What's new

Creation of Bangladesh

Okay my freind i will not deny it. It was just poor governance, just bad governance by the damn power-hungry corrupt bhutto bastard and idiotic support for him by yahya khan. Bangladeshis never wanted freedom until Bhutto directly told the army to commit murder in the area etc. .

Yh, there is evidence...but let me remind

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't spam the whole thread with the same useless comments. There is no evidence for genocide of all Bengalis. Not a single piece of evidence. If you have any, quote it. And mujib made plans for liberation well before bhutto and yahya had entered into any political leadership.
 
.
:flame: Salim on Fire!

You know what i am used to... i am used to playing futball in bed. Anyway how is the "jungle full of tigers" salim

Salim is the "Tiger of Peace"
:enjoy:

now what on God's green earth have to do regarding you playing football in the bed ! with the creation of Bangladesh?:hitwall:

as for a jungle full of tigers well quiet frankly i wouldn't like them to roam around in the city center that's for sure my friend.
 
.
If you don't know what you're talking about, don't spam the whole thread with the same useless comments. There is no evidence for genocide of all Bengalis. Not a single piece of evidence. If you have any, quote it. And mujib made plans for liberation well before bhutto and yahya had entered into any political leadership.

& guess what he did liberated Bangladesh & got the job done now that's what we in Canada call a great & successful leader is all about :tup:
thank you for honoring him it was long overdue on your part .
 
.
If you don't know what you're talking about, don't spam the whole thread with the same useless comments. There is no evidence for genocide of all Bengalis. Not a single piece of evidence. If you have any, quote it. And mujib made plans for liberation well before bhutto and yahya had entered into any political leadership.

Z.A.B was known for his corruption and suppression of political opponents, his cheap nationalization schemes and force used with balochis is wat we still pay for... ya it was'nt genocide as there is no evidence west wanted to eliminate all bengalis but too much force was used to contain the east rather than peace. U say i dunno wat i'm talkin abt, open ur eyes this is wat evry site and article says, even our own and then u give no evidence that mujib made plans f4 liberation long bf4, get evidence and i'll be the first to believe... ok, thats enough lets not fight with each other and be a target f4 the "tigers"...

Haan bengaliz se bhi lar ley... as if the tigers are not enough.

Keywords:
Tigers= Indians (Source: Salim <Salim was kind enough to describe India as a jungle of man-eating tigers check the Kashmir Issues Section>)
 
.
Skewing the history of rape in 1971 A prescription for reconciliation?

Nayanika Mookherjee runs a critical eye over Sarmila Bose's controversial analysis of the violence committed during the Liberation War

This is a discussion of Sarmila Bose's article: "Anatomy of Violence: Analysis of Civil War in East Pakistan in 1971" (EPW, Oct 8, 2005). A version of this paper was first presented by Dr Bose at a two-day conference, on June 28-29, 2005, organized by the historian branch of the United States Department of State titled "South Asia in Crisis: United States Policy, 1961-1972." This was arranged to mark the release of declassified US records relating to the theme of the conference.

As an Indian working in Bangladesh for nearly a decade on the public memories of sexual violence during the Bangladesh war of 1971, I was particularly struck by the author's use of the phrase "civil war" to refer to the Bangladesh war. Most Bangladeshis denounce the use of the term "civil war" to refer to the Bangladesh war as it deflects attention from its genocidal connotations.Instead, they semantically and politically distinguish the Bangladesh war as either muktijuddho (liberation war) or shadhinotar juddho(independence war).

It is also important to note that occurring at the juncture of Cold War politics, with the United States government supporting Pakistan during 1971, and the Indian government assisting the East Pakistani guerrilla fighters, the genocidal connotations of the Bangladesh war remains unacknowledged, till date. The use of the phrase "civil war" in the title of the article suggests that the author was in agreement with the Pakistani and US government's version of events of 1971. Yet the paper was claiming to provide "an impartial account." I was intrigued.

Through what Bose refers to as "case studies," she tries to highlight how violence was inflicted by both sides -- the Pakistani army and the East Pakistani liberation fighters -- during the 1971 war. She also refers to the lack of incidents of rape during the Bangladesh war in her "cases" in a small paragraph found at the end of her long article. She suggests a prescription for reconciliation through an acknowledgement of violence inflicted by all parties involved.

