What's new

The ground under Hasina's feet is shifting: Hindustan Times

.
Looks like RAW is really unhappy with Hasina.

Are they going to assassinate her like they did her father?

They will need to find another Major Zia.
Well totally my opinion brother. I said it many times. Most of people remain unconvinced because of their pre conceived ideas of BB and Hasina as indian stooge!

But the reality is opposite! I wish Hasina will remain safe!
Indians have said so many times that CPEC will be a disaster. Now Indians are warning Bangladesh about their fake veneer.
Yes , disaster for India! Bangladesh doesn't give India a fuk!
 
Last edited:
.
Talking about your daughter? Oh God, these people amaze me with their "morality".


So your morality is to allow your daugher to have multiple partners before marriage to meet their physical demands ????? But not let them marry

Your morality is different to ours as we call those women whores.

Dont bring god into this, your scriptures also call them whores.
 
.
So your morality is to allow your daugher to have multiple partners before marriage to meet their physical demands ????? But not let them marry

Your morality is different to ours as we call those women whores.

Dont bring god into this, your scriptures also call them whores.

You are giving Indian trolls oxygen!!

Deny them oxygen and you know what happened during covid.

Best way to suffocate them is by denying them oxygen.
 
. . .
No we were having a discussion about religious matter.
Stop engaging with (as hindus call them) rice bag christian converts. They dont really know anything. Even experts from other religions rarely engage with ours...
 
Last edited:
.
RAW didn't kill BB nor will they kill Hasina. What/who is the alternative for them?
But, who killed BB if not RAW? BB was independent-minded which did not suit Indian interests. He would say yes or no on your face. India wanted to destabilize BD and take opportunities on the dissatisfaction of the people.

I personally do not believe a few Majors and Colonels would do such a crime without indirect support from another power. Some RAW mole in BD must have assured them of Indian support in the aftermath of BB killing.

I suspect it was Dehradun-trained General Ershad who was the mole. He was responsible also for the murder of President Zia.
 
.
@bluesky bhai - since Sanghis keep saying that India is such a land of milk and honey, I am beginning to seriously doubt my dissing their chest-beating. Maybe they ARE a superpower already - huh ?!?

I think I will take a trip to India again and maybe try to get an aadhar and ration card since Sanghis say it is so easy to get. Who can resist sarkari ration-ki-chawal and refined edible taila?

Bengali chetona culture is not that different from Indian culture in general.....it'll be super easy to blend in with some cultural tips...just have to perfect my head bobbing.
 
.
@bluesky bhai - since Sanghis keep saying that India is such a land of milk and honey, I am beginning to seriously doubt my dissing their chest-beating. Maybe they ARE a superpower already - huh ?!?

I think I will take a trip to India again and maybe try to get an aadhar and ration card since Sanghis say it is so easy to get. Who can resist sarkari ration-ki-chawal and refined edible taila?

Bengali chetona culture is not that different from Indian culture in general.....it'll be super easy to blend in with some cultural tips...just have to perfect my head bobbing.
India a land of honey and milk- my balls. It was Pakistan time when we used to see Indians wearing clothes that resemble mosquito nets. it means the clothes were very shoddy just like nets.

People there are the most misers of all the people of this world. As such, they have not changed a bit since then.

You will still see Indians wearing mosquito nets there. However, good luck to you when you visit that unclean misery land but do not get robbed or cheated by them.

No culture in India except that India still has many good singers.
 
.
But, who killed BB if not RAW? BB was independent-minded which did not suit Indian interests. He would say yes or no on your face. India wanted to destabilize BD and take opportunities on the dissatisfaction of the people.

I personally do not believe a few Majors and Colonels would do such a crime without indirect support from another power. Some RAW mole in BD must have assured them of Indian support in the aftermath of BB killing.

I suspect it was Dehradun-trained General Ershad who was the mole. He was responsible also for the murder of President Zia.
1. The people who took over in the next few months were all anti-India.
2. Foreign intervention was not necessary - BB had managed to piss off enough people within the country through misrule whereby such a bloody coup was only a matter of time.
3. Besides being anti-India, Khandaker Mushtaq was known to be pro-US. The US was not happy with BB's hob-knob with Soviet Union and pursuing a socialist agenda. The US had made famine worse in 1974 by witholding aid as they did not appreciate BB's closeness to Castro. It only made sense for them to help remove BB and install pro-US Mushtaq and Zia.
4. Besides being anti-India, Zia was pro-China. At that time in history, USA and China were largely aligned but anti-India. Why on Earth would India help Zia take over?
5. Ershad was not relevant in 1975. However, given the shameless character that he was, colluding with India to remove Zia in 1981 was not beyond him. India had no reason to like Zia.
 
Last edited:
.
1. The people who took over in the next few months were all anti-India.
It was expected by India. India wanted to remove BB and destabilize the country and get indirectly involved in our domestic matters. It is now controlling the ruling govt. So, India is successful

50 years after 1971 India is holding the Ace.
Foreign intervention was not necessary - BB had managed to piss off enough people within the country through misrule whereby such a bloody coup was only a matter of time.
This I agree but even then India wanted to press our neck.
.
3. Besides being anti-India, Khandaker Mushtaq was known to be pro-US. The US was not happy with BB's hob-knob with Soviet Union and pursuing a socialist agenda. The US had made famine worse in 1974 by witholding aid as they did not appreciate BB's closeness to Castro. It only made sense for them to help remove BB and install pro-US Mushtaq and Zia.
Kh. Mushtaque being anti-India was no matter to India. Its plan was first to destabilize BD. It happened exactly that way after 15 August.
4. Besides being anti-India, Zia was pro-China. At that time in history, USA and China were largely aligned but anti-India. Why on Earth would India help Zia take over?

Zia was probably not calculated by India. Nor Brig. Khaled Mudsharref. But, 7 November 1975 was another destabilization of the country. All these started after the killing of BB. Always situations were degrading.
The US was not happy with BB's hob-knob with Soviet Union and pursuing a socialist agenda. The US had made famine worse in 1974 by witholding aid as they did not appreciate BB's closeness to Castro. It only made sense for them to help remove BB and install pro-US Mushtaq and Zia.
Yes, the US was unhappy with BB for keeping a good relationship with the communist camp. But, I wonder who was the mole to influence what the Majors did. I do not think the US Ambassador called them on the phone and asked them to kill BB.

If it is India, Ershad was the mole. Finally, he was awarded the top post as a reward.
4. Besides being anti-India, Zia was pro-China. At that time in history, USA and China were largely aligned but anti-India. Why on Earth would India help Zia take over?
Why do you incessantly come up with Zia? Did he kill BB? Who told you that India helped Zia to take over? He was anti-Indian even during the liberation war. Everything India did, was to destabilize the country which really happened one after another, and India took more and more control over BD in a few years. India had/ has long-term plans.

5. Ershad was not relevant in 1975. However, given the shameless character that he was, colluding with India to remove Zia in 1981 was not beyond him. India had no reason to like Zia.
Ershad was more relevant to every affair from the killing of BB and then Zia than any other person in BD. He got his prize by being awarded the country's political power in 1981. Finally.

Ershad was the mole. Indian RAW studied his mean character fond of drinking and womanizing while he was in Dehradun to get military training. He was set as a mole and a substitute for the BAL party when BAL was forced out of power.
 
.
India was not involved in BB killing, you can make conspiracy theory about anything but they don't become true. It was likely the US because they thought BB could be socialist leaning, Zia colluded with them.
 
.
It was expected by India. India wanted to remove BB and destabilize the country and get indirectly involved in our domestic matters. It is now controlling the ruling govt. So, India is successful

50 years after 1971 India is holding the Ace.

This I agree but even then India wanted to press our neck.
.

Kh. Mushtaque being anti-India was no matter to India. Its plan was first to destabilize BD. It happened exactly that way after 15 August.


Zia was probably not calculated by India. Nor Brig. Khaled Mudsharref. But, 7 November 1975 was another destabilization of the country. All these started after the killing of BB. Always situations were degrading.

Yes, the US was unhappy with BB for keeping a good relationship with the communist camp. But, I wonder who was the mole to influence what the Majors did. I do not think the US Ambassador called them on the phone and asked them to kill BB.

If it is India, Ershad was the mole. Finally, he was awarded the top post as a reward.

Why do you incessantly come up with Zia? Did he kill BB? Who told you that India helped Zia to take over? He was anti-Indian even during the liberation war. Everything India did, was to destabilize the country which really happened one after another, and India took more and more control over BD in a few years. India had/ has long-term plans.


Ershad was more relevant to every affair from the killing of BB and then Zia than any other person in BD. He got his prize by being awarded the country's political power in 1981. Finally.

Ershad was the mole. Indian RAW studied his mean character fond of drinking and womanizing while he was in Dehradun to get military training. He was set as a mole and a substitute for the BAL party when BAL was forced out of power.
It makes no sense for India to install anti-India elements just for the sake of "destabilising" BD. As for Zia's involvement in removing BB, he was certainly involved in plotting. He did not get appointed COAS in August and again steal the limelight in November out of sheer coincidences.
Him going out of his way to indemnify the assassins and facilitate safe passage out of the country is further evidence of his involvement.
 
Last edited:
.
It makes no sense for India to install anti-India elements just for the sake of "destabilising" BD.
Did I ever tell you that India installed its puppet govt immediately after August 1975? I repeat 1975 was just a rehearsal to destabilize the country and ultimately install its puppet govt(s). You are talking about one year and India thinks long-term 100 years.

In the course of a few years, now, India has successfully installed its puppet govt in Dhaka without a real election. Do you remember General Moeen's visit to Delhi when he was in power (CTG)?

He was seeking Indian blessings to become the next President. He was bluffed both by Hasina and India, but the election overwhelmingly went in favor of the BAL party with the blessings of General Moeen.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom