found it hard to feel anything but despair about working-class Muslim voters, who once again turned out in huge numbers for a white saviour and tankie[i] who had saluted Saddam Hussein, Bashir Assad and Vladimir Putin.

After all these years of exposure, no one has the right to feign ignorance about Galloway’s record. It’s not that his supporters do not know who Galloway is. It is that they know but do not care.

A large chunk of Muslim voters and an element on the white left adore him because he hates Israel and that is​ all that matters.

There’s a lot of drivel going around this morning that Galloway’s victory is a disaster for Labour. In the short-term that cannot be true.

Leave aside that Labour got into such a mess it did not even run a candidate, an analysis by Prof Rob Ford of Manchester University, and friend of this Substack, shows that Labour seats with a large Muslim vote are safe.

In the long run, though, it is a different story.

Lyndon Johnson is meant to have said that the skill you need most in politics is the ability to count. As the Muslim population grows and as Palestine becomes not one issue for the wider left but the issue, left politics will change

Here is how I ​see it

The Rochdale by-election raises a question that Labour will find hard to duck in government: can a European left-wing party survive without a pro-Islamist foreign policy? They can’t win with one, as Jeremy Corbyn proved twice. But the shocking success of George Galloway last night shows that the arguments of the Corbyn years have not been settled.

No one can pretend they do not know who the loudmouthed old ham really is after all this time. Just before Muslim voters propelled him to victory, Galloway received the endorsement of none other than Nick Griffin, the former leader of the British National Party (BNP). 

To use an overused label correctly for once, the BNP is genuinely neo-fascist. And yet Griffin had no qualms in recommending that his followers ‘get out and vote for George Galloway’ and ‘stick two fingers up to the rotten political elite and their fake news media cronies’.

 Like cocktails before a dinner party, obsessions about Jews bring all the extremists together.

What better illustration could you have of the horseshoe theory?

Admirers of dictators admire each other. Galloway ‘saluted’ Saddam Hussein, whose forces killed tens of thousands of Muslims. He praised Bashar al-Assad, as the Syrian president’s forces slaughtered the country’s Sunni Muslim population, for maintaining the ‘fortress of the remaining dignity of the Arabs’ – the grandiosity of Galloway’s pompous language was in inverse proportion to the misery Assad inflicted.

None of this concerned Muslim voters in Rochdale. Opposition to Israel was all that mattered.

There’s an argument doing the rounds this morning that Labour’s disastrous performance was just a blip. Galloway is a narcissist, it runs, who won’t last long. Muslim voters responded to his anti-Iraq war campaign and gave him victory in Bethnal Green in the 2005 general election. He was out by 2010. He won the Bradford by-election in 2012, and the voters rejected him in the 2015 general election. The voters of Rochdale will almost certainly do the same later this year.

Labour sounded confident. ‘George Galloway is only interested in stoking fear and division,’ the party told the BBC. Labour will ‘quickly’ select a new candidate for the upcoming general election, the spokesman said, adding the party wants to deliver the ‘representation and fresh start that Rochdale deserves’.

I am sure they will. Labour’s poll lead is so great, it can afford to be confident. But Rochdale raises a question about how Labour will deal with the obsessions of a large section of the left once in power, which are unlikely to go away.

The best way to think about it is to look at the threats to MPs and the endless denunciations of Keir Starmer. They are absurd on the face of it. Labour is in opposition. It has no influence over the Israeli government or Hamas whatsoever. What it says is supremely irrelevant.

But the explosion in rage makes sense if you see the anti-Starmer campaign as an attempt to bolster the chances of independent left-wing candidates and to change party policy. (For one, Jeremy Corbyn, kicked out of the party in October 2020 will be thinking of running in Islington North after Galloway’s victory.)

To date it has been a mess. Tom Baldwin, Keir Starmer’s biographer, says​ that the Labour leader and his team had simply not thought about Israel when they gave Benjamin Netanyahu a blank cheque after the Hamas atrocities in October. My guess is that they were so appalled by Labour’s anti-Semitism scandals of the 2010s they swung to the opposite extreme.

You can see how extreme they became by watching a YouTube clip from four months ago of Starmer telling Nick Ferrari that Israel had the right to ‘cut off power, cut off water’ to civilians in Gaza. It has been played tens of thousands of times by Starmer’s opponents. 

Now he has spoken to the Israeli left, government figures in Qatar and Jordan, and the Biden administration and has embraced a standard centre-left suspicion of Netanyahu as a result.

I could go on about the Labour leadership’s naivety. How can you not have a settled view on the Israel/Palestine question when Israel so dominates leftist thinking? When, indeed, supporting Palestine is now for a large faction on the left almost the definition of what it means to be left-wing? It’s astonishing.   

