What's new

East Pakistani Soldiers during Operation Searchlight

BTW:

There's infighting within the FSA according to fresh reports.

The whole Shia-Sunni thing in the middle east is not a natural manifestation but an engineered one.

I think the Sunni-Shia thing is more of an Arab-Persian d*ck measuring contest that got out of hand & got embellished by two different religious view-points !

You need to study the history of Shia Sunni conflicts if you think it started with Saudi's and Iran's Mullahs. It did not. The European control of the planet put a lid to it, now that Euro's are going slowly out of the picture, the old conflict is flaring up again. Just like the Jews, the Shia's took advantage of the European interregnum. Once they are defeated and shown their place, only then, they will stop making trouble with their power grab.

Kalu Bhai, I'm friends with countless Shias - We're a very chill lot !

Let the Arabs & the Persians spar with each other till their heart's content...its them playing their dirty war in my country that bothers me to no end !
 
@Loki

Please clean up this thread and remove this Shia Sunni crap or create a new tread with Kalus perspective so that can be discussed. I don't believe Shia Sunni had anything to do with 1971 and there has not been anything produced so far that remotely furthers the discussion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the Sunni-Shia thing is more of an Arab-Persian d*ck measuring contest that got out of hand & got embellished by two different religious view-points !

That's a possibility.

The Persian Empire fought some pretty dire battles in the past. That got nothing to do with south and southeast Asia. Do we ever hear of sectarian violence within the Muslims of Russia? This aspect is unique in the middle east.

@Loki

Please clean up this thread and remove this Shia Sunni crap or create a new tread with Kalus perspective so that can be discussed. I don't believe Shia Sunni had anything to do with 1971 and there has not been anything produced so far that remotely furthers the discussion.

Agreed.

It's pretty off-topic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the Sunni-Shia thing is more of an Arab-Persian d*ck measuring contest that got out of hand & got embellished by two different religious view-points !

Kalu Bhai, I'm friends with countless Shias - We're a very chill lot !

Let the Arabs & the Persians spar with each other till their heart's content...its them playing their dirty war in my country that bothers me to no end !

So that is why you defend Shia's. I have Iranian Shia as my friend as well, but facts are facts, you cannot avoid them. It is not a Arab-Iran problem, it is a Muslim problem. Shia and Sunni can never unite, only solution is defeat of one side by the other.

There is 400 million Arabs in the world, majority Sunni and around 80 million Iranians, almost all Shia. Even from a practical long term business point of view, we would have to choose Arab Sunni over Shia Iran. And choosing our Sunni brothers is always better and safer than people who may try to convert or kill us, no?

And Shia's will always help their Shia brothers, while Sunni Arab brothers have been helping us.

In Pakistan, you need to defeat the Shia's, in Bangladesh, we do not have the problem of Shia dominance, luckily, but we need to keep them under watch, because they are the enemy within with a friendly face.
 
So that is why you defend Shia's. I have Iranian Shia as my friend as well, but facts are facts, you cannot avoid them. It is not a Arab-Iran problem, it is a Muslim problem. Shia and Sunni can never unite, only solution is defeat of one side by the other.

There is 400 million Arabs in the world, majority Sunni and around 80 million Iranians, almost all Shia. Even from a practical long term business point of view, we would have to choose Arab Sunni over Shia Iran. And choosing our Sunni brothers is always better and safer than people who may try to convert or kill us, no?

And Shia's will always help their Shia brothers, while Sunni Arab brothers have been helping us.

In Pakistan, you need to defeat the Shia's, in Bangladesh, we do not have the problem of Shia dominance, luckily, but we need to keep them under watch, because they are the enemy within with a friendly face.

Dude, why do I need to choose one over the other....why ?

The Sunni Arabs & the Shia Iranians can go shag a goat for all I care !

My concerns are whether the Muslims or Non-Muslim Pakistanis are getting to live a life of dignity with their fundamental rights, as defined by our society, protected or not ?

My concerns are how do we rid our society of the poison of sectarianism & extremism ?

My concerns are that how do we revive an ailing economy ?

My concerns are that how do we deal with our atrociously abysmal Governance ?

I'm not in the least bit bothered about the Shias & the Sunnis from the rest of the world fighting their ideological war ! I'm concerned about Pakistan & only Pakistan.

