Falsehoods Galore

Bangladesh relives the horror of 1971 war after mass grave find

DHAKA, Aug 15 (AFP) - Nearly three decades after its independence war, Bangladesh has been given a grisly reminder of a massacre of its people carried out by Pakistani troops and their

Bangladeshi collaborators.

Since the discovery of a previously unknown mass grave on July 27, hordes of people, including writers, television and film stars, students and relatives of the dead, have crowded the muddy site

in Mirpur.

Bangladesh`s leading poet Shamsur Rahman said after visiting the grave: ``These people who committed the murders did not have a heart nor any humanity in them.

``I think some of the killers are still here and if found and pressed, a lot can emerge about the atrocities carried out in this area.``

Home Minister Mohammad Nasim, speaking to local residents Friday, said ``they (Pakistanis) and their local collaborators surpassed all records of brutality.

``The killers of 1971 must be tried,`` he declared, echoing a popular demand by war veterans, victims` families and cultural groups.

Bangladesh, then known as East Pakistan, became independent after a nine-month war in 1971.

After the latest find, a fact-finding committee led by M.A. Hassan, a doctor and war veteran, contacted the International Court of Justice in the Hague and prepared a draft case.

``I don`t want a trial of the Pakistanis as they are not here, but of those, the collaborators ... who helped in the genocide,``

local resident Mithun said. The discovery of more mass graves dating from the war was likely,

sources said.

Witnesses to mass executions have guided investigators to possible sites of further graves, but most were scared to go public, possibly because the area was still dominated by Urdu-speaking Biharis, officials said.

Biharis migrated to the area after the 1947 partition of the Indian sub-continent. They were against Bangladesh`s independence and refused to accept Bangladeshi citizenship.

Hasan said a forensic study of remains found in the grave showed some were beheaded or chopped to pieces, while others were tortured and shot.

Witness Fakir Shahabuddin said he identified at least seven ``large`` mass graves in Mirpur soon after independence.

``Bengalis have collected 1,000 scattered skulls from some parts of Mirpur and gave them to the government,`` he said.

The Museum and a War Crimes Fact-finding Committee led by Hasan have appealed to witnesses to come forward and a map was being prepared on the basis of eyewitness reports.

Army Chief Lieutenant General M. Mustafizur Rahman, a decorated war veteran, sent in his troops last week to help in the digging.

``It is our first such experience,`` said one trooper, as he worked along with labourers in the muddy 15-foot deep grave, with monsoon

rains making conditions difficult.

``More remains are almost a certain after we go deeper ... the area around the well was a swamp, which was filled up later,`` one official said.

By Friday, parts of weapons and ammunitions from the dig marked POF or ``Pakistan Ordinance Factory`` had been found at the site, along with six skulls and some 800 bones -- the remains of 20 people.

The grave, a deep sealed well, came to light after workers building an extension to a mosque discovered skulls and bones. The Museum declared it a war grave more than a week ago.

The Mirpur and Mohammadpur areas were under the control of Pakistani collaborators until the end of January, 1972 -- 45 days after the war ended on December 16, 1971.

A number of mass graves have been found in Mirpur and the surrounding area since. Three million people died in the nine-month war.

Re: mitr, Reply #113

As per the history books, the name `Pakistan` was

given by a fundamentalist muslim ideologue, Rehamat Ali. He was probably the first exponent

of a separate state for the Indian muslims. The

name had nothing to do with the provinces that now make up Pakistan. For, according to Rehmat Ali,

all the provinces, and even districts, with muslim majority would constitute Pakistan. So, the parts of supposed new state would be littered all over

the British India. Rehmat Ali was too militant for the likes of Iqbal and Jinnah and, was dejected and disappointed and exiled himself in England. However, Jinnah and the Muslim League did follow R. Ali`s lead in naming the muslim nation as Pakistan. Even then Jinnah had no idea which provinces actually will end up in Pakistan. BTW,

NWFP was never considered as Afghanistan, or vice versa. And what about Bengal? Muslim League was claiming the whole of Bengal as a part of Pakistan. Pakistan meant land of pure or pure land to Rehmat Ali as he was a staunch religious believer, and in Islam evertyhing unIslamic, by definition,is impure.

Lest people have forgotten, let me remind you that the name PAKISTAN was mnemonically formed from the names of Muslim majority areas of the north-west: Punjab; Afghania (NWF); Kashmir; Sind; and BaluchisTAN.

Reference: Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment, by Aziz Ahmad, OUP, New Delhi, 1999 (first published in 1964).

Of course, once formed, the name PAKISTAN was perhaps popularly seen as signifying the land of the pure. But one could take an Islamic (or any other religious) line on this matter and see the idea of one nation or one people as being PURE, as somewhat arrogant and heretical.

Every BODY has to be a Pakistan. That nation, of MAN, is PAKISTAN.

Like every BODY has to be YODHA, and that city, of MAN, is AYODHYA.

In 1946, before the Mulsim League`s Direct Action Day, 16 Augsut 1946, a slogan had fired the imagination of Muslims in Calcutta, so much so that even Hindus had it on their minds:

Haath mein bidi

Mooh mein paan

Ladkey lengey Pakistan!

Today it is time to sing:

Liye haath mein laathi muh mein Ram

Laana hey woh Pakistan

Sangh hai saathii to hoga hi kaam

Layengey woh Pakistan

(``Let no one commit the mistake of thinking that Ramrajya means a rule of the Hindus. My Ram is another name for Khuda or God. I want Khuda Raj, which is the same thing as the Kingdom of God on Earth.``

Mahatma Gandhi

26 February 1947)

Thanks,

mitr

Dear Ms. Khan

I am really amazed to find such an article written by a Pakistani woman. It really takes a lot of guts and moral courage to voice a point of view which is totally opposite to what many Pakistanis feel about Kashmir and India.

I hope you do not get any threats of violence from your compatriots.

Frankly speaking, you are the very first Pakistani I have come across who has appreciated the democratic norms of India and its position on Kashmir.

well folks!!!!

it has been nice reading reactions to this article. However below the belt personal attacks by some readers did leave a bad taste but on the whole the standard of debate was amazing.

Let me reassert-- I am a loyal, citizen of Pakistan, more loyal than any hothead --and am based in Pakistan not in US. In case Folks like omar1974 and others of his ilk would rather continue to believe ISPR and Tariq Altaf then so be it, but I for one would like to retain my objectivity.

Another point -- An article for me takes months of effort, often material has to be collected from different sources (essays, rough drafts etc )lying here and there on my harddisk. To debunk all I have so painstakingly collected, thru a direct personal attack without any substantive arguments, would not in the slightest weaken my resolve.

Consider this :

I know some strengths of my nation.

I know some shortcomings.

What I prefer to talk about in my articles should be my business -- or should I necessarily adopt an ``even handed approach`` each time I write about Pakistan.

For glowing tributes to the ``land of the pure`` the spin doctors are doing a very good job.

And yes -- my real name is Fauziya Khan.

Thanx all.

The question decent Indian Hindus who are concerned about the future must consider is: after having driven out the enemy intruder from the heights of Kargil, are we ready to admit the Muslim Indian citizen into the depths of our soul? In this regard, the recent riots in Ahmedabad cast a pall of gloom.

Dear God, lead us kindly to light.

mitr

Studebaker:

Thanks for your kind comments. I hope we can keep interacting from time to time.

Truth:

I don`t think we have a difference in perception. What I was talking about (inclusing rakhi) was purely inner world sensibility. Trying to externalise this may also indicate one`s residual covetousness, which can only bring negative outcomes. I must also appreciate your insightful comment regarding Mr Jinnah`s marginalisation of the genuine religious element - and we can all see the consequences. My comment about him was only in terms of his secular-rational-honest bearing, compared to Nehru.

Iconoclast:

I would value your responses to my submission.

Let us all pray, with much compassion, for our friend Omar. The energy and dynamism in him is a blessing, that is seraching for direction.

Thanks,

mitr

Re: Omar

Why do you always have to stoop to vulgarity when you criticise someone ? Is it because you lack the intelligence to argue something decently or is it because the truth hurts so much that it stirs the vitriol in you ?

iconoclast

Re: Omar

Mr. Omar, you lack the aptitude to counter points raised in the articles and invariably switch to personal attacks on the authors. You need to rethink your position here. The articles are not about the authors, they are about issues and topics independent of the authors for intelligent people to argue and discuss. Why do you always come up empty when it comes to intelligent counterpoints but have mouthfuls of expletives and personal attacks that are completely in bad taste. You have not shown any ability to argue or discuss about the relevant topics, but rather show a heightened and juvenile ability to throw in tangential prose punctuated with personal attacks and expletives. One thing I must give to you is that you do single handedly make up the comedy aspect, which is an amusing side show to most of these discussions.

I wouldn`t in the least be surprised if this so-called Fauzia Khan who lives in a fabled `pluralistic India` free from communal tension is in fact a Hindu who has adopted a muslim pseudonyn. It seems `Fauzia,` has a thing against Pakistan, which is very obvious. Perhaps its sour grapes which is the problems of `multiethnic` India that are really `her` problem in life. `Fauzia` definitely has a bee up her arse, and it has nothing at all to do with Pakistan, it has much more to do with, `her` dissatisfaction with her idealist India, which no independent observer would characterize as a society on the same par in any way as the U.S. Perhaps this article is really a sad and miserable attempt by `Fauzia` to counter the piece on the reality of the conditions of Indian Muslims presented on Chowk about 2 months or so ago, by labeling Pakistan as `intolerant` etc. I think it appropriate to remind, `Fauzia` that Muslims were at the bottom of ladder economically in British pre-partition India. We in Pakistan are much better off than we would have been living as mere Hindu slaves, unlike you `Fauzia`. That is the life your family (if you really are `Fauzia Khan`) appears to have chosen. Compromise is for the weak. Especially when it comes to identity. The author clearly has low self esteem, and a bit of a problem dealing with the not so glorious record of her own country, India. I find it interesting that you repeat Hindu propaganda claims about Pakistan verbatim. This stems from your basic attempt to try to become a `loyal` citizen of India, and your desire to demonstrate your loyalty to India. But the mere fact Fauzia that you have to do something (feel the need to prove your loyalty) in order to do this demonstrates that you yourself are well aware of the unequal status of muslims in India. I note that only perhaps 1 or 2%% of the Indians studying in the U.S are muslims. The reason being that they as a community are not doing too well overall in India, i`m sure there are exceptions, perhaps your family is one. Perhaps that is why you feel constrained to strive to `prove` the superiority of Indian society by running down Pakistan. Listen `babe` when it comes right down to it religion is what sets you apart from the rest in India, whether you care to admit it or not. And you know this well enough. There is a lot of religious discrimination in India against muslims. This article is really your cry/plea for help. If this drivel represents the level of your intellectual output I feel sorry for you. My advice, if you wanna become a real Indian, convert to Hinduism. Best thing for you really Fauzia. Get it over with now, don`t spend a life TRYING so desperately to be accepted, do what you know is necessary, (RE?)CONVERT to Hinduism. You`ll be much happier kiddo.

cheers,

Omar

Hi Studebaker:

You misunderstood my comment regarding the raakhi. I thought that reference may be annoying to Pakistanis since it implied India as a ``protector`` of Pakistan. As Pakistan is a proud and independent country, I thought that symbolism would be offensive to Pakistanis. But certainly, if the symbolism is one of friendship between two countries and even further, if Pakistan wanted to sign a defense pact with India, how can I object?

The title of the article ironically enough is appropriate, for it is a clearly biased attempt to spread factually incorrect information, a.k.a falsehoods galore, which is contains, and little else, in the most partisan propaganda manner

possible. There are several outright lies contained in the piece. Only about 5% of the facts stated herein are correct. Even simple things like the pre-partition mullahs being AGAINST the creation of Pakistan have not been related correctly, because of course they don`t fit into the pre-determined paradigm set out by the author. All manner of truth is completely disregarded by this piece. I`m surprised that Chowk would publish such blatant pathetic lies.

Omar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Hassann:

When was the last time you were in India? What is the basis of your comments about ``institutionalized`` problems. DO you mean innstitutionalized in the culture? I fail to see the difference between that and your self-admitted problems of poverty and ignorance. If you visited India, did you see any signs for optimism?

So you walked through death and destruction to get to Pakistan. What about my mother who had to leave her home in Lahore? Suffering was on all sides. I`m glad you`re happy in Pakistan. Maybe you`re better off there than you would have been in India. What about the problems that the creation of Pakistan has created for Indian Muslims? Do they figure in your thoughts? Or is the ultimate test, is hassann better off? Treading over paths that have been gone over many times. I suppose we will remain on opposite sides of this issue forever.