× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Junon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    3,284
    Threads
    319
    Reputation
    5911
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    452
    Likes (Received)
    516

    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Report bad ads?

    Salaam

    Bengali brother was earlier asking about darker aspects of Pakistans history. He's right.



    Its one perspective but shocking and sad.

    The aftermath





    | Likes CuriousonTruth liked this post

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    Junon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    3,284
    Threads
    319
    Reputation
    5911
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    452
    Likes (Received)
    516

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Salaam

    This has recently come to light.

    Blurb

    Remembering India’s Forgotten Holocaust An Indian politician has put Winston Churchill in the same category as some of “the worst genocidal dictators” of the 20th century because of his complicity in the Bengal Famine. Dr Shashi Tharoor, whose new book Inglorious Empire chronicles the atrocities of the British Empire, argued the former British Prime Minister’s reputation as a great wartime leader and protector of freedom was wholly miscast given his role in the Bengal famine which saw four million Bengalis starve to death.

    In 1943, up to four million Bengalis starved to death when Churchill diverted food to British soldiers and countries such as Greece while a deadly famine swept through Bengal. British policies under Winston Churchill killed nearly 4 million Indians in the 1943-44 Bengal Famine


    | Likes Abz2000, Bmh2019 liked this post

  4. #3
    Junon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    UK
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    3,284
    Threads
    319
    Reputation
    5911
    Rep Power
    67
    Likes (Given)
    452
    Likes (Received)
    516

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    | Likes Bmh2019 liked this post

  5. #4
    Bmh2019's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    93
    Threads
    5
    Reputation
    117
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    101
    Likes (Received)
    8

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Good to share from you
    He was portrayed in media as a goody hero but this exposes his bad actions
    Very eyes opening stuff
    Last edited by *charisma*; 03-23-2019 at 12:36 AM. Reason: merged posts

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    Ahmed.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    London
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    670
    Threads
    7
    Reputation
    782
    Rep Power
    71
    Likes (Given)
    710
    Likes (Received)
    380

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    What's past is past. There is no point in bringing up old historical stuff that opens up wounds.

    All civil wars are horrendous but Bangladesh has something to look on the bright side. Compared to other civil wars (especially independence wars) Bangladesh got off pretty lightly; shortest independent war in history, 9 months and only 300.000 (this was the official estimated number so it could be far less) deaths

    Alhamdulillah!

    You can bring up historical injustices if there is a chance of achieving justice, but here there is no chance, so rather than campaign on for apologies, acknowledgements, war crime trials etc, best to just leave it to Allah on day of Judgement, and on our part, just forgive and forget

  8. #6
    Abz2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,279
    Threads
    150
    Reputation
    45452
    Rep Power
    81
    Likes (Given)
    3793
    Likes (Received)
    2887

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Sometimes we forget that the land was separated in the name of Islam after the British government amplified its divide and rule policies and got massacres going between hindus and Muslims -making east pakistan one of the most concentrated places on earth, apparently, there is no prior historical record of such numbers of people leaving their homes and migrating such distances in such a short time period.

    The word "bangladesh" was chosen later by those who took the reigns of government of a land that had already been separated -with religious identity as primary purpose for separation- this was a question of Islamic identity or local identity - even though india wasn't about to hand over west bengal to those it was cajoling into claiming some sort of national pride through the now new racial claim of "bengali" .


    After the formation of india and pakistan, and the handing over of "independence" of india to the masonically rooted nehru gangdhi family, two wars were fought against the newly formed land of pakistan over kashmir, and i'm certain that most of us know the historic indiscipline of the indian vigilantes who were hired by political groups to gain majorities in border lands during the partitioning - and who were then recruited to fight those Muslims who claimed kashmir.

    The dakha langua bengali was NOT a language that my forefathers knew or cared about - and most elderly people of sylhet don't understand even 50 percent of it - and this ratio was probably a lot higher before 1975 when the other local dialect printing presses were being made obsolete.
    The people who mainly had a problem with urdu were people who despised the Islamic influences that were being introduced on an official level - since the british policy was to recruit public servants who were most opposed to the previous mogul government and its supporters. These people knew that not learning urdu would mean leaving jobs and positions of influence - and keeping calcutta bangla would mean using the language which the british had used to administer the region and was the language used by the previous recruits and others in west bengal (now india) and they used propaganda as a tool to stir the emotions of the masses withouht proper thought.
    We know this was a restructuring by indira gandhi who was an agent of the heirs of families and oligarchs who ran the east india company which brought masonry into the subcontinent to begin with.
    I know because i am a sylheti, and sylhetis came out onto the streets when the british had almost handed sylhet over to assam province whose politicians had been administering sylhet under british rule.

    I hate falling for ridiculous propaganda - especially when i still see these elderly people struggling to understand the foreign dhakha language which they are historically alien to .... and wonder what sort of "basha andolon" (language revolution) they must have been wondering about if they had radios blaring bbc world at the time....

    Those fascist sick pervy dogs who had massacred entire villages in india on behalf of the political goons were drooling over lighter skinned kashmiri women and girls long before india invaded east pakistan in 1971 - so it is better to think more carefully than to accuse mujahideen of folly without getting a clearer picture of the actual situation as it was at the time.

    i also think jinnah was a double dealing treacherous a#hole too.
    Last edited by Abz2000; 03-23-2019 at 03:16 AM.
    | Likes Bmh2019 liked this post
    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971













  9. #7
    Ahmed.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    London
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    670
    Threads
    7
    Reputation
    782
    Rep Power
    71
    Likes (Given)
    710
    Likes (Received)
    380

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Quote Originally Posted by Abz2000 View Post
    Sometimes we forget that the land was separated in the name of Islam after the British government amplified its divide and rule policies and got massacres going between hindus and Muslims -making east pakistan one of the most concentrated places on earth, apparently, there is no prior historical record of such numbers of people leaving their homes and migrating such distances in such a short time period.

    The word "bangladesh" was chosen later by those who took the reigns of government of a land that had already been separated -with religious identity as primary purpose for separation- this was a question of Islamic identity or local identity - even though india wasn't about to hand over west bengal to those it was cajoling into claiming some sort of national pride through the now new racial claim of "bengali" .


    After the formation of india and pakistan, and the handing over of "independence" of india to the masonically rooted nehru gangdhi family, two wars were fought against the newly formed land of pakistan over kashmir, and i'm certain that most of us know the historic indiscipline of the indian vigilantes who were hired by political groups to gain majorities in border lands during the partitioning - and who were then recruited to fight those Muslims who claimed kashmir.

    The dakha langua bengali was NOT a language that my forefathers knew or cared about - and most elderly people of sylhet don't understand even 50 percent of it - and this ratio was probably a lot higher before 1975 when the other local dialect printing presses were being made obsolete.
    The people who mainly had a problem with urdu were people who despised the Islamic influences that were being introduced on an official level - since the british policy was to recruit public servants who were most opposed to the previous mogul government and its supporters. These people knew that not learning urdu would mean leaving jobs and positions of influence - and keeping calcutta bangla would mean using the language which the british had used to administer the region and was the language used by the previous recruits and others in west bengal (now india) and they used propaganda as a tool to stir the emotions of the masses withouht proper thought.
    We know this was a restructuring by indira gandhi who was an agent of the heirs of families and oligarchs who ran the east india company which brought masonry into the subcontinent to begin with.
    I know because i am a sylheti, and sylhetis came out onto the streets when the british had almost handed sylhet over to assam province whose politicians had been administering sylhet under british rule.

    I hate falling for ridiculous propaganda - especially when i still see these elderly people struggling to understand the foreign dhakha language which they are historically alien to .... and wonder what sort of "basha andolon" (language revolution) they must have been wondering about if they had radios blaring bbc world at the time....

    Those fascist sick pervy dogs who had massacred entire villages in india on behalf of the political goons were drooling over lighter skinned kashmiri women and girls long before india invaded east pakistan in 1971 - so it is better to think more carefully than to accuse mujahideen of folly without getting a clearer picture of the actual situation as it was at the time.

    i also think jinnah was a double dealing treacherous a#hole too.

    With all due respect bro, this is disgusting to call sick civilian murdering and raping pakistani army at the time 'mujahideen'.

    And your conspiracy theory about how objection to urdu being made east pakistan's official language is somehow opposition to Islam is ludricous

    Maybe you should think along lines of how people thought in a part of the country separated by thousands of miles of India in between where 100% people spoke Bengali (sylheti is just slightly dissimilar to Bengali) felt it was opressive to have another language imposed on them?

    I think you've fallen for shibir jamaati Islami propaganda. These guys really don't use their brains

  10. #8
    CuriousonTruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    419
    Threads
    26
    Reputation
    207
    Rep Power
    5
    Likes (Given)
    13
    Likes (Received)
    87

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Bengalis are not "new" people. The region of Bengal is home to the second oldest civilization in the subcontinent after Mohenjo-Daro called Angha (Although the relation between bengalis and the settlers in Angha is not known).

    The first empire of Bengalis was Pala Empire that stretched from Bengal all the way to northern Pakistan. That was also the only time Bengalis were relevant at a global level. So Bengali civilization itself is atleast 1,000 years old.

    Saying that following the colonization of British Empire, and the disgusting, repulsive, liberal culture cultivated by bengali secular poets, the character, values of bengali people have transformed massively.

    Now Bengalis have become some weird inferior liberal race. And you have no idea how much it hurts me to say this. And it's not loss of land, it's loss and transformation of the character of Bengalis. By adopting liberalism, Bengalis have confirmed their relegation to an inferior race which will earn no achievement in this world and will w**** its culture out to foreign culture.

    What Bangladesh needs is a religious, nationalist dictatorship that will change its culture back to a more aggresive, militaristic one like how we were during Pala Empire. I want those good old days back.
    | Likes Bmh2019 liked this post

  11. #9
    Bmh2019's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    93
    Threads
    5
    Reputation
    117
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    101
    Likes (Received)
    8

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Thanks for these interesting points.

  12. Report bad ads?
  13. #10
    Abz2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,279
    Threads
    150
    Reputation
    45452
    Rep Power
    81
    Likes (Given)
    3793
    Likes (Received)
    2887

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    The partition of India was to happen along religious lines.
    The Muslim-majority areas would form Pakistan while the Hindu-majority areas would form India.[4]


    1280px-Muslim_percent_1909.jpg

    Sylhet was a Muslim majority district in Assam which was a Hindu-majority province. People in Sylhet spoke Sylheti and Bengali while those in the rest of the province spoke Assamese.
    The Government of Assam believed removing Sylhet would make the state more homogeneous and stronger as a result. Assam's Prime Minister Gopinath Bordoloi said in 1946 that his wish was to “hand over Sylhet to East Bengal”.[5] The Government of British Raj declared on 3 July 1947 that a referendum would be held to decide the future of Sylhet on 7 July 1947. H. C. Stock was appointed the commissioner of the referendum.[1]

    The majority of the population voted in favour of joining Pakistan. It was implemented in the Article 3 of the India Independence Act of 18 July 1947. The Radcliffe line published on 12 August 1947 gave some areas of Sylhet mainly the Barak Valley, which includes Karimganj, to India, while the rest of Sylhet joined East Bengal. Even though there was a majority vote across Sylhet to join East Bengal, the published Radcliffe line gave some areas of Sylhet to India like Karimganj, while the rest of Sylhet joined East Pakistan. It had a majority Muslim population which had opted for Pakistan unlike some other areas in Sylhet like Moulvibazar which had not.[1][6] India received three and a half thanas from Sylhet.[7][8] However, the result of the referendum was welcomed in Assam.[9]
    Thus, most of the Sylhet district of British Indian province of Assam joined East Pakistan, which subsequently became independent Bangladesh in 1971.[10]

    -----

    In 1947 the Bengali Muslims had identified themselves with Pakistan's Islamic project but by the 1970s the people of East Pakistan had given priority to their Bengali ethnicity over their religious identity, desiring a society in accordance with Western principles such as secularism, democracy and socialism.[40] Many Bengali Muslims strongly objected to the Islamist paradigm imposed by the Pakistani state.[41] Most members of West Pakistan's ruling elite also belonged to a liberal society, yet understood a common faith as the mobilising factor behind Pakistan's creation and the subsuming of Pakistan's multiple identities into one.[41] West Pakistanis were substantially more supportive than East Pakistanis of an Islamic state, a tendency which persisted after 1971.[42]

    Cultural and linguistic differences between the two wings outweighed any religious unity. The Bengalis took great pride in their culture and language which, with its Bengali script and vocabulary, was unacceptable to the West Pakistani elite, who believed that it possessed considerable Hindu cultural influences.[40][43]West Pakistanis, in an attempt to 'Islamise" the East, wanted the Bengalis to adopt Urdu.[40] The events of the language movement brought about a sentiment among Bengalis in favour of discarding Pakistan's communalism in favour of secular politics.[44] The Awami League began propagating its secular message through its newspaper to the Bengali readership.[45]

    The Awami League's emphasis on secularism differentiated it from the Muslim League.[46] In 1971, the Bangladeshi liberation struggle against Pakistan was led by secular leaders[47] and secularists hailed the Bangladeshi victory as the triumph of secular Bengali nationalism over religion-centred Pakistani nationalism.[48] While Pakistan's government strives for an Islamic state, Bangladesh was established secular.[42] After the liberation victory, the Awami League attempted to build a secular order[49] and the pro-Pakistan Islamist parties were barred from political participation.[50]
    The majority of East Pakistani ulama had either remained neutral or supported the Pakistani state, since they felt that the break-up of Pakistan would be detrimental for Islam.[51]


    -------


    The current nations, Pakistan and Bangladesh, were part of an undivided India during the British colonial rule. From the mid-19th century, the Urdu language had been promoted as the lingua franca of Indian Muslims by political and religious leaders, such as Sir Khwaja Salimullah, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk and Maulvi Abdul Haq.[2][3] Urdu is an Indo-Aryan language of the Indo-Iranian branch, belonging to the Indo-European family of languages. It developed under Persian, Arabic and Turkic influence on apabhramshas (last linguistic stage of the medieval Indian Aryan language Pali-Prakrit)[4] in South Asia during the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal Empire.[5]
    With its Perso-Arabic script, the language was considered a vital element of the Islamic culture for Indian Muslims;
    Hindi and the Devanagari script were seen as fundamentals of Hindu culture.[2]


    While the use of Urdu grew common with Muslims in northern India, the Muslims of Bengal (a province in the eastern part of British Indian sub-continent) primarily used the Bengali language. Bengali is an Eastern Indo-Aryan language that arose from the eastern Middle Indic languages around 1000 CE[6] and developed considerably during the Bengal Renaissance. As early as the late 19th century, social activists such as the Muslim feminist Roquia Sakhawat Hussain were choosing to write in Bengali to reach out to the people and develop it as a modern literary language. Supporters of Bengali opposed Urdu even before the partition of India, when delegates from Bengal rejected the idea of making Urdu the lingua franca of Muslim India in the 1937 Lucknow session of the Muslim League. The Muslim League was a British Indian political party that became the driving force behind the creation of Pakistan as a Muslim state separate from British India.[7]

    -------

    On 16 October 1905, the viceroy, Lord Curzon, in his second term, divided the largest administrative subdivision in British India, the Bengal Presidency, into the Muslim-majority province of East Bengal and Assam and the Hindu-majority province of Bengal (present-day Indian states of West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Odisha).[7] Curzon's act, the Partition of Bengal—which some considered administratively felicitous[by whom?], and, which had been contemplated by various colonial administrations since the time of Lord William Bentinck, but never acted upon—was to transform nationalist politics as nothing else before it.[7]
    The Hindu elite of Bengal, among them many who owned land in East Bengal that was leased out to Muslim peasants, protested fervidly.

    The large Bengali Hindu middle-class (the Bhadralok),
    upset at the prospect of Bengalis being outnumbered in the new Bengal province
    by Biharis and Oriyas,
    (???)
    felt that Curzon's act was punishment for their political assertiveness.[7] The pervasive protests against Curzon's decision took the form predominantly of the Swadeshi ("buy Indian") campaign and involved a boycott of British goods. Sporadically—but flagrantly—the protesters also took to political violence that involved attacks on civilians.[8] The violence, however, was not effective, as most planned attacks were either preempted by the British or failed.[9] The rallying cry for both types of protest was the slogan Bande Mataram (Bengali, lit: "Hail to the Mother"), the title of a song by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, which invoked a mother goddess, who stood variously for Bengal, India, and the Hindu goddess Kali.[10] The unrest spread from Calcutta to the surrounding regions of Bengal when Calcutta's English-educated students returned home to their villages and towns.[11]The religious stirrings of the slogan and the political outrage over the partition were combined as young men, in groups such as Jugantar, took to bombing public buildings, staging armed robberies,[9] and assassinating British officials.[10]Since Calcutta was the imperial capital, both the outrage and the slogan soon became nationally known.[10]

    The overwhelming, but predominantly Hindu, protest against the partition of Bengal and the fear, in its wake, of reforms favouring the Hindu majority, now led the Muslim elite in India, in 1906, to meet with the new viceroy, Lord Minto, and to ask for separate electorates for Muslims. In conjunction, they demanded proportional legislative representation reflecting both their status as former rulers and their record of cooperating with the British. This led, in December 1906, to the founding of the All-India Muslim League in Dacca. Although Curzon, by now, had resigned his position over a dispute with his military chief Lord Kitchener and returned to England, the League was in favour of his partition plan. The Muslim elite's position, which was reflected in the League's position, had crystallized gradually over the previous three decades, beginning with the 1871 Census of British India, which had first estimated the populations in regions of Muslim majority.[12] (For his part, Curzon's desire to court the Muslims of East Bengal had arisen from British anxieties ever since the 1871 census, the first comprehensive census there—and in light of the history of Muslims fighting them in the 1857 Mutiny and the Second Anglo-Afghan War—about Indian Muslims rebelling against the Crown.[12])

    In the three decades since that census, Muslim leaders across northern India, had intermittently experienced public animosity from some of the new Hindu political and social groups.[12] The Arya Samaj, for example, had not only supported Cow Protection Societies in their agitation,[13] but also—distraught at the 1871 Census's Muslim numbers—organized "reconversion" events for the purpose of welcoming Muslims back to the Hindu fold.[12]
    In the United Provinces, Muslims became anxious when, in the late 19th century, political representation.


    ...........


    Leading Bengali scholars argued why Urdu should not be the only state language. The writer Abul Mansur Ahmed said if Urdu became the state language, the educated society of East Bengal would become 'illiterate' and 'ineligible' for government positions.

    -------

    Copy paste in web search for references.



    Re. Recognition of smaller languages in a larger nation:

    .The status of Sylheti is hotly disputed with some considering it a dialect of Bengali, while others consider it a separate language.[4] There are significant differences in grammar and pronunciation as well as a lack of mutual intelligibility between the two varieties. There are greater differences between Sylheti and Bengali than between Sylheti and Assamese, which is recognised as a separate language.[5] Most Sylhetis are at least bilingual to some degree, as Bengali is taught at all levels of education in Bangladesh. Sylhet was part of the ancient kingdom of Kamarupa,[6] and Sylheti shares many common features with Assamese, including having a larger set of fricatives than other Eastern Indo-Aryan languages. According to George Abraham Grierson,[7] "The inflections also differ from those of regular Bengali, and in one or two instances assimilate to those of Assamese". Considering the unique linguistic properties such as phoneme inventory, allophony, and inflectional morphology in particular and lexicon in general, Sylheti is often regarded as a separate language (Grierson 1928, Chatterjee 1939, Gordon 2005). Indeed, it was formerly written using its own script, Sylheti Nagari, which, although largely replaced with the Bengali script in recent times, is beginning to experience a revival in use.

    ......
    During the British colonial period, a Sylheti student by the name of Moulvi Abdul Karim studying in London, England, after completing his education, spent several years in London and learned the printing trade.

    After returning home, he designed a woodblock type for Sylheti Nagari and founded the Islamia Press in Sylhet Town in about 1870. Other Sylheti presses were established in Sunamganj, Shillong and Kolkata. These presses fell out of use during the early 1970s.[13][14] Since then, the Sylotinagri alphabet has been used mainly by linguists and academics.[15] It gradually became very unpopular.[16][17]

    The script includes 5 independent vowels, 5 dependent vowels attached to a consonant letter and 27 consonants. The Sylheti abugida differs from the Bengali alphabet as it is a form of Kaithi, a script that belongs to the main group of North Indian scripts of Bihar.[18] The writing system's main use was to record religious poetry, described as a rich language and easy to learn.[19]

    Campaigns started to rise in London during the mid-1970s to mid-1980s to recognise Sylheti as a language in its own right. During the mid-1970s, when the first mother-tongue classes were established for Bangladeshis by community activists, the classes were given in standard Bengali rather than the Sylheti dialect which triggered the campaign. During the 1980s, a recognition campaign for Sylheti took place in the area of Spitalfields, East End of London. One of the main organisations was the Bangladeshis' Educational Needs in Tower Hamlets (usually known by its acronym as BENTH). However this organisation collapsed in 1985 and with its demise, the pro-Sylheti campaign in the borough lost impetus. Nonetheless, Sylheti remains very widespread as a domestic language in working-class as well as upper-class Sylheti households in the United Kingdom.[20]


    -------
    Last edited by Abz2000; 03-24-2019 at 10:55 AM.
    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971













  14. #11
    Abz2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,279
    Threads
    150
    Reputation
    45452
    Rep Power
    81
    Likes (Given)
    3793
    Likes (Received)
    2887

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Quote Originally Posted by Bhai View Post
    With all due respect bro, this is disgusting to call sick civilian murdering and raping pakistani army at the time 'mujahideen'.
    I believe you were referring to this post:

    Quote Originally Posted by Abz2000 View Post
    Those fascist sick pervy dogs who had massacred entire villages in india on behalf of the political goons were drooling over lighter skinned kashmiri women and girls long before india invaded east pakistan in 1971 - so it is better to think more carefully than to accuse mujahideen of folly without getting a clearer picture of the actual situation as it was at the time.
    Which was written with this earlier quote in mind:

    Quote Originally Posted by Junon View Post



    TheDon
    @TheDon10201694
    In addition to pakistani forces tribal “mujahideen” were indoctrinated and drafted by pakistan as proxies to fight in bengal one such group of Pashtun tribals from Tirah were told before being dropped into bangladesh that the hindus there were oppressing muslims
    8
    10:30 PM - Mar 22, 2019
    Though it surprises me that the secularist coup used the name of Islam and Allah , and then even erected a martyrs' minaret (shaheed minaar) for people including hindus who were fighting a war against Islamic establishment in a Muslim majority population on behalf of a pagan majority government under the name "bengali" - despite the fact that the same pagan government didn't recognise "bengali" as can be seen from the fact that it didn't hand over the western portion of bengal along with its bengalis to the other bengalis it was arming to fight for "bengalism" (though it did use hindu western bengalis to fight the Muslim government in the east - and the term "bengali" would wash more than the term "hindu" in both parts amongst the common masses (though it didn't with the Islamic intellectuals) - since it would otherwise have becone an obvious re-occupation of Muslim majority lands after all that blood and sweat.


    -------


    The actual division of British India between the two new dominions was accomplished according to what has come to be known as the "3 June Plan" or "Mountbatten Plan". It was announced at a press conference by Mountbatten on 3 June 1947 at 4 pm,[83] when the date of independence of India - 15 August 1947 was also announced. The plan's main points were:

    Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims in Punjab and Bengal legislative assemblies would meet and vote for partition. If a simple majority of either group wanted partition, then these provinces would be divided.
    Sind and Baluchistan were to make their own decision.[84]
    The fate of North West Frontier Province and Sylhet district of Assam was to be decided by a referendum.
    India would be independent by 15 August 1947.
    The separate independence of Bengal was ruled out.
    A boundary commission to be set up in case of partition.
    The Indian political leaders accepted the Plan on 2 June. It did not deal with the question of the princely states, but on 3 June, Mountbatten advised them against remaining independent and urged them to join one of the two new dominions.[85]

    The Muslim League's demands for a separate state were thus conceded. The Congress' position on unity was also taken into account while making Pakistan as small as possible. Mountbatten's formula was to divide India and at the same time retain maximum possible unity.

    Abul Kalam Azad expressed concern over the likelihood of violent riots, to which Mountbatten replied:

    At least on this question I shall give you complete assurance. I shall see to it that there is no bloodshed and riot. I am a soldier and not a civilian. Once the partition is accepted in principle, I shall issue orders to see that there are no communal disturbances anywhere in the country. If there should be the slightest agitation, I shall adopt the sternest measures to nip the trouble in the bud.[86]....


    ........

    Massive population exchanges occurred between the two newly formed states in the months immediately following the Partition. "The population of undivided India in 1947 was approx 390 million. After partition, there were 330 million people in India, 30 million in West Pakistan, and 30 million people in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh)."[91] Once the lines were established, about 14.5 million people crossed the borders to what they hoped was the relative safety of religious majority. The 1951 Census of Pakistan identified the number of displaced persons in Pakistan at 7,226,600, presumably all Muslims who had entered Pakistan from India. Similarly, the 1951 Census of India enumerated 7,295,870 displaced persons, apparently all Hindus and Sikhs who had moved to India from Pakistan immediately after the Partition.[2] The two numbers add up to 14.5 million. Since both censuses were held about 3.6 years after the Partition, the enumeration included net population increase after the mass migration.[92]

    About 11.2 million (77.4% of the displaced persons) were in the west, with the Punjab accounting for most of it: 6.5 million Muslims moved from India to West Pakistan, and 4.7 million Hindus and Sikhs moved from West Pakistan to India; thus the net migration in the west from India to West Pakistan (now Pakistan) was 1.8 million.

    The remaining 3.3 million (22.6% of the displaced persons) were in the east: 2.6 million moved from East Pakistan to India and 0.7 million moved from India to East Pakistan (now Bangladesh); thus net migration in the east was 1.9 million into India.

    There was no conception that population transfers would be necessary because of the partitioning. Religious minorities were expected to stay put in the states they found themselves residing in. However, an exception was made for Punjab where transfer of populations were organised because of the communal violence affecting the province. This did not apply to other provinces.[93][94]

    Punjab
    Edit

    A refugee special train at Ambala Station during partition of India
    The Partition of British India split the former British province of Punjab between the Dominion of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. The mostly Muslim western part of the province became Pakistan's Punjab province; the mostly Sikh and Hindu eastern part became India's East Punjab state (later divided into the new states of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh). Many Hindus and Sikhs lived in the west, and many Muslims lived in the east, and the fears of all such minorities were so great that the Partition saw many people displaced and much intercommunal violence. Some have described the violence in Punjab as a retributive genocide.[95]

    The newly formed governments had not anticipated, and were completely unequipped for, a two-way migration of such staggering magnitude, and massive violence and slaughter occurred on both sides of the new India-Pakistan border. Estimates of the number of deaths vary, with low estimates at 200,000 and high estimates at 2,000,000. The worst case of violence among all regions is concluded to have taken place in Punjab.[96][97][98][99] Virtually no Muslim survived in East Punjab (except in Malerkotla) and virtually no Hindu or Sikh survived in West Punjab.[100]

    Lawrence James observed that 'Sir Francis Mudie, the governor of West Punjab, estimated that 500,000 Muslims died trying to enter his province, while the British high commissioner in Karachi put the full total at 800,000...This makes nonsense of the claim by Mountbatten and his partisans that only 200,000 were killed: [James 1998: 636]".[101]


    During this period, many alleged that Tara Singh was endorsing the killing of Punjabis. On 3 March 1947, at Lahore, Singh along with about 500 Sikhs declared from a dais "Death to Pakistan".[102] According to political scientist Ishtiaq Ahmed, "On March 3, radical Sikh leader Master Tara Singh famously flashed his kirpan (sword) outside the Punjab Assembly, calling for the destruction of the Pakistan idea prompting violent response by the Muslims mainly against Sikhs but also against Hindus, in the Muslim-majority districts of northern Punjab. Yet at the end of that year, more Muslims had been killed in East Punjab than Hindus and Sikhs together in West Punjab."[103][104][105][106] Nehru wrote to Gandhi on 22 August that up to that point, twice as many Muslims had been killed in East Punjab than Hindus and Sikhs in West Punjab.[107]

    Bengal
    Edit
    Main article: Partition of Bengal (1947)
    The province of Bengal was divided into the two separate entities of West Bengal, awarded to the Dominion of India, and East Bengal, awarded to the Dominion of Pakistan. East Bengal was renamed East Pakistan in 1955, and later became the independent nation of Bangladesh after the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971.

    While the Muslim majority districts of Murshidabad and Malda were given to India, the Hindu majority district of Khulna and the Buddhist majority, but sparsely populated, Chittagong Hill Tracts were given to Pakistan by the Radcliffe award.[108]

    Thousands of Hindus, located in the districts of East Bengal which were awarded to Pakistan, found themselves being attacked and this religious persecution forced hundreds of thousands of Hindus from East Bengal to seek refuge in India. The huge influx of Hindu refugees into Calcutta affected the demographics of the city. Many Muslims left the city for East Pakistan and some of their homes and properties were occupied by the refugee families.


    Sindh
    Edit
    Most of Sindh's prosperous middle class at the time of Partition was Hindu. At the time of Partition there were 1,400,000 Hindu Sindhis, though most were concentrated in cities such as Hyderabad, Karachi, Shikarpur, and Sukkur. Hundreds of Hindus residing in Sindh were forced to migrate. Some anti-Hindu violence in Sindh was precipitated by the arrival of Muslim refugees from India with minimal local Muslim support for the rioters. Sindhi Hindus faced low scale rioting unlike the Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs who had to migrate from West Punjab.[109]

    On 6 December 1947, communal violence broke out in Ajmer in India, precipitated by an argument between Sindhi Hindu refugees and local Muslims in the Dargah Bazaar. Violence in Ajmer again broke out in the middle of December with stabbings, looting and arson resulting in mostly Muslim casualties.[110] Many Muslims fled across the Thar Desert to Sindh in Pakistan.[110] This sparked further anti-Hindu riots in Hyderabad, Sindh. On 6 January anti-Hindu riots broke out in Karachi, leading to an estimate of 1100 casualties.[110] 776,000 Sindhi Hindus fled to India.[111] The arrival of Sindhi Hindu refugees in North Gujarat's town of Godhra sparked the March 1948 riots there which led to an emigration of Muslims from Godhra to Pakistan.[110]

    Despite the migration, a significant Sindhi Hindu population still resides in Pakistan's Sindh province where they number at around 2.28 million as per Pakistan's 1998 census; the Sindhi Hindus in India were at 2.57 million as per India's 2001 Census. Some bordering districts in Sindh had a Hindu majority like Tharparkar District, Umerkot, Mirpurkhas, Sanghar and Badin, but their population is decreasing and they consider themselves a minority in decline. In fact, only Umerkot still has a majority of Hindus in the district.[112] The Sindhi community did not face large scale violence, but felt deprivation of homeland and culture.[110]

    Gujarat
    Edit
    During the partition, there was no holocaust in Gujarat as there was in Punjab and Bengal.[113] Only about 2.2% of the migrants to Pakistan were from Gujarat and Bombay city, and of them about 75% went to Karachi due to business interests.[113]

    Delhi
    Edit

    A crowd of Muslims at the Old Fort (Purana Qila) in Delhi, which had been converted into a vast camp for Muslim refugees waiting to be transported to Pakistan. Manchester Guardian, 27 September 1947.
    For centuries Delhi had been the capital of the Mughal Empire and of previous Turkic Muslim rulers of North India. The series of Islamic rulers keeping Delhi as a stronghold of their empires left a vast array of Islamic architecture in Delhi and a strong Islamic culture permeated the city. The 1941 Census listed Delhi's population as being 33.22% Muslim.

    However thousands of Hindu and Sikh refugees from Punjab poured into the city. This created an atmosphere of upheavals as anti-Muslim pogroms rocked the historical stronghold of Indo-Islamic culture and politics. Pakistani diplomat in Delhi, Hussain, alleged that the Indian government was intent on eliminating Delhi's Muslim population or was indifferent to their fate. He reported that Army troops openly gunned down innocent Muslims.[114] Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru estimated 1000 casualties in the city. However other sources claimed that the casualty rate had been 20 times higher. Gyanendra Pandey's more recent account of the Delhi violence puts the figure of Muslim casualties in Delhi as being between 20,000–25,000.[115]

    Tens of thousands of Muslims were driven to refugee camps regardless of their political affiliations and numerous historic sites in Delhi such as the Purana Qila, Idgah and Nizamuddin were transformed into refugee camps. At the culmination of the tensions in Delhi 330,000 Muslims were forced to flee the city to Pakistan. The 1951 Census registered a drop of the Muslim population in the city from 33.22% in 1941 to 5.33% in 1951.[116]

    Alwar and Bharatpur
    Edit
    Alwar and Bharatpur were two princely states of Rajputana (modern day Rajasthan) which were the scene of a bloody confrontation between the dominant, land-holding community of Hindu Jats and the cultivating community of Muslim Meos from May 1947 onwards.[117] Well-organised bands of Hindu Jats, Ahirs and Gujars started attacking Muslim Meos in April 1947. By June more than fifty Muslim villages had been destroyed after attacks by all sides. The Muslim League was outraged and demanded that the Viceroy provide Muslim troops. Accusations emerged in June of the involvement of Indian State Forces from Alwar and Bharatpur in the destruction of Muslim villages both inside their states and in British India.[118]

    In the wake of unprecedented violent attacks unleashed against them in 1947, 100,000 Muslim Meos from Alwar and Bharatpur was forced to flee their homes and an estimated 30,000 Meos are said to have been massacred.[119] On 17 November, a column of 80,000 Meo refugees went on their way to Pakistan. However, 10,000 stopped travelling due to the risk of trying to reach and settle in Pakistan.[117]

    Jammu and Kashmir
    Edit
    Main article: 1947 Jammu massacres
    In September–November 1947 in the Jammu region of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, a large number of Muslims were massacred and others driven away to West Punjab. The impetus for this violence was partly provided by the influx of a large number of Hindu and Sikh refugees since March 1947, who brought with them "harrowing stories of Muslim atrocities", to Jammu from West Punjab. The killings were carried out by extremist Hindus and Sikhs, aided and abetted by the forces of the Dogra State headed by the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir Hari Singh. Observers state that Hari Singh's aim was to alter the demographics of the region by eliminating the Muslim population, in order to ensure a Hindu majority in the region.[120][121]


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India




    Partition of Bengal (1905)

    The decision to effect the Partition of Bengal (Bengali: বঙ্গভঙ্গ) was announced on 19 July 1905 by the Viceroy of India, Curzon. The partition took place on 16 October 1905 and separated the largely Muslim eastern areas from the largely Hindu western areas.......

    .......The partition triggered radical nationalism. Bengali Hindus were upset with their minority status in the new province. They began an angry agitation, featuring terrorism, as younger members adopted the use of bombings, shootings[20] and assassinations in a blend of religious and political feelings.[21] Vande Mataram(meaning 'hail the mother'), praising the goddess who represented India, Bengal and Kali, was a rallying cry. Bengal was interpreted as the goddess which had been victimised by the British.[22] Although there were prominent Muslim speakers the Muslims were indifferent to the movement.




    Re-unification


    The authorities, not able to end the protest, assented to reversing the partition and did so in 1911.
    [30] King George announced in December 1911 that eastern Bengal would be assimilated into the Bengal Presidency.[31] Districts, where Bengali was spoken, were once again unified and Assam, Bihar and Orissa were separated. The capital was shifted to New Delhi, clearly intended to provide the British Empire with a stronger base.[32] Muslims were shocked because despite the Bengali terrorism they had seen the Muslim majority eastern Bengal as an indicator of the government's enthusiasm for protecting Muslim interests. They saw this as the government compromising Muslim interests for Hindu protests and administrative ease.[33]

    The partition had not initially been supported by Muslim leaders. [34] After the Muslim majority province of Eastern Bengal and Assam had been created prominent Muslims started seeing it as advantageous. Muslims, especially in Eastern Bengal, had been backward in the period of United Bengal. The Hindu protest against the partition was seen as interference in a Muslim province.[35] With the move of the capital to a Mughal site, the British tried to satisfy Bengali Muslims who were disappointed with losing hold of eastern Bengal.[36]



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Part..._Bengal_(1905)


    Last edited by Abz2000; 03-24-2019 at 08:20 PM.
    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971













  15. #12
    Abz2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,279
    Threads
    150
    Reputation
    45452
    Rep Power
    81
    Likes (Given)
    3793
    Likes (Received)
    2887

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Parliament member Shamsul Huq convened a new committee to push for Bengali as a state language.
    Assembly member Dhirendranath Datta proposed legislation in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan to allow members to speak in Bengali and authorise its use for official purposes.[8]
    Datta's proposal was supported by legislators
    Prem Hari Burman,
    Bhupendra Kumar Datta
    and
    Sris Chandra Chattaopadhyaya
    of East Bengal, as well as the people from the region.[8]
    Prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan and the Muslim League denounced the proposal as an attempt to divide the Pakistani people, thus the legislation was defeated.[8][16]

    In the height of civic unrest, Governor-General of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah arrived in Dhaka on 19 March 1948. On 21 March, at a civic reception at Racecourse Ground, he claimed that the language issue was designed by a "fifth column" to divide Pakistani Muslims.[19][20][21][22][full citation needed][23] Jinnah further declared that "Urdu, and only Urdu" embodied the spirit of Muslim nations and would remain as the state language,[8][21][24][25] labelling those who disagreed with his views as "Enemies of Pakistan". Jinnah delivered a similar speech at Curzon Hall of the University of Dhaka on 24 March.[9] At both meetings, Jinnah was interrupted by large segments of the audience. He later called a meeting of a state language committee of action, and overruled the contract that was signed by Khawaja Nazimuddin with the student leaders.[18] Before Jinnah left Dhaka on 28 March, he delivered a speech on radio reasserting his "Urdu-only" policy.[26]

    Shortly thereafter, the East Bengal Language Committee, presided by Maulana Akram Khan, was formed by the East Bengal government to prepare a report on the language problem.[27] The Committee completed its report on 6 December 1950, but it was not published until 1958. The government suggested that Bengali be written in Arabic script, as a potential solution to the language conflict.[28][full citation needed]


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beng...guage_movement
    Last edited by Abz2000; 03-24-2019 at 08:00 AM.
    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971













  16. #13
    AbdurRahman.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    700
    Threads
    2
    Reputation
    1738
    Rep Power
    45
    Likes (Given)
    648
    Likes (Received)
    546

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Pakistan is anything but Islam. Yes they're Muslims and they have aspects of sharia in their law, however the governments, army and politics has always been very corrupt secularism with only the word 'Islam' being thrown in to gain support from the populace...

    That Wikipedia narrative is just a pro-Pakistani propaganda narrative that's all.

    East Pakistan was being severely oppressed, all the money generated in East Pakistan was taken over to West Pakistan for that part to live in relative luxury while the former was left in abject poverty.

    The urdu language was being imposed on East Pakistan not because of any religious reasons (This reason is absurd really as all languages are from Allah and its the definition of words that either make it Islamic or non-Islamic) but due to concerns that a different language in East Pakistan will engender feelings of being different and thereby espouse desire for independence. All countries sadly tries to impose their language on any significant population of their citizens that have a different language for this very reason, such as Turkey trying to impose the Turkish language on the kurds.

    And the last straw for East Pakistan was when Shaykh Mujib won the general elections to be Prime Minister over all of Pakistan and the West Pakistan government never allowed it.

    I suppose Pakistan had a right to try quell a break up of the country, however if you oppress a nation too much then this could lead to rebellion.

    Bangladesh needed support for its bid for independence and the best way to get it is to become allies with powerful nations (in this instance, India) with a shared interest of secularism. In the letter to ISIS that was signed by all the mainstream Scholars it said that secularist government is ok for reasons of national security and secularist government is only kufr if you consider it better than sharia.

    In terms of Islam, it could be that Bangladesh's government could be more Islamic than Pakistan's as the 'Islam' aspect of Pakistan is only used as a red herring while the government and army itself fights Islam on the side of USA, so let's not judge with words like 'Islam' and 'secular' here and judge governments on their actions.

    even if Sylheti is excluded from the Bengali language, then still the language of 95% of people of Bangladesh is Bengali hence it was indeed very oppressive to try and impose a different language on the Bengali people
    Last edited by AbdurRahman.; 03-25-2019 at 07:53 AM.

  17. #14
    Abz2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Around the bend from Venus - Just before Mars
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    5,279
    Threads
    150
    Reputation
    45452
    Rep Power
    81
    Likes (Given)
    3793
    Likes (Received)
    2887

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    A large bulk of the money in the minimal taxes being generated by a newly established government was being spent plugging the black hole that was being kept wide open through two earlier wars in which the governments of britain and america played this-side-that-side good cop bad cop games and plunged them into war.
    The money excuse was simply that - another excuse by the same people creating the problem, inducing a reaction by pushing for agitation on the eastern front -and offering an otherwise unacceptable solution in chaotic madness.




    hijack
    transitive verb
    hi·​jack | \ ˈhī-ˌjak\
    Legal Definition of hijack
    : to seize possession or control of (a vehicle) from another person by force or threat of force
    specifically : to seize possession or control of (an aircraft) especially by forcing the pilot to divert the aircraft to another destination.

    Did the US hijack Egypt's revolution? And other ...
    https://www.pri.org › stories › did-us-hija...
    Feb 13, 2012 · The woman behind Egypt's NGO crackdown says US tried to hijack the revolution.





    The sleight of hand becomes obvious when one zooms out in terms of historical milestones.
    Last edited by Abz2000; 03-24-2019 at 04:30 PM.
    World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971













  18. Report bad ads?
  19. #15
    AbdurRahman.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    700
    Threads
    2
    Reputation
    1738
    Rep Power
    45
    Likes (Given)
    648
    Likes (Received)
    546

    Re: World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971

    Quote Originally Posted by Junon View Post
    MaashAllah I never knew this about the Pashtuns. May Allah bless them amin


  20. Hide
Hey there! World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971 Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. World in Action - A Documentary on Bangladesh in 1971
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 06-01-2013, 02:42 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-04-2009, 06:56 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-02-2007, 05:39 PM
  4. The World's Most Criminal State (A BBC Documentary)
    By Umar001 in forum Islamic Multimedia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-19-2006, 05:52 PM
  5. Does anyone have this documentary?
    By samobosna96 in forum Islamic Multimedia
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-13-2006, 04:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create