Besides for me its Turkey, China & Sri Lanka the countries that helped us the most - None of them is a Muslim State ! And our so-called Muslim Brothers have used & abused us to no-end...why then should I choose them at all ?
 
Okay back on topic please:coffee:

Ok, sorry to derail the thread. Back to topic.

Dude, why do I need to choose one over the other....why ?

The Sunni Arabs & the Shia Iranians can go shag a goat for all I care !

My concerns are whether the Muslims or Non-Muslim Pakistanis are getting to live a life of dignity with their fundamental rights, as defined by our society, protected or not ?

My concerns are how do we rid our society of the poison of sectarianism & extremism ?

My concerns are that how do we revive an ailing economy ?

My concerns are that how do we deal with our atrociously abysmal Governance ?

I'm not in the least bit bothered about the Shias & the Sunnis from the rest of the world fighting their ideological war ! I'm concerned about Pakistan & only Pakistan.

Besides for me its Turkey, China & Sri Lanka the countries that helped us the most - None of them is a Muslim State ! And our so-called Muslim Brothers have used & abused us to no-end...why then should I choose them at all ?

Could not help but answer it, really, and how much remittance you get from Turkey, China and SL put together?
 
Could not help but answer it, really, and how much remittance you get from Turkey, China and SL put together?

Not much but at least they've stood by me in my times of need nor do they have a fascist policy like the Kafeel system in place !
 
Not much but at least they've stood by me in my times of need nor do they have a fascist policy like the Kafeel system in place !

Not sure what Kafeel system is, but you did not answer the on topic part of the first post, here I will repeat it (just disregard the Shia words in it):

As for Operation Searchlight, Pakistani's don't waste your time in these threads. It was a mistake done by whoever planned it, their wrong decision broke off Pakistan, as simple as that. So don't come here and blame Bangladeshi's or our forefathers for it, we did not plan Operation Searchlight, it was some of your brilliant generals headed by the Shia scum Yahya Khan in consultation with crypto Shia Bhutto (wife Nusrat Ispahani is Iranian Shia). They are the traitors to Pakistan, not us. Major Zia declared independence as a reaction to your brilliant Shia planned Operation Searchlight, on 26th March, 1971, after that day all persona non grata foreign combatants here in our land and newly declared country were fair game. Non-combatant Bihari's and others were killed and these were war crimes, just like Operation Searchlight was.

As before, I call for a new investigation to unearth all facts from all sides, so we can put to rest all the BS from all sides. Now no one has any facts that will stand scrutiny.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...ng-operation-searchlight-7.html#ixzz2YroD9BlU
 
Finally a thread about 1971 with no trolls in it. Am blessed. Today is my lucky day. :yahoo::offpost:
 
@
kalu_miah

1. Let us look at the founding leaders of Pakistan.
a. Jinnah was born into the Punja sub sub sect of the Ismaili sub sect of the Shiah sect. The name, "Mohammad Ali" that his parents gave him is significant. He bore the name of the Holy Prophet as well as Hazrat Ali who is considered by the Shiahs as their first Imam. In his youth Jinnah was totally Anglicized in England. His attitudes changed, gradually first, but rapidly later when he came in contact with Muslim leaders and intellectuals. We must understand, Jinnah was highly intelligent and could grasp matters quickly. He was rational and the Message of Islam won him over in no time. Although he had his biological ties to Shiahs and was much under the influence of the Ismaili Imam Aga Khan, Jinnah followed the true course of a simple Muslim unencumbered with sectarian connections. Jinnah had Parsi Rutti converted to Islam and named Maryam before marrying her. When she died she was buried in the Muslim graveyard of Bombay with Islamic rites. And when his only child, Dina, decided to marry a non-Muslim, Jinnah simply disowned her. I am convinced to say that by the time Jinnah died, he had become a good Muslim by understanding the essence of Islam, its political philosophy, its economics and its ethics.
b. The next strong man Liaqat was a Shiah.
c. Nazimuddin was technically a Kshmiri Shiah but that family had really got absorbed into the mainstream of Bengalee Muslims hardly identifying themselves as Shiahs. The real power then lay in the hands of Ghulam Mohammad, a Qadiani, and Iskandar Mirza, a Shiah.

2. Ayub was the first Sunni strong man in Pakistan. When more research is done we will know whether there was a Shiah nexus to bring him down. In fact Ayub had made a fatal mistake to disbelieve Brig Ahmed's reports all along that there indeed was a conspiracy to throw him out of power. Ahmed, a close confidant and former MS(C) to Ayub had been appointed IB Chief.How can one rationalize starting Op Gibraltar without the knowledge of the other two Service Chiefs, top military commanders and senior political leaders, unless this was a conspiracy by Bhutto and Musa to oust Ayub? Both were Shiahs. And we must recall that any intention of Ayub to fight back in 1969 was given up when the Shah of Iran had advised him to go.

3. The Shah had dreams of becoming the Shahinshah of Iran -Pakistan. Did he encourage Yahya to crack-down on the Eastern wing with inevitable result? During the Persepolis celebrations he was keen that Pakistan withdraws from the East. His idea was to have a consolidated kingdom of Irano-Pak!!!

4. Then came Bhutto, a Rajput Shiah.

5. Gen Zia and Nawaz were/are Sunnis coming in between / after Sihahs Benazir and Zardari. Mush, with a Qadyiani wife, can be called a half-Qadyinai although he belongs to a Syed family.

6. Pre-1971 Shiah-Sunni tension was unheard of in Pakistan. The schism of Shiahs began as something political, not spiritual. The conflicts and killings that we witness these days is the result of political issues that have been exploited by enemies of the Muslims and Islam who control the media and command endless resources. And this assault on us is not limited to Pakistan only.
 
Dunno someone had recently posted on this thread & so I checked it out ! :oops:

Phir aaj rozaa rakhaaa ? :azn:

At any rate I think the Bangladeshis themselves exhibit a deep sense of intellectual dishonesty when they make Pakistan (West Pakistan) & more so the Punjabi to be 'evil incarnate' out to get the poor Bengali !

Were there issues ? Yes...the Bengalis weren't a bunch of idiots who rose up in protest ! Yes there were issues....there were massive issues but they should be looked at in a particular context !

Right now I haven't the figures but, if I remember correctly, when I was reading Brian Coloughley's (can't spell it) Book on the Pakistan Army, he'd quoted figures about Bengali, Punjabi & Pukhtoon Representation in the British Indian Army & those figures, well before Pakistan, were deeply...deeply skewed in favor of the Punjabis & by Pukhtoons by a factor of 4 to 1 or something & if both the Punjabis & the Pukhtoons are to be added together that factor increase to closer 8-9 to 1 ! The Brits didn't trust the Bengalis after the 1857 War & the Riots in Bengal due to the Reversal of its Partition - How could Pakistan, a country suffering from grave misgovernance, nepotism & corruption, be expected to bring parity to an ethnicity that had suffered closer to a century of institutionalized disparity.

Furthermore I've read numerous times, from independent sources, how what became East-Pakistan was just a hinterland of Calcutta where all the Jute Mills & the Progress was concentrated around Calcutta & when Calcutta was gone there wasn't a single Jute Mill in all of East-Pakistan in '47 ! Thats even worse than the disparity between Interior Sindh & Karachi or the Southern most tip of Punjab & Lahore !

Did people truly believe that these problems would be wished away painlessly without hicups ? That somehow East-Pakistan would grow about 10 dozen Jute Mills, that the Centers of Learning & other Institutions that were lost to West-Bengal & more so Calcutta would pop up out of the ground ?

The Bengali-Urdu Controversy wasn't done in Good Faith Either - No other language made sense; no other language was impartial enough to be the National Language of the Country ! And they, despite, been given the right to have Bengali as their official language in the Province (as elucidated in the Quaid's speeches) still played the ethnic & linguistic card to the detriment of Pakistan's Unity ! Imagine if the Punjabis or the Baloch or the Pukhtoons had asked that their languages be made the National Language of the country by the same token ?

At the end they've still not recognized that whatever killings we did, their Mukhti Bahini & enraged Bengali Mobs weren't exactly kind & merciful to West-Pakistani Civilians & the Biharis there ! I've heard of personal accounts, I've met people, who've lost their entire families to these Mobs ! And they have the temerity of claiming the moral high ground ? On what basis ?

Apart from the war part where s$it happens you still have the arrogance that ignited the spirit of separatism among the masses here back then... no offense :) .

Why are Bihari's victimized in Bangladesh?

Such as :what:?
 
I will inject a little sectarian facts.

Muslim League leadership was dominated by Shia Nawab family of Dhaka. Jinnah was Shia, married to a Parsi. Yes he was secular, but so are many Shia, except when it comes to remaining clannish and helping their own kind. Jinnah's sponsor's were Shia for the project Pakistan. Many of them moved to both parts of Pakistan and became the 22 industrial families of Pakistan. Iskander Mirza (Sirajuddaula, Mir Jafar et al were all Shia). A good chunk of the so called "Bihari" were Shia. @Md Akmal is not a Bihari, I believe he is a Bengali, he can state his home district to confirm.

So Shia got an entrance to South Asia due to Humayun's defeat with Sher Shah and subsequent help he received from Safavi's in Iran. I believe the result was a disaster for the Muslim community in South Asia. The Shia became dominant in subsequent Mughal administration, from Mumtaj Mahal (of Taj Mahal fame) to Murshid Quli Khan, who moved the capital from Dhaka to Murshidabad. I believe they not only weakened the Mughal empire and saw its demise, they also collaborated with the British, like Mir Jafar, Ismaili Aga Khani's and Dhaka Nawab's and got fabulously wealthy as a result.

They were instrumental in creating Pakistan, thinking that Pakistan will remain their personal clan property to enjoy, but East Pakistan broke off, because they failed to foresee the result of their actions and eventually they lost Pakistan as well, when Bhutto was deposed by Zia. Yes Benazir Bhutto's mother is an Iranian Shia, so is Zardari family.

And Yahya Khan, the butcher, was a Qizilbash Shia, one of the most reviled group of people in Sunni Muslim history who helped establish the Safavi dynasty in present day Azerbaijan and then expand itself in Iran and then convert the largely Sunni population there to Shia by force.

It is a sordid history, Bangladeshi's and Pakistani's need to know it, because it is a hidden part many of us do not know about very clearly. Arab's have been dealing with the trecherous Shia for 1400 years. So Arab Sunni's know them and their ways much better. From Lebanon Civil War to post Saddam Iraq and now in Syria, the Shia Mafia with help from Russian Mafia are killing Sunni's.

Shia is the enemy within much more dangerous than any other enemy, because they claim to be part of us, but they are anything but.

Many posters in this forum are Shia, some cannot hide it well, but others will hide it well. And they will work to weaken unity of Sunni Muslim communities of the world. They will show off as secular when they are weak, but the moment they gain upper hand, they will show their true sectarian face.

As for Operation Searchlight, Pakistani's don't waste your time in these threads. It was a mistake done by whoever planned it, their wrong decision broke off Pakistan, as simple as that. So don't come here and blame Bangladeshi's or our forefathers for it, we did not plan Operation Searchlight, it was some of your brilliant generals headed by the Shia scum Yahya Khan in consultation with crypto Shia Bhutto (wife Nusrat Ispahani is Iranian Shia). They are the traitors to Pakistan, not us. Major Zia declared independence as a reaction to your brilliant Shia planned Operation Searchlight, on 26th March, 1971, after that day all persona non grata foreign combatants here in our land and newly declared country were fair game. Non-combatant Bihari's and others were killed and these were war crimes, just like Operation Searchlight was.

As before, I call for a new investigation to unearth all facts from all sides, so we can put to rest all the BS from all sides. Now no one has any facts that will stand scrutiny.

@asad71, your kind input needed here please, provided that you yourself are not Shia, hopefully. Please state your sect for the benefit of the majority Sunni community in Bangladesh.

Thanked for the bottom part not for the racist comment upper. You seem to be diverting very natural instinct of human being to sectarian divide. There are some places where human being act selfish, no point making it sectarian. Abusing Mir Jafar for his treacherous act and crying for Sirajuddoula both go for 2 Shia guys. The inner story is Mir Jafar had to take the path of deception because Siraj was a stupid 22-year old inept ruler didn't have any respect to others. Anyway, these were All the King's Men Stories that happened thousand times in the history of human being, all of them were not Shia :) .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting subject.I shall comeback with my input. Like all Bengalee Muslims I am a Sunni which I had realized only when I was 11 and had to fill-up a form for inter-wing passport. I had not known there were other sects in Islam.

What does this mean....did pre-71 Pakistan have different passports for 2 wings and inter-wing for whole?
 
OK... now that I don't agree with.... it was actually created by the feudals for the feudals, for better share of water resources. Thank you chacha Quaid. :rolleyes:

Perfectly said by the feudals for the feudals masked with for the people by the people :) .
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom