1971 War - The Untold Story - EXPOSING Propanganda and the telling the truth

[eastwatch]

After watching Zaid Hamid's video, it seemed he has simplified the causes of separation of east wing of Pakistan to only one point of Indian conspiracy as if there cannot be anything else. His one-point allegation is baseless. It was not India, but it was west Pakistan itself that was responsible for this.

Pakistan people should read other materials and should not concentrate war only within the time frame of 1971. 1971 was a war that was caused by the continuous deprivation of the eastern wing people that they received from the central govt of Pakistan since its creation. Even, AL was not handed over power in 1971 although this party won 162 out of 300 national assembly seats.

Yahya Khan failed to honour his pledge to convene the national assembly in Dhaka on 25th March, 1971. Instead, he chose to teach a lesson to the demanding and hungry Bangalis of east Pakistan by ordering PA troops to unleash a reign of terror, torture and killing.

Zaid Hamid's conspirator, Sk. Mujib, allowed himself to be arrested by the army on 25th March. He was put in a jail, and Yahya never met him at least once in order to initiate a political dialogue and a peaceful settlements of the issues.

Now, Pakistanis are forced-fed into believing it was Sk. Mujib who betrayed the country, and Yahya and Bhutto were the heros. Did not Bhutto warn all the MPs of west Pakistan someday before 25th March, "Jo Log Dhaka Jaeyega, hum unka Paeyed tod Deyenge?"

It was to stop Parliament session there, so that somehow he would be given power when water is more troubled. What was the problem with convening the 1st Parliamentary Session in Dhaka? Was it possible for Sk. Mujib to get a Provincial autonomy just with a simple majority in the National assembly? It takes 2/3rd majority to make even any minor changes to the Constitution.

Yahya took all the unlawful steps on the advice of Z. A Bhutto and was expecting a joint China-US intervention if India interfered. But, the intervention did not materialize. China had even offered to mobilize its troops along the Russian border if USA was willing to intervene. But, USA did not bite the bid because of public opinion in the USA, and to avoid a prospect of a 3rd World War for a tiny east Pakistan.

Now, Zaid Hamid discovers that Yahya and Bhutto were the patriots, who tried to save the country. It was just the opposite. It was Sk. Mujib who decided to go to west Pakistani Jail instead of leading a seccession war. And the two drunkard politcians did everything possible to segregate the country. Yahya and Bhutto should be declared the JOINT FATHERS OF NATION OF BANGLADESH for their roles in 1971.

 

[I FLY HIGH]

After watching Zaid Hamid's video, it seemed he has simplified the causes of separation of east wing of Pakistan to only one point of Indian conspiracy as if there cannot be anything else. His one-point allegation is baseless. It was not India, but it was west Pakistan itself that was responsible for this.

Pakistan people should read other materials and should not concentrate war only within the time frame of 1971. 1971 was a war that was caused by the continuous deprivation of the eastern wing people that they received from the central govt of Pakistan since its creation. Even, AL was not handed over power in 1971although this party won 162 seats out of 300 national assembly seats.

Yahya Khan failed to honour his pledge to convene the national assembly in Dhaka on 25 the March, 1971. Instead, he chose to teach a lesson to the demanding and hungry Bangalis of east Pakistan by ordering PA troops to unleash a reign of terror, torture and killing.

Zaid Hamid's conspirator, Sk. Mujib, allowed himself to be arrested by the army on 25th March. He was put in a jail, and Yahya never met him at least once in order to initiate a political dialogue and a peaceful settlements of the issues.

Now, Pakistanis are forced-fed into believing it was Sk. Mujib who betrayed the country, and Yahya and Bhutto were the heros. Did not Bhutto warn all the MPs of west Pakistan someday before 25th March, "Jo Log Dhaka Jaeyega, hum unka Paeyed tod Deyenge?"

It was to stop Parliament session there, so that somehow he would be given power when water is more troubled. What was the problem with convening the 1st Parliamentary Session in Dhaka? Was it possible for Sk. Mujib to get autonomy just with a simple majority? It takes 2/3rd majority to make any changes to the Constitution.

Yahya took all the unlawful steps at the advice of Z.A. Bhutto and was expecting a joint China-US intervention which did not materialize. China offered to mobilize its troops along the Russian border if USA was willing to intervene. But, USA did not bite the bid because of public opinion in the USA.

Now, Zaid Hamid discovers that Yahya and Bhutto were the patriots, who tried to save the country. It was just the opposite. It was Sk. Mujib who decided to go to west Pakistani Jail instead of leading a seccession war. And the two drunkard politcians did everything possible to segregate the country. Yahya and Bhutto should be declared the JOINT FATHERS OF NATION OF BANGLADESH for their roles in 1971.

I agree to some points that the power was not transfered to Mr Sh mujib , the general public in pakistan then and now thinks very strongly that power should had been transfered . It was not a common pakistani who opposed it . I ask you a question , if Army takes over your country and does not transfer power to your elected leaders ,what will you do? Will you take funding from your enemy country and fight to break your country (B.D)? ONE SHOULD NOT BE A HELPING HAND OF ENEMY CONSPIRATORS .

 

[Md Akmal]

I agree to some points that the power was not transfered to Mr Sh mujib , the general public in pakistan then and now thinks very strongly that power should had been transfered . It was not a common pakistani who opposed it . I ask you a question , if Army takes over your country and does not transfer power to your elected leaders ,what will you do? Will you take funding from your enemy country and fight to break your country (B.D)? ONE SHOULD NOT BE A HELPING HAND OF ENEMY CONSPIRATORS .

@ In the decades of 60/70s there were a feeling among the common people in the world that "hav not"can acquire their legitimate rights through revolution and be part of Communism/Socialism. For that purpose they were ready to do anything whether he is a friend, relative or even an enemy. In a Socialist revolution it is common to take neighbour's help. There are many examples in the world politics. But in the true sense we were in a trap.Moreso, India itself was not a Socialistic country so after the independence she had no sampathy for Bangladesh other than her evil desire. Had Indian would been a Socialistic country than the politics of Bangldesh would have been different.

@ In the crisis of 1971 most of the young followers inclined towards Socialism. Though initially Sh Mujib sought the help of India but later on once he realise that things have gone beyond his control he quickly surrendered to the Pakistani Army. Otherwise he would have been killed.

@ I came to know from a reliable source that after the surrender of Sk Mujib probably on 29 March 1971 Dr Kamal Hossain contacted through his relative(In Pakistan Army) that he also wanted to surrender and once Pakistan Army gave a green signal he surrendered and shifted to West Pakistan.

@ If at all power had to hand over to Sk Mujib by the Pakistan it should have been done before March 7 1971 with the negociation with Bhutto. But Bhutto took a different turn, " Udher tum adher ham".

@ In 1970 election campaign the impact of religion was almost absent.

@ Now the question arises how so many young people of the then East Pakistan were tilted towards Socialism ? To some extend FM Ayub was also responsible for this. As we all know once Ayub tilted towards China so in order to get whole hearted support from China, Pakistan allowed all Communism books to import inside Pakistan and it was available in every book stall.

 

[IND151]

by Md Akmal

Originally Posted by I FLY HIGH
I agree to some points that the power was not transfered to Mr Sh mujib , the general public in pakistan then and now thinks very strongly that power should had been transfered . It was not a common pakistani who opposed it . I ask you a question , if Army takes over your country and does not transfer power to your elected leaders ,what will you do? Will you take funding from your enemy country and fight to break your country (B.D)? ONE SHOULD NOT BE A HELPING HAND OF ENEMY CONSPIRATORS .

@ In the decades of 60/70s there were a feeling among the common people in the world that "hav not"can acquire their legitimate rights through revolution and be part of Communism/Socialism. For that purpose they were ready to do anything whether he is a friend, relative or even an enemy. In a Socialist revolution it is common to take neighbour's help. There are many examples in the world politics. But in the true sense we were in a trap.Moreso, India itself was not a Socialistic country so after the independence she had no sampathy for Bangladesh other than her evil desire. Had Indian would been a Socialistic country than the politics of Bangldesh would have been different.

@ In the crisis of 1971 most of the young followers inclined towards Socialism. Though initially Sh Mujib sought the help of India but later on once he realise that things have gone beyond his control he quickly surrendered to the Pakistani Army. Otherwise he would have been killed.

@ I came to know from a reliable source that after the surrender of Sk Mujib probably on 29 March 1971 Dr Kamal Hossain contacted through his relative(In Pakistan Army) that he also wanted to surrender and once Pakistan Army gave a green signal he surrendered and shifted to West Pakistan.

@ If at all power had to hand over to Sk Mujib by the Pakistan it should have been done before March 7 1971 with the negociation with Bhutto. But Bhutto took a different turn, " Udher tum adher ham".

@ In 1970 election campaign the impact of religion was almost absent.

@ Now the question arises how so many young people of the then East Pakistan were tilted towards Socialism ? To some extend FM Ayub was also responsible for this. As we all know once Ayub tilted towards China so in order to get whole hearted support from China, Pakistan allowed all Communism books to import inside Pakistan and it was available in every book stall.

for bolded part : India was socialistic country and we intervened in 1971 coz 10 million east Pakistanis took refuge in India which caused burden on our already over burdened economy. Nehru accepted mixed model for India's economy. in many aspects India was socialistic country and even after accepting financial liberalization India still retains few policies it was undertaking when it was socialistic country.

 

[Md Akmal]

for bolded part : India was socialistic country and we intervened in 1971 coz 10 million east Pakistanis took refuge in India.

@ India never was a Socialist country it was only on paper and also to take some advantage from USSR and other Socialistic countries of Soviet Block in order to safe her from USA.

@ Socialistic type of Govt were formed at West Bengal, Kerela and Tripurra.

