What's new

Liberation War martyrs would exceed 30 lac: Mamun

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks to BAL's extremism & politics this may not ever be known. Even BNP or their ally JI will ever run a census fearing propaganda and backlash by these awami indian dalals. But truth always
prevails and falsehood and propaganda perishes in front of truth. I am sure some future gen will
dig out the truth and set history straight in its correct path. :)

@ Are bhai , it is already dig out. Only thing that AL and their God father does not allow the people to make them belief the truth.

@ Can you imagine how big the Indian media is ?????? And if you add those days Soviet Union and other Socialist Block countries. All these countries favoured/supported Bangladesh and Indian propaganda. Still they are playing the old outdated record.

Please provide any internet link or the name of book or newspaper (including date issue etc.) for William Drummond report.

@ Here is the link !!!!!! Behind the Myth of 3 million
 
.
If a Bangladeshi starts calling anyone who he does not like "rajakar" what can we assume about such people, paranoid? Affiliated or sympathetic to Awami League?

Akmal Bhai, thanks for that link. I saw comments of people there, many also want fresh investigation to settle this issue.

What about India's role in creating Awami League and backing Bengali nationalism? What about role of North East states, was Pakistan broken to save the North East? Was this a factor at all, along with reducing threat from 2-3 sides? Your kind comments please Akmal Bhai.
 
.
Awami and indian politics over dead bodies are exposed by none other than an indian. Read the Book review of Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose


----------------------------
Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose - review

A long-overdue study of Bangladesh's war of independence

Martin Woollacott

guardian.co.uk, Friday 1 July 2011 18.55 EDT


The eyes would widen and the head move from side to side in the striking Bengali gesture of affirmation. "How many were killed?" we would ask refugees who had fled from areas where the Pakistani army and its auxiliaries were attempting to suppress the Bangladesh independence movement. "Lakhs and lakhs!" came the answer. Journalists who covered the Bangladesh war in 1971 remember the phrase with a mixture of amusement and frustration. Lakh is the Indian word for 100,000, and it sometimes seemed as if the majority of Bengalis knew no other number, or, if they did, it was "crore" – ten million – at least when describing the atrocities and depredations of their West Pakistani oppressors. Reporters had no doubt that there were such atrocities. Some of them witnessed bloody incidents or their aftermath, but for the most part correspondents had to rely on the accounts of others. Between the protestations of the Pakistani military, for whom all Bengali deaths were those of "miscreants" or criminals, and the manifest exaggerations of inflamed and sometimes bereaved East Bengalis, it was difficult to steer a measured course.


Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War
by Sarmila Bose

The numbers mattered, and matter still, because they make the difference between seeing the war as a tragedy and seeing it as a terrible crime, indeed as a genocide. That in turn is important because it profoundly affects the way in which the peoples of South Asia understand both their separate and their common histories. Much that is both wrong and dangerous in the subcontinent today, from Pakistan's paranoia to India's extreme self-righteousness and Bangladesh's sense that it is neglected and ignored, can be traced to the 1971 conflict, even if the roots go back further still. Sarmila Bose's attempt to set the numerical record straight in her aptly named book is a contribution to a debate that ought to have taken place a long time ago but instead has hardly started. It is a grim kind of accountancy, because even when she concludes, as she often does, that fewer, sometimes far fewer, died than claimed, still we are dealing with murder, rape, unnatural deaths and the destruction of individuals and their families in a land that had joyously embraced the idea of Pakistan less than a generation before.

Her method is to take the worst of the alleged atrocities, and then to attempt to reconstruct and quantify them by interviewing the participants on both or, rather, all sides. She wove back and forth between Pakistan and Bangladesh, seeing mainly retired Pakistani officers in the west, and survivors of killings and their relatives in the east, as well as members of the non-Bengali and non-Muslim minorities. Bose (pictured) seems to have been the first to do this. It is a method not without its problems. My own feeling, remembering how charming Pakistani officers, like their Indian equivalents, can be, is that she may have been a bit too ready to accept the honourable, just-trying-to-do-our-duty image that those officers naturally prefer to convey, and that she may also be too convinced that the received wisdom needs to be entirely overturned. Yet when she underlines how stretched the Pakistani forces were, how unready they were for the role of suppression that was thrust on them, and how perplexed they were in the face of a Bengali hostility that seemed to them so disproportionate, what she writes rings very true.

Bose's case-by-case arithmetic leads her in the end to estimate that between 50,000 and 100,000 people died in 1971. One lakh, in other words, at most. One cannot say that she absolutely proves this, but her evidence points in that direction, and, in any case vastly away from the figure of 3 million still proclaimed in Bangladesh and India. The wider revision of the conflict's history she implies exonerates the Pakistani government of any plot to rule the east by force, suggests that the Bengali leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman let the genie of nationalism out of the bottle but could not control it, and insists that the conflict was a civil war within East Pakistan. The killings by Bengalis of non-Bengali minorities, of Bengalis who stuck with the idea of a united Pakistan, and even of some Hindu Bengalis – all of whose deaths were attributed at the time to the Pakistani army – needs to be reckoned in any fair balance. The notion that the Bangladesh movement was non-violent, even Gandhian, was always fantastical. Bose has written a book that should provoke both fresh research and fresh thinking about a fateful turning point in the history of the subcontinent.

Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose - review | Books | The Guardian
 
.
If a Bangladeshi starts calling anyone who he does not like "rajakar" what can we assume about such people, paranoid? Affiliated or sympathetic to Awami League?

Akmal Bhai, thanks for that link. I saw comments of people there, many also want fresh investigation to settle this issue.

What about India's role in creating Awami League and backing Bengali nationalism? What about role of North East states, was Pakistan broken to save the North East? Was this a factor at all, along with reducing threat from 2-3 sides? Your kind comments please Akmal Bhai.

@ Creating Awami Leaque

AL was created at its own force. It was some thing like, "Jole uthuc upon sakti te". In those days of British times the Muslim Leaque of Bengal were always led by Shurwardy. Most of the time he was elected as Mayor of Calcutta on Muslim Leaque ticket. He was also elected as Chief Minister of greater Bengal from 1946 to 1947 from ML ticket. He belongs to Indian Midnapur. On the other hand Muslim Leaque was created by the Nowabs of Dacca in 1906. So there was always a leadership clash between these two groups. both of them were Urdu speaking. During those days of partition this Shurwardy made a secret meeting with C R Bose to remain together(greater bengal) but soon it was leaked out. The pact was some thing like "Sociolist Republic of Bengal" to be remain with the greater domain of India. Once it was leaked out, it was vemently opposed by both ML and Congress. After this inccident the grip of Shurwardy on Bengal Muslim Leaque was lossen. Soon a parliamentary election was held to elect the future Chief Minister. In this election Khaja Nazimuddin was elected where he got something like 143 votes and Sharwady got some thing like 43 votes. After this election Shurwardy lost all interest about East Pakistan/ greater Pakistan. At that time General secretary was Abul Hashem (Bengal Muslim Leaque). Sk Mujib was the muslim student leader of Shurwady group at either Presidency College or Islamia Collage. So this group remained at Calcutta even after independance. Once Jinnah died Shurwardy landed at Kharachi. Abul Hashem came to Dacca after the riot of 1949/50 once his house was completely burned. In 1948 Shurwardy with other political leaders of West and east Pakistan made a first anti-govt political party in Pakistan as "Awami Muslim Leaque". Once East Pakistan Congress joined AL it dropped the name "Muslim" and renamed as "Awami Leaque". Since than it came under the Indian intelligence radar. Once language movement started every thing was financed by India specially our "Bangali Babus". The Hindu refugees which fled to West Bengal started to conspire how to dismember Pakistan. all sort of financial, material and intellectual helps started coming. Once Ayub started tilted towards China after 1965 war it was picked up by both RAW and CIA.

@ North East States. Most of these states were princely states under British rule. Insurgency was there even during British times. Once India was divided these insurgency started at the peak being helped by China and Pakistan. During Pakistan times there were lot of insurgency camps inside Bnagladesh. In Bandarban a whole Brigrade training facilities were arranged for them. There were few camps at Tangail(Mudhupur) also. During the Pakistan's times the Insugency was at peak. Even in West Bengal the "Nokshalist" Movement at west Bengal was at peak.
 
.
hmmm... Much dust of controversy is being raised. To me I know that I did not join a Large Group of Dhaka even having a very good offer. Bcoz. my best friend said to me" Will you go to serve a nation who slaughtered my uncle ,aunt and children (a peaceful worker at adamjee mills during 1971) and hate us most ?.... My question is that were the '' civil victims of Mukti butchery also included in surveys conducted by these "soft-hearted" awami representatives?
 
. .
Awami and indian politics over dead bodies are exposed by none other than an indian. Read the Book review of Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose


----------------------------
Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose - review

A long-overdue study of Bangladesh's war of independence

Martin Woollacott

guardian.co.uk, Friday 1 July 2011 18.55 EDT


The eyes would widen and the head move from side to side in the striking Bengali gesture of affirmation. "How many were killed?" we would ask refugees who had fled from areas where the Pakistani army and its auxiliaries were attempting to suppress the Bangladesh independence movement. "Lakhs and lakhs!" came the answer. Journalists who covered the Bangladesh war in 1971 remember the phrase with a mixture of amusement and frustration. Lakh is the Indian word for 100,000, and it sometimes seemed as if the majority of Bengalis knew no other number, or, if they did, it was "crore" – ten million – at least when describing the atrocities and depredations of their West Pakistani oppressors. Reporters had no doubt that there were such atrocities. Some of them witnessed bloody incidents or their aftermath, but for the most part correspondents had to rely on the accounts of others. Between the protestations of the Pakistani military, for whom all Bengali deaths were those of "miscreants" or criminals, and the manifest exaggerations of inflamed and sometimes bereaved East Bengalis, it was difficult to steer a measured course.


Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War
by Sarmila Bose

The numbers mattered, and matter still, because they make the difference between seeing the war as a tragedy and seeing it as a terrible crime, indeed as a genocide. That in turn is important because it profoundly affects the way in which the peoples of South Asia understand both their separate and their common histories. Much that is both wrong and dangerous in the subcontinent today, from Pakistan's paranoia to India's extreme self-righteousness and Bangladesh's sense that it is neglected and ignored, can be traced to the 1971 conflict, even if the roots go back further still. Sarmila Bose's attempt to set the numerical record straight in her aptly named book is a contribution to a debate that ought to have taken place a long time ago but instead has hardly started. It is a grim kind of accountancy, because even when she concludes, as she often does, that fewer, sometimes far fewer, died than claimed, still we are dealing with murder, rape, unnatural deaths and the destruction of individuals and their families in a land that had joyously embraced the idea of Pakistan less than a generation before.

Her method is to take the worst of the alleged atrocities, and then to attempt to reconstruct and quantify them by interviewing the participants on both or, rather, all sides. She wove back and forth between Pakistan and Bangladesh, seeing mainly retired Pakistani officers in the west, and survivors of killings and their relatives in the east, as well as members of the non-Bengali and non-Muslim minorities. Bose (pictured) seems to have been the first to do this. It is a method not without its problems. My own feeling, remembering how charming Pakistani officers, like their Indian equivalents, can be, is that she may have been a bit too ready to accept the honourable, just-trying-to-do-our-duty image that those officers naturally prefer to convey, and that she may also be too convinced that the received wisdom needs to be entirely overturned. Yet when she underlines how stretched the Pakistani forces were, how unready they were for the role of suppression that was thrust on them, and how perplexed they were in the face of a Bengali hostility that seemed to them so disproportionate, what she writes rings very true.

Bose's case-by-case arithmetic leads her in the end to estimate that between 50,000 and 100,000 people died in 1971. One lakh, in other words, at most. One cannot say that she absolutely proves this, but her evidence points in that direction, and, in any case vastly away from the figure of 3 million still proclaimed in Bangladesh and India. The wider revision of the conflict's history she implies exonerates the Pakistani government of any plot to rule the east by force, suggests that the Bengali leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman let the genie of nationalism out of the bottle but could not control it, and insists that the conflict was a civil war within East Pakistan. The killings by Bengalis of non-Bengali minorities, of Bengalis who stuck with the idea of a united Pakistan, and even of some Hindu Bengalis – all of whose deaths were attributed at the time to the Pakistani army – needs to be reckoned in any fair balance. The notion that the Bangladesh movement was non-violent, even Gandhian, was always fantastical. Bose has written a book that should provoke both fresh research and fresh thinking about a fateful turning point in the history of the subcontinent.

Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose - review | Books | The Guardian

Just went through the comments on this article. There are quite a few emotional Bangladeshi's trashing this book, because Sarmila got her evidence from Pakistan Army personnel and collaborators (rajakars). So I maintain that we need a completely neutral report, headed and funded by a neutral foreign organization.
 
.
Apparently, Sheikh Mujib said 3,000,000 by accident when he was going to say 300,000. Man, what a difference a single zero can make :rofl:
 
.
@ Creating Awami Leaque

AL was created at its own force. It was some thing like, "Jole uthuc upon sakti te". In those days of British times the Muslim Leaque of Bengal were always led by Shurwardy. Most of the time he was elected as Mayor of Calcutta on Muslim Leaque ticket. He was also elected as Chief Minister of greater Bengal from 1946 to 1947 from ML ticket. He belongs to Indian Midnapur. On the other hand Muslim Leaque was created by the Nowabs of Dacca in 1906. So there was always a leadership clash between these two groups. both of them were Urdu speaking. During those days of partition this Shurwardy made a secret meeting with C R Bose to remain together(greater bengal) but soon it was leaked out. The pact was some thing like "Sociolist Republic of Bengal" to be remain with the greater domain of India. Once it was leaked out, it was vemently opposed by both ML and Congress. After this inccident the grip of Shurwardy on Bengal Muslim Leaque was lossen. Soon a parliamentary election was held to elect the future Chief Minister. In this election Khaja Nazimuddin was elected where he got something like 143 votes and Sharwady got some thing like 43 votes. After this election Shurwardy lost all interest about East Pakistan/ greater Pakistan. At that time General secretary was Abul Hashem (Bengal Muslim Leaque). Sk Mujib was the muslim student leader of Shurwady group at either Presidency College or Islamia Collage. So this group remained at Calcutta even after independance. Once Jinnah died Shurwardy landed at Kharachi. Abul Hashem came to Dacca after the riot of 1949/50 once his house was completely burned. In 1948 Shurwardy with other political leaders of West and east Pakistan made a first anti-govt political party in Pakistan as "Awami Muslim Leaque". Once East Pakistan Congress joined AL it dropped the name "Muslim" and renamed as "Awami Leaque". Since than it came under the Indian intelligence radar. Once language movement started every thing was financed by India specially our "Bangali Babus". The Hindu refugees which fled to West Bengal started to conspire how to dismember Pakistan. all sort of financial, material and intellectual helps started coming. Once Ayub started tilted towards China after 1965 war it was picked up by both RAW and CIA.

@ North East States. Most of these states were princely states under British rule. Insurgency was there even during British times. Once India was divided these insurgency started at the peak being helped by China and Pakistan. During Pakistan times there were lot of insurgency camps inside Bnagladesh. In Bandarban a whole Brigrade training facilities were arranged for them. There were few camps at Tangail(Mudhupur) also. During the Pakistan's times the Insugency was at peak. Even in West Bengal the "Nokshalist" Movement at west Bengal was at peak.

Valuable treasure trove of info as always, thanks. Some links please, if any, for both of the above subjects.
 
.
@ Dear Atanz, to answer your above question is really very difficult and some times impossible.

@ It reminds me an old Indian song, " Kia sara dosh mere tha !!! kuch mere tha, kuch tumhara tha aur shahed ham dono ka tha ".

@ Remember one thing political crisis cannot be solved with "Yes or No" statement. You know as the version of present Indian and Bangladeshi media Bengalise used to hate the West Pakistanise specially Punjabise and the viz versa. But reality was different. I gave you one my practical examples of those days. In 1966, we used to stay at Rawalpindi. Every alternative years we used to come for vacation to East Pakistan via Lahore. On the way we used to do lot of shopping at Lahore with my father. Once in April 1966 I alone with my father went for shopping at Lahore. We bought lot of things from a shop as a gift for our relatives. After hurriedly shopping my father asked, "Kitna whowa bhai", the man replied, "Ap passand kijiye na bhai, kimat ka koi fikker mat kijiye ". My father thought that we were in a trap. He stopped marketing. Then the main shop owner came and gave a big "Salam" and said, "Kia whowa bhai, tusi Bangal ke rehney waley ho na jee? tusi lussi pioge yeh thanda ?". Miracally he took not a single penny from us and said " O badshao tusi ash koro jee, ashi Bangalio se paise nahi leyte ". "San paishat(65) ki jang me Bangalione Lahore ko bachaya tha Hindustanio se, ashi tumhara bhuhat shokar gojar hai ".

@ My dear friend Pakistan Army killed many many fellow Bengali army, Navy, and other para military forces while disarming them. While bringing "Law and Situation", they killed many innocent Bengalise even with barrage artillery fire. It is true that most of the Pakistani soldiers were illiterate and hardly had any idea about East Pakistani. They even could not pronounce " Identy Card". Most of them used to call "Tumhara danty card dekhao". However they were very loyel to their superior command.

@ In conclusion I will say, your politicians, your military command structure and other civil authorities completely failed to tackle the Eastern Crisis for which we are still suffering.

Thanks for the reply. I have no doubt as to what happened. I am more than certain that Pak Army was involved in mass murder. The chained fist was used without mercy. I also have no doubt that this was systemic. This was not as a result of some lone wolf operation or breakdown in command control. This mass murder was calculated and planned. It came from the highest levels of command.

There existed and I am afraid still does exist [whether people are prepared to be honest about this is a differant matter] prejudice within the Pakistani psyche against Bengali's. My position on Bengal is very simple. I don't think it should ever have been part of Pakistan. I don't think Allama Iqbal's original speach concieved Bengal being part of Pakistan. Independant yes but not part of the west wing. Even the Lahore resolution talks in plural as in 'states' as opposed to a state.

I had a debate with a chap about this not long ago. My view is that if Bengal was included in a united Pakistan then certain things should have been implicit. Since Bengal had larger population the capital should have been in Dhaka. How can a capital be in the minority wong? The civil service and military should have been almost 53% to 47% tilt in Bengali favour.

You have capital now, you have a military now. Why was this not possible in united Pakistan. The answer was it was possible but prejudice prevented the West Pakistan to accept this reality thus everything was done to frustrate this. The reason why I asked the questions as I did was I would imagine that Bengali views on 1971 should be unambiguoes but instead from what I can see it is far from that.

I do not accept the wild figures of 3 million, or even 300,000. Perhaps 50,000 is near the mark although I suspect we will never know the exact numbers. What is strange though is that without a shred of doubt more Bengali's have been killed by Pakistan than India but India seems to be hated. I find that rather surprising.

I mean the Indian's did help you guy's in getting your Bangladesh. No offence but I don't think that Bengali's alone would have defeated Pak Army. Of course like I often point out to the Indian's the Bengali's also fought so it was a joint effort. It was the combined effort of Bengali's and Indian's that brought Lt. Gen AAK Niazi to the table. On your independance should you guy's not also give the Indian's a chance to join your celebrations?
 
.
@ 4.2. The Inquiry Committee Report:

The Inquiry Committee seemed to have also failed Mujib in giving him the kind of truth he was after. The Government of Bangladesh never said a word about officially receiving the report, which was, as per as the original Gazette notification, due on or before 30 April 1972 or what happened to the Inquiry Committee's work.

On 6 June 1972, William Drummond reported:

"Since the third week of March, when the Inspector General's office in the Bangladesh Home Ministry began its field investigations, there have been about 2,000 complaints from citizens about deaths at the hands of the Pakistan Army have been received." [3]

Later, sources in Bangladesh reported that the draft report showed an overall casualty figure of 56,743. When a copy of this draft report was shown to the Prime Minister,

"he lost his temper and threw it on the floor, saying in angry voice 'I have declared three million dead, and your report could not come up with three score thousand! What report you have prepared? Keep your report to yourself. What I have said once, shall prevail."

Where are you quoting all these from ?

Whats your source ?
 
.
Where are you quoting all these from ?

Whats your source ?

Its this ebook.

http://www.storyofbangladesh.com/Articles/History/Behind%20the%20Myth%20of%203%20million.pdf

@ Your question reminds me your favorate song, " Hamko hami se choralo, dilpe kahi vi bethalo ".
Now try to look into ____

On 6 June 1972, William Drummond reported:


"Since the third week of March, when the Inspector General's office in the Bangladesh Home Ministry began its field investigations, there have been about 2,000 complaints from citizens about deaths at the hands of the Pakistan Army have been received." [3]

Later, sources in Bangladesh reported that the draft report showed an overall casualty figure of 56,743. When a copy of this draft report was shown to the Prime Minister,

"he lost his temper and threw it on the floor, saying in angry voice 'I have declared three million dead, and your report could not come up with three score thousand! What report you have prepared? Keep your report to yourself. What I have said once, shall prevail." [4]

Only the first quote is from William Drummond's article. The second quote is from an "unknown source" :angel:

Here's the William Drummond article,

Rz71J.jpg

LYVDJ.jpg


And lets not forget that William Drummond is an American journalist, so obviously would write in Pakistan's favour. Pakistan and America were quite the chums back then.
 
.
Just went through the comments on this article. There are quite a few emotional Bangladeshi's trashing this book, because Sarmila got her evidence from Pakistan Army personnel and collaborators (rajakars). So I maintain that we need a completely neutral report, headed and funded by a neutral foreign organization.
After Hamudur Rahman's judicial inquiry, it was only she (From Rationalist’s perspective) that made the field trip, collected samples/evidence, talked to witnesses etc. So, her dissemination out of close to scientific research as oppose to brainwashed lot's emotional hodge-podges should be weigh more IMO. And no, no Bangladeshi living at BD would ever dare to make such endeavor what she had done; despecially having RAWamy dalals at helm, thanks.
 
.
After Hamudur Rahman's judicial inquiry, it was only she (From Rationalist’s perspective) that made the field trip, collected samples/evidence, talked to witnesses etc. So, her dissemination out of close to scientific research as oppose to brainwashed lot's emotional hodge-podges should be weigh more IMO. And no, no Bangladeshi living at BD would ever dare to make such endeavor what she had done; despecially having RAWamy dalals at helm, thanks.

If you are talking about Sharmila Bose she just took HRC report and extrapolated the number from it. She never visited Bangladesh or talked with eye witness and victims, neither did HRC commission which constructed it's report based on log book entries of PA officers.

It doesn't matter to me actually but I happened to go through these reports in detail.


*Expecting an emotional outburst of name calling with keywords malaun, hindu, hanuman etc*
 
.
@ Creating Awami Leaque

AL was created at its own force. It was some thing like, "Jole uthuc upon sakti te". In those days of British times the Muslim Leaque of Bengal were always led by Shurwardy. Most of the time he was elected as Mayor of Calcutta on Muslim Leaque ticket. He was also elected as Chief Minister of greater Bengal from 1946 to 1947 from ML ticket. He belongs to Indian Midnapur. On the other hand Muslim Leaque was created by the Nowabs of Dacca in 1906. So there was always a leadership clash between these two groups. both of them were Urdu speaking. During those days of partition this Shurwardy made a secret meeting with C R Bose to remain together(greater bengal) but soon it was leaked out. The pact was some thing like "Sociolist Republic of Bengal" to be remain with the greater domain of India. Once it was leaked out, it was vemently opposed by both ML and Congress. After this inccident the grip of Shurwardy on Bengal Muslim Leaque was lossen. Soon a parliamentary election was held to elect the future Chief Minister. In this election Khaja Nazimuddin was elected where he got something like 143 votes and Sharwady got some thing like 43 votes. After this election Shurwardy lost all interest about East Pakistan/ greater Pakistan. At that time General secretary was Abul Hashem (Bengal Muslim Leaque). Sk Mujib was the muslim student leader of Shurwady group at either Presidency College or Islamia Collage. So this group remained at Calcutta even after independance. Once Jinnah died Shurwardy landed at Kharachi. Abul Hashem came to Dacca after the riot of 1949/50 once his house was completely burned. In 1948 Shurwardy with other political leaders of West and east Pakistan made a first anti-govt political party in Pakistan as "Awami Muslim Leaque". Once East Pakistan Congress joined AL it dropped the name "Muslim" and renamed as "Awami Leaque". Since than it came under the Indian intelligence radar. Once language movement started every thing was financed by India specially our "Bangali Babus". The Hindu refugees which fled to West Bengal started to conspire how to dismember Pakistan. all sort of financial, material and intellectual helps started coming. Once Ayub started tilted towards China after 1965 war it was picked up by both RAW and CIA.

@ North East States. Most of these states were princely states under British rule. Insurgency was there even during British times. Once India was divided these insurgency started at the peak being helped by China and Pakistan. During Pakistan times there were lot of insurgency camps inside Bnagladesh. In Bandarban a whole Brigrade training facilities were arranged for them. There were few camps at Tangail(Mudhupur) also. During the Pakistan's times the Insugency was at peak. Even in West Bengal the "Nokshalist" Movement at west Bengal was at peak.
Akmal Bhai, yours are the solid gold from the mine and you have almost put together all the pieces of the puzzle except saying that East PAK's Congress led by powerful Hindus that had link with Bharati intelligentsia called it quiet to join RAWamy League right away. So, it's not farfetched to say AL is a Bharati's product all together.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom