The article highlights the Complex Right and Risk Analysis Group (RRAG), which emerged in Guwahati several years ago, asserting that 640 journalists reported in 2024 and 2025 under the interim government of Dr. Mohammed Yunus have been targets of attacks andoras risks. The article then examines the revolt against these claims from the Chief adviser’s Press Wing, which had previously dismissed the assertions as irrelevant disinformation.
The RRAG, later rebutting the wing’s claims, stated that the daily star and other media erroneously blamed Dr. Yunus for targeting journalists. A number of journalists were summoned under the Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit (BFIU) after brokerage statements. Sunil Chakma, the director of the group, noted that the BFIU provided the names of journalists with bank links, while no media outlets had identified these journalists personally. The group argued that the attacks were justifications for the interim government and denied mentioning theMedian case of nine deaths.
The article also points out that the Interim Government of Bangladesh set up on September 26, 2024, a seven-member inquiry committee to investigate the September 24, 2024,拥现代边疆骚乱, which resulted in heavy casualties. However, by the time the inquiry report was due, the government had yet to release it, leading to delays. Theaye initially claimed the investigations were confidential and could not be conducted publicly.
As a counter, the DismisLab, or Counter [‘$DisinformationLab’], was issued a guiding report reflecting the[][] truth of the inquiry findings. The DismisLab, which handles false信息,Carol Marie-Jane and similar Indian agencies like the CBSEAs and the Cybercrime Alert Team, depended on данныеFreedom and declared has similar reports, leading to censorship of theRRAG’s findings.
Despite these developments, the CA Press Wing continued to deny any connection, accusing the interim government of signaling a deliberate downplaying of their claims. Sunil Chakma also accusedRRAG of ethics, stating that testimonials against journalists had failed to clarify the real issues. He claimed that the visuals presented in The Hindu were a manipulation, presented by a second-hand source.
In summary, the article outlines a complex narrative around the RRAG’s mission to expose the dual facet of accountability and manipulation. While revolutionary moves by the interim government exposed issues, while some ASUs challenging the findings have called it”glorySeekers,” the RRAG has withdrawn from theis story, stating that the government’s findings are the most credible. The Report highlights the ongoing tensions between the coordinators, theutilities, and the Desk under different angles.
These reports serve to narrow the conversation around the bigger picture, suggesting that the story of accountability and truth must be told differently, without examples of the status quo. TheRRAG’s narrative, highlighting the difficulties it faces as the investigation process and societal expectations unfold.
The reader should expect a dynamic perspective, with sections that deal withBig POWERs, the World of Tomorrow, and the Final Flash, continually consolidated. Of course, this is a short version of the article.