 

[Christian]

@ India never was a Socialist country it was only on paper and also to take some advantage from USSR and other Socialistic countries of Soviet Block in order to safe her from USA.

@ Socialistic type of Govt were formed at West Bengal, Kerela and Tripurra.

*facepalm* i think you just confused between socialism and communism....try looking up what socialism is will you? Oh and kerala , west bengal, tripura had communist state governments following socialist principles. My advice, dont embarrass yourself.

 

[Md Akmal]

@ Now after analysing the South Asian politics I can forsee two broad options:

1. If the Taleban are sucessful in Afganistan than it would also have an impact on both Pakistan , India and Bangladesh. In that case it is likely that Kashmir would be independant/part of Pakistan. The fundamentalist of Bangladesh might capture power.

2. If Talebans are defeated than the people of Bengal and West Bengal may rise against India and greater Bengal may be establish the way "Nakshalist" and "Maobadis" are fighting in India. There is a posibility that even seven sisiters might breaks in pieces.

 

[Bang Galore]

@ Now after analysing the South Asian politics I can forsee two broad options:

1. If the Taleban are sucessful in Afganistan than it would also have an impact on both Pakistan , India and Bangladesh. In that case it is likely that Kashmir would be independant/part of Pakistan. The fundamentalist of Bangladesh might capture power.

2. If Talebans are defeated than the people of Bengal and West Bengal may rise against India and greater Bengal may be establish the way "Nakshalist" and "Maobadis" are fighting in India. There is a posibility that even seven sisiters might breaks in pieces.

I didn't know you do stand up comedy.

 

[IND151]

by Md Akmal

Originally Posted by IND151

for bolded part : India was socialistic country and we intervened in 1971 coz 10 million east Pakistanis took refuge in India.

@ India never was a Socialist country it was only on paper and also to take some advantage from USSR and other Socialistic countries of Soviet Block in order to safe her from USA.

@ Socialistic type of Govt were formed at West Bengal, Kerela and Tripurra.

@ Md Akmal
you are wrong. India was socialistic country and still is in many aspects i.e GOI is dedicated for lifting people from poverty and it has uplifted millions from poverty. get your facts straight. there are communist governments in West Bengal, Kerela and Tripurra not socialistic type.
Pakistan took help from US,china so we took from USSR.

 

[FulcrumD]

@ Now after analysing the South Asian politics I can forsee two broad options:

1. If the Taleban are sucessful in Afganistan than it would also have an impact on both Pakistan , India and Bangladesh. In that case it is likely that Kashmir would be independant/part of Pakistan. The fundamentalist of Bangladesh might capture power.

2. If Talebans are defeated than the people of Bengal and West Bengal may rise against India and greater Bengal may be establish the way "Nakshalist" and "Maobadis" are fighting in India. There is a posibility that even seven sisiters might breaks in pieces.

Are u a retard or just acting stupid,this is a serious forum at least most of the posters here try to keep it that way,these sort of posts will only degrade their effort,so my request is to make good your post.

 

[IND151]

by Md Akmal
@ Now after analysing the South Asian politics I can forsee two broad options:

1. If the Taleban are sucessful in Afganistan than it would also have an impact on both Pakistan , India and Bangladesh. In that case it is likely that Kashmir would be independant/part of Pakistan. The fundamentalist of Bangladesh might capture power.

2. If Talebans are defeated than the people of Bengal and West Bengal may rise against India and greater Bengal may be establish the way "Nakshalist" and "Maobadis" are fighting in India. There is a posibility that even seven sisiters might breaks in pieces.

Md Akmal..........new political expert!

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Md Akmal..........new political expert!

But only after Zion Hamid. Aap katar mein hain.

 

[IND151]

by Capt.Popeye

Originally Posted by IND151
Md Akmal..........new political expert!

But only after Zion Hamid. Aap katar mein hain.

couldn't agree more.

 

[chisty_chowdhury]

@ Now after analysing the South Asian politics I can forsee two broad options:

1. If the Taleban are sucessful in Afganistan than it would also have an impact on both Pakistan , India and Bangladesh. In that case it is likely that Kashmir would be independant/part of Pakistan. The fundamentalist of Bangladesh might capture power.

2. If Talebans are defeated than the people of Bengal and West Bengal may rise against India and greater Bengal may be establish the way "Nakshalist" and "Maobadis" are fighting in India. There is a posibility that even seven sisiters might breaks in pieces.

1. Talebans already have a great impact in Pakistan but no way Taleban can survive in Bangladesh. That period is over. The Kashmir issue is not that likely to resolve and Talebans can not free it from India alone.
The word 'Fundamentalist' means many thing.
There are Muslim fundamentalist, Hindu fundamentalist, Communist fundamentalist, Capitalist fundamentalist, other people who don't like the above are also one type of fundamentalist.
2. There is no intention to defeat Talebans from both side. West bengal will never rise against India. Too many years have passed and there is no sign of it.
But seven sisters have a point of interest.

 

[desiman]

Zaid Hamid exposing propaganda lol That just does not make sense lol