1. ETV in the name of illegality
2. Gas Export and Relative stories
1. ETV in the name of illegality
Here is a story: A person got a LEGAL driver license by pressuring
the authority OR by BRIBE( I mean illegal way). When someone says it
was illegally issued and investigation proved that (or court said
that license was illegally issued), then first job goes to the gov't
to stop the driver to drive and ask him to surrender the license
(even it is legal), isn't it? Do you allow him to drive on the road?
Off course not! So you could have been thinking like way in case of
ETV.
An MP if he involved in corruption and proved by the court, he could
get free as he has got popularity to be elected. No never, so
popularity never the excuse of get rid of from corruption.
A student, if he passed by copying, no problem if nobody says
against him, if so, and proved by the investigation, first jobs again
goes to the gov't to cancel his result, then punish the rest of the
corrupted guys.
So in conclusion, I wanna say, stop the result (ETV) first and then
go for against those people who did this. Corruption never be got
rid of even s/he got the 100% popularity. The king goes, the another
king will come, wait
until....(durjon biddan holeo poritajjo)
Thanks anyway.
Alamgir
1.1 Reply to Mr. Haroon Rashid,
You said:
<<The case was for the Terrestrial transmission of ETV, but government closed down even the sattelite transmission!! Why the hell government had to
do this? REVENGE? Against whom? We beleive government is an institute not a person. Then how come an institute can act with emotion, i.e.
revenge?>>
If you wanna broadcast something whatever you want to, can be accepted by the
gov't? I don't think so, you need some procedure u need permission. Yes u r so crazy at that point, ETV wants to transmit their so called good or
very good thing over sattelite, and then and there they can start, no never. This is another proven that they have no legality, they wanna do all thing
by forcing not following the rule, MOGER MULLUK naki deshta. Whoever you are, you cann't do whatever you want.
Please Haroon, don't be crazy, think just POPULARITY AND LEGALITY which one best. ETV got popularity against BTV( SO RUSTY). I loved ETV also, it was
the best one when I was in my country, and even now but I cann't support the
illegal way. I wish we had another good and so good broadcast tv center in a proper way very soon.
I agreed with your another all other points, we have right to choose channels, we need more channel, but not corrupted one.
By this time you will read my previous mail, and hope to understand ... We don't want corruption, I'll feel
ashamed to see again and again no. 1corrupted country is our/my BANGLADESH.
Alamgir
1.2 Reply to Anneel Kumar,
I like your comments and critics, but if you have no faith anywhere, then you cann't justify any case because you justity yourself, which may not be
always true (I know many of the case happen like Ershad, but not all). If we don't trust anybody, then question would be, r we trustworthy?
Your story: Answer would be, if the driver is not permitted to go outside the city, the police should drive the car, and let the children to enjoy
their tour. And for the case of ETV, the answer would be yes gov't allow something to let them go, but first thing is to stop them and then change
the driver and let them go to make people watch. So in between stop and start there is a time gap, you should allow that. For the case of your story
it would be 1/2 hrs and for the ETV it would be 1/2 yrs. Can you really think that the bus can be replaced (if the new driver detects fault of the
car as well) so we can hope not ETV, we wish to have more than ETV.
ETV is not absolute.
Alamgir, Australia
1.3 Replied by Tanveer
We totally agree with Mr. Alamgir on the point that we don't want corruption. But mere saying that does not solve the issue created by this debatable closure of etv.
There can be many other ways of solving an issue which one thinks is not done in a proper way. Regarding etv, one way could have been giving the ETV authority an opportunity, a chance to make their so called Illegal license legal. That would have been, we believe, a decent way of solving the problem given the fact that it is indeed a popular tv channel. When we consider something popular, we mean it is supported by a cross section of ppl which include common ppl. This cross section of ppl has vetted their approval by watching the channel regularly, loving it dearly.
Coming back to Mr. Alamgir's analogy, he sited few interesting analogies which can in isolation very well be acceptable. Let's go back in 90s for a moment. Ershad handed over the power to a caretaker government who in turn held a free election thru which BNP came into power. Then BNP handed over the power to a caretaker govt and AL came to power and thus we are at present under BNP governance. Many ppl still consider Ershad regime an illegal one even though after his bloodless coupe he gave his reign legality. I wonder if Ershad realy had illegal power, his handing over the power to the caretaker govt would be illegal. Therefore BNP's coming to the power was also illegal by the same argument. Thus a vicious chain reaction of illegality starts. But is it realy acceptable to cancel all these elections since Ershad's fall just because Ershad's regime was considered illegal? Should the decisions/plans/projects taken by Ershad to develop the country be unwond because Ershad's regime was an illegal one? How was it resovled? Common ppl of the country ratified it by accepting the fact that we are now under democracy: those elections, those plans, projects are for the betterment of the country. So just for the sake of not accepting somethin which was done illegaly (that is also a big question), it does not justify closing down a popular tv channel in a haste.
What is the intention behind closing down ETV? To PURIFY the government's media policy? To act like the ever honest Yudhistir of Mahabharat? To punish the errant evil doers? Or to serve some other malafide intention of the government which we, the common ppl, are missing, when we know this govt or that govt, or any govt for that matter, is not DHOA TULSHI PATA.
My writing this mail is not to oppose finding out the fact that ETV was illegaly given a license. I just want to express my opinion that IT COULD HAVE BEEN SOLVED IN A MUCH BETTER AND POLITICALLY CORRECT WAY.
Best wishes
Tanveer
1.4 Reply to Mr Tanveer,
The topic you said was well discussed by Cyrus Z. And we've been discussing about the corruption. Look dear Tanveer, corruption/illegality is never be
the example to defend another corruption/illegality. Well during 1982-2002 the ruling partys are different in time to time. If one was wrong, people
selected another one, and in continuation we have the new gov't. Under this circumstances, people played the dominent role. So there was no wrong to
handover (pushed by people) the power to Care Taker Gov't at that time.
Another point I wanna mention here that a liar can say true, believe it. Moreover if you consider this again as an illegal one, then consider as a
time depended corrution. It is impossible to go back to correct this, but we could hate the ruling period as the present ruling party could learn
(doubtful). But in case of ETV it could have been corrected and purified.
Don't lock the door to protect liars; if you do, you will lock the truth as well. (dorja bondho kore vromo k rukhi, sotto bole ami tobe kotha diye
dhuki)
Thanks all.
Alamgir, Australia
2. Gas Export and Relative
stories
I've been hoping for many days the alochoks would discuss
regarding Gas Exporting. I think all of us will give their views and arguments
toward their opinion.
In Bangladesh, about less than 15% people r using gas at present.
Most of them in city. More than 85% people don't know how the gas is being
used or what is gas. Most of them using the gas for their cooking. But my
vision is, there is electricity which could be the substitute of gas. And we
may have the electricity from existing one plus neuclear plant (which is
cheaper at minimum level, like France) and solar plant for future.
So for other industrial purpose we can use gas, and thereby life
of gas
could be larger. Now if we look at the gas reservoir, gas is
entrapped by a hemisphere with a certain pressure, more general, if we use the
gas that pressure could be decrease and more gas would be produced to fill
up the hemisphere (very slow rate) but if not use it and deposit without
any preparation the pressure of the gas decreases for the time being
and we may loose gas in a great amount.
So, my argument is to export the gas in a proper way and invest
that money to many individual sectors like agriculture, garment, fishing,
costal area, and most flood affected area to upgrade their livelihood, to fight
against poverty and illiteracy. We can also set up so many power plants
with that money and rural area could be benefited where people do not know
what is gas.
But we may consider Nigeria, some people took all the money. We
also may consider Bolivia, where experts said 20yrs ago that existing gas
lasted for next 15yrs, but that was not true because the discovered
uncertain
deposit. So exporting of gas should be in transparent way. It is only
possible with help of the total people (gov't and opposition). I wanna request
to the opposition not to use the sentiment of the helpless 85% people
(who r not using the gas), rather use the assert in the best way and gov't
should place all the prospects of gas to the whole nation not only the minority
(15%).
Here is gossip, "a poor farmer has ducks, they give eggs in a
season not for the whole year, say he may have 500 eggs within 3 months. then
what can he do? Sell them to buy his family's prime needs (food, cloths,
education for his children); or he could keep these for the whole yr as he
consumes the eggs within the 365days, if he does, he would be regret because
the eggs don't last for the yr, ie he looses all. Alochoks
definitely would
be saying in favor of selling eggs and arguing to buy his prime needs
We r now saying after deposit for 50yrs we may sell, what happen
after that? Expert says deposition will go only 15yrs. What can we do after
then? Or people can think for their child and grandchild not more than
that(?) So export them and get ready (ie build up infrastructure to sustain in
the future) for the next generation, look 100yrs ahead not 15yrs. We
need huge investment, more GDP to build up sustainable infrastructure and
for gas as well to find more and more gas zone.
Therefore, in conclusion, I would like to mention gas is the
assert for the whole nation not only who r using at present (15%).
Alamgir
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comment: Gas Committee report have been submitted and the recommendation is
not to take any decision for export until new fields have been
explored. But we all know the country is under donor pressure for
immediate export. Now, the government is in process of taking
decision whether to export gas or not. The issue that the alochok
raise is also the same debate that is going between different
fronts, i.e., whether to export now or to wait for a few more
years.
So what would be our stand point? From sustainability point of
view, will it be wise for immediate export ? How the country will
address this issue keeping intact the national interest?
2.1 Reply to Tahera Jabeen,
<If the news is true then it is again a serious insult to
public sentiment.>
You said public, but how many? 15%, who r using now the gas or
40%(literate) who know there is gas and it is being used for cooking? So why
we do not count the rest of the people who r living far away from
poverty level, if we could export the gas at a minimum limit and earn some foreign
currency and invest for those people to feed them, learn them and also
invest to discover more gas reservoirs that would be well enough, and our poor
country deserves it.
If you r talking about 15%, who r living in cities, rich and
have the capability to live without gas, even they can cook food with
solar energy, and playing with human sentiment, I don't have to say
anything. For example a person has a family with 5 members and one is
ill who needs everyday an egg, and he has a farm and everyday he gets 50
eggs, he knows he will be getting it at least 1/2 months, then what can he do?
If he keeps the whole eggs for his son for everyday eating, you may call him as
a fool. You may say he can sell the eggs and call a doctor to cure his son
from pain and it is wise, then he needs not the eggs anymore for his son and
he then sell all of them.
You know that gas is entrapped in a hemisphere rock, there is
pressure, if the pressure is above a certain limit we can get it. But if
you keep it (without preparation) for long time, the pressure may
decreases and we loose the gas, but if we use it, the empty space could be filled up
by the new gas at a certain portion.
So, don't be fool, just have a look over the people who r
living far away from poverty level, they can sacrifice all for the rich but the
rich never does anything for them, this is the fact.
Alamgir, Australia
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comment: [M:IA] If the gas export money can properly be invested in
human and infrastructure
development of our country, then, yes, it may be wise to export
gas. Bangladesh does need some good source of foreign
currency now for its economy to be on stable footing. However,
in a country, where corruption is part of the culture, how can you ensure that
gas export money will trickle down to the poorest of poor people's
of our country?
2.2 Reply to:
"As for the original concern, rest assured - Bangladesh
gas does have a
future."... I have also the same feelings as Alochok
Badruzzaman has.
I'm not afraid by this news.
But my concern is that news is not only for the discovery of
the gas
field in India but also a good try to pressurize Bangladesh.
I think NY
Times tried to focus negetive side which is not the concern
of that news.
India got gas is a good news for the world but what NY Times
wanted to
do.......focusing Bangladesh, what their loss or profit.
Originally the
headline would be 'GOOD NEWS FOR INDIA'.
Two years ago a news was published in the ITTEFAQ which was
"Bangladesh
is floating on oil and the per capita income of us would be
140000US$",
which is 5 times greater than any top most country. This was
also a fake
and tried to divert Bangladeshis to make faster decision.
I think this news is also a propaganda, and aiming to earn
faster decision
toward them (oil companies). Did anybody get this news from
Indian
newspaper? I think no.
I don't want any pressure any more from anywhere, gas is our
resource and
decision should be taken by us.
Alamgir Hossain, Australia
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Comment: [M:ER] Alochok Alamgir presents a very interesting
perspective on this
news. Lately there have been many claims of anti-Bangladesh
propaganda.
Opinion has been sharply divided as to the validity of these
claims.
Perhaps our fellow Alochoks would care to investigate
Alochok Alamgir's
assertion that this story was not published in India? If
not, then his
agrument does appear somewhat compelling!
