A long awaited but nevertheless highly welcome admission by Faisal Gazi that the Jamaat-e-Islami and the Pakistan Army were right to target extremist Awami League intellectuals, including his uncle, during the 1971 war!.
After all, Mr Gazi has justified the killing of Anwar Al-Awlaki, a non combatantant, simply because of the speeches he made. Likewise the Jamaat and Pakistani Army would justify their elimination of his uncle for speaking out against the state and calling for violence and it’s break up.
To paraphrase the “man” himself:
“I think this is a massive statement by Gazi”.
Gazi: I do nothing whatsoever to bring justice to Awami Leaguers in East Pakistan. I have enough on my plate here in the UK.
Support for anti-Awami League actions
“In another sense Gazi should be congratulated for being honest about his apathy to Muslim victims of killing without a trial.
His statement is liberating and should be celebrated. It now frees Bangladeshi nationalists of their obligation to loyalty to the Awami League, in exactly the same manner as Gazi does, by saying these words:
I was born in the UK and am not “Bangladeshi”, so to be honest, I very rarely think about “Bangladesh”.
By using this simple ethical argument, Bangladeshis who choose to, can now detach themselves from the insidious emotional blackmail and moral upbraiding which is used to force them to side with this or that national/territorial cause of other Bengalis, simply because they were their their co-nationalists
If Gazi of the Spittoon can do it so can any Awami Leaguer, and for this reason he should be applauded”.
What are the equivalents of the First and Fifth Amendments in Awami League ideology that protects an individual’s right to due process and a trial before they are inadvertently killed in a Awami League rebel terror attack by one of Mujibur Rahman’s duped disciples?
Robert-e-Chesney on bypassing the Fifth Amendment:
“A corollary to Bobby’s second point in this post is that it is not enough to say the words “due process” by way of denouncing the killing of Gazi’s uncle, as though those words represent a discussion-ending argument. One has to specify what process is due to someone being targeted in a particular circumstance before one concludes that the targeting violates due process. If targeting Gazi’s uncle were really an assertion of the power to kill any East Pakistani citizen anywhere based on his speech, I would find it alarming indeed. But I am, in fact, quite certain that Bobby is correct that it is no such thing”.