Soon after the Washington conference, the points made in her paper were promptly picked up by the Pakistani newspapers: The Daily Times (Hasan, June 30,2005; Editorial, July 2, 2005) and Dawn (Iqbal, July 7, 2005). Both refer to the violence inflicted by both sides, and the absence of rape during the Bangladesh war. The entry on Sarmila Bose in Wikipedia, the popular internet encyclopedia, reiterates only the brief paragraph on rape.

In a response to Uttorshuri, a Bangladeshi web mail group, on July 2, 2005, Bose said: "The heading given to the Daily Times, Pakistan, report is incorrect and not the finding of my study." Her work unleashed a barrage of criticism in Bangladesh and her research methods have been attacked as being shoddy and biased.

Collingwood (1945) has shown that historical "facts" are the reconstitution of the past in the historian's minds, involving the selection and interpretation of the past, as history is the choice of a particular expository style that is itself determined historically.

My discussion of Bose's article here, nearly ten months after the publication of her article in EPW, is an attempt to show the various responses to Bose's work, her response to these feedbacks and to highlight Bose's expository style which is appropriated by varied configurations.

In this discussion, I critically address Bose's exposition about: a) violence being inflicted on both sides, b) the lack of instances of rape in her "cases," and c) interrogate her formulation of reconciliation and highlight its implications on sub-continental politics.

Violence inflicted on both sides
All parties involved are shown to "commit acts of brutality outside accepted norms of warfare, and all had their share of humanity …with Bengalis, Biharis and West Pakistanis helping one another in the midst of mayhem," in Bose's article. This is evidenced by the Pakistan army targeting adult males while sparing women and children. However, local Bengali "loyalists"/collaborators, and not the Pakistani army, are involved in inflicting violence on their fellow Bengalis and the killing of intellectuals.

According to these accounts the Pakistani army did not inflict all the violence. This decontextualized account of Bengali collaborators does not recognize the triggers and advantages that the presence of, and collaboration with, the Pakistani army created. It misses the analytical point that in all wars local collaborators become the indispensable foot-soldiers of the institutionalized military paraphernalia.

The Pakistani army is portrayed as kind, but violent when provoked, whereas the Bengalis inflict violence "for unfathomable reasons." The situation in Bangladesh during 1971 is described through phrases like: "widespread lawlessness during March," "encouraged to break the law," "urban terrorism," and "rebels."

The treatment of the Pakistani army namely: "refusal of Bengalis to sell them food and fuel, being jeered and spat at … and the widespread disregard of curfew orders, murder of army personnel," are not considered to be examples of resistance and opposition, but are cited as instances of the suffering of the Pakistani army and an exhibition of "extraordinary restraint of the army under provocation."

The "rule of law" remains with the Pakistani army as they "secure" and "gain control" over territories. Army reaction is cited as "overwhelming" while the rebels are "disorganised and amateurish" who for "unfathomable reasons … take pot-shots at the advancing units in the bazaar which triggered an overwhelming reaction from the army."

There is no commentary on the contestations that exist in Bangladesh in relation to the varied national narratives of 1971. As a result, the observation by the former liberation fighter Iqbal: "This must be the only country in the world where there are two views on the independence of the country," remains unanalysed.

As in-depth reading of various critical literature on war and violence (Butalia 1998; Das 1995; Nordstrom 2004) would show liberation and independence of countries are not homogenous narratives, and contain within their folds multiple contesting interrogations of wars through which countries become free. This is more so the case in Bangladesh (Hitchens 2001), given its fractured histories of partitions and independence.

Also, Nixon's reference to Bangladesh as the "place" remains uncommented upon. This article, which was first presented in a conference hosted by the US department of State, is particularly conspicuous in the absence of any critical examination of the US support for Pakistan's role in the Bangladesh war of 1971, in the context of Cold War calculations.

The article is helpful in addressing the ethnicization of the army as "Punjabis," and in bringing out some of the nuances of the Pakistani army. That wars and conflicts are rife with instances of violence, kindness, cowardice, complicity, contradictions by the same individuals is not anything new and has been highlighted by various feminists, critical researchers and filmmakers within Bangladesh (Akhtar et al. 2001; Choudhury 2001; Kabir 2003; Masud 1999, 2000).

They show the multiple, contradictory, subjectivities of the Bangladesh war experience, and the violence inflicted upon the poor, women, Biharis, and adivasis. In my own work, I have encountered similar complicities and contradictions. Rather than citing these experiences as ahistorical and apolitical "facts," they need to be located at the crossroads of local and national politics and histories.

The earlier mentioned formulation by Collingwood is significant here. In her other writings, Bose has attempted to go beyond Indo-Pakistani enmities. She highlights the various symbolic roles of a flag, and the possible repercussions of possessing a Pakistani flag in India (Bose 2003). In the Christian Science Monitor she argues (Bose and Milam 2005) in support of the sale of F-16s to Pakistan as a stabilizing factor within world and sub-continental geo-politics. In the EPW article, the nature of her expository style and presentation of "facts" make her "cases" representative of war-time experiences of all in Bangladesh.

Skewing the history of rape
The small paragraph, located in the last page of the article, relating to the absence of rape in the "cases" has been highlighted as evidence that the Pakistani army did not rape. In her response to Uttorshuri, Bose says: "The issue of rape amounted to about 100 words out of a nearly 6,500 word paper on the subject of patterns of violence in 1971." An issue as contentious as the "patterns" of violence of rape can be claimed to be absent, through only 100 words! Bose explicates: "As I pointed out in the discussion that followed, there is evidence elsewhere that rape certainly occurred in 1971. But it seems -- from this study and other works -- that it may not have occurred in all the instances it is alleged to have occurred."

Bose's comment that rapes did occur elsewhere in 1971 is absent in her EPW article. In it she emphasizes the need to distinguish between the instances where rape occurred and where it did not. Throughout, it shows that the Bengalis raped Biharis while the Pakistani army did not rape anyone during the war. Also, it is not very clear which "cases" are being referred to in the statement: the rapes "may not have occurred in all the instances they are alleged to have occurred." Rather than this generalized statement, it would have been more transparent scholarship to cite the specific "cases" where the rapes were alleged which the research instead finds, is absent.

Bose shows, in the case of "mutinies" by "rebels," that "there was assault and abduction" of women. The Pakistani army however, "always" targeted adult males while sparing women and children. The Hamdoodur Rahman Commission (2000) established by the Pakistani government, while referring to the attack and rape of pro-Pakistani elements by Bengalis, also cites various instances of rape.

Eyewitness accounts can also be found in the eighth volume of the Dolil (Rahman 1982-85: 106, 192, 385). There is literature from the 1970s (Greer 1972; Brownmiller 1975) and recent scholarship and films based on oral history from within Bangladesh (Akhtar 2001; Choudhury 2001; Guhathakurta 1996; Ibrahim 1994, 1995; Kabir 2003; Masud 2000) which shows that the Pakistani army committed rapes and highlights the complexities of these violent encounters. Bose makes no reference to any of these documentations.

Recently, in Bangladesh, various women from different socio-economic backgrounds have narrated their violent experiences of rape by the Pakistani army and local collaborators. The well-known sculptor, Ferdousy Priyobhashini, has been vocal about her war-time experiences and the role of Pakistani army and Bengalis. My own work with various women who were raped during the war shows the contradictions of the war-time experiences while highlighting their violent encounters. All these documentations emerge as important counter-narratives to the various prevalent Bangladeshi nationalist accounts of the war.

Emphasizing these war-time contradictions is not tantamount to a denial of the incidents of rape perpetrated by Pakistani army and their local collaborators.

A prescription for reconciliation?
Reconciliation, according to Bose, is possible through an acknowledgement of violence inflicted by all parties involved. However, for her, this is hinged on an unequal reliance on literally accepting the various viewpoints of the Pakistani army and administration, drawn from secondary sources (only one interview with General Niazi is briefly quoted).

While referring to the innumerable publications on 1971 as a "cottage industry," Bose seems to negate the emotive expressions of her informants as "the cultivation of an unhealthy victim culture" and a "ghoulish competition with six million Jews in order to gain international attention." This highlights a lack of empathy with her informants, and insensitivity to their comprehension of violence.

Primo Levi's work on Auschwitz shows that individuals who have encountered and survived violence make various complicated, competitive and contradictory negotiations to inhabit their survival and "victimhood." Here, Bangladeshi testimonials are ironically the means through which war-time narratives are negated.

The various individual accounts of violence, in turn, become muted with the prescription of "reconciliation." Significantly, for many Bangladeshis, "reconciliation" has a jarring resonance, as it is perceived to be the objective of various war-time collaborators, who are currently rehabilitated in the Bangladeshi political landscape.