It is equally astonishing that due diligence did not spot that the official Labour candidate held views about Jews that weren’t just anti-Israel but were simply racist. Now Labour has moved on, and I can easily see a Labour government offering full diplomatic recognition to the Palestinian Authority as a compromise.

But that is no more than a Conservative government is likely to do. The activists are crying ‘from the river to the sea’ on the streets, and the Labour left do not want compromise. They want Labour to be like France’s largest left-wing party La France Insoumise (LFI), which is for electoral, as well as ideological, reasons pro-Islamist.

LFI repeatedly declined to call Hamas a terrorist group (a conclusion the EU came to about Hamas a full 20 years ago). Their initial communique on 7 October used Hamas’s own language about itself, calling the attack ‘an armed offensive by Palestinian forces’ that came ‘in the context of the intensification by Israel of the policy of occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem’.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s party can’t win a presidential election any more than Corbyn could win a general election.

And as with Corbynism, its foreign policy is not just about Palestine but includes a softness towards Vladimir Putin and the other dictators George Galloway salutes. On the other hand, LFI captures a large chunk of the Arab-French vote because it is pro-Islamist. And no French left-wing party can succeed without that vote.

Labour is so far ahead at present it can shrug off the mess in Rochdale, and predict with assurance that it will retake the seat at the election.

It can say it has learned from its mistake in underwriting Netanyahu and his extremely right-wing government and moved on.

In power, however, things will be different. What Labour says and does will finally matter, and elements in its electoral coalition will be making their demands very clear.

Labour hopes that Joe Biden’s ceasefire initiative will work, and that Israel will just go away as an issue.

That hope, as anyone who knows the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict since 1948 will guess, is likely to be vain.

This is the conflict that never goes away.

[werindialive]

Hasina Accuses Yunus of Mass Killings and Minority Targeting in Bangladesh

In a dramatic virtual address to Awami League party workers in New York, deposed Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina leveled serious allegations against Muhammad Yunus, accusing him of masterminding mass killings and orchestrating attacks against religious minorities in Bangladesh.

Hasina, who fled Bangladesh on August 5 amid violent student protests, made explosive claims about the current interim government led by Yunus. She directly accused Yunus and student coordinators of executing a "meticulous designed plan" targeting religious communities and political opponents. This is the top news headline in India today.

Targeting of Religious Minorities Sparks Concern

The former prime minister highlighted a disturbing pattern of violence sweeping across Bangladesh. She emphasized the systematic attacks on religious minorities, pointing out that Hindus, Buddhists, and Christians have been particularly vulnerable. "Churches and several temples have been attacked," Hasina declared, questioning the motivation behind these targeted assaults.

Describing the deteriorating situation, Hasina painted a grim picture of widespread unrest. She claimed that teachers, police, and civilians are being attacked and killed indiscriminately. The recent arrests of three Hindu monks have further intensified concerns about the safety of minority communities.

A Dramatic Escape and Continuing Conflict

Hasina also revealed dramatic details about her departure from the country. She claimed an armed mob approached Gana Bhavan intending to assassinate her, eerily similar to the assassination of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in 1975. "I did not want a massacre," she stated, explaining her decision to leave to prevent potential bloodshed.

The former leader suggested that a broader conspiracy was at play, referencing statements by Tarique Rahman, a BNP leader, who allegedly predicted that continued deaths would destabilize the government.

These allegations come at a critical time when Bangladesh is experiencing significant political turbulence. The Muhammad Yunus-led interim government took charge after Hasina's departure, marking a dramatic shift in the country's political landscape.

Hasina's accusations have drawn international attention to the ongoing crisis in Bangladesh, raising urgent questions about political stability, minority rights, and the potential for escalating violence.

As the situation continues to develop, the international community watches closely, hoping for a peaceful resolution to the mounting tensions in the South Asian nation.

To read top international news in Hindi, subscribe to our newsletter.

[odnewsin]

Thousands rally in Bangladesh capital as major political party demands quick reforms and election

Dhaka: Tens of thousands of activists of a leading political party in Bangladesh rallied in the nation’s capital Friday, calling for a new election and quick reforms. The country is under an interim government after the fall of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who fled in August. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party, or BNP, led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia organised the rally as it has…

[samacharapp]

Attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh Not Communal, Issue 'Exaggerated': Yunus

During student-led violence after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's ouster, the minority Hindu population faced vandalism of businesses, property damage, and temple destruction.

Dhaka: Chief Adviser to Bangladesh's interim government, Muhammad Yunus, has said the issue of attacks on minority Hindus in his country is “exaggerated” and questioned the manner in which India projected it. In an interview with PTI at his official residence here, Yunus said the attacks on minorities in Bangladesh are more political than communal.

He suggested that the attacks were not communal, but a fallout of a political upheaval as there is a perception that most Hindus supported the now-deposed Awami League regime.

“I have said this to (Prime Minister Narendra) Modi also that this is exaggerated. This issue has several dimensions. When the country went through an upheaval following the atrocities by (Sheikh) Hasina and the Awami League, those who were with them also faced attacks,” the Nobel laureate told PTI.

The minority Hindu population faced vandalism of their businesses and properties, as well as the destruction of Hindu temples, during the student-led violence that erupted following the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

After unprecedented anti-government protests that peaked on August 5, Hasina resigned as prime minister and fled to India.

“Now, while beating up Awami League cadres, they had beaten up Hindus as there is a perception that Hindus in Bangladesh mean Awami League supporters. I am not saying that what has happened is right, but some people are using it as an excuse to seize property. So, there is no clear distinction between Awami League supporters and Hindus,” he said.

In his first direct contact with New Delhi last month, shortly after becoming the head of Bangladesh's interim government, Yunus conveyed to Prime Minister Modi that Dhaka would prioritise the protection and safety of Hindus and all other minority groups.

During the conversation, Modi reaffirmed India's support for a democratic, stable, peaceful, and progressive Bangladesh and emphasised the importance of ensuring the safety of Hindus and other minority communities in the violence-hit country.

Hindus, who made up 22 per cent of Bangladesh's population at the time of the 1971 Liberation War, now constitute about 8 per cent of 170 million and have predominantly supported the Awami League, known for its secular stance.

Describing the attacks as more political than communal, Yunus questioned the manner in which India is “propagating” them.

“These attacks are political in nature and not communal. And India is propagating these incidents in a big way. We have not said that we can’t do anything; we have said that we are doing everything,” the Chief Adviser said.

Prime Minister Modi, in his Independence Day address from the Red Fort on August 15, expressed hope that the situation in violence-hit Bangladesh would return to normal soon and said 1.4 billion Indians are concerned about the safety of Hindus and minorities in the neighbouring country.

Discussing the future of India-Bangladesh relations, Yunus expressed a desire for good ties with India but insisted that New Delhi must abandon the narrative that Bangladesh will turn into another Afghanistan without Sheikh Hasina at the helm.

“The way forward is for India to come out of the narrative. The narrative is that everybody is Islamist, BNP is Islamist, and everyone else is Islamist and will make this country into Afghanistan. And Bangladesh is in safe hands with Sheikh Hasina at the helm only.

“India is captivated by this narrative. India needs to come out of this narrative. Bangladesh, like any other nation, is just another neighbour,” he said.

The noted economist added, “The issue of trying to portray the conditions of minorities in such a big way is just an excuse.” Yunus said that when he met leaders of the minority community, he urged them to protest as citizens of the country with equal rights and not merely as Hindus.

“Even when I met members of the Hindu community, I had requested them: please don’t identify yourselves as Hindus; rather, you should say you are citizens of this country and you have equal rights. If someone tries to snatch your legal rights as citizens, then there are remedies,” he said.

The Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council (BHBCUC), a prominent Hindu minority group in Bangladesh, had also reported attacks on minorities, especially Hindus, following the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government on August 5.

Thousands of Hindus staged protest rallies in Bangladesh's capital and the northeastern port city of Chattogram on August 10-11, demanding protection amid nationwide vandalism that saw attacks on temples and their homes and businesses.

Earlier in August, the Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance said that the minority Hindu community faced attacks and threats in 278 locations across 48 districts since the fall of the Hasina-led government and termed it as an “assault on the Hindu religion."

News is originally taken from: https://bit.ly/47hejrg Samachar App: watch the live latest news of India and the world, business updates, cricket scores, etc. Download the Samachar App now to keep up with daily breaking news. Like and Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

[warningsine]

With the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year autocratic regime, Bangladesh’s political landscape is shifting into a new dimension. As the once-dominant Awami League (AL), led by Hasina herself, and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) struggle to maintain their grip, a political vacuum has set the stage for a realignment. Amid the weakening of traditional parties, the weakness of leftist factions and people’s frustration with the AL-BNP power cycle, Islamist groups are seizing the moment to step into the spotlight.

For example, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), which had operated at a minimal level during the Hasina regime, especially in public university campuses through their student wing Bangladesh, Islami Chhatrashibir, and by promoting Islamic preachers around the country, is now reasserting its presence. Now JI is expanding its influence from urban centers to rural areas and among conservative sections of the population.

Bangladesh’s political landscape is characterized by a wide array of parties, including 44 active political parties. Among these are 13 Islamic parties, which are becoming increasingly prominent. Key players in this movement include JI, Islami Andolan Bangladesh, and Bangladesh Khelafat Majlis. Hefazat-e-Islam, though not a political party, wields significant influence through its large support base and vocal leader, Mamunul Haque. The group gained popularity during the 2013 protests at the capital’s Shapla Chattar.

While the AL committed to secularism and modernization, promoting economic development and a secular state, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has traditionally appealed to nationalist sentiments, with a focus on social justice, which grants the party a more conservative agenda than that of the AL but less in line with the ideas of Islamists.

Islamist parties do promote a political model of governance based on Islamic doctrine and, therefore, focus on an inclusive policy toward Sharia within the political context. It is worth mentioning that around 90 percent of the population in Bangladesh practices Islam. Hindus comprise 8 percent of the population. Christians, Buddhists, and others account for the remainder.

Although the BNP is still considered the largest opposition party, it was substantially weakened during Hasina’s rule. Years of harassment and imprisonment by the AL government along with internal strife took a heavy toll on the party. The recent release of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and the potential return of her son Tarique Rahman could give the party some momentum. Yet it may not regain its erstwhile importance.

Moreover, the absence of a robust leftist presence has also inadvertently paved the way for radical parties to gain prominence. Historically, leftist parties like the Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB) played crucial roles in historical movements. However, today, these parties are numerically small and significantly divided by internal dissensions. The AL’s crackdown is also one of the main reasons for their weakness.

A look at the past indicates that the advent of Islamist parties in a popular opposition has created a comfortable environment for extremism to operate, whether intentionally or unintentionally. In fact, during the period beginning with 1991-1996 under the BNP, Islamist parties like JI gained more influence. There was a greater inclusion of religious rhetoric into mainstream politics during this period.

This influence became more entrenched when the BNP came to power again in 2001 in coalition with Islamist parties. Data shows an increase in extremist activities during this period. Groups such as Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI) and Hizb Ut Tahrir (HTB) carried out bombings and targeted foreign diplomats, judges, and writers, including the perpetration of a spate of bombings across the country in 2005. The most alarming aspect is that the HTB is now actively protesting in various places demanding the lifting of the ban on the outfit. The organization was banned in 2009 due to its calls for the establishment of a caliphate, which is a threat to national security and democratic values.

Apart from political activities, Islamist parties have gained significant popularity through social welfare, disaster relief, and educational support work. Their grassroots humanitarian initiatives, especially during recent floods in Cumilla, Feni, and Noakhali, have built a strong community presence and trust, expanding their support beyond mere politics.

In contrast, since August 5, numerous accusations surfaced against BNP leaders for engaging in illicit activities especially extortion and attacks on AL leaders, leading to public disillusionment. Although the BNP has suspended several implicated activists, the damage to their credibility poses a significant concern.

Despite gaining popularity among people day by day, Islamist parties are now aiming for coalition-building — a new development, as traditionally, they had differing theological bases.

Mia Golam Parwar, secretary of JI, recently told BBC Bangla, “We hope that all the Islamic parties will do the election in a coalition. A desire for unity is clearly noticeable among the parties, which we never saw in the past.”

At a rally in Dhaka on August 31, Islami Andolan Bangladesh’s Senior Naib-e-Ameer Mufti Syed Muhammad Faizul Karim hinted at a potential alliance between Islami Andolon Bangladesh and JI. He said that if there is consensus, the two parties could unite.

He remarked, “Today, I say to Jamaat: a golden opportunity is approaching. The election will not take place tomorrow. This is a remarkable chance to fight the election together.”

This coalition, comprising some parties that were earlier fragmented, may just prove to be a game-changer in the case of Bangladesh. If the coalition wins, many believe there will be an increase in Islamist representation and possibly a policy change in the growing inclination toward conservative and religiously aligned governance.

However, the process of coalition building will face various obstacles on different theological beliefs. For example, the bone of contention for the alliance would be differing views regarding shrines, as one group has a pro-veneration stance toward these places of worship whereas another group is against this type of veneration. Ideological differences promote vandalism activities, which make efforts toward attaining a consolidated posture difficult. Already many shrines have been vandalized in various places around the country.

Moreover, historical and political baggage, like the controversial past of JI during the Liberation War in 1971, add difficulties to forging a cohesive coalition. Many parties don’t like JI for their involvement with Pakistan during the war and its different political agenda.

Moreover, while Islamic political parties have generally performed well in street protests, they haven’t done as well at the ballot box. In the 1991 national election, JI won only 18 seats among 300 in the coalition of the BNP. In the 2001 elections, JI secured only 17 seats. Yet, this was followed by a series of setbacks. By the 2008 elections, JI could only manage to obtain two seats through its four-party alliance with the BNP.

So, the current political vacuum in Bangladesh presents both opportunities and challenges for Islamist parties and the people of the country. While their rise is facilitated by the weakening of mainstream parties and growing public discontent with the AL and the BNP alternating in power, the path ahead is fraught with obstacles, including internal theological differences and historical baggage. The success of Islamist parties in forming a cohesive coalition and gaining electoral success will significantly shape Bangladesh’s future political landscape. As the country navigates this transitional period, the balance between radicalism and moderation will be crucial in determining the stability and direction of Bangladesh’s democracy.