3. Nothing looses: MP
I completely agree to the top ten qualifications that very much need for the
top level person. But question, who will tie the bell to the neck of the cat? Look only the upozila, the MPs do not want it at all, because they
thought power would go to the other person (chairman) and MPs will be platform less. So those MPs who r elected to control rules according to the
constitution, now they are looking for both side (tolar tao, salar tao). Thus they want two offices ie two way of corruption. Can u
imagine, a minister how he could be for only an upozila, he is for the whole nation,
why he does not wanna sacrifice his one petty position for the own beloved people, is it for only be elected again and again? I don't think so, it is
for his corruption. So two term is the best.
So MPs should be (must be) literate (minimum graduate) that he can understand the other (chairman) and also the profit of people. Illiterates
always hate the literate because he can't be win over the wisdom, he never wants debate rather than
absolute the wisdom.
3.1 MPs versus Chairman
Do you think that our MPs can ever come above the their own interest? I don't think so. Look at the present situation about the upozila porishod, MPs are thinking that if elected chairmen would be more popular than him or all profits will go to chairman's favor. But as a person we could think no matter whoever MPs or chairmen do something for the people. MPs are elected to make rules and control legislative behavior, so MPs are not the ruler they are watcher and governor, whereas chairman are the ruler and directly link to the people. People easily could come to him and get him for whatever he needs.
For an example, once there was a rule that character certificate (CC) would be taken from MPs, and I needed a copy of CC, but I couldn't find our MPs in Dhaka, then I wrote to my parents to collect it, they said he was not here. I was in a fix how I could get him.. I contact to MP hostel and they said, "MP is now visiting north with PM", he then went to Kolkata for his fat surgery... so readers can understand what my situation was.
Now if MPs will take shear development program, what do you think the program will be ever ended? Answer is no, that would be 0 (zero) if same party and -(negative) for opposite party's chairman and MPs.
Again, if MPs could think for their party's interest, they will not be forever and chairman can do better development for our rular area, they will permit the Upozilla porishod. Or if PM could think it is for our people's interest, so no matter who will be elected chairman ( her party or other), they will do for our population, they will permit Upozila porishod. But problem is MPs themselves are looking for their interest not country's interest.
So it is only the proverb not for ourselves: Party is more than person, even country is above all (baktir cheye dol r doler cheye desh boro).
Alamgir, Australia
3.2 Reply to
MPs are the legislative body of a country, so their main task is to making policies according to the constitution of his country. But chairmen (selected or elected) are executive body of a country.
My view is that, when a person elected as MP, he will be a representative not only for his locality but also for the whole country (main), he is a vote for the constitution. Look at the ministers, they all represent the country, so all MPs likely the same as a minister. You can compare them with the senators or congress of US.
Whereas chairmen are definitely the executive body for his locality (like governor or Mayor or US, Australia or Britain). He will be governing his territory and form another small gov't so that people don't need to go far away for his judiciary or legislative needs. It will save lots of time and money of the people and it is the only way to decentralization.
Another way to think, if chairman and MP election
holds
2/3 yrs interval, people can choose either of the
parties, that means governing party must have sincere to the
peoples needs. (People will be benefited.) If there any disorder ness, the
governing party may loose the chairman. And
if chairman can do wrong, the party loose the MP seat. So this
might be the check and balance for the country.
So what I said in my previous mail, these are two form of body, no
way to contradict each other, MPs and chairmen are completely two
deferent position for a country. If MPs think they should take
control over the chairman, I must say they are mad, they are
thinking themselves not about the country. So MPs need to come
up.... think for the general people.. think for the next
generation. So then person could think, whichever he may enjoy
MP/Minister or chairman? that's it. Never think, "am o nebo
salao nebo"
Alamgir, Australia
4. Operation Clean Heart
Back
to top
The leader of AL and opposition leader of Parliament Sheikh Hasina said in London that the present govt is nourishing riches with the wealth of poor. It’s true and even more true when you look at the speech of famous economist Dr Deboprio Vottacharjee. He showed that the wealth of poorest 10% people was 2.24% in FY 1995-’96, which diminished to 1.84% in the FY 2000, whereas richest 10% people hold 34.68% in FY 1995-‘96, which increased 40.72% in the FY 2000.
How treble figure it is! So no way to get rid of it. Anyway, the budget is too big in contrast of money-52 hundred billion tk, but it will be more than good if at least 60-70% of plan will be implemented. I wish the present budget gave us a good economic and social stability.
Thanking all
Alamgir, Australia