19

UBC student blinded, maimed in brutal attack

Incident occurred while on family visit in Bangladesh


 

A University of British Columbia graduate student was horribly injured and blinded in a vicious attack that occurred while she was visiting her family in the Bangladeshi city of Dhaka. Images from the local media show Rumana Manzur lying in a hospital bed with bandages on her nose and what appear to be heavily bruised eyes. Her husband, Hasan Sayeed Sumon, reportedly confessed to attacking Manzur after police arrested him. Sumon and Manzur have a five-year-old daughter. “He has made my world dark. I can’t see my daughter,” Manzur told reporters in Bangladesh. Manzur has been studying political science at UBC and is an assistant professor at Dhaka University’s international relations department.

CTV News


 
Filed under:

UBC student blinded, maimed in brutal attack

  1.  ‘my reputation as an expert in both politics and hockey’???

    SUCH humility 

    • SUCH pettiness.

      • Ahh ever to the defence of an arrogant PM I see.

        • I’m perfectly willing to defend him from idiotic, petty, churlish comments, yes.

          • Weren’t you the guy complaining because Iggy used the word ‘I’ too often for your liking?

            It’s not illegal to be a Con you know…you could just admit and stop looking foolish

          • No, I never said that about Iggy.  Nice backhanded attempt at a lie.  You are unbelievable.  I have said repeatedly  that I had no problem with Iggy being PM. Congenitally I’m pretty much in the same ideological space as Iggy. I don’t know if I’ve ever posted anything particularly negative about Iggy, certainly nothing more negative than what other Liberals have posted. If you had any rudimentary reading comprehension skills, you’d know that.  But you clearly lack the reading comprehension gene.

            You know, it’s funny — I thought that in order to be a Conservative, one had to join the Conservative party, be a member of the Conservative party, donate money to the Conservative party, or at least support the Conservative Party — like at least endorsing a substantial number of its policies and decisions   But apparently, miraculously, none of this is necessary in Emilyland — all that is required is that you disagree and debate with Emily — and presto!  You’re a “Con”.

            The fact that I support Insite, support legal and taxed marijuana, support legalized prostitution, opposed the Cons’ trashing of the long-form census, opposed the Cons’ GST cut, opposed the Cons’ maternal health initiative de-funding abortions, all of that is somehow irrelevant.  The fact that, as far as I can tell, I oppose more of their policies and positions than I support, is also somehow irrelevant in Emily’s topsy-turvy world.  I will leave it to other readers, who presumably have the reading comprehension gene and are presumably clinically sane, to decide if it makes any sense to call me a “Con”.

          • Oops, I accidentally “liked” Emily’s idiotic comment above. 

          • @OrsonBean:disqus 

            Get a grip Bean….better yet have a cold shower.

            I know you’re a student, but I’m pretty sure you’re past 15 where this kind of sulky whiny behavior is the norm

            You are a Con…there is no shame in admitting that…and you know very well you don’t need to buy a membership card or donate money to be one

            You’re not only a Con, you’re a Harper cult member…we’ve long known that.

            So you can come out of the closet now

          • You didn’t even get the student part right.  You don’t have an effing clue what you’re talking about.

          • @OrsonBean:disqus 

            Hey, you claimed to be a student, I can’ t help it if you lie

            It’s part of your character apparently, along with whining and sniveling.

            At least stop pretending to be a mugwump.

          • Well, I seriously doubt Emily that you were ever a member of the Reform party as you have claimed.  No one who was a “former Reformer” hates Alberta like you do.

          • @healthcareinsider:disqus 

            Reform and then CA in fact

            Riding president

            And I lived in Alberta, toots…got married there, had a child there.

            Beautiful summers, winters that suck, crackpot Cons…and they started out so well with Lougheed

      • ‘Yawn’.

  2. I enjoy Murdoch Mysteries.

    I look forward to seeing Steve “playing” somebody who is described as clueless.

    • “He turns up in next week’s instalment as a clueless cop who fails to recognize then-prime minister Wilfrid Laurier when the political leader walks into the police station.”

      Spot on! 

      Harper ‘acting’ clueless should be quite easy, not out of character at all.

      Reputation for expert at politics?

      Bill Maher ~ In the land of midgets, pygmies cast tall shadows.

      • However much you may disagree with Harper on a number of things, I don’t think characterizing him as clueless is a fair assessment.  I find him to be incredibly calculating – for better and for worse.

  3. I’ll give any Prime Minister credit for being an expert in politics.  That said, is there a single person on the planet who views Stephen Harper as an expert in hockey?

    • Just you wait until that hockey book is finished. Then you’ll see.

    • I have no idea if Stephen Harper is or is not an expert in hockey but I am sure you are right that people who don’t know him probably would not view him as such.  The funny thing about being an “expert” on something is that it involves immersing onself in research about the subject.  The parents of children with cancer become experts on that illness…why couldn’t a fan become an expert on a sport he/she loves?

Sign in to comment.