Seen only as a "place" (Nixon), a "basket case" (Kissinger), Bangladesh is stereotypically viewed internationally, and in South Asia, as a country ravaged only by poverty, floods, cyclones and, hence, in need of the saviour, interventionist, developmental paradigms.

Here, Bangladeshi histories and politics are again delegitimized as a result of sub-continental dynamics, as there is no engagement with the wider picture in Bangladesh.

The expositions in this article itself stand in the way of reconciliation between Bangladesh and Pakistan, and cannot provide a prescription to resolve these hostilities. War-time contradictions, complicities, nuances can be highlighted without negating the foundational violence of the history of rape of the Bangladesh war perpetrated by the Pakistani army and the local collaborators.

While the Bangladesh war might be a "civil war," or Indo-Pakistan war for India and Pakistan, for most Bangladeshis it is the war of liberation and independence, even though that liberation might be interrogated in post-colonial Bangladesh. Only by recentring the issues which concern Bangladesh, along with highlighting the contradictions of wartime experiences, rather than proffering an argument which caters to Indo-Pakistan geo-political concerns, could one help the cause of reconciliation between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

This piece is adapted from "Bangladesh War of 1971: A Prescription for Reconciliation?" EPW, Vol. 41 No 36: 3901-3903. We have reprinted it here by special arrangement with EPW due to the intense interest within Bangladesh generated by the original Bose article that Dr Mookherjee discusses.

Dr Nayanika Mookherjee is a Lecturer in the Sociology Department in Lancaster University and a Research Fellow for the Society of South Asian Studies, British Academy.

References
Akhtar, Shaheen, Suraiya Begum, Hameeda Hossain, Sultana Kamal, and Meghna Guhathakurta, eds. 2001. Narir Ekattor O Juddhoporoborti Koththo Kahini (Oral History Accounts of Women's Experiences During 1971 and After the War). Dhaka: Ain-O-Shalish-Kendro (ASK).

Bose, Sarmila. 2005. "Anatomy of Violence: Analysis of Civil War in East Pakistan in 1971," Economic and Political Weekly, October 8, 2005.http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2005&leaf=10&filename=9223&filetype=html

Bose, Sarmila and WB Milam. 2005. "The Right Stuff: F-16s to Pakistan is Wise Decision." Christian Science Monitor, April 11, 2005. http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0411/p09s02-coop.html

Bose, Sarmila. 2003. "What's in a Flag?" The Daily Times (Pakistan), September 23, 2003. http://www.countercurrents.org/ipk-bose230903.htm

Brownmiller, Susan. 1975. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, pp. 78-86. London: Secker & Warburg.

Butalia, Urvashi. 1998. The Other Side of Silence: Voices from the Partition of India. New Delhi: Viking Penguin India.

Collingwood, RG. 1945. The Idea of History. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Das, Veena. 1995. Critical Events, pp. 55-83. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Greer, Germaine. 1972. "The Rape of the Bengali Women." Sunday Times, April 9, 1972.

Hamdoodur Rahman Commission of Enquiry. 1971. Published in August 2000. Pakistan Government.

Guhathakurta, Meghna. 1996. "Dhorshon Ekti Juddhaporadh" (Rape is a War Crime). Dhaka: Bulletin of Ain-O-Shalish Kendra (ASK), February 6-8.

Hasan, K. 2005. "Army Not Involved in 1971 Rapes." June 30, 2005. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?p...30-6-2005_pg1_2

Hitchens, Christopher. 2001. The Trial of Henry Kissinger. London: Verso.

Ibrahim, Nilima. 1994-5. Ami Birangona Bolchi (This is the "War-Heroine" Speaking), 2 Volumes. Dhaka: Jagriti.

Iqbal, Anwar. 2005. "Sheikh Mujib Wanted a Confederation: US Papers." July 7, 2005. http://www.dawn.com/2005/07/07/nat3.htm

Levi, Primo. 1996. Survival in Auschwitz: The Nazi Assault on Humanity. Translated from the Italian by Stuart Wolf. New York: Touchstone Books.

Mookherjee, Nayanika. (forthcoming). Specters and Utopias: Sexual Violence, Public Memories and the Bangladesh War of 1971. Durham: Duke University Press.

Mookherjee, Nayanika. 2006. "Remembering to Forget: Public Secrecy and Memory of Sexual Violence in Bangladesh." Journal of Royal Anthropological Institute (JRAI), 12 (2), June 2006: pp. 433-450.

Mookherjee, Nayanika. 2004. "My Man (Honour) is Lost but I Still Gave my Iman (Principle): Sexual Violence and Articulations of Masculinity." South Asian Masculinities. R Chopra, C Osella and F Osella, eds. New Delhi: Kali for Women: pp. 131-159.

Nordstrom, Carolyn. 2004. Shadows of War: Violence, Power, and International Profiteering in the Twenty-First Century. California Series in Public Anthropology, University of California Press.

Rahman, Hasan H, ed. (1982-1985). Bangladesher Shadhinota Juddho Dolilpotro (Documents of the Bangladesh Independence War). Sixteen Volumes. Dhaka: People's Republic of Bangladesh, Information Ministry.

Films

Choudhury, Afsan. 2001. Tahader Juddho (Their War).

Kabir, Yasmin. 2003. Shadhinota (A Certain Freedom).

Masud, Tareque and Catherine Masud. 1999. Muktir Katha. (Words of Freedom). Dhaka: Audiovision.

Masud, Tareque and Catherine Masud. 2000. Women and War. Dhaka: Ain-O-Shalish-Kendra (ASK) and Audiovision.

Web-sites
Discussion Forum: Story of Pakistan http://www.storyofpakistan.com/discforum/t...d=11&page=1

Drishtipat: http://drishtipat.org/sarmila/sarmila.htm

IndPride: Sarmila Bose: In Praise of Pakistan http://www.indpride.com/mediamonitor.html

The Daily Times (Pakistan), July 2, 2005. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_2-7 2005_pg3_1

US Department of State South Asia in Crisis: United States Policy, 1961-1972 June 28-29, 2005, Loy Henderson Auditorium, Tentative Program. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/46059.htm

Uttorshuri: "Revisionist Historian on Rapes of 1971," July 2, 2005.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/uttorshuri/message/4090

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmila_Bose
 
.
Salim sed: What has Kashmir and what Indians do got to do with Bangaldesh Liberation and the atrocities?

See thats what. u ignore the problems u gyz create and the abuses u are responsible f4 while u keep looking f4 a chance to pounce on us... U remember describing india as "a jungle of man-eating tigers?" Yes, thats whats going on, the "man-eating tigers" on this site are trying to eat us and we are defending ourselves! Just tell me straight why do u want to keep the circle of conversation on pakistan and its problems while completely ignoring or denying ur own... ppl in india are dying of proverty even as we speak picking food from gutters, farmers kill themselves because they can't grow enuf food and u are here giving us lessons and telling us what we did wrong.

1. There is no pouncing involved. It is mere discussion of the issue of the thread. Meandering with irrelevance is like complain about having gas because the farmer produced poor wuality of vegetables. As far fetched as that.

2. The Jungle issue of another thread (?) was for that post, But given your sense of logic, you could apply it to even Lal Mazjid thread and sit back with smug glee that you could type something on the forum to establish that you exist too!

3. Indeed India has her cup full of problems. What is new about that? Poverty is there there is no doubt against a backdrop of a galloping economy and increasing international recognition as a country moving forward after years of stagnation. That is the irony of it all! Are you suggesting Pakistan is a land without any problems or poverty? If indeed it is not, then best of luck to you.

No one is giving lessons here and I am no Mullah to give lessons.


Salim sed: Now, there is a feeling that some of the posters perpetuate that Pakistan is beyond a whiff of wrong doing and is purer than the driven snow. Therefore, don't you think there should dawn a sense of reality of existence amongst those who claim they are purer than driven snow and should they not remove the cobwebs of self delusion? And there are some who chuck in a few religious verses so that it shuts up all from debate!
<Man the posters knw we did a wrong thing by killing those bengalis but it was on the orders of a corrupt power-hungry bastard but they don't want to admit it to an opportunist audiance! Furthermore u are trying to exagerate events. thousands were killed yeah but not millions...Anyway we did say that we were wrong... u gyz cannot even say that even though u have been wrong many more times than we were... Instead u are carrying ur head high like sum gr8 hypocrate superstar infact happy f4 ur countries history and then u also try to dodge questions like kashmir and discrimination in ur own country. Salim i hav never heard u say anything bad about ur country or admit that the illegal occupation of kashmir against the popular will of the people is wrong even if u believe it and then u want us Pakistanis to talk all day about the wrong that was done becuz of a heretic bastard like z.bhutto? I find it hard to respect u, dude>

'Opportunist audience'? So you are suggesting that all who are here are merely playing games and participating in a charade? You maybe a budding star and an actor, but please do not club all members to be so capricious seized with intense frivolity.

As far as Bangladesh is concerned, forget what the Indian or Bangladeshi members are saying. Check what the world has said. Now, if the world is wrong and you are right, then so be it. You are the only wise owl in a forest of the blind!

I do not think that Kashmir being a part of India is illegal and enough has been said on this subject. So, why should I say red when I see blue. Just to please you? Fine. Let's please you. India is a part of Pakistan. Makes you happy?

Zulfikar was a bastard? I thought Indians should say that. He gave you the nuclear bomb and said Pakistan rather eat grass but the bomb she will have! Is that how you show gratitude to your leaders. Yes, you may not like him, but as they say, give the dog his due!

No country is perfect and that is the reality.

<Ya i never sed that but i can say that our countries history and our peoples purposes are much cleaner than yours!>

That was just a statement summing up my post.

But then you are the type that finds fault even in a sterilised operation theatre!

Paranoia leads to nowhere!

My answer to you is:

Spread :smitten:

and not:

:devil:
 
.
Amar sonar Bamla,
Ami tomay bhalobashi,
Ciradin tomar akas, tomar batas, amar prane
Oma amar prane, bajay basi.
Sonar Bamla, Ami tomay bhalobasi.
O ma, Fagune tor amer bane ghrane pagal kare, mari hay, hay re
O ma, Fagune tor amer bane ghrane pagal kare,
O ma, aghrane tor bhara ksete ki dekhechi ami ki dekhechi madhur hasi
Sonar Bamla ami tomay bhalo basi, ki sobha, ki chaya go ki sneha,
ki maya go ki acal bichayecha
bater mule, nadir kule kule.
Ma, tor mukher bani amar kane lage suhar mato,
mari hay hay re ma,
tor nadankhani malin hale, o ma, ami nayanjale bhasi.

Amar Shonar Bangla (My Golden Bengal)

My Bengal of gold, I love you
Forever your skies, your air set my heart in tune
as if it were a flute,
In Spring, Oh mother mine, the fragrance from
your mango-groves makes me wild with joy-
Ah, what a thrill!

In Autumn, Oh mother mine,
in the full-blossomes paddy fields,
I have seen spread all over - sweet smiles!
Ah, what a beauty, what shades, what an affection
and what a tenderness!
What a quilt have you spread at the feet of
banyan trees and along the banks of rivers!
Oh mother mine, words from your lips are like
Nectar to my ears!
Ah, what a thrill!
If sadness, Oh mother mine, casts a gloom on your face,
my eyes are filled with tears!

Understand the deep ecstasy and emotions of a liberated people!
 
.
(by SU 47) I'm proud of my country for helping the bangladeshis in their time of need
OK!Then its great if we help Kashmiris and Sikhs in their time of need.



(by Salim) Ah! Of course, the Indian agents!

The world was blind.

Bought of by the Hindu Lalas, what?

And I presume you think the Bangladeshis were fools and they could not make out Indian agents from Pak military men from Camps in their areas!

You sure love to self delude and run away from unpleasant facts!

Don't you think that the Mukti Bahini was actually Chinese in Bangladeshi garb? That would complete the script for your fascinating fairy tale!

Right ! The world is blind that's why they cant see who burnt "Samjhoota Express".
 
. .
Salim sed: What has Kashmir and what Indians do got to do with Bangaldesh Liberation and the atrocities?

See thats what. u ignore the problems u gyz create and the abuses u are responsible f4 while u keep looking f4 a chance to pounce on us... U remember describing india as "a jungle of man-eating tigers?" Yes, thats whats going on, the "man-eating tigers" on this site are trying to eat us and we are defending ourselves! Just tell me straight why do u want to keep the circle of conversation on pakistan and its problems while completely ignoring or denying ur own... ppl in india are dying of proverty even as we speak picking food from gutters, farmers kill themselves because they can't grow enuf food and u are here giving us lessons and telling us what we did wrong.

1. There is no pouncing involved. It is mere discussion of the issue of the thread. Meandering with irrelevance is like complain about having gas because the farmer produced poor wuality of vegetables. As far fetched as that.

2. The Jungle issue of another thread (?) was for that post, But given your sense of logic, you could apply it to even Lal Mazjid thread and sit back with smug glee that you could type something on the forum to establish that you exist too!

3. Indeed India has her cup full of problems. What is new about that? Poverty is there there is no doubt against a backdrop of a galloping economy and increasing international recognition as a country moving forward after years of stagnation. That is the irony of it all! Are you suggesting Pakistan is a land without any problems or poverty? If indeed it is not, then best of luck to you.

No one is giving lessons here and I am no Mullah to give lessons.

1> Well is it not true that you are searching for a chance to make fun of pakistan. Does'nt that sum up the reason of your being on this site? Oh you call it irrelevence... oh so the question "Why do u want to keep the circle of conversation on pakistan and its problems while completely ignoring or denying ur own?" is irrelevent because you could not answer it. All i sed has evrything to do with the forum but to the "tigers eye" its irrelevent. Okay continue ignoring ur problems as irrelevent and when there will be another pakistan formed then you can come back and whine. :what: vegetables and gas... i luv ur examples.

2>Well u called all indians man-eating tigers is that not true? I'm just refering to u gyz with the name you want to be called. Ya ya whateva u say... i understand u typed this post sitting in ur mamas lap eating cereal... maybe its time f4 u to go to school now...

3> :D A "cup full of problems" u say? Naah a cup is'nt big enough. You are talking about size? I think the size of Delhi and Mumbai put together is big enough to contain all ur problems so u ppl shud start leaving the place. When did i ever say we had no problems? I hav no issues admitting we have problems, i do not try to dodge our problems and call them "irrelevant" and we readily admit our mistakes. I was just trying to say that the jungle... sorry india has some problems too which its tigers actually ignore.

Salim sed: Now, there is a feeling that some of the posters perpetuate that Pakistan is beyond a whiff of wrong doing and is purer than the driven snow. Therefore, don't you think there should dawn a sense of reality of existence amongst those who claim they are purer than driven snow and should they not remove the cobwebs of self delusion? And there are some who chuck in a few religious verses so that it shuts up all from debate!

<Man the posters knw we did a wrong thing by killing those bengalis but it was on the orders of a corrupt power-hungry bastard but they don't want to admit it to an opportunist audiance! Furthermore u are trying to exagerate events. thousands were killed yeah but not millions...Anyway we did say that we were wrong... u gyz cannot even say that even though u have been wrong many more times than we were... Instead u are carrying ur head high like sum gr8 hypocrate superstar infact happy f4 ur countries history and then u also try to dodge questions like kashmir and discrimination in ur own country. Salim i hav never heard u say anything bad about ur country or admit that the illegal occupation of kashmir against the popular will of the people is wrong even if u believe it and then u want us Pakistanis to talk all day about the wrong that was done becuz of a heretic bastard like z.bhutto? I find it hard to respect u, dude>


1>'Opportunist audience'? So you are suggesting that all who are here are merely playing games and participating in a charade? You maybe a budding star and an actor, but please do not club all members to be so capricious seized with intense frivolity.

2>As far as Bangladesh is concerned, forget what the Indian or Bangladeshi members are saying. Check what the world has said. Now, if the world is wrong and you are right, then so be it. You are the only wise owl in a forest of the blind!

3>I do not think that Kashmir being a part of India is illegal and enough has been said on this subject. So, why should I say red when I see blue. Just to please you? Fine. Let's please you. India is a part of Pakistan. Makes you happy?

4>Zulfikar was a bastard? I thought Indians should say that. He gave you the nuclear bomb and said Pakistan rather eat grass but the bomb she will have! Is that how you show gratitude to your leaders. Yes, you may not like him, but as they say, give the dog his due!

1>:rolleyes: Hello! I was talking about Salim and most "tigers"... the rest of the members are not opportunists bcuz they do not look for opportunities to pounce on ppl... i got u there! u do pounce on ppl... i thank you for ur comments about me and i must admit i am absolutely flattered.

2>The world criticised both countries in case you have forgotten. They sed Pakistan poorly handled the issue and that india shud not have interfared in Bangladesh. See u want me to keep repeating what i sed over and over. It gives u sum sort of pleasure wen we say "we were wrong"... i totally understand why the other posters did not want to say all this about their country bcuz i feel embarrassed now. Exactly the way u want me to feel. Are you forgetting that india did not join the war becuz of their luv for bengalis... u hated east pak as much as u hated west... nor did u love the mukti bahinis u only joined because the civil war gave u a great opportunity to gain land, resources, power etc. Why do u not admit that? And weren't u always filled with rage and agony that u had lost Pakistan a large area of ur land. I know if the world pressure was'nt that much and the world did not care wat u did u would have taken Bangladesh and not let go just like u don't wanna let Kashmir go.

3> Nawww i wud'nt believe thats true anyway... Oh, u are here to please me... okay lemme tell u what u cud do to make me happy...

step 1: Gather all people in India at a particular location.

step 2: Atom-Bomb the location and throw all ur nuclear weapons there.

step 3: Call Pakistani forces into your country.

if u are saying that "india is part of pakistan" makes me happy then this wud too... :P we dun giv a damn about taking india over okay and never have... its only ur war-mongers that have always been vouching for a war. We defend, we dun attack... :pakistan:

4> :flame: Salim on fire yet again! Did u sign an accord to deny evrything that i say? If i say now that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto is a great dude will you start saying the opposite? Okay ya ofcourse u know more about my country than i do... okay fine, yes u are absolutely right!!! He was a hero ofcourse he was. U see we are comitted to the peace process so we accept what u say...Actually i think we shud send every corrupt war-mongering theif we find to india and you can give him a position in the government... Infact Bugti, Osama bin ladin, Mullah Umar, Nawaz Sharif, Goerge Bush shud all be in ur government. I think that wud make the council and advisors but the leader should be Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto for his mass-rigging of elections, extreme corruption and his lust for power and wealth which is represented by the suppression of Balochis and Bangladesh. :yahoo: Indians have a sense of gud leadership!

No country is perfect and that is the reality.

<Ya i never sed that but i can say that our countries history and our peoples purposes are much cleaner than yours!>


That was just a statement summing up my post.

But then you are the type that finds fault even in a sterilised operation theatre!

Paranoia leads to nowhere!

My answer to you is:

Spread love

and not:

hate

:woot: A strilized operation theatre... wat are u talking about? Were you in an operation theatre when u were typing this? Well that sums up the delusional writing then.

Oh i am spreading "hate" here... i see... i understand... ahan! U are definately here on this site because u luv pakistanis and support the peace process... limitless love for Pakistanis brings you here... right

Wrong u are here becauz u either hate pakistan or want to have fun by making fun of our economy, history, problems etc. U are an opportunist looking for the chance to get into every thread where any problem with pakistan is related to and have fun. I know the sort of fun u gyz have with each comment you post criticizing us. I hav seen ppl flush with pleasure wen u make such comments. So who is spreading the hate? Would it be me or you? If telling the world the truth is spreading hate then fine i am spreading hate and i am proud of it. But i really think you should practice what you preach and stop spreading hate urself cauz that is exactly what you are here to do and all of ur posts reflect that.
 
.
Right. But you are wrong!

Yes evry1n is wrong accept u! Ya, ofcourse u are always right... we follow a policy of "the tigers are always right". You see we "love" u ppl... i mean u teach us so much about loving our neighbors so obviously we shud always keep saying "you are right." Every1n else is obviously wrong becauz a tiger has said it.

Well i think i need rest after that long post back there...this time pls try to answer my questions and not to ignore them by saying they are irrelevent .:P
 
. .
Actaually the main thing which we should seriously consider is that Bangladesh is not the part of India.
why! just because of ideology they have the same ideolody which is of Pakistan.

the lesson is there might be differences at times but the Binding Force among Pakistan and Bangladesh is "Two Nation Theory",Islam and "Ideology of Pakistan".We beleive that "Muslims of India" are our people b/c no one can deny their role in Creaion of Pakistan(East and West Pakistan).
 
.
1> Well is it not true that you are searching for a chance to make fun of pakistan.

You indicate that you have no perception of what is written. Please check my post before you slander.

You are a typical mutton headed individual who shoots off this mouth without reading the content!

Hello! I was talking about Salim and most "tigers"... the rest of the members are not opportunists bcuz they do not look for opportunities to pounce on ppl... i got u there! u do pounce on ppl... i thank you for ur comments about me and i must admit i am absolutely flattered.

it does not matter to me from which side you speak.

What mater is the content!
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom