MERCILESS MAYHEM - The Bangladesh Genocide through Pakistani Eyes

[Skies]

By the mean time, here is a Bangladeshi Pakistani supporter in BD wearing a cap with Pakistani flag! On youtube

 

[Avicenna]

By the mean time, here is a Bangladeshi Pakistani supporter in BD wearing a cap with Pakistani flag! On youtube

View attachment 551756

Please guys let’s stop this back and forth bickering.

BD and PK people are not enemies.

Rather brothers.

There was conflict in the past but other countries have had problems in the past also but are now allies.

i.e. US and UK or France and UK

The point is countries have gotten over past conflict in the face of current geopolitics.

In the case of BD and PK I agree there isn’t a confluence of interests which would ally the two nations however I argue there needs to be cooperation between all Muslim nations given the current environment of anti Islam sentiment present in many seemingly disparate countries of the world.

 

[Black_cats]

I like how these bengalis think that the idea of Pakistan originated in the swamps of Bangladesh and so they have some sort of relevance. Let's just say it did, even then If the true Pakistani people, the people of the highlands did not support this idea. Then the people of the swamps wouldnt have been able to do Jack Sh*t

Look at your face in the mirror where your PM running from country to country with a begging bowl before calling other country Swamps which is ahead of Pakistan in almost all indicators. Is there even a doubt from where idea of a Muslim country in South Asia even originated? If I am not mistaken you lot supported Congress during election. Isn’t it?

 

[Pakhtoon yum]

Look at your face in the mirror where your PM running from country to country with a begging bowl before calling other country Swamps which is ahead of Pakistan in almost all indicators. Is there even a doubt from where idea of a Muslim country in South Asia even originated? If I am not mistaken you lot supported Congress during election. Isn’t it?

That's cute sweatheart, but it's called business, have u seen the amount of money America or any of the other "wealthy" countries owe to other countries?
Regarding u being ahead, well that's a big HA

 

[Rusty]

we didn't go out of our way to learn urdu or hindi for that matter....
our language is older than hindi and as all of these stem from a sanskrit root... it's easy for us to grasp by watching a few movies....
your govt. wanted us to stop speaking bangla altogether... and look what happened... people in pakistan, like for example punjabis still prefer to speak their lanuage over urdu at home....
if there's one thing i learnt over the years, you can't enforce your beliefs, religion, culture or language on someone else to follow, if they're not willing to accept it themselves

Do you actually believe your nonsense?
You can't be that stupid.
In the breath you say we wanted you to stop speaking Bengali, then right after you say punjabis still prefer to speak Punjabi..... Proving no one was forced to stop speaking their language.

No one forced you to do Jack shit!
You people wanted youre language to be supreme and we wanted a neutral language that was not native to the land so no one ethnicity was supreme.

So again, why speak Urdu when you already speak you superior language?

 

[Aasimkhan]

How many time we need to say there were paramilitary forces, Razakars, Al Badr, Al Shams and other local collaborators. The genocide was carried out by combination of all. Please stop blabbering of this 33k soldier. If I am not mistaken there were 45-50k soldiers and rest were paramilitary.

Al badr and al shams were all men of great character and they were very good Muslims and God fearing ones. They were mostly bengalis fighting to keep Pakistan united.their character assassination by drunkards like Muheeb is unacceptable

now you're showing your true class. stop with the projecting behavior and killing your daughters for fornicating... incestual relationships are encouraged in your culture not mine... we don't marry in family between cousins. nor do we face much genetic defects from such inbreeding.
now calm your tits and stop barking


we don't go about torturing and repressing our women... be they the trash of the society or religious cultured women... we treat them all the same. unlike y'all who end up killing your daughters and throwing acid on them.
speaking of family values... pfft... want to bark more?

@Avicenna @UKBengali @bd_4_ever @Bilal9

You started talking about mother's sisters and daughters, I didn't. This shows your upbringing.

Look at your face in the mirror where your PM running from country to country with a begging bowl before calling other country Swamps which is ahead of Pakistan in almost all indicators. Is there even a doubt from where idea of a Muslim country in South Asia even originated? If I am not mistaken you lot supported Congress during election. Isn’t it?

From where ever the idea originated the on ground fact is that Pakistan is an Islamic republic where as Bangladesh is socialist republic

 

[SIPRA]

I like how these bengalis think that the idea of Pakistan originated in the swamps of Bangladesh and so they have some sort of relevance. Let's just say it did, even then If the true Pakistani people, the people of the highlands did not support this idea. Then the people of the swamps wouldnt have been able to do Jack Sh*t

This ridiculous narrative, that the idea of Pakistan was originated in Bengal, has no historical basis, whatsoever. The idea of a separate homeland, for Muslims, came out of the discussions, held by All India Muslim League, throughout India, for the major part of 1939, and has no association with any city or region, except of course Lahore, where, incidentally, 1940 Resolution was tabled and passed. Even, this resolution could have been presented, in any other city.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Please guys let’s stop this back and forth bickering.

BD and PK people are not enemies.

Rather brothers.

There was conflict in the past but other countries have had problems in the past also but are now allies.

i.e. US and UK or France and UK

The point is countries have gotten over past conflict in the face of current geopolitics.

In the case of BD and PK I agree there isn’t a confluence of interests which would ally the two nations however I argue there needs to be cooperation between all Muslim nations given the current environment of anti Islam sentiment present in many seemingly disparate countries of the world.

Lol........Pakistanis and bengalis are NOT brothers and sisters.........

bangladesh is TOO far and different from us to have anything to do with one another.

16 pages and 233 posts, yet NO ONE has been able to find ANY proof that the PA committed war crimes in 1971. "0" evidence.

 

[Black_cats]

Lol........Pakistanis and bengalis are NOT brothers and sisters.........

bangladesh is TOO far and different from us to have anything to do with one another.

16 pages and 233 posts, yet NO ONE has been able to find ANY proof that the PA committed war crimes in 1971. "0" evidence.

Unless you are deaf and dumb, plenty of evidence was provided including CIA estimate, news report from 1971, videos.

It appears you like to bury your head in the sands, please continue to do so.

US Embassy even in April, 1971 said in cable genocide is going on in Bangladesh and showed displeasure for US support for Pakistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_Blood#The_Blood_telegram

The Blood Telegram (April 6, 1971), sent via the State Department's Dissent Channel, was seen as the most strongly worded expression of dissent in the history of the U.S. Foreign Service.[4][5] It was signed by 20 members of the diplomatic staff.[2] The telegram stated:

Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities. Our government has failed to take forceful measures to protect its citizens while at the same time bending over backwards to placate the West Pak[istan] dominated government and to lessen any deservedly negative international public relations impact against them. Our government has evidenced what many will consider moral bankruptcy,... But we have chosen not to intervene, even morally, on the grounds that the Awami conflict, in which unfortunately the overworked term genocide is applicable, is purely an internal matter of a sovereign state. Private Americans have expressed disgust. We, as professional civil servants, express our dissent with current policy and fervently hope that our true and lasting interests here can be defined and our policies redirected in order to salvage our nation's position as a moral leader of the free world.

— U.S. Consulate (Dacca) Cable, Dissent from U.S. Policy Toward East Pakistan, April 6, 1971, Confidential, 5 pp. Includes Signatures from the Department of State. Source: RG 59, SN 70-73 Pol and Def. From: Pol Pak-U.S. To: Pol 17-1 Pak-U.S. Box 2535
[6]

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Unless you are deaf and dumb, plenty of evidence was provided including CIA estimate, news report from 1971, videos.

It appears you like to bury your head in the sands, please continue to do so.

US Embassy even in April, 1971 said in cable genocide is going on in Bangladesh and showed displeasure for US support for Pakistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_Blood#The_Blood_telegram

The Blood Telegram (April 6, 1971), sent via the State Department's Dissent Channel, was seen as the most strongly worded expression of dissent in the history of the U.S. Foreign Service.[4][5] It was signed by 20 members of the diplomatic staff.[2] The telegram stated:

Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities. Our government has failed to take forceful measures to protect its citizens while at the same time bending over backwards to placate the West Pak[istan] dominated government and to lessen any deservedly negative international public relations impact against them. Our government has evidenced what many will consider moral bankruptcy,... But we have chosen not to intervene, even morally, on the grounds that the Awami conflict, in which unfortunately the overworked term genocide is applicable, is purely an internal matter of a sovereign state. Private Americans have expressed disgust. We, as professional civil servants, express our dissent with current policy and fervently hope that our true and lasting interests here can be defined and our policies redirected in order to salvage our nation's position as a moral leader of the free world.

— U.S. Consulate (Dacca) Cable, Dissent from U.S. Policy Toward East Pakistan, April 6, 1971, Confidential, 5 pp. Includes Signatures from the Department of State. Source: RG 59, SN 70-73 Pol and Def. From: Pol Pak-U.S. To: Pol 17-1 Pak-U.S. Box 2535
[6]

Again, the above source is conjectural at best. Too many metaphors and no facts. WHERE in the above source does it prove/confirm that 3 million bengalis were killed by the PA in 1971?

 

[Black_cats]

Again, the above source is conjectural at best. Too many metaphors and no facts. WHERE in the above source does it prove/confirm that 3 million bengalis were killed by the PA in 1971?

US Diplomats does not send confidential telegram based on conjectural to state department. Not only that this is report by a Pakistani itself during July, 1971 which eposed brutal killing and genocide to the whole world who witnessed it with his own eyes.

Bangladesh war: The article that changed history
By Mark DummettBBC News

• 16 December 2011

On 13 June 1971, an article in the UK's Sunday Times exposed the brutality of Pakistan'ssuppression of the Bangladeshi uprising. It forced the reporter's family into hiding andchanged history.

Abdul Bari had run out of luck. Like thousands of other people in East Bengal, he had made the mistake - the fatal mistake - of running within sight of a Pakistani patrol. He was 24 years old, a slight man surrounded by soldiers. He was trembling because he was about to be shot.

So starts one of the most influential pieces of South Asian journalism of the past half century.

Written by Anthony Mascarenhas, a Pakistani reporter, and printed in the UK's Sunday Times, it exposed for the first time the scale of the Pakistan army's brutal campaign to suppress its breakaway eastern province in 1971.

Nobody knows exactly how many people were killed, but certainly a huge number of people lost their lives. Independent researchers think that between 300,000 and 500,000 died. The Bangladesh government puts the figure at three million.

The strategy failed, and Bangladeshis are now celebrating the 40th anniversary of the birth of their country. Meanwhile, the first trial of those accused of committing war crimes has recently begun in Dhaka.

Watershed moment

Key defendants

Article that changed history

Foreign journalists had already been expelled, and Pakistan was also keen to publicise atrocities committed by the other side. Awami League supporters had massacred tens of thousands of civilians whose loyalty they suspected, a war crime that is still denied by many today in Bangladesh.

Eight journalists, including Mascarenhas, were given a 10-day tour of the province. When they returned home, seven of them duly wrote what they were told to.

But one of them refused.

Yvonne Mascarenhas remembers him coming back distraught: "I'd never seen my husband looking in such a state. He was absolutely shocked, stressed, upset and terribly emotional," she says, speaking from her home in west London.

"He told me that if he couldn't write the story of what he'd seen he'd never be able to write another word again."

Clearly it would not be possible to do so in Pakistan. All newspaper articles were checked by the military censor, and Mascarenhas told his wife he was certain he would be shot if he tried.

Pretending he was visiting his sick sister, Mascarenhas then travelled to London, where he headed straight to the Sunday Times and the editor's office.

Image captionIndians and Bengali guerrillas fought in support of East Pakistan
Evans remembers him in that meeting as having "the bearing of a military man, square-set and moustached, but appealing, almost soulful eyes and an air of profound melancholy".

"He'd been shocked by the Bengali outrages in March, but he maintained that what the army was doing was altogether worse and on a grander scale," Evans wrote.

Mascarenhas told him he had been an eyewitness to a huge, systematic killing spree, and had heard army officers describe the killings as a "final solution".

Evans promised to run the story, but first Yvonne and the children had to escape Karachi.

They had agreed that the signal for them to start preparing for this was a telegram from Mascarenhas saying that "Ann's operation was successful".

Yvonne remembers receiving the message at three the next morning. "I heard the telegram man bang at my window and I woke up my sons and I was: 'Oh my gosh, we have to go to London.' It was terrifying. I had to leave everything behind.

"We could only take one suitcase each. We were crying so much it was like a funeral," she says.

To avoid suspicion, Mascarenhas had to return to Pakistan before his family could leave. But as Pakistanis were only allowed one foreign flight a year, he then had to sneak out of the country by himself, crossing by land into Afghanistan.

The day after the family was reunited in their new home in London, the Sunday Times published his article, under the headline "Genocide".

'Betrayal'
It is such a powerful piece of reporting because Mascarenhas was clearly so well trusted by the Pakistani officers he spent time with.

I have witnessed the brutality of 'kill and burn missions' as the army units, after clearing out the rebels, pursued the pogrom in the towns and villages.

I have seen whole villages devastated by 'punitive action'.

And in the officer's mess at night I have listened incredulously as otherwise brave and honourable men proudly chewed over the day's kill.

'How many did you get?' The answers are seared in my memory.

This was one of the most significant articles written on the war
Mofidul Huq, Liberation War Museum
His article was - from Pakistan's point of view - a huge betrayal and he was accused of being an enemy agent. It still denies its forces were behind such atrocities as those described by Mascarenhas, and blames Indian propaganda.

However, he still maintained excellent contacts there, and in 1979 became the first journalist to reveal that Pakistan had developed nuclear weapons.

In Bangladesh, of course, he is remembered more fondly, and his article is still displayed in the country's Liberation War Museum.

"This was one of the most significant articles written on the war. It came out when our country was cut off, and helped inform the world of what was going on here," says Mofidul Huq, a trustee of the museum.

His family, meanwhile, settled into life in a new and colder country.

"People were so serious in London and nobody ever talked to us," Yvonne Mascarenhas remembers. "We were used to happy, smiley faces, it was all a bit of a change for us after Karachi. But we never regretted it."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-16207201

 

[UKBengali]

Please guys let’s stop this back and forth bickering.

BD and PK people are not enemies.

Rather brothers.

There was conflict in the past but other countries have had problems in the past also but are now allies.

i.e. US and UK or France and UK

The point is countries have gotten over past conflict in the face of current geopolitics.

In the case of BD and PK I agree there isn’t a confluence of interests which would ally the two nations however I argue there needs to be cooperation between all Muslim nations given the current environment of anti Islam sentiment present in many seemingly disparate countries of the world.

Pakistan needs to make a full and unconditional apology for good relations.

 

[Avicenna]

Lol........Pakistanis and bengalis are NOT brothers and sisters.........

bangladesh is TOO far and different from us to have anything to do with one another.

16 pages and 233 posts, yet NO ONE has been able to find ANY proof that the PA committed war crimes in 1971. "0" evidence.

Let me also add Nigerian Muslims and Bosnian Muslims are also brothers.

Also, if you call yourself a Muslim I suggest you try to understand that concept.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

US Diplomats does not send confidential telegram based on conjectural to state department. Not only that this is report by a Pakistani itself during July, 1971 which eposed brutal killing and genocide to the whole world who witnessed it with his own eyes.

Bangladesh war: The article that changed history
By Mark DummettBBC News

• 16 December 2011

On 13 June 1971, an article in the UK's Sunday Times exposed the brutality of Pakistan'ssuppression of the Bangladeshi uprising. It forced the reporter's family into hiding andchanged history.

Abdul Bari had run out of luck. Like thousands of other people in East Bengal, he had made the mistake - the fatal mistake - of running within sight of a Pakistani patrol. He was 24 years old, a slight man surrounded by soldiers. He was trembling because he was about to be shot.

So starts one of the most influential pieces of South Asian journalism of the past half century.

Written by Anthony Mascarenhas, a Pakistani reporter, and printed in the UK's Sunday Times, it exposed for the first time the scale of the Pakistan army's brutal campaign to suppress its breakaway eastern province in 1971.

Nobody knows exactly how many people were killed, but certainly a huge number of people lost their lives. Independent researchers think that between 300,000 and 500,000 died. The Bangladesh government puts the figure at three million.

The strategy failed, and Bangladeshis are now celebrating the 40th anniversary of the birth of their country. Meanwhile, the first trial of those accused of committing war crimes has recently begun in Dhaka.

Watershed moment

Key defendants

Article that changed history

Foreign journalists had already been expelled, and Pakistan was also keen to publicise atrocities committed by the other side. Awami League supporters had massacred tens of thousands of civilians whose loyalty they suspected, a war crime that is still denied by many today in Bangladesh.

Eight journalists, including Mascarenhas, were given a 10-day tour of the province. When they returned home, seven of them duly wrote what they were told to.

But one of them refused.

Yvonne Mascarenhas remembers him coming back distraught: "I'd never seen my husband looking in such a state. He was absolutely shocked, stressed, upset and terribly emotional," she says, speaking from her home in west London.

"He told me that if he couldn't write the story of what he'd seen he'd never be able to write another word again."

Clearly it would not be possible to do so in Pakistan. All newspaper articles were checked by the military censor, and Mascarenhas told his wife he was certain he would be shot if he tried.

Pretending he was visiting his sick sister, Mascarenhas then travelled to London, where he headed straight to the Sunday Times and the editor's office.

Image captionIndians and Bengali guerrillas fought in support of East Pakistan
Evans remembers him in that meeting as having "the bearing of a military man, square-set and moustached, but appealing, almost soulful eyes and an air of profound melancholy".

"He'd been shocked by the Bengali outrages in March, but he maintained that what the army was doing was altogether worse and on a grander scale," Evans wrote.

Mascarenhas told him he had been an eyewitness to a huge, systematic killing spree, and had heard army officers describe the killings as a "final solution".

Evans promised to run the story, but first Yvonne and the children had to escape Karachi.

They had agreed that the signal for them to start preparing for this was a telegram from Mascarenhas saying that "Ann's operation was successful".

Yvonne remembers receiving the message at three the next morning. "I heard the telegram man bang at my window and I woke up my sons and I was: 'Oh my gosh, we have to go to London.' It was terrifying. I had to leave everything behind.

"We could only take one suitcase each. We were crying so much it was like a funeral," she says.

To avoid suspicion, Mascarenhas had to return to Pakistan before his family could leave. But as Pakistanis were only allowed one foreign flight a year, he then had to sneak out of the country by himself, crossing by land into Afghanistan.

The day after the family was reunited in their new home in London, the Sunday Times published his article, under the headline "Genocide".

'Betrayal'
It is such a powerful piece of reporting because Mascarenhas was clearly so well trusted by the Pakistani officers he spent time with.

I have witnessed the brutality of 'kill and burn missions' as the army units, after clearing out the rebels, pursued the pogrom in the towns and villages.

I have seen whole villages devastated by 'punitive action'.

And in the officer's mess at night I have listened incredulously as otherwise brave and honourable men proudly chewed over the day's kill.

'How many did you get?' The answers are seared in my memory.

This was one of the most significant articles written on the war
Mofidul Huq, Liberation War Museum
His article was - from Pakistan's point of view - a huge betrayal and he was accused of being an enemy agent. It still denies its forces were behind such atrocities as those described by Mascarenhas, and blames Indian propaganda.

However, he still maintained excellent contacts there, and in 1979 became the first journalist to reveal that Pakistan had developed nuclear weapons.

In Bangladesh, of course, he is remembered more fondly, and his article is still displayed in the country's Liberation War Museum.

"This was one of the most significant articles written on the war. It came out when our country was cut off, and helped inform the world of what was going on here," says Mofidul Huq, a trustee of the museum.

His family, meanwhile, settled into life in a new and colder country.

"People were so serious in London and nobody ever talked to us," Yvonne Mascarenhas remembers. "We were used to happy, smiley faces, it was all a bit of a change for us after Karachi. But we never regretted it."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-16207201

Again, too much conjecture and NO facts. You are providing non-verifiable opinion pieces. To date, NO bengali has EVER been able to provide ANY facts or evidence which prove the PA committed war crimes in 1971. The fact that the bengali/indian government NEVER requested a UN war crimes tribunal against the PA speaks volumes in itself. Almost to the point where it absolves the PA or any wrong doing.

PS You do realize that 27 years before 1971, it took millions of Nazis and their collaborators accross Europe, 6 years to kill 6 million Jews. Yet here we are suppose to believe that 50,000 PA soldiers killed 3 million bengalis in 2 months in 1971.

 

[SIPRA]

Please guys let’s stop this back and forth bickering.

BD and PK people are not enemies.

Rather brothers.

There was conflict in the past but other countries have had problems in the past also but are now allies.

i.e. US and UK or France and UK

The point is countries have gotten over past conflict in the face of current geopolitics.

In the case of BD and PK I agree there isn’t a confluence of interests which would ally the two nations however I argue there needs to be cooperation between all Muslim nations given the current environment of anti Islam sentiment present in many seemingly disparate countries of the world.

To some degree, you have got it. Real reason, for a lack of proper reconciliation, between Bangladesh and Pakistan, is that they are, to a large extent, irrelevant to each other; though, they can, of course, have voluntary cooperation, in many areas. Otherwise, both the countries could have found some means for due resolution of their past. You see, in Pakistan, I hardly hear any body discussing Bangladesh. I am sure, same would be true in Bangladesh.

Regarding your last paragraph, I appreciate your sentiments. But, again, I think that the geopolitical, commercial and trade considerations, of the countries, have become far more relevant and important, than any religious bond.