To: jlallen who wrote (35716 ) 6/1/2005 4:00:30 PM From: microhoogle! Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947 Don't y'all go soft on Nixon yet. He could have directly stopped the genocide in Bangladesh by getting Pakistani generals on leash - but he chose not to. Tell Pat Buchanan to take a hike. I doubt if there is anything Nixon would have and could have done to stop genocide in Combodia. Following is the first google result I gotculturechange.org There Blood witnessed the beginning of a massacre that would take hundreds of thousands if not millions of lives. The Pakistan army, faced with an incipient rebellion among the Bengalis, slaughtered thousands in a pre-emptive attack on the University of Dacca and the barracks of Bengali police. Columns of troops followed the roads throughout the country, burning and killing. Blood in his first cable described what he termed a "selective genocide," alerted President Richard Nixon and national security adviser Henry Kissinger to what was happening and urged them to pressure Gen. Yahya Khan, the Pakistani dictator, to stop the killing. His cable, dated March 28, 1971, was declassified last year. In it Blood wrote: "Here in Dacca we are mute and horrified witnesses to a reign of terror of the Pak military ..." The trouble was that Nixon and Kissinger had tilted toward Pakistan as a counter to Soviet influence in the subcontinent. The administration didn't want to hear what Blood was reporting. That cable was followed by another, signed by 20 Americans stationed in East Pakistan with various U.S. government agencies, decrying the official American silence as serving "neither our moral interests broadly defined nor our national interests narrowly defined ..."