Wed 17 Aug 2005
Add to this list:
Here is a list of quotes from our home minister on the existence of JMJB aka Bangla bhai. These are all from pre February admission of their existence after the strong pressure from donors to take action:
“We don’t know officially about the existence of the JMJB. Only some so-called newspapers are publishing reports on it. We don’t have their constitution in our record,” State Minister for Home Lutfozzaman Babar said on January 26.
Ruling coalition partner Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer and Industries Minister Matiur Rahman Nizami on July 22 last year said, “Bangla Bhai was created by some newspapers.”
“If they (newspapers) do not have any relations with him (Bangla Bhai) then how do they publish exclusive interview of Bangla Bhai,” the Jamaat ameer told a press conference.
Making the comment to the BBC radio, Babar, on government’s inaction to arrest Bangla Bhai, said, “I oppose very strongly that our ministry has failed to take action, because we are still trying. How would we arrest anyone if he is absent physically or not available?”
More here
August 17th, 2005 at 11:33 am
[...] 05 @ 12:33 EDT South Asia Bangladesh Global Roundups Unheard Voices compiles statements of the Government of Bangladesh regarding JM [...]
August 17th, 2005 at 2:44 pm
In light of the recent bomb attack, let’s also start a discussion here on RAW, it’s activities and it’s possible involvement in this henious act. How about it?
August 17th, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Please lead the discussion by showing some proofs and documents
August 18th, 2005 at 6:33 pm
A discussions on Islamic militants has been started here immdiately after the blasts. This action did not require categorical proofs and documentations. Obviously, some people strongly believe that the JMJB and similar other are the responsible party.
I strongly believe that India and RAW are behind this agains, such as have been the past cases. That is why I want to invoke a discussion on that line. Terrorism violets the human rights of the victims. All civilized people of our planet are equally opposed to terrorism. So, why not explore the strong possibilities in the process of bashing the usual suspects. RAW, by its reputation, is and should be an usual suspect.
Or, am I at the wrong site to discuss this? Is this a place where the usual suspects are always the same?
August 18th, 2005 at 8:55 pm
Why do you strongly beleive that RAW is behind this? I would love to discuss this and hear about this because I’ve never heard of anyone else bring this up with regard to the bombings.
August 19th, 2005 at 2:56 am
[...] y. After the blasts it has begun to arrest members of a terrorist group whose existence it had denied until recently. But its Islamist coalition partners h [...]
August 19th, 2005 at 7:51 pm
In Bangladesh, terrorists signal their arrival
The nationwide bombings were a small demonstration of their organisation The terrorists who set off explosions all over Bangladesh warned the American president and the British prime minister to get out of Muslim countries, asserting…
August 22nd, 2005 at 9:47 am
[...] in the world. Unheard Voices provides details, gives an insight into the the group blamed through quotes and the leaflets found at the blast sites, and li [...]
September 7th, 2005 at 9:04 pm
I too would be interested in the background for Ruby Gosh suspicions regarding RAW. Perhaps the militant connection is based on the literature found at the blast sites and also that some of those arrested have apparently asserted their membership in extremist organizations?!
April 1st, 2006 at 9:04 pm
Your web site is excellent! I added your site to my bookmark!
April 3rd, 2006 at 11:44 am
Excellent point Ruby — RAW is a threatening force that is operating in Bangladesh (and in neighboring countries, namely Pakistan and China) and the focus on so-called Islamic militant groups have taken attention away from RAW. But that’s reality — and because the emphasis is unquestioningly on Islamic groups, one needs less support to voice anti-sentiments against them.
So, given that the RAW-involvement theory is an underdog, there is plenty of analysis and investigative work that has been done to support the theory … actually, that has given rise to the theory. Two books — “Raw’s Activities in Bangladesh” and “RAW in Bangladesh : Portrait of an Aggressive Intelligence” come to mind readily (the latter in fact published in India, and not by a pro-Muslim, default anti-Hindu, publishing house).
As far as recent developments and alleged involvement is concerned — let’s ask ourselves, how much did one hear of CIA’s involvement in Afghanistan or Iraq, while events were taking place? It is easy to jump on the obvious usual suspects and not bother with counter-proofs or possibilities. It is unlikely that too many would consider reports in certain Bangladeshi newspapers or Pakistani newspapers to hold any ground (those would be written off as pro-Muslim, anti-Indian). As each event takes place, there has continually been news in these mentioned channels indicating possible RAW involvement.
Ruby, the proofs and documents are needed because what you bring up in not mainstream hype. But do continue with the discussion … the threat is very real.
April 3rd, 2006 at 12:48 pm
goodness — i just noticed the post date — talk about my belated reactioN!!
April 3rd, 2006 at 5:24 pm
Naureen, I am amazed at your courage. Now a days it needs a lot of (and believe me, a lot) of courage to dare talk about RAW or something not so ” Her Highness” Type about India.
In progressive literate, cultured society, for anything, you are only allowed to suspect, blame ISI ( the pakistani intelligence agency); NOT RAW!
Ruby Ghosh is definitely an alias. Not real name. So you are quite brave, definitely more than Ruby Ghosh.
April 4th, 2006 at 1:17 pm
This reminds me of a site called the powerhour.com where they have collected actual evidence of the twin towers being blown by demolish bombs and planes that were made to look like passenger planes. The question is why did the Jewish proprietor of the twin towers insure the buildings a week or so prior to the demolish work?
And, how come the damage done to a section of the pentagon by a plane did not match with the size of the plane that was supposed to have crash-landed on that section?
That’s just the tip of the iceberg…