toxic_pus
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 1,852
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
How many barracks? Well as many there were.OK. Barracks.
How many of these barracks were discovered or uncovered by Gen. Aurora's Indian troops. And how many people did they find in each?
How many people? Well, they found loads of half dead naked Bengali women tied to bed-posts. Does that count?
You do realise that dead bodies can be made to disappear simply by throwing them into rivers.
And how would one tell bullet casing, used for cold blooded murder from the one fired in war?That's even better for the evidence. Bullet casings in the barracks, and dead bodies close by, would have made it much easier for the Indian troops to record the atrocities.
So tell me or point me where is the Indian army records for this.
I can find similar records from WW2 where Jews suffered the holocaust (May Hitler burn in hell forever).
Surely the recording was much easier in 1971 compared to WW2. Point me to similar records by Indian army and I'll send bad sentneces towards Gen. Niazi and others.
As I said, you have creative rectum.Because we have to account for a very very large total of 3 million deaths here. This is why we have to look for very large grave sites. Simple mathematics thing.
Primary evidence of Rawandan genocide comes from graves.Yes. this can happen. But we have examples from Rawanda. Where a million bodies were thrown in rivers and still they were able to document the atrocities.
And have you seen Ganges during high tide?
If that is what it takes for a Pakistani to spit on Niazi and Tikkah's grave, then I have a pocket full of pity for you.You bring these numbers from Indian army, and I promise with you that I'll go spit on Niazi and Tikkah Khan's graves.
Thank You.