The answer my friend is blowing the wind
There are obvious answers to some questions. In fact the answer is visible in the query. But the dushto mind deems otherwise.
For instance, if you were asked 'How long did the Hundred Years' War last?' there is one hundred percent chance that you, him and her will think, say and write one hundred years. Right? Wrong. For in truth the armed conflict between France and England from 1337 to 1453 that is 116 years
Let us try another one: Which country makes Panama hats? Panama, of course, even I thought that. But, alas, the brimmed men's hat of plaited leaves of the jipijapa are made over six hundred miles away in believe it or not Ecuador.
Want to try another one? Ok! In which month do Russians celebrate the October Revolution? I know you are thinking November, and by God! You are right.
Here's a more obvious one. What are Razakars, not in the sense of religious soldiers, but in the context of Bangladesh? If you are the pola of your baap, which you obviously are, you are thinking what I am thinking. But the killers-rapists-torturers of ekattur will utter utter rubbish. Such as, there were no Razakar-fazakars, ever.
How about someone popping up an obvious question like, what is Baddho Bhumi or the killing fields of 1971? The sons of another soil will perchance fall from the sky, where they have been raised to by their selfish political allies, freedom fighters inclusive. Now don't anyone butt in and say that this is yet more bashing of omuk valiant leader. We are no more in the mood for pansy talk. The nation has arisen.
History in time gives its due share to the deserving. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was obliterated from Bangladesh Television (BTV) and Bangladesh Betar, stations he had a major hand in creating, during the years 1975 to 1990 that is over 15 years but he emerged as Bangabandhu, the Father of the Nation, and remains so.
The Razakar Army of 1971, the Al-Badr, the Al Shams, the Peace Committee members, and such other factions guilty of twisted mentality and treason; that is, those who not only by heart and soul opposed the creation of Bangladesh but bodily collaborated with the occupying Pakistani forces, are trying to cash in on that sort of a pretext. They have begun to give ambiguous answers to queries that have the answer written all over them.
A Bangladeshi asks 'What is Muktijuddho (the War of Liberation)?' These knowledge-paapis respond by saying that there is no such thing, but something took place in 1971 which at best can be described as a 'civil war'. If so, then why were the Jamaat leaders solemnly observing at state level for at least five years 26 March as Independence Day and 16 December as Victory Day? Independence from what? Victory against whom? Hypocrisy is not one of the virtues of a Muslim.
Independence from what? Independence from West Pakistan, who looted its Eastern part of its wealth for 24 years, deprived Bangalee from health, education, jobs, business…
Victory against whom? Victory against the most brutal army in history, who with the direct collaboration from a handful of local goons (some of who unfortunately also spoke in Bangla) killed three million Bangalee, raped two lakh Bangalee women, tortured millions of Bangalee and imprisoned an entire Bangalee nation of 75million people, whose only fault was that being majority of Muslims they wanted to speak in Bangla. Contrary to the crudely lame belief of the murderers with political ambition and suction mentality that Islam and Bangla were opposing numbers, thirty-six years up the time chart they both not only exist in Bangladesh but have flourished.
There is no conflict, there never was, between Islam as a religion and the Bangalee culture. With the cardinal statutes remaining firm, Islam has been accepted in different cultures across the world. That is its beauty, its dynamism, its heartbeat, its reason for being the fastest growing belief in the world today.
The pro-Pakistani elements of pre-liberation and their gawjano followers, handful though may be, most often come with the excuse that Bangabandhu pardoned the war criminals and so there is no question of a trial. How much more lame can an excuse be, which without the support of successive governments, is a non-starter. Most importantly Bangabandhu did not pardon any person against whom there was a charge of any crime against humanity, such as murder and rape, or such war crimes. The very Bangabandhu who they detest suddenly becomes the sole authority, according to them, to decide which killer will become an MP, which rapist would become a minister.
Even if Bangabandhu did pardon them, he is not divine that his pardon cannot be revoked and the war or mere criminals cannot be punished. Should anti-liberation subjects, razakars, et al., who killed, raped and maimed go scot-free, just because a mere mortal, who himself was killed with his family, made a gross error of judgement, is that is the interpretation of his magnanimity?
The answer, my friend, is blowing the wind.
Copyright (R) thedailystar.net 2007