[UPDATE:
- Read my op-ed about Congressman Jim McDermott’s private bill.
- Read the brief submitted by the Department of Justice to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals responding to Mohiuddin’s petition for asylum. It is a damning document that lays out Mohiuddin’s crimes.
]
Nearly 32 years after he committed his crimes, convicted terrorist Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed’s days of evading justice are coming to an end. His petition for rehearing and petition for enbanc hearing have been denied by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court denied the petition on May 23, 2007. The docket reads [PACER login required]:
Filed order ( Thomas G. NELSON, Eugene E. Siler, Michael D. HAWKINS, ): The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied. [6133233-1] [03-74603] (wp)
He faces deportation to Bangladesh as early as May 31, 2007.
Representative Jim McDermott, Democrat of Washington State, has introduced a private bill in the House to try to prevent Mohiuddin’s deportation. The bill is currently referred to the House Judiciary Committee. The bill has no cosponsors. The bill, HR 2181, claims, after the 9th Circuit found him guilty, that Mohiuddin "is an innocent Bangladeshi citizen." The bill aims to do the following:
-
stay Mohiuddin’s deportation indefinitely
-
release Mohiuddin from custody
-
makes Mohiddin eligable for permanent residence
-
gives Mohiuddin and his family preferential treatment in the granting of permanent residence over all other applicants for permanent residence from Bangladesh
-
if Mohiuddin is deported, he shall be permitted to seek asylum in a foreign nation
This appears to be Congressman McDermott’s Terry Schiavo moment. The Congressman should explain why he believes a convicted terrorist deserves permanent residence over all other immigrants who have been patiently waiting in line. The Congressman should also explain why he thinks Mohiuddin is innocent when all courts that have looked at Mohiuddin’s case, including the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, have found him to be duly convicted of murder and terrorism.
Mohiuddin, an former Bangladeshi army officer, of course is now returning to Bangladesh at a time when the political situation there might work in his favor. Nonetheless, the United States Congress should not intervene by passing a private bill on behalf of a convicted terrorist after the courts of the land have ruled. His guilt is not in doubt.
Certainly, a convicted terrorist should not be given permanent residence in the United States or allowed to escape justice by going into exile.
Do you think Rohrbacher and those other nutcases will come out and join McDermott in his Terri Schiavo moment? :d
I am getting ripped on DKos because I posted a diary critical of a Democratic congressman’s bill. One commenter suggested that perhaps I posted at the wrong site. Partisanship is strong stuff! :d
That’s the main reason why I don’t post on sites like that anymore. A dissenting point of view is not allowed or tolerated.
Thanks for keeping us posted.
Did you know the family was pleading to Canadian govt after failing in U.S.?
http://www.thestar.com/article/218689 l-)
Nice to hear from you in this issue.
Its our duty to keep USA Govt in pressue for deporting the criminal.
I read the Ahmed court transcripts from the 1997 trial in Bangladesh.
I read how an eyewitness testified that Ahmed was in Mujib’s home and killed Mujib and the family…yet later in the testimony that same witness admitted he didn’t join the army until a month after the coup. So how could he have seen Ahmed or anyone else in that house the night of the coup?
I read how one witness for the prosecution was himself charged with crimes until he agreed to become a prosecution witness.
I read how Ahmed’s defense lawyer was appointed by the courts and never once contacted Ahmed to get his side of the story. How can you get due process if you have no contact with your lawyer?
I read how judges were threatened by mobs in the street demanding a guilty verdict.
I read how defense attorneys were physically harassed right in the court house.
I read how the judges were selected by the Awami league that clearly had an interest in getting a guilty verdict.
I read how the US State dept considers Bangladesh to be a very corrupt country with a terrible judicial system. So why did they accept the Awami version of the murders without an independent investigation? Maybe they’re trying to hide the CIA involvement behind the coup?
I have to ask how is it possible that army generals, who were closer to the coup than Ahmed could ever be, are still in the army. Why? Because they aligned themselves with the Awami league.
I have to ask how is it possible that the murder of the prime minister was not investigated for 21 years? How is it possible to get to the truth about what happened in a dark house, filled with soldiers, all dressed in black, all shooting each other.
I have to ask how is it possible to believe blogs that say Ahmed is a terrorist when those same blogs say he’s also an international drug dealer with multiple passports and private jets.
The US uses the word, “terrorist†whenever they want to get rid of somebody. I don’t trust the US in this area and I don’t trust any country, like Bangladesh, with one of, if not, the worst records of human rights and judicial abuses.
Hasina is now facing four murder charges herself that are politically motivated charges. I believe Ahmed was also charged and convicted for political reasons.
Dear Steve
Pls spend some minutes at http://www.majordalim.com/
You will find how Mohiuddin was involved in killing and then repost your comment.
I hope Mr. Mohiuddin will not be deported to Bangladesh. He is certain to face the gallows if he is deported. His trial was unfair as far as I understand. Best of luck to him and his family.
Steve and Hasib, if you have any evidence that Mohiuddin is innocent, you should forward it to the 9th circuit court of appeals. The 9th circuit has looked at his case twice now along with lower courts in the US. They have ruled against him. This is what the 9th circuit said in its decision:
Steve, your questions and comments are lifted right out of Mohiudin’s own website. Like I said, if you really believe them perhaps you can forward them to the court.
You asked the following question about timing:
Well, um, because the military ruled for 16 years after the murders and Mohiuddin and his buddies passed a law called the “indemnity act” that gave them immunity for their murders. Once democracy returned to Bangladesh, Bangladesh’s highest court was able to find that law unconstitutional. Thats when the trial began and Mohiuddin fled to the US.
As for the last part about it being dark in the house, that quote is lifted from Mohiuddin’s son’s post. So, are you saying that Mohiuddin now admits to being in the house and his defense now is that it was too dark to see what was going on? Did his trigger finger also accidentally cause the bullets to fire as he gunned down Sheikh Mujib and his family, including his 10 year old son and pregnant women?
You can probably see why the 9th circuit found his defense unconvincing.
Mash:
Did you call McDermott’s office to educate them? What was the response?
For interested people, here is the bill, which will probably never get out of the committee and die.
I’ve always considered McDermott a smart and decent guy–wonder what version he heard. The April-May contributions are not online yet; what are the chances we will see some familiar names there?
Shadakalo, I sent the Congressman an email yesterday. I followed up with a phone call today. The staffer I spoke to was not able to respond to my questions but she recorded my questions and said that they would get back to me with answers. I pointed out to her that the assertions in the Congressman’s bill are both inaccurate and misinformed. Here are the questions I posed to her:
I’ll post his responses as soon as I have them.
Ugh!! What did I tell you? Enough of this political crap and talk about Lindsay Lohan!
James, I hear a Congressman has introduced a private bill demanding that Lindsay Lohan be freed from alcohol rehab. :d
forget Lindsey…poor Paris is rotting in jail:))
Why is Diane Finley even considering accepting mass murder/terrorist, Mohiuddin Ahmed as a refugee when one of a government’s principle responsibilities is to protect it’s citizens from terrorists and mass murders.
U..S. authorities are set to deport Ahmed, sending him back to Dhaka where he has been sentenced for his role in a 1975 mass murder and/or terrorist attack. Even the most left wing Circuit Court in the US, the very liberal San Francisco’s 9th Circuit Court, refused to hear his case again. The extreme left-wing San Francisco court ruled Ahmed assisted or participated in the persecution of others for political reasons and said the coup was an act of terrorism. Also, The U.S. state department has ruled that his trial in Dhaka followed due process.
For once, Harper must pretend that he really is a small-c conservative and do what is necessary to keep Canadians safe from this terrorist. We know the far-left Liberals, or the sub-human, Marxist morons in the Bloc and NDP won’t take steps to protect us against terrorists, however, we trust Harper, McKay, Day and even Findley will refuse this terrorist’s claim.
.
The word \
The word “Bangladesh” and “Sheikh Mujib” bears the same meaning to me. Those who killed Sheikh Mujib and those who are symphathatic to those killers are in denial of the spirit of Bangladesh.
I am enjoying the rat race of one of the killers (Mohiuddin) for his own life. These cowards are dying many times before the death.
But Bangladesh and Sheikh Mujib will remain alive forever.
machiavelli, it would astonish me if Canada granted Mohiuddin asylum. Canada has already refused asylum to Mohiuddin’s co-conspirator Nur Chowdhury who floated similar revisionist arguments of “innocence”.
This is choice between the rule of law and supporting terrorists. US Congressman McDermott is supporting a bill on behalf of a duly convicted terrorist. I hope Canada does not make the same mistake. Mohiuddin’s victims and the nation of Bangladesh deserve better.
Also, those who are arguing that Mohiuddin did not get due process should note that Mohiuddin got a public trial and substantial due process. He got infinitely more due process than the detainees in Guantanamo Bay. Yet I do not see a single American Congressman floating a private bill on behalf of those at Guantanamo who have been locked up for nearly 6 years without any hint of due process. It rings hollow when Congressmen go out of their way to support terrorists that have been duly convicted and whose trials have been ackowledged as fair by US courts and yet do not lift a finger to support those who are locked up without any charges.
Dear Folks– I have been Din Ahmed\’s neighbor for a number of years in Venice. He is not a right wing ideologue. He loves his country and had the guts to serve in both the military and the diplomatic corps, under whatever government existed, as do our most progressive politicians and military officers serving under George W. Bush. I know Din and I believe him when he says he was not at the site where the prime minister was killed, and that it was his understanding that the coup was to be peaceful, and he heard with abhorance about what actually happened. It was then his choice to stay in Bangladesh and serve, or to leave. He chose to stay and serve, as all of us choose to stay in America, because we love our country although it is now engaged in some of the most craven and bloodthirsty acts ever to be perpetrated on the world. Folks, I know that you take the positions you take because you want justice. Well, I do too, but I have no illusions that I can make a sound judgment about what is right and wrong in a place I know so little about. I should not be playing God, nor should the American judicial system. I believe Din should be sent to Canada, where he can live out his life with family he has there. To take a side in this conflict, in which all sides are accused of corruption and murder, depending on whom you talk to, is a distraction from the problems here in our own country which is where we need to spend the bulk of our political energy. I am writing this because I know and respect Din Ahmed and I don\’t want him executed for serving such a tragic country in the best way he knew how.
Ahmed’s case is supported by Amnesty USA and International. For the Court of Appeal to parrot the word terrorist isn’t exactly an endorsement of sending a man off to torture and death.
From what I read, Ahmed was miles away manning a road block when the coup took place.
Calling Din a terrorist does not make him a terrorist; sending him to Bangladesh for certain execution does not befit a country founded on the principle of freedom and justice for all. Let him go to Canada and be accorded appropriate investigation of his alleged crime.
Douglas, you said:
What you have read is Mohiuddin’s claim. Perhaps you should also read the trial transcripts or what the US courts have said about the trial. There was overwhelming evidence that Mohiuddin plotted with the other Majors and then carried out the killings in cold blood. After the murders, he and the seven Majors ruled the country until they fled on November 3, 1975. This bit of history is very well documented in press accounts from the time. His claims of innocence did not pass muster in a court of law. He has variously said that he was only manning a checkpoint, his troops had been taken over by senior officials, etc. He also made the incredible claim that while he was manning the checkpoint he was unaware of the killings. Mohiuddin claims he found out about the killings the next morning. That is patently absurd. If he was manning the checkpoint a mile away as he claimed, surely he would have heard the artillery shells that his unit was launching in the vicinity – half of Dhaka city heard them. Especially since one overshot a house they were aiming at and killed a dozen civilians in the neighborhood of Mohammadpur in Dhaka. If you are to believe Mohiuddin’s account, then you must also believe that he became deaf that night and did not hear artillery shelling. Absurd at best!
Amnesty International has never said the trial was unfair. Their concern, as with all death penalty cases, is that Amnesty considers the death penalty cruel and inhuman punishment and therefore opposes the death penalty in all cases.
The letter from Amnesty posted on Mohiuddin’s own website never says the trial was unfair. It supports Mohiuddin’s deportation to Canada on anti-death penalty grounds.
Here’s the link to the letter for your reference:
http://www.freedin.org/freedin.org/Home%20Page_files/AmnestyInt.pdf
The court of appeals rejected Mohiuddin’s claim that he would be tortured. Please see citation to actual text of ruling in my comments above and in other posts I have written. Just because Mohiuddin claims something does not make it true. The court rejected his claims.
The court used the term “terrorist activities” as defined by US code. If you have a problem with US laws, please lobby congress to change them. Otherwise we are all bound by those very laws – Mohiuddin is no exception.
The court in its ruling cited the following law that defines terrorist activity:
Kit, Mohiuddin has been evading justice for over three decades. He has been duly found guilty in a trial that no credible foreign observers, including Amnesty and the US State department, found to be unfair. The US courts have also not found the trial to be unfair.
If you believe in justice then you would think that his victims, which include pregnant women and a 10 year old boy, also deserve justice. He has had ample opportunity in Bangladesh and the US to try to plead his case. He fled Bangladesh because he knew the evidence was overwhelming. He failed in US courts here.
Now you want to send him to Canada? His partner Nur Chowdhury trid to plead his case in Canada but was found by the Canadian courts to be not credible. Nur Chowdhury’s arguments were similar to Mohiuddin’s but the court found them as incredible as the US court’s have found Mohiuddin’s arguments.
Canada has a law that prevents it from deporting anyone to a country that has the death penalty. These convicted criminals try to use that Canadian law to somehow make it to Canadian shores and then evade justice. Well, in the case of Nur Chowdhury, Canada was in a pickle because he was already in the country. In the case of Mohiuddin, Canada probably will not make the mistake of allowing a known criminal to enter and then be stuck with him.
Sheila, you said:
Sheila, please consult the history books. This guy was a major in the army. He and the other majors who plotted and executed the coup were given diplomatic posts abroad by the military regime that took over Bangladesh thanks to the coup. This is rather well documented in the press and in the history books. Spinning their diplomatic postings earned through blood as something benign is a mockery of the facts and history.
You also say:
This guy massacred over two dozen unarmed persons including pregnant women and a 10 year old boy who pleaded for his life before he was shot at close range. It was a gruesome murder. Which side of this murder should one be on? On the murderer’s side or on the vitim’s side? You say taking sides is not something one should do but you have clearly taken the side of the murderer since you think he should be allowed to ride off into the Canadian sunset for his crimes.
I will agree with you that we should not “spend the bulk of our political energy” on this. The courts have decided. It is Congressman McDermott who has brought this into the political arena. Perhaps you should ask him why he feels that politicians should overrule the courts here.
Finally, I am sorry you feel that Bangladesh is a “tragic country”. Bangladeshis, and I was born in Bangladesh, do not consider their country “tragic”. It is a beautiful country with gentle people who have been subjected to military rule thanks to people like your neighbor Mohiuddin. It took Bangladesh and its people 16 years after Mohiuddin’s murders to restore democracy to the country. The tragedy was brought upon Bangladesh by Mohiuddin and his partners. The country by no means is “tragic” – the people have persevered in spite of Mohiuddin’s attempts to destroy the country. That is not tragic, that is heroic.
I don’t pretend to know all the facts of this case, but one thing is very apparent to me. The divergent opinions are so far apart, and the truths believed so opposed to one another, that the situation demands a calm, reasoned reconsideration. The rhetoric is heated, emotions are high, and everyone wants “justice.” What form that takes should be considered very carefully. As civilized people, we must do all we can to ensure that we have done all we can to dispel all doubts before we act.
Freude, I agree with you that this requires a calm, reasoned consideration. That is what the courts are for. Mohiuddin appealed his case in the US over 9 years. Justice has been calm, slow and deliberate.
I see no reason to doubt the 9th Circuit’s ruling. Unless anyone else can convince the courts who have looked at this in the US for 9 years, I would say that he has been given a full hearing in front of the law here. Justice has run its course and Mohiuddin’s guilt is no longer in doubt.
His supporters seem to want to set aside all facts and all court rulings against him and start from scratch as if the law does not matter. Well, life just does not work that way.
Thanks, Mash; it’s evident that you’ve given a great deal of thought to this. And I much appreciate the tone of your response – thank you for that as well. I don’t share your certainty, though. I’ve lived long enough to see many verdicts that were decided decisively decades ago be reversed. For some of those convicted, of course, the reversal was too late to save their lives. Once again, there’s a great deal of doubt in the minds of many people about the dismissal of the appeals in this case. To me, that suggests that the case should be tried elsewhere. No country is exempt from making incorrect decisions, and every human being deserves to be treated fairly in the eyes of all.
Regards,
Freude
Freude, Mohiuddin’s trial was in 1998 in Bangladesh. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decided on his appeals in February of this year. You said “there’s a great deal of doubt in the minds of many people about the dismissal of the appeals in this case.” The doubt is coming from Mohiuddin’s defense – that should not be surprising.
No credible party who has observed the case, again including Amnesty International, US State Department and the US court of appeals, has ever cast doubt on the fairness of trial or that Mohiuddin received due process. Doubt in law cannot be an article of faith. You cannot simply invent doubt out of thin air and then argue that there is any credible doubt. Facts matter in law.
Just because the person convicted of the crime protests his innocence does not make it so. Given the overwhelming evidence against him, his attempts to spin the facts may have some resonance with his supporters but it has not worked with any court who has looked at the case.
I am not sure what other court is supposed to try this man. Apparently the Bangladeshi and US courts are not good enough for his supporters. His supporters seem to be light on facts and heavy on faith in his innocence, all evidence and court rulings to the contrary.
Interesting stuff on both sides. But, I personally don\’t trust the 9th Circuit here on almost any issue and I certainly would not want to be tried in the courts in Bangladesh. Just curious though what are the appeal options in Bangladesh for Mohiuddin? From his info, he will be executed upon is return with no chance of appeal. Is this fact? Why has the Bangladesh government not offered a life sentence if Mohiuddin returns on his own and his appeals fail? I must say, it is interesting that the PM who spearheaded his conviction (who,if my facts are correct, also happens to be the daughter of the PM \
….conintued…..of the PM “murdered” 32 yeas ago) is now herself accused of murder. I understand the passion of not wanting a person executed, but what is the motivation of “Mash”? What is your connection and why do you want this guy dead so bad?
“T from PP”, you say:
Its really hard to take you seriously if you dont trust the court’s decisions. FYI, the 9th Circuit is the most liberal appeals court in the United States. If Mohiuddin cant convince the 9th Circuit, he has a snowball’s chance in hell in other appeals courts.
So, good luck with the campaign to spin on behalf of Mohiuddin. To courts where truth matter, his spin doesn’t amount to much in the face of overwhelming evidence.
By the way, I hope the weather is nice in Venice, California. The weather has been good in DC lately, but I hear Venice is beautiful.
Tried 2 times to post. Refused twice. Do ou only take comments that you like ?
“V”
I have been following the posts regularly. V, I have experienced the same as you 😕
Anyhow, just wanted to point out and quote from a recent article on the Washington Post –
Titled: Army Takeover in Bangladesh Stalls Key Muslim Democracy.
It has many amazing quotes including a quote from Mainul Hussein, the Caretaker Minister of Law, Justice and Information.
Mr. Hussein adds that he is particularly “fed up” with westerners bringing up humanitarian rights abuses in his country. “Bangladesh is going through a huge crisis”, he says. “Is this the time to discuss individual cases? Invididuals are not important.”
And this from Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury, Head of the Anti-Corruption Commission in the Caretaker govt: “At least 99% of the Bangladeshi politicians are corrupt. Half of these corrupt ones will come back as members of parliament again so you will not have achieved anything by having an election.”
And this from Abdul Awal Mintoo, former president of the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry: “All of us are corrupt here. Can you take everybody to jail in this country?”
This may shed some light in the truth behind Ahmeds Plea, even the current so called “care taker govt” admits to Bangladesh’s state of affairs since its birth. Ahmed did not get due process.
By the way, the weather in Venice is great today!
SURFS UP DUDE! :)>-
I know it’s hard for many people to believe a political party in power can have such intense influence on the judicial process that the defendant can not get a fair trial. But that was the case in 1996 when Din was tried, in absentia, in Bangladesh.
Here are just some of the reasons why I believe Din did not get a fair trial:
21 years passed before there was an investigation into the killings that occurred during the night of the military coup in 1975. There was no physical evidence linking Din to the crime, and, after all that time, any eyewitness testimony against Din is highly suspect. According to various reports, many of them highly suspect, over 100 men stormed the president’s home, all wearing the standard black uniform and black beret of the Bangladeshi army. Since these killings happened in the middle of the night, under a highly charged atmosphere, we believe any eyewitness testimony has to be seriously placed in doubt, 21 years after the fact.
The entire trial was orchestrated by Sheikh Hasina, the daughter of the slain president, and her Awami League political party. They picked the judges in Din’s case and they picked his defense attorney in Bangladesh.
Din was not in Bangladesh during the trial. He was tried, in absentia, and his, Awami League, appointed attorney never called any witnesses in Din’s defense. He never objected to any testimony against Din and this lawyer never contacted Din in America even though Din could have been easily found living in Los Angeles. US Govt knew Din’s whereabouts at all times because, at the time of the Bangladesh trial, Din’s application for political asylum was winding its way through the US courts. He had work permits to work legally in America and he paid his taxes like anyone else. Din was not hiding. He was completely reachable. The Bangladeshi government had ongoing communications with the US INS regarding the status of Din’s case, and the submission of documents from the in absentia trial. Nonetheless, the Bangladeshi government appointed lawyer never made any attempts to contact Din, or defend him at trial.
A soldier testified against Din who was not even in the army when the killings took place.
In fact, he testified during the in absentia trial that he joined the military AFTER the coup! If he wasn’t even in the army when the military coup happened, how could he have been in the president’s home to have seen Din kill anyone? Nonetheless, his testimony was allowed as relevant to the trial, and worthy of evidentiary weight. Witness#11.pdf
Eyewitnesses in Bangladesh can be easily intimidated and bought. Bangladesh is, and was, plagued by police and judicial corruption, torture for confession, torture for testimony and outright killings in the street by authorities and political thugs. This killings, or as the Bengali like to call them “crossfireâ€, are a frequent occurrence and if you voice opposition against the political party in power you can get killed in the street or tortured in jail.
Mohiuddin Ahmed is a common name in Bangladesh and there was frequent confusion in the trial as to who was being talked about, Din or someone else with that same name.
Other defense attorneys were openly harassed and threatened just for trying to defend their clients. One female defense attorney was even attacked while on the court premises.
The Awami League, which was the political party behind Din’s 1996 trial, orchestrated violent intimidating demonstrations outside the court house to let everyone know, if a guilty verdict was not reached, there would be blood in the streets. And violence and intimidation by Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League continue to this day. On April 11th the BBC reported Bangladesh police have filed murder charges against Hasina for masterminding the murder of political opponents during street violence in Dhaka last October.
Rouben
V at #33, look around at the other comments before making baseless statements. If you are unable to post comments, it may be that you are not typing the spam check correctly.
During Din’s hearing for political asylum, the US State Dept acted as a conduit for the Bangladesh government, as Sheikh Hasina and her minions provided evidence in support of a mandatory denial of asylum. Notably, the immigration court record, which consists of more than 5,000 pages of testimony and evidence, does not contain one piece of evidence that was independently developed by the US Department of State. That is to say that, according to the record, the US State Department did not conduct an independent investigation of the allegations leveled by Sheikh Hasina. Nor did the US State Department offer any opinions regarding the unlawful repeal of the 5th Amendment to the Bangladesh constitution. Rather, the US State Department apparently only acted as a post office, forwarding charge sheets, testimony, and conviction documents from the Bangladesh prosecutor to the US Courts.
At the beginning of Din’s asylum hearings in the US, the Bangladesh government provided court transcripts to the US prosecutor that were offered into evidence. However, a technical point required that the Bangladesh documents be returned to Bangladesh for a proper attestation from the prosecutor Accordingly, those documents were sent back to be retranslated and attested by Bangladesh officials, although a set remained in the Immigration Court file for identification purposes. Apparently, upon review of those documents, the Bangladesh government recognized the significance of these transcripts, and it chose to edit some of them, and remove some testimony that might cast doubt on Din’s guilt. Once sanitized, the witnesses’ testimony was resubmitted to the US State Department, and then later filed in the Asylum hearing. Closer inspection showed that many of the documents were edited to, among other things, place Mr. Ahmed in the worst possible light, strengthen the Bangladesh case, and hide the acquiescence of a general close to Hasina who pledged his allegiance to the new government after the coup! Bangladesh prosecution Witness #29 is a good example: in the first submission of his testimony to the US immigration court, he states he was never in the president’s home during the shooting, he was at another location, and only heard, through hearsay, that Din was guilty of murder. But in the second submitted translation, the attested official version provided by the Bangladesh government, over 300 words are missing from his testimony- the 300 words that prove witness #29 was not in the president’s home to witness any killing and only heard about them later. He couldn’t have see Din kill anyone in the president’s home but that fact was left out of second papers submitted to the US courts.
deletedtestimony.pdf
And in this piece of testimony, in the English translations provided by the Bangladesh government to the US Courts, Bangladesh prosecution witness #11 testified in 1996 that Din plotted the coup in August 1975, and played a major role. Yet, you’ll notice, in translations omitted from the US records, witness #11 states he didn’t actually join the army until a month after the coup in Sept. of 1975. 😕
Rayan
Rouben at #35 and other assorted comments, welcome to my blog. I understand your zeal to defend your father. It must be a very difficult position to be in.
However, please do not defraud my readers by commenting as at least three different people in the same thread. If you are going to pretend to be multiple people, please use different IP addresses when you are posting. You will save yourself the embarrassment.
You are asking us to believe you over the US courts. I think the least that you can do to establish credibility is not try to post as multiple people.
Surf’s up dude!\:d/
Mash reply to your comment on #39. You may want to believe that Rouben is taking different identity but the fact is there is alot of people that support his father and belive he is innocent. We are normal citizens not politicians. In addition the fact that we are not using different ip address says that we have nothing to hide!!!! Lets not get too creative.
Raihan, so you guys are all huddled together at the same computer typing comments? How cozy.:d
If you believe Mohiuddin is innocent, please try to prove it in court. You have failed and failed miserably. The rest is all spin. You can believe pigs fly but that is simply not so.
FYI:
New comment on your post #443 “Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed Facing Imminent Deportation”
Author : Raihan (IP: 71.105.70.73 , pool-71-105-70-73.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
New comment on your post #443 “Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed Facing Imminent Deportation”
Author : Rayan (IP: 71.105.70.73 , pool-71-105-70-73.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
New comment on your post #443 “Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed Facing Imminent Deportation”
Author : RM (IP: 71.105.70.73 , pool-71-105-70-73.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
New comment on your post #443 “Mohiuddin AKM Ahmed Facing Imminent Deportation”
Author : SURF’s UP (IP: 71.105.70.73 ,
pool-71-105-70-73.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net)
How rude,
Its quite unprofessional to make direct comments like that wouldnt you agree? I guess not. By the way is Mash your actual name, Iam Raihan by the way, Rouben and Jo also say hello.
Mash from reading your post you seem well educated, havent you heard of wifi?
Raihan, I think readers of this blog can judge for themselves what is considered rude.
As for trying to make an end run around the US justice system in the case of convicted murderer Mohiuddin Ahmed, good luck with that. I think the 1975 coup plotters have evaded justice long enough. Those who dont know the history or the facts may be misled by your spin, but to the courts and those of us who lived through the time and know what the Majors did quite well, your spin sounds pretty much like, well, spin.
We havent failed Mash. Infact, according to many responsible individuals in the international community including individuals from Bangladesh its the so called independent judiciary of Bangladesh that has failed in the case of Mr. Mohiuddin and many unknown innocent victims. Unfortunately corruption is rampant in Bangladesh but I dont need to tell you that Iam sure you already know that yourself.
SPIN SPIN SPIN SOUNDS LIKE WMD WMD WMD. Do you have anything substantial to say? Thank you[-x
Raihan, I think the quality of Mohiuddin’s defense is on ample display here. Thank you.
I think I have written plenty of substance on the matter. Feel free to read them.
Mash do you believe that Mr. Mohiuddin Ahmed got a fair trial under the then current government in bagladesh under Sheik Hasina? If so could you please elaborate? Thank you.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Please all read “An Innocent Man” (John Grisham, first non fiction book of his). That book would show you that any Judicial system makes mistakes, and that these mistakes are sometimes known even as they are perpetrated. It will show you that witnesses may lie, or may be coerced into making stories up, that prosecutors may have other agendas than finding the truth, That Judges may have pressure applied to them, that experts may not accept
being wrong and that the will of the People demands culprits, often regardless of facts.
“These are the facts of the case, and they are undeniable” is one of the most dangerous statement that is routinely made at trials, because it is often biased and sometimes an unsupported statement.
Remember Nicola Sacco and Bob Vanzetti, among many others who have been wrongly convicted, under one of the most advanced Judicial system in the World (that of the USA, for those who fail to recognize the names).
As a quick aside, the 9thCircuit has NOT ruled on Ahmed’s guilt in a crime. It has ruled that Asylum could not be granted because of his participation in a coup (undeniable) under a rather recent set of Laws.
That set of Laws would perhaps prevent a person such as Lech Walesa to come to the States, as the definition of Terrorism is now the broadest possible.
“These are the facts of the case, and they are undeniable” is one of the most dangerous statement that is routinely made at trials, because it is often biased and sometimes an unsupported statement.
Remember Nicola Sacco and Bob Vanzetti, among many others who have been wrongly convicted, under one of the most advanced Judicial system in the World (that of the USA, for those who fail to recognize the names).