Tweet
Originally posted by lemontree
-
Lol!!!! You obviously cannot read. Here is the reference for Major General Qureishi, Maj. Gen. H. A. Qureishi, The 1971 Indo-Pak War, (2003), p. 16-17. In other words, she didnt interview him, this was taken from his book. DUH!! -
Systematic analysis, my foot. You nor Bose can refute the article by Joe Galloway. He was in Bangladesh when the $hit happened. Did Bose happened to be there as well?Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
So Kissinger and Nixon fought month long combat which includes killing of hundreds and thousands of people using tanksand mortar??There's no doubt that Blood wasnt liked by Nixon for what he said. He was summoned. The 20 US officials were later demoted by Kissinger. Nixon went so far as to describe Blood as a pansy or something, because he hadnt seen war before, and so everything was grossly exagerrated.
No, he did not exactly say that. He still said that there was selective genocide happening in Pakistan. Even in his memoirs he did not refute the telegrams that he sent to the State dept. So your arguement that Blood revised his earlier statements is vanilla BS .But Blood states in his 2002 memoirs, which he wrote well after the Nixon administration that there was no genocide in East Pakistan.A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!Comment
-
Actually you are wrong.Originally posted by lemontree
Maj Gen Hakeem Arshad Qureshi commanded an infantry battalion in East Pakistan through the 1970 general election, the civil war in East Pakistan and the 1971 war with India. He retired from the army in 1990 when he was appointed member of the Punjab Public Service Commission, a position he held till 1995. The 1971 Indo-Pak war: a soldier's narrative
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showthread.php?t=82839Last edited by Hongkongfuey; 14 Sep 05,, 15:39.Comment
-
There are stray incidents and the men are taken to task. You can find numerous links on that too. In Kashmir, its mostly propaganda gobbled up by the human rights pinkos. There is no state sponsored terrorism in J&K, but it exists in Balistan.Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
Where you blind to read the atrocities (read rapes and killings) by jihadis, and security forces (read arrest under POTA (like the Patriot act), searches and detentions).
Link does not work.
All medical facilities treating militants are targetted. Nothing wrong in that.
Link does not work
Where does it state genocide in any web link?Some more on the renegade militant secret police in Kashmir :-
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/kashmi...7.htm#TopOfPage
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/defenders.htm
http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C...24004651F6?Open
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/impunity.htm
Cheers!...on the rocks!!Comment
-
Noone said it was genocide. I didnt. It's gross human rights violations in my opinion, and definitely a case of war crimes.Originally posted by lemontreeComment
-
I dont expect you to understand this since you have the brain of an antOriginally posted by Jay
. It's really quite simple. Joe Galloway = one man. Did he have satellite imagery access to view Bangladesh when the war was going on? NO. He was one man, most likely couped up in a bomb proof embassy underground, who just heard of alleged incidents from people.
Samila Bose carried out thousand of case studies of Bangladeshis post war, asking them cleverly thought out questions to determine how much of the reporting during and after the war was nonsense. And she found significant differences between her sampling and those of what was reported.
Actually he did refute that there was a genocide in East Pakistan. He said there was selective targeting of Hindus, but how does he know? Can he tell the difference between a Bengali Hindu and a Bengali Muslim, because I cannot.Originally posted by Jay
If he's going on the figures of refugees, a lot of the Hindu refugees left, in part because Bengali Muslims and non Bengali Muslims were trying to obtain their properties. This was again nothing to do with the Pakistani Army.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ray
Ray, That will be the biggest insult of your life,if he calls you sir.What's the difference between people who pray in church and those who pray in casinos?
The ones in the casinos are serious.
Comment
-
I assumed that he was a serving Maj Gen in 1971.Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
Was he one of the infamous SSG battalion commanders? It is mentioned that he commanded an SSG bn in Bangladesh. There was no SSG bn commander in 1970/71 by that name in Bangladesh.Maj Gen Hakeem Arshad Qureshi commanded an infantry battalion in East Pakistan through the 1970 general election, the civil war in East Pakistan and the 1971 war with India.Last edited by lemontree; 14 Sep 05,, 12:45.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!Comment
-
Will not stand up in any court. Those guilty have already been punished.Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
Cheers!...on the rocks!!Comment
-
It doesnt mattr, how large our brain, let it be a size of a foot ball, its the intelligence that counts and you are as good as an amoeba.Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
Joe Galloway was one man. But he had access to several other people whicl the genocide was happening. Now did Sarmila bose had satellite imagery access to Bangladesh? Was she prsent in Bangladesh during genocide??It's really quite simple. Joe Galloway = one man. Did he have satellite imagery access to view Bangladesh when the war was going on? NO.
But still the interviews he had were not fake.He was one man, most likely couped up in a bomb proof embassy underground, who just heard of alleged incidents from people.
Here he says it,
For the better part of a day I listened to men and women who wept as they told how parents, siblings, even children had died in Dhaka and in towns from Chittagong to Naryanganj to the hill country tea plantations. When my plane lifted off from Dhaka I began banging out a lead I still remember:
"Fear, fire and the sword are the only things holding East and West Pakistan together ... "
Now, he is not an ordinary jounalist, who has never seen war and killings. This is his bio,
http://www.nsc.org/news/jg100702.htmJoseph Galloway is a journalist, but not just any journalist. He has reported on wars and revolutions from places like Vietnam, Laos, Sri Lanka, India, East Timor, Bangladesh and Iraq for 42 years. During the course of his foreign postings, he served four tours as war correspondent in Vietnam.
Galloway has been decorated with a Bronze Star Medal Of Valor for rescuing wounded solders under fire in the Ia Drang Valley in 1965. His is the only Medal of Valor the U.S. Army awarded to a civilian for actions during the Vietnam war.
General Norman H. Schwarzkopf called Galloway "the finest correspondent of our generation -- a soldier's reporter and a soldier's friend."
Samila Bose carried out thousand of case studies of Bangladeshis post war, asking them cleverly thought out questions to determine how much of the reporting during and after the war was nonsense. And she found significant differences between her sampling and those of what was reported.
For the better part of a day I listened to men and women who wept as they told how parents, siblings, even children had died in Dhaka and in towns from Chittagong to Naryanganj to the hill country tea plantations. When my plane lifted off from Dhaka I began banging out a lead I still remember:So, just becoz you cannot say the difference does not mean that Joe cannot say the difference. Your IQ is getting in to single digits now. Kepp continuing this trend, its getting funnier to read!Actually he did refute that there was a genocide in East Pakistan. He said there was selective targeting of Hindus, but how does he know? Can he tell the difference between a Bengali Hindu and a Bengali Muslim, because I cannot.A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!Comment
-
Duh!! it goes in one ear out out something else doesnt it Jay?Originally posted by Jay
Samila Bose's report = hundreds or thousands of case studies over a three or four year period
Joe Galloway = For the better part of one day listened to men and women telling stories of how their loved ones died, not even neccesarily by the Pakistani Army, could have been Biharis or Razakhars.
Yes yes, and i'm sure the people Joe Galloway had access to were not Mukti Bahini or Bangladeshis wanting an independent country.Comment
-
Last 4 linksOriginally posted by lemontree
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/kashmir....htm#TopOfPage
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/defenders.htm
http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C4...4004651F6?Open
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/kashmir/impunity.htm
Other link that didnt work
http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/docu...2569A500714D22Comment
-
Amnesty is a neutral, well reputed human rights organization with not as much bias as the Brownmillers or Drings that you quote from. It says that the Indian Army covers up the killings they do. Only a very small proportion of the guilty Indian soldiers are punished. The rest have virtual imupunity. I'm sure Amnesty's evidence, or that of Human Rights Watch would never be thrown out of court unless it was an Indian one.Originally posted by lemontree
Attempted cover-up
The government has sought to cover up torture and deaths in custody, rather than ensuring that effective, independent investigations are carried out and that the perpetrators are brought to justice.
Despite the assurances of the Minister of State for Home Affairs that custodial deaths would be investigated, official investigations are extremely rare. In the few cases in which they have reportedly been held, their outcome is either not known or investigations were held by members of the security forces themselves and not by an independent body. Dismissing the allegations, such inquiries often concluded, without specifying the evidence, that the person died "in cross-fire". The human rights cell established in June 1994 by the Jammu and Kashmir state government is reportedly headed by an Inspector General of Police who is also in charge of the Kashmir intelligence service. The cell also incorporates members of the paramilitary forces and the army who themselves stand accused of committing grave violations of human rights(10). Not surprisingly, the human rights cell has found most of the allegations of human rights violations to be "false and misleading" and "inspired by militants". It has not stated on what grounds it based these conclusions. Amnesty International has not received a satisfactory response to any of the 28 allegations of deaths in custody in Jammu and Kashmir raised in its previous report on torture and custodial deaths (see Chapter III). The organization does not know of a single case where an investigation has been conducted by an independent and impartial authority into a report that someone has allegedly died in custody as a result of torture
It is possible -- as in any situation of armed conflict -- that armed separatist groups and their sympathizers have inflated reports of deaths in custody for propaganda purposes. However, it is essential in cases where the government's investigation finds that this has occurred, that the evidence for this conclusion is presented. To dismiss allegations of deaths under torture without making public the evidence diminishes the credibility of government findings. It also makes a mockery of the government's expressed intention to take human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir seriously.
The government has responded to well-documented reports of torture resulting in death by stating that "there is no policy to carry out torture of detainees in Jammu and Kashmir" and suggesting that "often such reports are circulated to deflect attention from terrorist activities". India's Ambassador in Bonn did so in response to Amnesty International's urgent appeal on behalf of Manzoor Ahmed Ganai (Case 176, Appendix I), a farmer and embroidery worker from Wakoora, Ganderbal. Arrested on 7 January 1993 with 16 other young men from his village during a "crackdown" by the army's 10 Bihar Regiment, he was held for three weeks and tortured for 10 days in Mansabal army camp. He said that he was given electric shocks, was beaten with sticks and guns and was trampled on by soldiers. He said that soldiers set light to his legs with paraffin and that he was suspended upside down by the feet for around 24 hours until he lost consciousness. He was released on 27 January 1993 and immediately taken to the Bone and Joint Hospital, Barzulla, Srinagar, where both his lower legs had to be amputated. He had developed gangrene. He died three weeks later. A medical examination reportedly revealed that death was due to renal failure, which Kashmiri doctors often relate to the after-effects of torture (see Chapter III).
According to an Amnesty International medical expert who examined photographs of Manzoor Ahmed Ganai's legs before amputation, there were clear marks on his ankles which were consistent with the tying of ropes around the ankles. A doctor who treated him in Srinagar said that he could have been saved had he received timely medical treatment. India's Ambassador assured Amnesty International on 19 March 1993: "We are ascertaining the facts of the case and a further communication will follow". But there was no further communication. Nor, as far as Amnesty International is aware, was any investigation carried out.
Manzoor Ahmed Ganai recovering in the Bone and Joint Hospital, Srinagar, in February 1993, from the amputation of his lower legs necessitated by army torture. He died within weeks
His legs before amputation show peripheral discoloration and deep circular skin lesions just above the ankle, marks consistent with the torture allegations. He was suspended by his feet for many hours.
Attempts by relatives of victims to bring complaints against the security forces have persistently been frustrated. The first step which relatives have to take is to register a complaint with the local police, who are obliged in law to take their statement down in writing in a First Information Report (FIR) (see Chapter IV). However, lawyers allege that the local police have been secretly instructed to refuse to register complaints of human rights violations without first obtaining permission from higher authorities. They cite an order from the Superintendent of Police (South Srinagar), dated 4 April 1992: "If there is any misdemeanour by the security forces during search operations or otherwise... FIRs should not be lodged without approval of higher authorities". This instruction clearly contravenes Indian law.
Complaints to the courts seeking to ensure that the security forces investigate allegations of custodial killings or produce the "disappeared" in court have routinely been ignored by the government to whom they are addressed. The pattern of official non-compliance with court orders in such cases in Jammu and Kashmir has been criticized by High Court judges themselves and has been described in other Amnesty International reports(11) and by civil liberties groups in the state (see Chapter IV).
http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/docu...2569A500714D22
Virtual impunity
The government has given different figures at different times on action taken against members of the security forces for alleged human rights violations. The government told Amnesty International in November 1992 that action had been taken against 230 members of the security forces. In July 1993 it revised that figure downwards to 135. However, a year later it claimed that as of 20 May 1994 action had been taken against 174 members of the security forces. Seventy of these 174 actions resulted in terms of imprisonment imposed on 15 members of the army, 40 members of the BSF and 15 members of the CRPF. Of these 70 prison sentences, the majority (55) were of less than a year's duration. Only 15 members of the security forces were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of one year or more.
Amnesty International welcomes the publication of this information. It shows that the government does not wish its security forces to remain entirely immune from prosecution for committing human rights violations. The few prosecutions that have taken place establish the important principle of accountability for human rights violations. However, unfortunately, they bear no relation whatsoever to the gravity and persistence of the numerous human rights violations that have been reported in Jammu and Kashmir during the last four years. Moreover, the government continues to refuse to provide any information about the type of offences for which the 174 punishments were imposed, the identity of the security forces involved, and the incidents to which the punishments relate. From other information provided by the government, it appears that at least half of the 15 terms of imprisonment of one year or more were imposed following convictions for rape. None of these punishments are known to have been imposed on any members of the security forces for torturing and killing hundreds of suspects in custody(12).
This is not surprising since laws in force in Jammu and Kashmir allow the security forces to operate with virtual impunity (see Chapter IV). They assist the government in shielding the perpetrators of these grave human rights violations from prosecution. Section 7 of the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act provides that unless previous approval has been obtained from the central government, "No prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted.. against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers of the Act". Members of the UN Human Rights Committee examined India's periodic report about its observance of the rights guaranteed in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 1991. They felt that this particular provision was highly dangerous in that it encourages violations of the right to life. Committee members recommended its prompt review. However, to date the government has failed to conduct a review or to bring provisions of the act which clearly contravene international human rights standards in to line with India's obligation to protect human rights, notably the right to life.
http://www.amnestyusa.org/women/docu...2569A500714D22Comment
-
As I always say, you always crap all around the forum as if you talk by your @SS!Originally posted by Hongkongfuey
So you are blind now
Archer blood, Joe Galloway and 20 other US Consul officials vouch that Pakistani Army was at a killing spree killing civilians in Dhaka. they were the eye witness, I believe in them, rather than some report by some Professor after 20 years.Samila Bose's report = hundreds or thousands of case studies over a three or four year period
[quote]Joe Galloway = For the better part of one day listened to men and women telling stories of how their loved ones died, not even neccesarily by the Pakistani Army, could have been Biharis or Razakhars.[/COLOR]
Check out Joe's column, he has specifically said Pakistani Army killed people.
Joe Galloway interviewd American consul employees. Other American Consul officials are neither Mukti Bagini nor people who wished for independent BD, rather they were Americans. so you point is moot.Yes yes, and i'm sure the people Joe Galloway had access to were not Mukti Bahini or Bangladeshis wanting an independent country.A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!Comment
-
From Samila Bose's report, it saysOriginally posted by Jay
You can read it for yourself. Operation Searchlight was a bid to crush the rebellion swiftly. There were of course going to be casualties. It did not work, as Niazi himself said later. It was poorly executed by Tikka Khan. However, Bose's report states all this - it's being objective. Archie Blood got some of his reports from the Indian High Commissioner, but regardless of this, he changed his mind or revised it as he put it and said that no genocide was committed during 1971. He was clearly wrong in his Telegram of the 27th March, 1971, and he admitted it in his memoirs.3. Military Action: Operation Searchlight, 25-26 March
The extraordinary restraint of the army under provocation was totally
reversed with the launch of military action with 'Operation Searchlight'
during the night of 25-26 March. The operation was aimed at both Dhaka and
the rest of the province and included the arrest of political leaders,
disarming of potentially disloyal Bengali personnel in the police and
army, and crushing the militant rebellion by force. Two target areas in
Dhaka were Dhaka University, considered by the government to be the hotbed
of militants, and parts of old Dhaka. In the action in the university, I
draw a distinction between the attack on student halls and that on faculty
quarters.
a. Attack on Dhaka University student halls
In the usual Bangladeshi depiction, the army is accused of attacking
the student halls and killing unarmed students residing there. For
instance, Kaliranjan Shil, the survivor from Jagannath Hall, describes the
residents as 'nirastra' - unarmed.[9] However, a recording of army
communications during the attack made by a Bengali and made available to
me by the Liberation War Museum in Dhaka, supports the army version of a
two-way battle, but reveals it to have been a very unequal one, with .303
rifle fire from the halls, and no evidence of automatic weapons or
grenades.[10]
A vivid description of the attack on Jagannath Hall given to me by an
eye-witness, Rabindra Mohan Das, who lived in the staff quarters on the
grounds, corroborates the massive use of force by the army, and also the
killing of unarmed staff. According to Lt. Gen. Kamal Matinuddin's
account, the officer in overall command of this attack - then Brigadier
Jehanzeb Arbab - admitted "over-reaction and over-kill by the troops under
his command."[11]
The military action under 'Operation Searchlight', undertaken on 25-26
March by the newly arrived governor General Tikka Khan, was condemned by
Lt. Gen. A. A. K. Niazi, who arrived in April as commander of the Eastern
Command, as a violation of the mission and equivalent to the
Jallianwalabagh massacre in the Punjab by the British in 1919, which made
his task of regaining control of the province infinitely harder by
provoking widespread mutiny among Bengali officers and men and turning
virtually the entire population hostile.[12] In another evidence of a
difference of opinion within the army about the execution of this
operation, Nazrul Islam, then a student at the Art College, has written
about how a group of soldiers shot him and two others in their hostel next
to the EPR camp on 26 March, only to be followed by a second group of
soldiers who expressed shock that they had been shot, gave them water and
encouraged the two of them still alive to seek help and live.[13]
b. Killing of Dhaka University faculty
During the attack on the university, several faculty members and adult
male members of their family were dragged out of their apartments and
shot. This must necessarily be placed in a different category from the
battle at the student halls. Eye-witness accounts of the case of one of
the victims, Professor Jyotirmoy Guhathakurta, is provided by Professor
Guhathakurta himself - as he lived for four days before succumbing to his
injuries, as well as the memoirs of his wife and the testimony of his
daughter to me.
In a confusing pattern, while soldiers attempted to break down the
doors to all apartments, two out of the five faculty members then residing
in the same building were killed while the other three were not.[14] In
response to my question whether the army had a specific list of faculty
members they were looking for, the then Secretary of the National Security
Council, Maj. Gen. Ghulam Umar, expressed his view that there was no
specific list.[15] However, the Guhathakurta family testifies to the
officer asking for a specific person by name. Professor Guhathakurta said
that he was asked his name and religion before being shot. The other
faculty killed was Professor Maniruzzaman, along with his son, nephew and
another young man from his apartment.[16]
c. Attack on areas of old Dhaka
The attack on 26 March on areas of old Dhaka like Shankharipara, a
single narrow lane specializing in the 'shankha' (conchshell) business,
has yet to yield a clear reason for its targeting, unless the fact of it
being a Hindu business area was the sole reason. US Consul-General in
Dhaka, Archer Blood, sent a situation report on 27 March, citing the
Indian Deputy High Commissioner's view of a "large number of casualties"
in this area. Mascarenhas has written, without citing any source, that "In
Shankaripatti an estimated 8000 men, women and children were killed when
the army, having blocked both ends of the winding street, hunted them down
house by house."[17] This description is entirely false.
Eye-witnesses and survivors of the attack on Shankharipara on 26 March
testify that about 14 men and one child (being carried by his father) were
killed inside a single house that day. The father and child who were
killed - Chandan and Buddhadev Sur - are one of my case-studies. The
soldiers did not go house to house. Other residents who remained inside
their homes survived and within a couple of days everyone fled the area,
mostly to go to India, returning only after the independence of
Bangladesh.[18]
http://www.drishtipat.org/1971/sarmila_paper.html
And how did other American Consul employees know the exact situation on the ground? Were they venturing out into the streets of Dhaka at this time? It's not an important point anyway. The Blood Telegrams are Irrelevant now. Archie Blood himself stated that they were incorrect in that the term used, genocide, was wrong during 1971 - There was no extermination ordered contrary to his initial Telegram. All these people, Archie Blood, Joe Galloway, they all agreed on the Blood Telegram at the time (27th March, 1971), which turned out to be an exagerration.Originally posted by JayLast edited by Hongkongfuey; 14 Sep 05,, 21:50.Comment
Comment