Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jay
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hongkongfuey
Just a few who took part in the discussions on the 1971 war. They look pretty important to me, not like the quacks you keep quoting. All you do is quote journalists many of whom arent independent, they have vested interests.
Hey moron, all my quotes were indeed from that meeting and US Foreign policy archives. are you smoking crack? when did I keep quoting journos?
|
Moron, read over the report again. There is documentary evidence that Pakistani Army was systematically killing innocents. I believe in US Consular and foreign policy archives than your scholars, coz those were first hand reports received from US Consul office from Bangladesh. |
Which report? Can you show me one not written by a Bangladeshi, not written by an Indian, and not written by a journalist with a vested interest such as Aubrey Menon or Simon Dring? Just one would be a start. Archie Blood seemed to have changed his mind, and he was the one who was heading the campaign in 1971 to get Nixon's attention. Some other politicians relied on his reports, which he now says werent true. Just one independent, reliable, neutral observer would be a start, and then we can worry about the figures, but not some eagle that can see thousands of people mown down all over the place like they were all standing in line to be shot even though they were running away - You're totally confused on this.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jay
Quote:
|
Why dont you get it through your heads, they have not done a head count, they are guessing, they cannot distinguish between Biharis and Bengalis and it was the Bengalis that slaughtered the Biharis not the Pakistan Army.
|
Moron, read over the report again. There is documentary evidence that Pakistani Army was systematically killing innocents. I believe in US Consular and foreign policy archives than your scholars, coz those were first hand reports received from US Consul office from Bangladesh. |
The US Consul-General WAS ARCHIE BLOOD!!!! How difficult is it to understand. Jezus H Christ.
Someone rescue me, this is getting ridiculous, i feel like a teacher
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jay
Quote:
|
But some of your quotes say thousands were mown down in the first few days (ref 73).
|
If you burnt down 25 blocks, then the numbers would indeed be in 1000's. |
If you burnt down 25 blocks with people fleeing the scene as your quote says, you probably wouldnt have anybody remaining in the blocks. Would you remain in them while they're being torched? Dont answer that Jay..
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jay
Quote:
|
Apparently reference 73 are news reports!! You call news reports evidence????? They could have been written by a Bengali, even a member of Mukti Bahini!!!! Do you not know about impartiality?
|
So?? News reports are not sources?? They were news report presented in US Congress. Impartiality? Actually Nixon was supporting Pakistan all the way, so if its partial, it would be siding against Pakistan. |
Well news reports written by people about an event that happened to them are bound to be biased? It's a stretch of the imagination to see this, i know but try.
If country X invades country Y, do you think country Y is going to likely give a fair and balanced view of what country X is doing?
The last bit about Nixon makes no sense, though Nixon was supporting Pakistan. Nixon did not present reports to the US Senate you dolt!! DUhhh!
I think this was the time when he described Indians as slimy, treacherous, the most goddam aggresive bastards in south asia, and i can see why.