The New Nation - Internet Edition

Coping with bird flu

THE spread of bird flu to different corners of the country has increased the urgency of measures to cope with the menace that has adversely affected the poultry sector. Reportedly, about five lakh chickens, ducks and pigeons from 179 poultry farms under 37 districts have been culled since March 2007. Culling of birds in farms infected or suspected to be infected with avian influenza was urgent to check the disease from assuming dangerous proportions and to prevent human infections. As a result, many farms have sustained huge financial loss. Poultry is an important sector of the agricultural economy. It serves as an important source of employment and income for a large number of people. Some farmers have achieved financial solvency through poultry farming.

It is learnt from the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock that so far Tk 1.27 crore has been distributed as compensation among the poultry farm owners who suffered losses. This support is however, too small. The government should take up a comprehensive plan to protect the sector from collapse. Mass awareness about bird flu and some simple but effective measures are essential to avoid further spread of the disease. In spite of the spread of the flu, there is no reason to panic. Proper cooking of chickens and eggs at 70C temperature and above makes them safe for human consumption. Use of gloves and masks while dressing chickens is another effective way to prevent the spread. To reduce or stop handling of live chickens with bare hands, marketing of processed chickens has been suggested. This may help restrict human infection. Measures should be taken also to make sure that dishonest sections of traders cannot supply infected or dead chickens to the market, as such cases were reported in the past.

Raising of mass awareness is vital in guarding against further spread of bird flu and preventing human infection. People must know the mode of transmission of the disease and the measures needed to prevent the same. They must have correct idea about safe handling of live chickens. Indiscriminate disposal of poultry wastes is a potential cause of spread of the disease. Crows are suspected to have been infected through this mode. If equipped with proper knowledge about the disease and ways of preventing its infection, people would be free from panic. Both the farm owners and the consumers need to be made aware of the safe processing of poultry birds and disposal of their wastes.

Coal for power generation

THE demand for power has increased over the years. It is due to the higher consumption of power in industries, commercial complexes and residential areas. As reported in the Bangladesh Economic Review, 2007, the generation of electricity with the use of gas may become uncertain as supply from the present recoverable reserves may exhaust by 2011. The recoverable gas reserve in the country was estimated at around 15.189, Trillion Cubic Feet (TCF). Around forty percent of the reserve has already been used for generation of electricity, production of fertiliser and the remaining reserve may be exhausted by 2011. That being so, the use of coal for generation of electricity is an imperative.

The existing supply of power is quite inadequate and the people at large look for effective measures for augmenting the generation and supply of electricity. Over the past one year new power stations and terminals have been set up at different locations in the country. The transmission and distribution lines have been expanded. The use of electricity for operating water pumps used in farm sector has also increased. The need for augmenting the generation of electricity has been reviewed in a round table held the other day at the Jatiya Press Club in the capital. The Secretary of the Ministry of Energy was the Chief Guest and was reported to have told the meet that the government has taken a decision to optimise extraction and utilisation of coal for meeting the growing demand for power.

The Country Director of the Asian Development Bank, pointed out that a sort of imbalance is pronounced. While the eastern zone of the country has been having more and more industries, the western zone remains less developed. The western zone lags behind in respect of industrialisation. He underscored the use of coal for generation of electricity and production of building materials among other things that could be used in factories and establishments. The people at large have no technical knowledge on the use of coal. They may only insist upon the use of the natural resources for creating job opportunities for young people. The generation of electricity with coal may augment its supply to the western zone. The use of coal should be based on proper planning. The possible negative environmental effects of extraction of coal on the people living around the mines should be off-set by taking adequate pollution abatement measures.

Handicapped US Presidents

A.Z.M. Shamsul Alam

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) was one of a few very outstanding Presidents of the United States of America (1933-45). In facts he was the only President who could be elected President of the United States four time in 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a crippled man. He was paralyzed from the waist down due to polio. When he became a Presidential candidate, Republican critics tried to brush him aside stating that a crippled man could run New York State of which he was the Governor, but not the USA which was fast replacing British Empire in world leadership. Republican criticism was a great handicap for a physically handicapped candidate to run the race and win it.

Franklin D. Roosevelt had to actually travel a lot to falsify Republican apprehension. He battered all the previous records of Presidential election campaign in visiting more cities and covering more states and areas. More American citizens saw the presidential candidate during that campaign. Minor cities, business centres, industrial towns were thrilled to receive a presidential candidate for the first time and more so, a candidate on wheel chair.

The speaking chair used to be lifted more than a foot to give the impression that the candidate Rousevelt was delivering speech from standing position behind the podium. They were delighted to see him as such as they knew that he was delivering speeches from a raised wheel chair. Total mileage of the election tours of Franklin D. Roosevelt was highest and higher than any other candidate in any previous electoral campaign.

Franklin D. Roosevelt could convince the American people that he could run more without any movable leg and was a fit candidate for electoral race and for running the country. American people elected him as 32nd President not only once but four times giving confidence to all handicapped and crippled American citizens that they could deliver the goods, if they were mentally armed with will, firmness and determination.

Thomas Woodrow Wilson, the 28th President (1913-21) of the USA was known to be a dull headed and very slow in understanding. He could not fully recognise the alphabets till he was nine years old. But he would constantly read books and would not waste his time and he was the only American President who had Ph. D. degree. But he would use this as the initial of his name as is done by almost all Ph. D. holders. He got his Ph. D. from the John Hopkins University in 1886. His thesis was titled "Consultative Government, a study in American Politics."

Thomas Woodrow Wilson could do a diplomatic miracle in human history which none could perhaps dream or do. Through his endeavour the League of Nations. the predecesor institution of present United Nations Organisation could be established. Creation of League of Nations can perpaps be viewed as one of the most outstanding contribution to human peace and civilisation.

Lack of sophistication, articulation or immaculate dress could not act as a handicap for John Quincey Adams to enable him to enter into White House as a President. John Quincey Adams, the sixth President of USA (1797 -1801) was a very simple, calm, conservative, unassuming and unattrative personality. He would loathe power and authority connected with the office of the President. Still he was elected President. One of the point in his favour was that he did not change his hat for ten years.

American voters perhaps wanted to see a new cap and a feather to his hat, but failed. They believed that such a man would not be changed after he was vested with all the power and pomp of presidency. He proved himself worthy of the trust of the Americans and did not buy a new cap to take his oath nor thereafter.

Lack of wife did not stand in the way of James Buchanon 15th President to enter into White House. James Buchanon was in love with Anne Caroline, a daughter of an aristocratic and rich family. Her parents did not agree to their marriage. She failed to convince her parents to agree to give their consent to her marriage but she suceeded to commit suicide.

The family of unfortunate Anne Caroline blamed James Buchanon for their daughter's unnatural death. Buchanon was also deeply hurt at the suicide of the girl he loved. He decided not to fall in love again with any other girl, but to remain in love with the people and serve their interests. All his life he remained a bachelor. People rewarded him with the Presidency of the USA in 1856.

Clover Cleaveland was elected President twice (1884 and 1892), not on continuous two terms but with an interval. He had a good physique but with an artificial jaw. He was attacked with cancer of the mouth. His left jaw was removed and a new jaw was set. He was known to be a very obstinate and determined man. Once he took a decision. he would never change for which he was used to be called bull-headed.

Lack of formal College level education was not handicaps for many American Presidents to successfully run presidential campaigns. School education was enough for many illustrious Presidents to grace Presidential Chair and White House.

Many U.S. Presidents did never cross the threshold of any college room for educational purposes. Among them comparatively famous names are those of George Washington (1789-1797), Martin Van Buren (1836). Billard Filmmore (1850-53). Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865), Andrew Johnson (1865), Harry S. Truman (1945), Andrew Jackson (1929-1937), Glover Cleveland (1885).

In spite of not going to College, they earned enough knowledge to compensate their lack of formal education. The American people do not feel that they faited to find persons of higher education or merit to elect their Presidents, rather they are proud of them.

George Washington, the first President of the USA (1789-97) was offered crown to become King of America. He was a scion of the royal family of Britain. He declined the offer of crown and wanted to preside over the affairs of the people. He wanted that every American citizen should be as distinguished as a King. As the first among them, he will preside over the conduct of their affairs, and be called President. Slavery was legal during his time and was abolished by Abraham Lincoln (1861-1863). It was rumoured that like many others of his time he had unrecognised children through his slave girls. It was not viewed as a moral handicap to be elected President.

When George Washington was offered third term as President. he declined and held that there should be persons among the Americans who would be able to conduct their affairs without him and perform better.

Though his successor John Adams (1797-1801) was not as charismatic or competent as George Washington, but Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) the third President revived presidential dignity and glory and set a heritage.

George Washington (1789-97) was the only President in the United States' history, who was elected unanimously without a single vote cast against him. He was the only President who took arms in his hand and led an army in the battle. No other President went out of the President's House himself to lead an armed expedition during their tenures.

In 1794, the farmers of West Pennsylvania took-up arms against the imposition of tax on liquor and refused to pay. This is known as famous Whisky Rebellion. President George Washington declared that decision made by persons elected by the vote of the people must not be changed by bayonets or bullets of discontented persons. He asked them to go home and wait for a decision till the next election of the Congress or Presidency.

In order to establish the authority and power of ballot and of elected Government, President Washington himself took-up arms and turned an ordinary soldier of domocracy. Seeing the determination of President George Washington and himself with arms, whisky rebellion melted with moderate resistance.

William Howard Taft, 27th President of the USA (1909-13) was a deaf man. He would not hear what others would say but had a very quick grasp of mind. He could study the mind of others from their faces. He was so deaf that he would not even hear when national anthem used to be sung. His Private Secretary was required to give him a push with elbow to ask him to stand up for national anthem. Though he would hear neither the voice nor the noise of musical instruments, but would well understand the language of elbow-push of his Private Secretary.

The White House race

Jonathan Freedland

FUNNY, isn't it, how we have come this far in the US election campaign, reaching the milestone of results from 24 states, and still a mystery remains - one that has vexed more than a few readers. Despite all the ink spilled, the pages filled and the airwaves crammed with coverage, they complain, there is something large they still don't know. What, exactly, do these warring candidates stand for?

Partly this is a media mea culpa, to go alongside the, er, misreading of the New Hampshire primary. For what have been the dominant themes so far? Barack Obama's rhetoric in Iowa, Hillary Clinton's tears in New Hampshire, the role - asset or liability? - of Bill, the cost or benefit of Obama's race and of Clinton's gender. On the Republican side, we've had Mitt Romney's Mormonism, John McCain's age and Mike Huckabee's wit. That's a bit of a caricature, but not so far off. Policy differences have not exactly been centre stage.

And yet, it would be a grave mistake to conclude that somehow this election is nothing more than a personality contest, albeit a gripping one. We could repeat the old cliche - that, under the surface, all these politicians are the same - but too many made that mistake before. In 2000 it was fashionable to say that Al Gore and George W Bush were ideological twins, the Tweedledum and Tweedledee of bland centrism. Now we know, to our cost, how wrong that was. So perhaps today, as the presidential campaign enters a new phase, we should take a hard look at what these candidates are about.

Start with Obama, the candidate who, more than any other, is accused of being light on detail. It's true that he offers nothing like the programmatic minutiae of Clinton, but it's still clear where he stands. During the last month, Obama's standard stump speech opened with a declaration that "The nation is at war and the planet is in peril". In that single sentence, he signalled two radical breaks with the last eight years, on Iraq and on climate change.

On Iraq, he cites his own early opposition to the war to draw one of his sharpest dividing lines with Clinton. Back in October 2002, when he was a mere member of the Illinois state senate, he addressed an anti-war rally. At that same moment, Hillary Clinton voted in the US Senate to authorise the use of force in Iraq, a decision she has never renounced. Obama doesn't quote his own speech but it would be powerful if he did. He condemned "a dumb war, a rash war" in terms that look remarkably prescient now.

More than five years on, Obama promises a US withdrawal and "no permanent bases" in Iraq, besides a garrison to protect the US embassy in Baghdad. He would send more troops to Afghanistan. He would then open talks with Iraq's neighbours, including Iran and Syria, because strong countries "talk to their enemies as well as their friends".

He would not only end the war in Iraq, he says, but end the "mindset that led to the war in Iraq". That means an effort to restore America's standing in the world. Accordingly, he would close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus rights so that no suspect could be detained without charge. He speaks about the assault on civil liberties entailed by what he does not call the "war on terror".

Related will be his effort to wean the US off Middle Eastern oil, required anyway to make the move towards "green energy". (Both he and Clinton avoid the language of climate change and global warming, as if preferring to focus on the solution rather than naming the problem.) He suggests setting a new fuel efficiency standard for motor cars.

Domestically, he wants to pay teachers more, to offer help with college bills to young people who do voluntary work and to do the same for returning military veterans. He speaks about financial excesses, citing "the CEOs who earn more in 10 minutes than ordinary people earn all year". He wants to raise the cap on social security contributions which at present sees Bill Gates pay as much as a worker who brings in $97,000 a year. "Millionaires should pay their fair share," he says.

Clinton touches some of the very same points, even in the same language, though she has wavered on the social security payment question. She, too, is for help with student grants, and keen to forgive the debts of those who become teachers, nurses or police officers. She, too, wants greener energy, favouring micro-generating solutions that would feed electricity back into the grid or that would see solanels on household roofs.

She also wants to "end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home", promising to start withdrawing personnel within 60 days of taking office. Her husband says "we're going to use diplomacy with friend and foe alike", a slight shift from her earlier condemnation of Obama as "naive and irresponsible" for suggesting he would talk to the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Fidel Castro.

Her signature difference with Obama is in the provision of universal healthcare. Both agree it's a calamity that tens of millions of Americans have no cover. She would impose mandates, obliging everyone to be insured; he proposes no such compulsion, assuming that people will buy insurance once it becomes affordable.

Crudely, then, she is to the left of him on healthcare and he is to the left of her on Iraq. Otherwise there is huge overlap between their programmes - and, what's more, both would be recognisable to European eyes as pitched firmly on the centre-left. That has not always been the case with America's Democratic party. (Much credit for that goes to former candidate John Edwards, whose message of economic populism dragged both Obama and Clinton leftwards and obliged them to replace platitudes with gritty policies.)

Given this closeness between them on so much of the substance, it's hardly surprising their contest has turned into a duel over their personal merits as candidates. But that should not obscure a larger truth, also made clear this primary season - that the gulf between them and the Republicans remains wide and real.

On the large themes that unite Obama and Clinton, the leading Republicans are squarely opposed. During the last month, they have competed to declare their support for the Iraq war: Baptist preacher Huckabee said that just because no Iraqi weapons of mass destruction had been found it doesn't mean they weren't there: "Just because you didn't find every Easter egg didn't mean that it wasn't planted." Romney promised to double the size of Guantanamo.

On climate change, McCain concedes the problem, but would have little support in his party for taking any action: his arch-rival Romney would only say that man "probably" plays a role in global warming. As for the rest, the social programmes favoured by the Democrats are condemned as wasteful spending, and the need for universal health coverage barely registers.

The battle so far may seem to have been about identity politics, resumes and political style. But don't be misled: the ultimate battle will be about two entirely different conceptions of the US and its place in the world.

(Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist)

Opinion: We need an experienced Test Team

ABM Moniruddin

The overall performance of our test cricketers is very dull & disappointing. Still we don't like to remain immersed in the disappointing sea. We must retrieve our test cricket from the hard shell of disappointment. Thence the BCB, the selectors & the players must be more & more careful & responsive. We know that the test cricket is a game of experience, fitness & performance. The performance of our ever best batsman Habibul Bashar Suman for the last two years is being found very dark & dull. Considering his age & recent poor, non-responsive performance, he should no longer be kept as an ODI & test player.

Before being properly matured & nourished, Mushfiqur Rahim is forcibly kept in our test cricket - that made an easy topic to question our test status. His repeated failure in the test arena is making a vista to expel him from test squad permanently. BCB can't overlook its such sort of irresponsive responsibility. BCB couldn't rear up & nourish many of our promising talented cricketers like Mehrab Hossain Opee, Shahriar Hossain Bidyut, Hannan Sircar, Ehsanul Hoq Shejan, Nafis Iqbal & so on.

If we pose blind faith in Coach Sidonce, we shall have to repent a lot. Gordon Grenich, Dave Whitemore were much better than & superior to Sidonce.

If Khaled Masud is to be kept outside the test squad, the selectors had better option like Dhiman Ghose & Anwar Hossain. Besides that none of us could understand the reason of keeping Khaled Masud outside the test squad despite his brilliant performance in the last National Cricket League. A player must be considered for the national team when he is at the top of his form & fitness. Similarly, despite brilliant performance of Rajin Saleh in the last National Cricket League, he was kept sitting idle during the last Newzealnd tour of our national team, thus to earn a heart-rending perfect failure by the national team.

The best cricketer of our present generation Sakibul Hassan was kept outside the eleven squad in the first test during the last Newzealnd tour. Javed Omar is always known as a genuine test player. Up till now, he is the most experienced test opener of our national team. Yet he is also known as one of the best fielders with enough fitness of our national team. We wonder that despite brilliant performance of this Javed Omar in the last National Cricket League, he was kept outside the test squad during the last Newzealnd tour. Ex-cricketer Minhajul Abedin Nannu & late-cricketer Manjarul Islam Rana were similarly neglected by the then BCB authority & the then selectors. The then BCB authority & the then selectors were thus questioned & hated by the cricket-lovers.

The cricket giants of the world were surprised at the absence of our best all-rounder Mohammad Rafiq in the test squad during the last Newzealnd tour.We believe that in-formed cricketers like Khaled Masud, Rajin Saleh, Aloke Kapali need not any replacement at this moment. Enamul Hoq Junior is not yet capable of replacing our best all-rounder Mohammad Rafiq. We are afraid of thinking that if the best performers of our last National Cricket League are not considered for the coming cricket matches, we may have to say 'Good-bye test cricket' for a year or two like Zimbabwe. We like to see the best all-rounder Mosharref Hossain Rubel of last National Cricket League in the coming ODI & test matches. Because he proved his efficiency in both one-day & four-day matches. Even, like many others, our best all-rounder Mohammad Rafiq praised highly to see him (all-rounder Mosharref Hossain Rubel) in international cricket arena specially mentioning the coming South Africa tour in Bangladesh. The outstanding performers of the last National Cricket League Nazimuddin, Rakibul Hassan, Imrul Quais, Imran Ahmed, Dollar Mahmud should also be considered for our test & ODI squads in accordance to their respective merits.

It is of course claimed that if a team is formed by the best performers of last National Cricket League, the newly formed team would be stronger than the test team that just concluded the Newzealand tour. If few practice matches are arranged between the two proposed teams, the truth might come to light. We expect that the selectors would be more careful & responsible in selecting our players for the coming test & ODI matches. Otherwise, as a nation we shall have to pay a lot.