Tibetans Fought as Mukti Bahni in 1971 in East Pakistan

Posted byalaiwahPosted inBangladesh, Indo Pak Relations, TibetTags:, , ,

Clip_8Tibetan Brigadier Ratuk  Brigadier Ratuk who is now 84 years old living in ‘Majno Cottila’ situated in “Tibet Colony” New Delhi, states that his secret gorilla force was not part of regular Indian army however they were under command of Indian army and Indian General Pabun was their Commander. The initial name of Ratuk’s army was ‘Voluntary Freedom Fighter Force’ but after 1962 Sino-Indian war it was renamed as ‘Tibetan Secret Regiment’. In order to avoid objection from Chinese side for armed interference into China this terrorist force of India was renamed as ‘Special Frontier Force’. Its Head Quarter was in ‘Dehradhun’ in Uttar Paradesh.

Brigadier Ratuk says that when he was ordered to send his force to Eastern Pakistan to fight against Pakistan he was shocked because his only target was freedom of Tibet from China and secret war/ terrorism against China , so he denied to wage secret war/terrorism in East Pakistan.

Clip_13When Dalai Lama’s elder brother Gyalo Thondap ordered them to help India in this war he got ready because Gyalo deceived him that if he (Ratuk) helps India in war against Pakistan than Indian army would help them to defeat Chinese army in Tibet.

After this approximately 2000 Bengali were brought into the camp and he was told that these are men of Mukti Bahni and will support his force in Gorilla war against Pak-Army in Eastern Pakistan . When these Tibetan militants entered into the Bengal they learned that Bengali traitors were not trained enough to fight against Pak army however they proved to be worthy guides because Tibetan terrorists were not aware of ground routes and installations of Pakistan army.

Clip_10Brigadier Ratuk further claims that they (his Tibetan terrorists) waged war against Pakistan disguised as Mukti Bahni and the world was being deceived that Mukti Bahni is a force of freedom fighters fighting for freedom against Pakistan . Ratuk says that this is the most clear lie of history; the actual war was fought by his men, Indian army was brought in when Indians were assured that Pakistan army has been badly hurt and Pakistan army was isolated on the international level through successful/influential propaganda even that Pakistanis themselves were feeling ashamed for the stories of war crimes of Pak Army.

The biggest proof of our (Brigadier Ratuk & his force) success against Pak Army is that when we (Tibetans) reinforced our control over Chitagong, Special Advisor for Indira Gandhi and most trusted officer of Indian Secret Agency ‘Mr. R.N. Kao’ specially visited and acknowledged that without your (Tibetan terrorists) support Indian army would never had been able to achieve such a big success in East Pakistan.

The confession of Brigadier Ratuk should be sufficient to open our eyes that East Pakistan was separated from us through a big conspiracy.

Clip_12However if our Pro-Indian intellectuals and Aman Ki Asha brand Journalist beat their old triumphant even after discovery/ disclosure of reality of Mukti Bahni that Pakistan army gang raped Bengali women, and was involved in heinous crime of genocide than I would like to question them that in Tribal Areas from last ten years Pakistan army is fighting against terrorists and successful operations are being conducted than why in spite of slaughtering of kidnapped soldiers (by terrorists) and the number of casualties of armed forces in thousands why not a single incident of rape or intentional killing of innocents have been reported/proved?

And in Balochistan these operations are going even before our maturity than why no such incident has been brought forward except the case of Dr. Shazia employed in a hospital that was allegedly raped by a Captain but when army investigations were started all those (including the target of rape) who wrote this propaganda story to   defame Pakistan  army fled to London so that actual facts could not be revealed through investigations.

However, in spite of the disclosure of reality of Mukti Bahni, Hamid Mir wants that Pakistan should apologize from Bangladesh (for the crimes of Indian terrorists)?

Clip_11If these pro-Indian elements are stuck to their demands that Pakistan should apologize from Bangladesh with regard to 1971 and Mujeeb is a hero for them than would they like to inform nation that why Mujeeb and his family was murdered by his own Bangladeshi army, not by one or two soldiers but by the whole Regiment; why did army murder their hero along with his family?

Published by alaiwah

ALAIWAH'S PHILOSOPHY About 12 years ago, while studying Arabic in Cairo, I became friends with some Egyptian students. As we got to know each other better we also became concerned about each other’s way of life. They wanted to save my soul from eternally burning in hell by converting me to Islam. I wanted to save them from wasting their real life for an illusory afterlife by converting them to the secular worldview I grew up with. In one of our discussions they asked me if I was sure that there is no proof for God’s existence. The question took me by surprise. Where I had been intellectually socialized it was taken for granted that there was none. I tried to remember Kant’s critique of the ontological proof for God. “Fine,” Muhammad said, “but what about this table, does its existence depend on a cause?” “Of course,” I answered. “And its cause depends on a further cause?” Muhammad was referring to the metaphysical proof for God’s existence, first formulated by the Muslim philosopher Avicenna. Avicenna argues, things that depend on a cause for their existence must have something that exists through itself as their first cause. And this necessary existent is God. I had a counter-argument to that to which they in turn had a rejoinder. The discussion ended inconclusively. I did not convert to Islam, nor did my Egyptian friends become atheists. But I learned an important lesson from our discussions: that I hadn’t properly thought through some of the most basic convictions underlying my way of life and worldview — from God’s existence to the human good. The challenge of my Egyptian friends forced me to think hard about these issues and defend views that had never been questioned in the milieu where I came from. These discussions gave me first-hand insight into how deeply divided we are on fundamental moral, religious and philosophical questions. While many find these disagreements disheartening, I will argue that they can be a good thing — if we manage to make them fruitful for a culture debate. Can we be sure that our beliefs about the world match how the world actually is and that our subjective preferences match what is objectively in our best interest? If the truth is important to us these are pressing questions. We might value the truth for different reasons: because we want to live a life that is good and doesn’t just appear so; because we take knowing the truth to be an important component of the good life; because we consider living by the truth a moral obligation independent of any consequences; or because we want to come closer to God who is the Truth. Of course we wouldn’t hold our beliefs and values if we weren’t convinced that they are true. But that’s no evidence that they are. Weren’t my Egyptian friends just as convinced of their views as I was of mine? More generally: don’t we find a bewildering diversity of beliefs and values, all held with great conviction, across different times and cultures? If considerations such as these lead you to concede that your present convictions could be false, then you are a fallibilist. And if you are a fallibilist you can see why valuing the truth and valuing a culture of debate are related: because you will want to critically examine your beliefs and values, for which a culture of debate offers an excellent setting.

Leave a comment