# Stone Age Soanian Culture (Ancient Pakistan II)



## Indus Priest King

*~Pakistan: A Peoples History~*
_* Part II: Stone age Soanian culture*_







Following the early human Riwat culture, the Soanian culture appeared in the Lower Paleolithic (early stone age) between 500,000 to 125,000 years ago in the Soan Valley of upper Punjab.

The term "Soanian Culture" was first used by Hellmut De Terra in 1936, but D. N. Wadia had identified the presence of these archaeological implements in 1928. Two important Soanian culture sites are Adiyala and Khasala, about 16 km (9.9 mi) from Rawalpindi terrace on the bend of the Soan River.

Tools up to two million years old have been recovered from these sites including hundreds of edged pebble tools, hand axes and cleavers have been found. Some of these artifacts are on display at the Pakistan Museum of Natural History in Islamabad.

Other Stone Age sites have been discovered at Bajaur, Makli Hill and Sanghao.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
2 | Like Like:
21


----------



## Indus Priest King

My facebook post




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1584248241635154

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
5


----------



## kalakaar

Ancient India and current days Pakistan, to be precise and accurate.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> Ancient India and current days Pakistan, to be precise and accurate.



No, because the Republic of Hindustan came into existence in 1947 as well. 

Just because you named yourself after the Indus river doesn't mean its history belongs to you. Unless you come from Hindustani provinces that border Pakistan, you are not part of the Indus Basin and therefore Indus history is not yours.

Reactions: Like Like:
21


----------



## My-Analogous

kalakaar said:


> Ancient India and current days Pakistan, to be precise and accurate.


In any text of old book show me any word refers as ancient India?. Don't make your self fool here and read proper history not some Indian text book publish just 20 to 50 years. This is our culture and our history and nothing to do with you.



Indus Priest King said:


> *~Pakistan: A Peoples History~*
> _* Part II: Stone age Soanian culture*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Following the early human Riwat culture, the Soanian culture appeared in the Lower Paleolithic (early stone age) between 500,000 to 125,000 years ago in the Soan Valley of upper Punjab.
> 
> The term "Soanian Culture" was first used by Hellmut De Terra in 1936, but D. N. Wadia had identified the presence of these archaeological implements in 1928. Two important Soanian culture sites are Adiyala and Khasala, about 16 km (9.9 mi) from Rawalpindi terrace on the bend of the Soan River.
> 
> Tools up to two million years old have been recovered from these sites including hundreds of edged pebble tools, hand axes and cleavers have been found. Some of these artifacts are on display at the Pakistan Museum of Natural History in Islamabad.
> 
> Other Stone Age sites have been discovered at Bajaur, Makli Hill and Sanghao.


Keep the good work going

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PaklovesTurkiye

kalakaar said:


> Ancient India and current days Pakistan, to be precise and accurate.



Portuguese India...Dutch India...

India was never one....until British came and regrouped it and called it one India.....for their easiness

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PaklovesTurkiye

@Kaptaan


----------



## kalakaar

dsr478 said:


> No, because the Republic of Hindustan came into existence in 1947 as well.
> 
> Just because you named yourself after the Indus river doesn't mean its history belongs to you. Unless you come from Hindustani provinces that border Pakistan, you are not part of the Indus Basin and therefore Indus history is not yours.





My-Analogous said:


> In any text of old book show me any word refers as ancient India?. Don't make your self fool here and read proper history not some Indian text book publish just 20 to 50 years. This is our culture and our history and nothing to do with you.
> 
> 
> Keep the good work going



May be in Pakistan you won't find but here in India we can find the existence starting from satyug till kalyug. And we are doing better than you people in education.


----------



## Mentee

PaklovesTurkiye said:


> Portuguese India...Dutch India...
> 
> India was never one....until British came and regrouped it and called it one India.....for their easiness


Not one India but british east Indian union to be precise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimoor Khan

kalakaar said:


> Ancient India and current days Pakistan, to be precise and accurate.



Bollocks.

Indians for once need to stop being a lousy bunch of glory hunters and start looking at their miserable beginning within their ganges civilization. Granted, its not funky to be associated with a premitive civilization as Ganges, but atleast it is yours.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## kalakaar

Taimoor Khan said:


> Bollocks.
> 
> Indians for once need to stop being a lousy bunch of glory hunters and start looking at their miserable beginning within their ganges civilization. Granted, its not funky to be associated with a premitive civilization as Ganges, but atleast it is yours.



Sindhu bhi Humari, Ganga bhi humari, Saraswati bhi humari aur Yamuna bhi humari. Tumhe zam zam Mubarak ho.


----------



## Taimoor Khan

kalakaar said:


> Sindhu bhi Humari, Ganga bhi humari, Saraswati bhi humari aur Yamuna bhi humari. Tumhe zam zam Mubarak ho.




Fikar na karo, tumhain kat kat kay Ganga tak mahdood kar dain gaey. Sometimes you need to Ghetto a certain group of people for the good of all.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

@Indus Priest King Keep up the good work. You have my 100% support. If you need any input from me in your page just tag me. You are performing a incredibly important tast and shaping future of Pakistan. And I hope others here also support you.

I don't have time now but I will explain why your mission is so vital to the cultivating of soft power of Pakistan.

_Ps. And don't listen to Gangadeshi's croaking in jealousy_.

Reactions: Like Like:
16


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> May be in Pakistan you won't find but here in India we can find the existence starting from satyug till kalyug. And we are doing better than you people in education.



This is about the history of the Indus Valley (Pakistan)...not Hindustan (Ganges Plain). Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> This is about the history of the Indus Valley (Pakistan)...not Hindustan (Ganges Plain). Thanks.



the largest IVC structure and city is in haryana, India, 2 times larger than mohenjo daro. lol
and that Mohenjo daro is also ours only. right now under occupation of invaders.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> the largest IVC structure and city is in haryana, India, 2 times larger than mohenjo daro. lol
> and that Mohenjo daro is also ours only. right now under occupation of invaders.



LOL...bunch of Dasyus of Dasyuvarta think they're Indus? That's hilarious. The largest Indus Valley sites are all in Pakistan...2 sites haven't even been fully excavated yet.

Know your role Dasyu...you're not Aryans and you're not Indus either. You're Dasyu...

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> LOL...bunch of Dasyus of Dasyuvarta think they're Indus? That's hilarious. The largest Indus Valley sites are all in Pakistan...2 sites haven't even been fully excavated yet.
> 
> Know your role Dasyu...you're not Aryans and you're not Indus either. You're Dasyu...



No one cares what pakistan says, it was our ideology, our city, infact Delhi is known as Indraprastha and Ayodhya had a King married to Mata kekayi from Sindh region, who was step mother to Bhagwan Ram.

Pata wata hai nahi kuch ajatey hai historians ban ke.


----------



## My-Analogous

kalakaar said:


> May be in Pakistan you won't find but here in India we can find the existence starting from satyug till kalyug. And we are doing better than you people in education.


First educate your self and come here. Now go back to your cave



kalakaar said:


> Sindhu bhi Humari, Ganga bhi humari, Saraswati bhi humari aur Yamuna bhi humari. Tumhe zam zam Mubarak ho.


Poor soul. Go educate your self



kalakaar said:


> No one cares what pakistan says, it was our ideology, our city, infact Delhi is known as Indraprastha and Ayodhya had a King married to Mata kekayi from Sindh region, who was step mother to Bhagwan Ram.
> 
> Pata wata hai nahi kuch ajatey hai historians ban ke.


What Ideology? your one is only 2000BC old maximum and IVC end 4000BC. Like i said before educate your self and then come back. How can you justify 2000 years in between?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

My-Analogous said:


> What Ideology? your one is only 2000BC old maximum and IVC end 4000BC. Like i said before educate your self and then come back. How can you justify 2000 years in between?



What 2000 5000


To under stand vedic civilization you have to become Hindu. Our epics are our History our traditions fully recorded. Read Mahabharat and you would come to know that delhi was called as Indraprastha even before 2000bc.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> May be in Pakistan you won't find but here in India we can find the existence starting from satyug till kalyug. And we are doing better than you people in education.



No, your nation started in 1947. The land mass might have been inhabited by people before that time, but the same can be said about Pakistan.

And we have higher IQ's than you people:

https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country

That "education" clearly isn't going to good use since most of you still lack toilets, believe in paganism, reject the Aryan migrations (even though everyone else considers it fact), hate Muslims but still claim our history/culture (e.g the Taj Mahal, Urdu, Mughlai cuisine, etc), and are basically the FYROM of South Asia, claiming the history of your neighbours because you lack any of your own, based on the stupid fact that you named yourselves after our river.



Kaptaan said:


> @Indus Priest King Keep up the good work. You have my 100% support. If you need any input from me in your page just tag me. You are performing a incredibly important tast and shaping future of Pakistan. And I hope others here also support you.
> 
> I don't have time now but I will explain why your mission is so vital to the cultivating of soft power of Pakistan.
> 
> _Ps. And don't listen to Gangadeshi's croaking in jealousy_.



Are you serious?

He literally thinks that you can be a Pakistani nationalist without being Muslim (he even openly blasphemes against the religion), and calls those he opposes "Hindustanis in disguise". Do you honestly agree with him?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> No one cares what pakistan says, it was our ideology, our city, infact Delhi is known as Indraprastha and Ayodhya had a King married to Mata kekayi from Sindh region, who was step mother to Bhagwan Ram. Pata wata hai nahi kuch ajatey hai historians ban ke.



Nobody in Sindh (even Sindhi Hindus) give a shit about your Mahabharata or your myths. There's a reason why we called you DASYUS. Even the latest genetic studies prove you're not even Aryan. LMFAO.

You're Dravidians who are posing as Aryans. LMFAO.

Pakistan is the real India
Pakistanis are the real Indians
Pakistanis are the real Indo-Aryans

You are Bharat
You are Bharatis
You are Dravidian Dasyus

Take your Ramayana, Mahabharata, Manusmriti and shove it up your Gangetic arse. This is Vedic territory son. The Vedas supersede all your other shit.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## U-571

so if you think that indus valley civilization saw migration of aryans in 1500 BC to 1000 BC, then how can you claim the rights of indus valley civilization?

because i read your views on





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1945561392170502





according to your own assumption, the indus valley people were dravadians 

let me tell you friend, the Punjabis and sindhis are indic people, as much as balochistan and pashtuns are iranian people, this is no hidden fact. it is universally accepted that we are indians through race, as much as western pakistan is iranic by race.

Pakistan was made by Jinnah, a gujrati indian, you cannot even call him native pakistani because he isn't to you he is as well dravida desyus?

pakistan was made in the name of islam and racially slurring people is not what pakistan was made for, remember that.

i did believe that dravidians were indus valley people before since i believed in aryan migration, but more i learnt, the more i now realize indus was not dravidian, and there are hard evidences of indus not being dravidian, firstly because indus valley was bronze age civilization and south india didn't get to bronze age.


----------



## UnitedPak

Please ignore the ganga. Earned himself a negative rating for trying to derail a genuine and informative thread with his insecurity.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## My-Analogous

kalakaar said:


> What 2000 5000
> 
> 
> To under stand vedic civilization you have to become Hindu. Our epics are our History our traditions fully recorded. Read Mahabharat and you would come to know that delhi was called as Indraprastha even before 2000bc.


How old are you? . Tell me did you become Cristian to understand Computers? You are not mature person and your this comment is not even worth to answer you. Now you are in my ignore list


----------



## Indus Priest King

U-571 said:


> so if you think that indus valley civilization saw migration of aryans in 1500 BC to 1000 BC, then how can you claim the rights of indus valley civilization?



I never once said the Indus Valley Civilization were Dravidians. Learn the difference between INDUS VALLEY (geographical region) and INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION (ancient civilization which inhabited the Indus Valley).



> according to your own assumption, the indus valley people were dravadians



How do you come to that conclusion?



> let me tell you friend, the Punjabis and sindhis are indic people, as much as balochistan and pashtuns are iranian people, this is no hidden fact. it is universally accepted that we are indians through race, as much as western pakistan is iranic by race.



Umm sorry.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/genetic-map-of-pakistan.558317/









> Pakistan was made by Jinnah, a gujrati indian, you cannot even call him native pakistani because he isn't to you he is as well dravida desyus?



This just proves how fucking stupid you are. Gujarat (Western Gujarat) are an Indus nation. Have you ever opened a genetic study before? They share similar genetic makeup of that of Sindh. Jinnah was a son of the soil.



> pakistan was made in the name of islam and racially slurring people is not what pakistan was made for, remember that.



Where does it say that? Show me. You're probably upset because you yourself are Gangetic trash. Pakistan was created to safeguard the rights of Muslims which were being infringed upon by the British-Brahmin elite ruling British India. It had nothing to do with Islam...if it was made in the name of your Islam, why did all the Islamic parties oppose Pakistan? Dumbass.



> i did believe that dravidians were indus valley people before since i believed in aryan migration, but more i learnt, the more i now realize indus was not dravidian, and there are hard evidences of indus not being dravidian, firstly because indus valley was bronze age civilization and south india didn't get to bronze age.



Who said they were Dravidian? Don't talk outta your *** and then claim I said something. The Indus Valley Civilization (Harappans) had more cultural links with Mesopotamia (Sumerians) than with "Dravidians". Indus Valley Civilization were NOT Dravidians.

Dear mods. Kindly delete all this bullshit written by these Indian cunts and these Mullah boys. It amazes me how similar they react...both hate Paksitanis owning their heritage and culture. I'm surprised why they hate each other so much...when much of what they believe is exactly the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## U-571

Indus Priest King said:


> I never once said the Indus Valley Civilization were Dravidians. Learn the difference between INDUS VALLEY (geographical region) and INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION (ancient civilization which inhabited the Indus Valley).
> 
> 
> 
> How do you come to that conclusion?
> 
> 
> 
> Umm sorry.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/genetic-map-of-pakistan.558317/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This just proves how fucking stupid you are. Gujarat (Western Gujarat) are an Indus nation. Have you ever opened a genetic study before? They share similar genetic makeup of that of Sindh. Jinnah was a son of the soil.
> 
> 
> 
> Where does it say that? Show me. You're probably upset because you yourself are Gangetic trash. Pakistan was created to safeguard the rights of Muslims which were being infringed upon by the British-Brahmin elite ruling British India. It had nothing to do with Islam...if it was made in the name of your Islam, why did all the Islamic parties oppose Pakistan? Dumbass.
> 
> 
> 
> Who said they were Dravidian? Don't talk outta your *** and then claim I said something. The Indus Valley Civilization (Harappans) had more cultural links with Mesopotamia (Sumerians) than with "Dravidians". Indus Valley Civilization were NOT Dravidians.
> 
> Dear mods. Kindly delete all this bullshit written by these Indian cunts and these Mullah boys. It amazes me how similar they react...both hate Paksitanis owning their heritage and culture. I'm surprised why they hate each other so much...when much of what they believe is exactly the same.



i think you an idiot yourself believes in crap, if you bother to read the basics of AMT its clear that its about aryans vs dravidians and nothing else, what ever else you are cooking up or pulling from your orifice is just nothing but pile of made up garbage you are making yourself. if indus valley had mesopotamia race/ culture, it would be termed as extension of mesopotamia and not a separate civilization.

what you brainwash pakistanis is pure crap, try to use a little sense before trying to open BS facebook page.


----------



## Indus Priest King

U-571 said:


> i think you an idiot yourself believes in crap, if you bother to read the basics of AMT its clear that its about aryans vs dravidians and nothing else, what ever else you are cooking up or pulling from your orifice is just nothing but pile of made up garbage you are making yourself. if indus valley had mesopotamia race/ culture, it would be termed as extension of mesopotamia and not a separate civilization.
> 
> what you brainwash pakistanis is pure crap, try to use a little sense before trying to open BS facebook page.



What are you even talking about Aryans and Dravidians? You don't even know what you're arguing about do you? Pakistanis are the true Indo-Aryans....Indo-Aryans formed when Harappans and Aryans merged together in 1500 BCE. This gave rise to the Indus Vedic Civilization you twit. Aryans NEVER migrated into the Ganges plain...that's the point I'm making. North Indians and South Indians are pretty much the same people. The only difference is North Indians think they're actually Aryans. Genetic studies have proven that as WRONG. Deal with it.

What exactly are you crying about? Are you upset you're not Aryan? LOL don't cry Dasyu...just accept it. You're a gangetic piece of trash.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> Sindhu bhi Humari, Ganga bhi humari, Saraswati bhi humari aur Yamuna bhi humari. Tumhe zam zam Mubarak ho.


_“Where these five rivers, Shatadru, Vipasha, the third Iravati, Chandrabhaga and Vitasta flow and where there are Pilu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called Aratta…”._

_“who will save us from our mortal enemies in the Sapta Sindhu?”_

_“that (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta (country) is called Balhika where the Brahmin should not stay even for two days”.
_
straight from Hindu texts

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Indus Priest King

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> _“Where these five rivers, Shatadru, Vipasha, the third Iravati, Chandrabhaga and Vitasta flow and where there are Pilu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called Aratta…”._
> 
> _“who will save us from our mortal enemies in the Sapta Sindhu?”_
> 
> _“that (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta (country) is called Balhika where the Brahmin should not stay even for two days”.
> _
> straight from Hindu texts



It's translated to either Vahika Desa or Bahika Desa. These chutiya Dasyus don't even know the difference between Vedic civilization of the Indus and their bullshit Dasyu Puranic civilization in the toilet bowl called the Ganges.

The Puranas were written with a hatred for the Indus Valley...they (Ganga Dasyus) called us Mlechas and the land was considered unholy for their pseudo Aryan Brahmins to even touch (Vahika Desa).

That's why we called them Dasyu Varta. The next time you come across an Indian, call them Dasyus. They will completely flip out on you. LMFAO.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> It's translated to either Vahika Desa or Bahika Desa. These chutiya Dasyus don't even know the difference between Vedic civilization of the Indus and their bullshit Dasyu Puranic civilization in the toilet bowl called the Ganges.
> 
> The Puranas were written with a hatred for the Indus Valley...they (Ganga Dasyus) called us Mlechas and the land was considered unholy for their pseudo Aryan Brahmins to even touch (Vahika Desa).
> 
> That's why we called them Dasyu Varta. The next time you come across an Indian, call them Dasyus. They will completely flip out on you. LMFAO.




And those Vahikas or Gandharis never believed in Mohammad nor in Ali neither in Mecca or in Zam Zam ,  they were staunch worshipers of either Shukracharya or Shiva. That's enough for me 

After 10000 years an ideology from the Arab came and converted them forcefully. So sad!



My-Analogous said:


> How old are you? . Tell me did you become Cristian to understand Computers? You are not mature person and your this comment is not even worth to answer you. Now you are in my ignore list



Oh well, then tell me who is the central figure in Mahabharat?


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> And those Vahikas or Gandharis never believed in Mohammad nor in Ali neither in Mecca or in Zam Zam ,  they were staunch worshipers of either Shukracharya or Shiva. That's enough for me
> 
> After 10000 years an ideology from the Arab came and converted them forcefully. So sad!
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well, then tell me who is the central figure in Mahabharat?



Umm....your gods were not worshiped by the Indus Vedic. For us, it was Indra....for you it was your own Dravidian gods you usurped. LMFAO. Shiva? LMFAO.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proudpakistaniguy

Soan River — witness to rise and fall of many civilisations

*It is said that rivers give birth to civilisations and if a river dries up or changes its path, the civilisation also dies eventually.* Obvious examples of such cities that have now gone extinct can be found in Cholistan desert where remains of several settlements of Indus Valley civilisation have been found along the dry bed of the ancient river Hakra.

However, those rivers that continue to exist become cradle of history as one civilisation after another rises and falls on their banks. Soan River has proven to be one such asset which has seen the rise and fall of many civilisations and cultures. But as fates have turned, once the site of a prehistoric civilisation, today Soan River has been reduced to nothing more than a sewer and a dump site for our ‘modern civilisation’.

Though Soan is considered to be one of Pakistan’s smaller rivers, this is an important stream of the Potohar region and historically has been the centre of pre-historic Soanian culture.

Emerging from the foothills of Patriata and Murree, Soan River eventually falls into Indus River near Makkar.

“The oldest evidence of life in Pakistan has been found in Soan River valley. It was here that some of the earliest signs of humans have been discovered during the excavations of prehistoric mounds,” said Director of Taxila Institute of Asian Civilization at Quaid-i-Azam University, Dr Ashraf Khan.

According to Dr Khan, Soan River Valley is where 500,000 year old relics of the Stone Age man have been found, identifying it as the place with the earliest human inhabitation in the region.

Soan River has many archeological as well as natural heritage sites along its banks and there is no denying that the areas of Rawalpindi and Islamabad are a rich den of precious history.

“The historic background of Rawalpindi and Islamabad can be traced back to the Paleolithic period, the oldest stone tools have been reported in Morgah, Sohan and on the banks of River Soan,” said Dr Ashraf.

“The Stone Age men of Soan Valley have been found to organise themselves in a homogeneous society where they formed groups and developed a culture called the Soan Culture,” explained Dr Khan. Beyond people, significant animal remains have also been found along Soan River. Experts reveal that one such discovery has been of a large fossil, probably remains of a rhinoceros, along the bank of River Soan near another historically site, the Pharwala Fort.

Unfortunately, instead of finding more about the hidden treasures around Soan River, these remains are under permanent danger of being destroyed.

Mr Zulminun, a resident of Soan Garden Housing Society, remarked: “Due to sewage disposal and piles of municipal waste being dumped into the river without any hesitation or fear of legal action by the authorities, I fear there will be nothing left for future generations to learn from here.”

Part of the problem is the sheer lack of awareness about the importance of Soan River and its surroundings. Archeological and heritage sites have never been given their due attention by the government and so people remain unaware of the significance of these remains that give clues to our prehistoric past.

Irfan Bhatti, a radio producer and the patron-in-chief of Potohar Adventures Club, condemned the negligence of the authorities for the ongoing damage.

It is not just a matter of destruction of our history, but the river is a natural home for many species: “Birds and animals of Potohar Region naturally make their homes along the river - just like the extinct animals that once lived here. But this window to our pre-historic past is facing increasing pressure from developers and polluters,” he added.

Theoretically, no new project is authorised without its Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports.

Thus when housing and other developmental projects fulfil this legal requirement, they commit that their projects will not cause any harm to environment or heritage.

This means that project planners should assume the responsibility of developing proper sewage and solid waste treatment and disposal systems. But in reality, such planning and development is simply not taking place and EPA and the government keeps its eyes closed to ongoing violations.

This matter needs to be addressed not just because of the significance of these sites but also because their full value has not even been completely discovered yet.

“Detailed scientific excavations are needed on these sites so that a stratified chronology of the history of this region can be established,” said Dr Khan, pointing out the abundant room for exploration and discovery that exists in these areas.

Experts claim that these prehistoric sites have immense value and are worthy of being selected as one of Unesco’s many world heritage sites - but without attention from authorities concerned, they will remain unnoticed and ignored.

https://www.dawn.com/news/707009

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Umm....your gods were not worshiped by the Indus Vedic. For us, it was Indra....for you it was your own Dravidian gods you usurped. LMFAO. Shiva? LMFAO.



I don't mind if you also start worshiping Lord Indra and forget Islamic way and preachings. Rather I would suggest you to immediately change your name and keep it as Indra Kumar. I would be the happiest  I welcome you to the dharmic and vedic way of living. When are you changing your name to Indra Kumar?


----------



## UnitedPak

U-571 said:


> i think you an idiot yourself believes in crap, if you bother to read the basics of AMT its clear that its about aryans vs dravidians and nothing else, what ever else you are cooking up or pulling from your orifice is just nothing but pile of made up garbage you are making yourself. if indus valley had mesopotamia race/ culture, it would be termed as extension of mesopotamia and not a separate civilization.
> 
> what you brainwash pakistanis is pure crap, try to use a little sense before trying to open BS facebook page.





U-571 said:


> pakistanis are certainly known to live in their la la land, denial and ignorance is the first line of attack or defence for Pakistanis.
> 
> preach your mesopotamian indus valley culture to ignorants and la la land dwellers like yourself.


Please stop trolling this thread.

AMT has evolved significantly if you bother to spend your previous time on the latest studies by western led research teams. The Indus valley people were a mix of local hunter gatherers (not Dravidians) + Iranian agriculturalists. Central Asian Steppe people arrived later and mixed with the Indus people. This is the basis of Pakistani ancestry. Don't confuse AASI with Dravidians either. It's a nonsensical term for the Hunter Gatherer people settled across Asia (from Turkey to Thailand), hence why some Turkish people have the same AASI genetic component, albeit very tiny..

The ANI + ASI does not apply to Pakistan as there is no evidence of ASI migration to the Indus region.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## U-571

UnitedPak said:


> Please stop trolling this thread.
> 
> AMT has evolved significantly if you bother to spend your previous time on the latest studies by western led research teams. The Indus valley people were a mix of local hunter gatherers (not Dravidians) + Iranian agriculturalists. Central Asian Steppe people arrived later and mixed with the Indus people. This is the basis of Pakistani ancestry. Don't confuse AASI with Dravidians either. It's a nonsensical term for the Hunter Gatherer people settled across Asia (from Turkey to Thailand), hence why some Turkish people have the same AASI genetic component, albeit very tiny..
> 
> The ANI + ASI does not apply to Pakistan as there is no evidence of ASI migration to the Indus region.



aryan migration theory has been fully debunked as its predecessor aryan invasion theory, archeologists have found zero proof of either invasion or migration. The BMAC civilization was not indo aryan as evidence suggests so there couldn't have been no migration from central asian steps. the studies have found no genetic change up until 10,000 BC at the end of the last ice age, indian population has remained unhindered y any migration or mixing.

as for your study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration, it has also been debunked by an indian study. hunter gatherer is considered to be the andamanese people to be the AASI and suggests indian population remained unevolved up until the iranian farmers migrated into indus valley (iranian comes from persian which itself is a very wrong assumption considering persians didn't migrate or invaded prsent day iran up until 1000 BC), which means another migration scenario is suggested as if AMT was not enough, again, there has been zero proof that there was any iranian or what ever genetic mixing in the indus valley. The study makes these assumptions based on their concoction that any farming was followed by migration. many crops including rice were domesticated in india which was then spread to west asia. the spread of wheat to india is taken in the light of people migration to india, but no such model is proposed showing out of india migration. rice domestication alone suggests that idians were clearly not hunter gatherers.

Aryan migration theory suggests that dravidians were the people who made indus valley civilization

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ryan-invasion-theory/articleshow/64565413.cms

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

U-571 said:


> aryan migration theory has been fully debunked as its predecessor aryan invasion theory, archeologists have found zero proof of either invasion or migration. The BMAC civilization was not indo aryan as evidence suggests so there couldn't have been no migration from central asian steps. the studies have found no genetic change up until 10,000 BC at the end of the last ice age, indian population has remained unhindered y any migration or mixing.
> 
> as for your study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration, it has also been debunked by an indian study. hunter gatherer is considered to be the andamanese people to be the AASI and suggests indian population remained unevolved up until the iranian farmers migrated into indus valley (iranian comes from persian which itself is a very wrong assumption considering persians didn't migrate or invaded prsent day iran up until 1000 BC), which means another migration scenario is suggested as if AMT was not enough, again, there has been zero proof that there was any iranian or what ever genetic mixing in the indus valley. The study makes these assumptions based on their concoction that any farming was followed by migration. many crops including rice were domesticated in india which was then spread to west asia. the spread of wheat to india is taken in the light of people migration to india, but no such model is proposed showing out of india migration. rice domestication alone suggests that idians were clearly not hunter gatherers.
> 
> Aryan migration theory suggests that dravidians were the people who made indus valley civilization
> 
> https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ryan-invasion-theory/articleshow/64565413.cms



Now who is in lala-land, quoting ToI. The study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration was never debunked. Please give me a single non-Indian source for this claim. Hindu nationalists were upset about the results and started peddling the Out of India rival theory, as they have always done. Evey Indian study takes the same approach.

Interesting that you are promoting the same theory.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## U-571

UnitedPak said:


> Now who is in lala-land, quoting ToI. The study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration was never debunked. Please give me a single non-Indian source for this claim. Hindu nationalists were upset about the results and started peddling the Out of India rival theory, as they have always done. Evey Indian study takes the same approach.
> 
> Interesting that you are promoting the same theory.



study is a study, if you are attaching ''indian nationalism'' to a scientific study then i also question that aryan migration proponents are making BS study you are refering to. you can research more about this matter by name of Toomas Kivisild whose study shows that mtDNA of south asia was resposnible for the population of euroasia when indians migrated to the north in 10,000 BC.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

U-571 said:


> study is a study, if you are attaching ''indian nationalism'' to a scientific study then i also question that aryan migration proponists are making BS study you are refering to. you can research more about this matter by name of Toomas Kivisild whose study shows that mtDNA of south asia was resposnible for the population of euroasia when indians migrated to the north in 10,000 BC.



Not aware of confirmation bias?


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> And those Vahikas or Gandharis never believed in Mohammad nor in Ali neither in Mecca or in Zam Zam ,  they were staunch worshipers of either Shukracharya or Shiva. That's enough for me


wrong again









UnitedPak said:


> Now who is in lala-land, quoting ToI. The study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration was never debunked. Please give me a single non-Indian source for this claim. Hindu nationalists were upset about the results and started peddling the Out of India rival theory, as they have always done. Evey Indian study takes the same approach.
> 
> Interesting that you are promoting the same theory.


this guy is a self-hating Pakistani, I don't even think he is a Pakistan; look at his previous posts.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## kalakaar

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> wrong again



Hahahaa Oh man you are really funny! This is shit what you have posted. 

First you quote Mahabharat, and you are not aware who is the central figure in Mahabharat. What and how Mahabharat was conlcuded, and what event prior to Mahabharat took place. I mean I find myself fool trying to teach about Mahabharat to a Mohammaddan. 
LOL

Now no matter what, who ever the Vahika or Gandharis worshiped, they were not Muslims, nor they believed in Kalma nor in Mohammad nor in Arab or in Mecca. They had their own rituals  and I will be first one to appreciate if you start following these rituals again  

I am serious about this, come back to originality! I Welcome you back to the vedic and dharmic life style.


----------



## Pakistani E

kalakaar said:


> I am serious about this, come back to originality! I Welcome you back to the vedic and dharmic life style.



Just because I change my religion, it doesn't mean I am not entitled to the inheritance of my father's house. Take your ridiculous Ganga logic back to your swamps.

I am a proud son of Indus, and I proudly follow whichever religion finds acceptance in my heart. I don't need a glory stealing delinquent to teach me about my land. You should be proud of the land of your forefathers, don't develop an inferior complex my Ganga swamp dwelling friend. Be proud of who you are.

@Indus Priest King Great thread by the way, keep up the good work and ignore the trolls.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## kalakaar

Sher Shah Awan said:


> Just because I change my religion, it doesn't mean I am not entitled to the inheritance of my father's house. Take your ridiculous Ganga logic back to your swamps.
> 
> I am a proud son of Indus, and I proudly follow whichever religion finds acceptance in my heart. I don't need a glory stealing delinquent to teach me about my land. You should be proud of the land of your forefathers, don't develop an inferior complex my Ganga swamp dwelling friend. Be proud of who you are.
> 
> @Indus Priest King Great thread by the way, keep up the good work and ignore the trolls.



1.Your fore father was an invader who illegally occupied the land. Since when you became the owner?
2. And if you are a convert then the invaders forcefully converted your forefathers into their way of theology and traditions. Then you are a slave. You own nothing. 
3. And if your forefathers converted by choice this means you people have left the vedic traditions because you don#t find them worth following. In this case you have no right to own them either. 

You are going through identity crisis mate.  There is a saying, '' dhobhi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka ''.

Neither you are from Ganga ghaat nor Sindhu ghaat, and arbis don't consider you as pure muslims lol. 



UnitedPak said:


> Now who is in lala-land, quoting ToI. The study about hunter gatherer and iranian migration was never debunked. Please give me a single non-Indian source for this claim. Hindu nationalists were upset about the results and started peddling the Out of India rival theory, as they have always done. Evey Indian study takes the same approach.
> 
> Interesting that you are promoting the same theory.



The la-la logic as posted by you is '' your source is wrong because its TOI, my source is right because I found them on google''. Any independent source means western source, which can be biased too. So your way of debating is very unprofessional way of debating.


----------



## UnitedPak

kalakaar said:


> The la-la logic as posted by you is '' your source is wrong because its TOI, my source is right because I found them on google''. Any independent source means western source, which can be biased too. So your way of debating is very unprofessional way of debating.



The study I quoted has not been debunked as the poster claimed. It is an actual scientific research paper rather than a trash ToI article which seems to peddle the same "out of India" theory that is ridiculed the world over.

Looking at your debating logic, you seem to think of Pakistanis as illegal invaders, hence modern Indians must be true heirs to a region 2000km west of Ganga. That's certifiable delusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xyxmt

thats my people, we have been around for million of years and would be around million more with one and only objective.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sine Nomine

Butthurt of Gangadeshis is Quite high on this very thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

UnitedPak said:


> The study I quoted has not been debunked as the poster claimed. It is an actual scientific research paper rather than a trash ToI article which seems to peddle the same "out of India" theory that is ridiculed the world over.
> 
> Looking at your debating logic, you seem to think of Pakistanis as illegal invaders, hence modern Indians must be true heirs to a region 2000km west of Ganga. That's certifiable delusion.



The studies what you are quoting has nothing to do with you claiming to be the sole owner of anything. You people are Muslims, we are Hindus, you believe in Muhammad we don't. It makes no difference whether there were aryans or Bahaviks or Gandharis or Sindhudeshis what so ever. They were all no believers of Allah and disbelievers of any Yusuf.

The point I am making is, we know who we are and you are trying to copy our traditions (which are anti islamic and not advised to follow in Sharia) as your property but Pakistan got separated because of Islamic identity which has nothing to do with Vedic culture, the vedic people never worshipped Allah ( the Arabic one) or never believed in Muhammad or Ali. The so called Hindus living in Pakistan were reduced to less than one percent, the sindhi Hindus had to migrate to India due to forceful conversion and killings. Why did they migrate because they knew that an anti vedic ideology has caused the destruction and division of the land which never fought on the basis of religion.
So come on dude, next time bring some better logic.


----------



## UnitedPak

kalakaar said:


> The studies what you are quoting has nothing to do with you claiming to be the sole owner of anything. You people are Muslims, we are Hindus, you believe in Muhammad we don't. It makes no difference whether there were aryans or Bahaviks or Gandharis or Sindhudeshis what so ever. They were all no believers of Allah and disbelievers of any Yusuf.
> 
> The point I am making is, we know who we are and you are trying to copy our traditions (which are anti islamic and not advised to follow in Sharia) as your property but Pakistan got separated because of Islamic identity which has nothing to do with Vedic culture, the vedic people never worshipped Allah ( the Arabic one) or never believed in Muhammad or Ali. The so called Hindus living in Pakistan were reduced to less than one percent, the sindhi Hindus had to migrate to India due to forceful conversion and killings. Why did they migrate because they knew that an anti vedic ideology has caused the destruction and division of the land which never fought on the basis of religion.
> So come on dude, next time bring some better logic.



You are obsessed with religion and this topic of *ancestry and heritage* has very little to do with religion.

Please move your clueless self to a relevant forum. You are clearly confused as to the purpose of this thread. I am not willing to entertain your asininity anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Every Pakistani history thread gets derailed by Indians promoting this RSS nonsense. 

“You are slaves, you are invaders, you are rape products, you are not real Muslims.”

Don’t these qualify as abuse, slander, propaganda, dehumanisation?

I believe this forum would be a much better place if these were ban-able offenses.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

kalakaar said:


> the largest IVC structure and city is in haryana, India, 2 times larger than mohenjo daro. lol
> and that Mohenjo daro is also ours only. right now under occupation of invaders.






Can you please provide a link to reliable, genuine, honest and irrefutable evidence as per your claims that those above found indian sites were in fact part of the IVC. If not then you are 100% lying.



kalakaar said:


> 1.Your fore father was an invader who illegally occupied the land. Since when you became the owner?
> 2. And if you are a convert then the invaders forcefully converted your forefathers into their way of theology and traditions. Then you are a slave. You own nothing.
> 3. And if your forefathers converted by choice this means you people have left the vedic traditions because you don#t find them worth following. In this case you have no right to own them either.
> 
> You are going through identity crisis mate.  There is a saying, '' dhobhi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka ''.
> 
> Neither you are from Ganga ghaat nor Sindhu ghaat, and arbis don't consider you as pure muslims lol.
> 
> 
> 
> The la-la logic as posted by you is '' your source is wrong because its TOI, my source is right because I found them on google''. Any independent source means western source, which can be biased too. So your way of debating is very unprofessional way of debating.






Where is the evidence that the IVC was vedic in nature? Please provide honest, reliable, irrefutable and genuine evidence. If not you are telling lies and spreading misinformation.



U-571 said:


> study is a study, if you are attaching ''indian nationalism'' to a scientific study then i also question that aryan migration proponists are making BS study you are refering to. you can research more about this matter by name of Toomas Kivisild whose study shows that mtDNA of south asia was resposnible for the population of euroasia when indians migrated to the north in 10,000 BC.




Sorry. Have to strongly disagree. A study or evidence that is indian is immediately null, void and worthless. indian sources regarding EVERYTHING have a LONG history of being outright lies, propaganda, misinformation, fairy tales, made up stories and twisted fantasies. Especially when the TRUTH doesn't fit their narrative or beliefs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Sorry. Have to strongly disagree. A study or evidence that is indian is immediately null, void and worthless. indian sources regarding EVERYTHING have a LONG history of being outright lies, propaganda, misinformation, fairy tales, made up stories and twisted fantasies. Especially when the TRUTH doesn't fit their narrative or beliefs.



AMT has been completely debunked by many geneticists and even archaeologists, this is why now the AMT proponents propose another theory that is aryan trickling theory, in which they propose aryan population trickled down to india for thousands of years.

https://www.harappa.com/sites/default/files/pdf/CulturesSocietiesIndusTrad.pdf



> There is no archaeological evidence for invasion, or even large-scale migration into the northwestern subcontinent
> 
> When linguists tried to understand the relationship between the Sanskrit language and other classical languages such as Latin and Greek, they coined the word Indo-European, to refer to a large family of related languages that spread from India to Europe (Mallory 1989; Renfrew 1987).
> 
> Although many scholars have proposed that the Bactro- Margiana region was inhabited by Indo-Aryan speaking communities, there is no linguistic evidence to support this. Even if these communities did speak Indo-Aryan languages and practice Vedic style sacrifices on fire-alters, there is no indication that political or military leaders from Bactria or other regions of Central Asia invaded the Indus valley and established a new cultural tradition in this area despite the evidence of other forms of contact.
> 
> However, the analysis of non-Indo-Aryan linguistic elements in Old Indo Aryan languages (Southworth 2005:64-67) and studies of place names (toponymy) that may indicate the presence of early linguistic communities, it appears that more than one language may have been spoken in the greater Indus Valley (Fairservis and Southworth 1989). For example, rivers in Sindh and Baluchistan have names that can be attributed to Mundari or Dravidian languages even though there are no modern speakers of these languages in the region today. In the Punjab and Afghanistan, the rivers have Indo-Aryan names, while further to the north the names become TibetoBurman or some other language. Future studies of place names need to be undertaken to better understand the implications of these patterns.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Can you please provide a link to reliable, genuine, honest and irrefutable evidence as per your claims that those above found indian sites were in fact part of the IVC. If not then you are 100% lying.



The irony is you quote Mahabharat to prove something about a particular tribe and the same Mahabharat revolves around Sri Krishna the main personality in the book. And you know where Sri Krishna was born? Mathura, just google where Mathura is. 

For us important is to remain dharmic which we are, no matter where. Unlike you, because you are abrahmic, you need land you want to spread Islam, you want to spread Arabic traditions 

It wouldnt matter to you where IVC is or where Mathura. The propaganda by you is exposed.



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Where is the evidence that the IVC was vedic in nature? Please provide honest, reliable, irrefutable and genuine evidence. If not you are telling lies and spreading misinformation.



I could have given other logic but the below one suits better.
It may or may not be vedic, I don't mind but it was not Islamic for sure. As there was no Mohammad that time. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The famous phrase,

''lal meri pat rakhio bhala Jhulelalan, sindhardi da, sehvan da''

Who is this *Jhulelal*? Most Pakistanis don't know._ It's a synonym to rig vedic God, Varun deva_ copied by Muslim invaders and now address Shahbaz Qalandar a 'human' as Jhulelal.  Ask any Sindhi Hindu he would know who Jhulelal is 

Baat kartey hai yahan heritage ki
huh!


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

We are Iranic, spreading the Persian-Turk culture of our cousins. What is wrong with that? We have many commonalities with Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey even besides Islam.

Adopting Islam doesn't make us any more Arabic than Christians becoming Jewish for following Jesus.

You want the whole world to become Hindu, spreading yoga and sadhus to Western/Asian countries, yet you have a problem with Pakistanis becoming more Islamic.

Hypocrites.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

kalakaar said:


> The irony is you quote Mahabharat to prove something about a particular tribe and the same Mahabharat revolves around Sri Krishna the main personality in the book. And you know where Sri Krishna was born? Mathura, just google where Mathura is.
> 
> For us important is to remain dharmic which we are, no matter where. Unlike you, because you are abrahmic, you need land you want to spread Islam, you want to spread Arabic traditions
> 
> It wouldnt matter to you where IVC is or where Mathura. The propaganda by you is exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> I could have given other logic but the below one suits better.
> It may or may not be vedic, I don't mind but it was not Islamic for sure. As there was no Mohammad that time.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The famous phrase,
> 
> ''lal meri pat rakhio bhala Jhulelalan, sindhardi da, sehvan da''
> 
> Who is this *Jhulelal*? Most Pakistanis don't know._ It's a synonym to rig vedic God, Varun deva_ copied by Muslim invaders and now address Shahbaz Qalandar a 'human' as Jhulelal.  Ask any Sindhi Hindu he would know who Jhulelal is
> 
> Baat kartey hai yahan heritage ki
> huh!







I have no idea what the mahabarat is and have never quoted it. Another lie by an indian. You are trying to change the subject. Now as per your outlandish claims, WHERE is the IRREFUTABLE, GENUINE, RELIABLE & HONEST evidence that the largest IVC site is in india? That it is not a different civilisation that is unrelated to the REAL IVC which is situated in Pakistan?



U-571 said:


> AMT has been completely debunked by many geneticists and even archaeologists, this is why now the AMT proponents propose another theory that is aryan trickling theory, in which they propose aryan population trickled down to india for thousands of years.
> 
> https://www.harappa.com/sites/default/files/pdf/CulturesSocietiesIndusTrad.pdf






Your above source is a pre-2010 analysis which has been thoroughly disproved by a 2017 study based on advanced genetic analysis:

https://www.livescience.com/59703-north-india-populated-by-central-asian-invaders.html


----------



## kalakaar

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> I have no idea what the mahabarat is and have never quoted it. Another lie by an indian. You are trying to change the subject. Now as per your outlandish claims, WHERE is the IRREFUTABLE, GENUINE, RELIABLE & HONEST evidence that the largest IVC site is in india? That it is not a different civilisation that is unrelated to the REAL IVC which is situated in Pakistan?



I am not posting any link because I know what you going to do next, example is above in the previous post #55 

just google Rakhigarhi, its even older than IVC and twice as large as Mohenjo Daro, to my understanding it should be the part of Delhi when it was called as Indraprastha . But the similar traditions of Bhakti and dharma like in.

AND FOR YOUR INFO:

*IVC is also known as HARAPPAN CIVILIZATION* just because first findings happened here. It has nothing particular with Indus river. The whole North India had similar civilization. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We are Iranic, spreading the Persian-Turk culture of our cousins.



There you go, Shabshh you just proved me right!! 

I told, most of the people in Pakistan have identity crisis.

Bravo

keep it up!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Gangadeshi's desperate for some civilization still trying to use Indus Pakistan to gain lustre. These aboriginals of Ganga are like Black Africans who try to use Egypt to derive some pride. They call that Afrocentrism. I call the Indian need to use us as way to polish their history "Gangacentrism".

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> There you go, Shabshh you just proved me right!!
> 
> I told, most of the people in Pakistan have identity crisis.
> 
> Bravo
> 
> keep it up!!



Do you think our civilization began with the IVC?

Silly Indian, we are descended from nomads just like the Turks and Persians.

We came to the Indus and settled there.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

U-571 said:


> only an idiot will comment like you did
> 
> what i posted was an article on archeology by a prominent archeologist of indus valley, you are disproving it with genetic study bravo dear
> 
> genetic study conducted by prominent indian geneticist has already refuted any bronze age migration directly based on the DNA analysis of ancient indus valley people. what your link proves is nothing based on actual physical evidence but based on biased study and analysis of DNA of swat people, again in the harappa article if you bother to read, it mentions that the culture which existed in near swat didn't have any evidence of advancing towards ganga valley.
> 
> 
> 
> https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ryan-invasion-theory/articleshow/64565413.cms





Really?.......you must really be retarded if you think archaeological evidence is more compelling in proving the origins of a peoples than dna evidence????????........ ...........as I said before, only a retard or indian false flagger will believe any indian evidence or sources which are always dubious at best................you have proved that you are a liar and are spreading disinformation. You have been reported for spreading propaganda.



kalakaar said:


> I am not posting any link because I know what you going to do next, example is above in the previous post #55
> 
> just google Rakhigarhi, its even older than IVC and twice as large as Mohenjo Daro, to my understanding it should be the part of Delhi when it was called as Indraprastha . But the similar traditions of Bhakti and dharma like in.
> 
> AND FOR YOUR INFO:
> 
> *IVC is also known as HARAPPAN CIVILIZATION* just because first findings happened here. It has nothing particular with Indus river. The whole North India had similar civilization.
> 
> 
> 
> There you go, Shabshh you just proved me right!!
> 
> I told, most of the people in Pakistan have identity crisis.
> 
> Bravo
> 
> keep it up!!






There is NO evidence which supports your claims. Only dubious indian conjecture. You are knowingly lying and spreading disinformation and fairy tales. You are unknowingly destroying indian myths yourself with your fairy tales, NONE of which can be substantiated.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Pakistan

U-571 said:


> Punjabi people are very racist


I am not Punjabi and what are you? Indian?



U-571 said:


> vedic aryans which is gangetic


Vedic Aryans migrated to Ganga from Af-Pak borders. The orginal Ganga's is the trash that you lot classed as 'shudra' and that runs in 100s of millions in India or the typical Indian. You know is Austro-Dravid types that resemble Australian Abos.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## U-571

Kaptaan said:


> I am not Punjabi and what are you? Indian?
> 
> Vedic Aryans migrated to Ganga from Af-Pak borders. The orginal Ganga's is the trash that you lot classed as 'shudra' and that runs in 100s of millions in India or the typical Indian. You know is Austro-Dravid types that resemble Australian Abos.



australian? some one has definitely filled gobar in your upper chamber.

vedic culture has roots in gangetic plains and archaeological evidences and vedic sites are all located in gangetic plains not indus plains. grey, black and red pottery ware have all been excavated from ganga plains particularly mathura, kushambi etc, all in uttar pradesh, it has nothing to do with indus plains in the first place. vedic literature talks about civilizations in gangetic plains not indus plains, so if you are claiming to be indo aryan then you are claiming to be belonging to gangetic plains unless vedic culture i discovered in indus plains.

if you claim to be indus valley according to AMT, you claim to belonging to dravida culture like south indian

if you are not punjabi, maximum chances are you dont belong neither.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> Punjabi people are very racist, first they claim they are indo aryan (vedic aryans which is gangetic) then they claim they are people of the indus (dravidian in case of aryan theory) and then claim that they are iranic not indic
> 
> you guys dont just have identity crises, you guys definitely have much more than that.



Asalamu Alaikum

Since when has any Punjabi claimed to be Iranic? At best, some of us only claim Iranic ancestry (because almost all of us have some, our Eurasian component didn't pop out of thin air).

We all recognise ourselves as Indo-Aryans, that means a mix of the invading Vedic Aryans and the local people of the Indus (by the way, we don't know if they were Dravidians or not).



U-571 said:


> vedic culture has roots in gangetic plains and archaeological evidences and vedic sites are all located in gangetic plains not indus plains. grey, black and red pottery ware have all been excavated from ganga plains particularly mathura, kushambi etc, all in uttar pradesh, it has nothing to do with indus plains in the first place. vedic literature talks about civilizations in gangetic plains not indus plains, so if you are claiming to be indo aryan then you are claiming to be belonging to gangetic plains unless vedic culture i discovered in indus plains.
> 
> if you claim to be indus valley according to AMT, you claim to belonging to dravida culture like south indian
> 
> if you are not punjabi, maximum chances are you dont belong neither.



Are you stupid? The Aryans originally came from the Caucasus like all other Europeans. Their original settlements in the sub-continent were along the Indus, specifically in Afghania, the Punjab and Kashmir, which was where they composed the Rig Veda. It was also where they mixed with the natives to form the Indo-Aryans we know today. From there, they expanded to conquer the rest of the sub-continent.

As said before, we don't know the ethnicity/race of the people of IVC. 

He's from the Indus, maximum chances are that he has ancestry from both groups.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

U-571 said:


> maximum chances are you dont belong neither.


And you would know would you? If you are Australian of Indian extraction why is your flags not showing that? Why false flags for?

And look bizzare this disacussion is turning into. A Indian telling us our history and then telling us what we are and what we are not. Absurd. The thread is about Soanian Culture which existed when even the name India was not coined. So what gives a Gangadeshi leave to even talk about something that falls outside their country. I cannot with certainity my ancestors lived where we hail from 10,000 years but then most people can't but I can say with certidude that Soan culture was located within my country of origin. Which is something you can't. That is about enough time I am going to waste on you false flagger. Wondering why mods allow you fly false flags?

All the stuff you are citing is just Indian propaganda and I won't even bother taking the time to knock it out. You keep believing in your own rubbish. Even aboriginals are allowed to dream.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> Since when has any Punjabi claimed to be Iranic? At best, some of us only claim Iranic ancestry (because almost all of us have some, our Eurasian component didn't pop out of thin air).
> 
> We all recognise ourselves as Indo-Aryans, that means a mix of the invading Vedic Aryans and the local people of the Indus (by the way, we don't know if they were Dravidians or not).
> 
> 
> 
> Are you stupid? The Aryans originally came from the Caucasus like all other Europeans. Their original settlements in the sub-continent were along the Indus, specifically in the Punjab and Kashmir, which was where they composed the Rig Veda. It was also where they mixed with the natives to form the Indo-Aryans we know today. From there, they expanded to conquer the rest of the sub-continent.
> 
> As said before, we don't know the ethnicity/race of the people of IVC.
> 
> He's from the Indus, maximum chances are that he has ancestry from both groups.



Pakistani's racist minds have all been filled with gobar to be honest

indo aryan and vedic culture relates to gangetic plains, it has nothing to do with indus plains or Pakistan. the ancestors of indo aryans might have migrated from the north according to AMT, but vedic culture itself was founded in the gangetic plains, and vedic hymns were all composed in the gangetic plains, it has nothing to do with race and more to do with culture and civilization which arouse from there.

secondly AMT is a migration not invasion theory, i think some pakistanis like you need some mental check up and treatment to get rid of that racist notion


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> Pakistani's racist minds have all been filled with gobar to be honest
> 
> indo aryan and vedic culture relates to gangetic plains, it has nothing to do with indus plains or Pakistan. the ancestors of indo aryans might have migrated from the north according to AMT, but vedic culture itself was founded in the gangetic plains, and vedic hymns were all composed in the gangetic plains, it has nothing to do with race and more to do with culture and civilization which arouse from there.
> 
> secondly AMT is a migration not invasion theory, i think some pakistanis like you need some mental check up and treatment to get rid of that racist notion



Wrong, it started in Pakistan:







Migration, invasion, whatever. It's all the same, and none of it is racist at all. People don't mass migrate to an area totally alien to them culturally without some blood spilling, it's happened everywhere, e.g the European discovery of the America's.


----------



## Nilgiri

U-571 said:


> if you claim to be indus valley according to AMT, you claim to belonging to dravida culture like south indian



There is problem with this assertion. Proto-South India never had a real copper or Bronze age like indus valley (or even gangetic plain did). South India went from neolithic straight to Iron age somewhere around 1000 BC (which mind you it did excellently with technology wise).

It is unlikely (at least with the archaeological evidence we have so far) that IVC people migrated to South India en masse given the fact they would have brought the bronze age tech and know how with them.



U-571 said:


> but vedic culture itself was founded in the gangetic plains, and vedic hymns were all composed in the gangetic plains, it has nothing to do with race and more to do with culture and civilization which arouse from there.



Not really, the transition from vedic to classical sanskrit (and derived prakrits) indeed did happen in the gangetic area...but original Vedic sanskrit (Esp Rg Vedic) has many references and connections to further west, even to what we call Persia (hence the connection to Zoroastrianism and Avestan language).

As for the broader culture and civilisation initiation and development points, that is a really complicated subject that is still being researched.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> Wrong, it started in Pakistan:
> 
> Migration, invasion, whatever. It's all the same, and none of it is racist at all. People don't mass migrate to an area totally alien to them culturally without some blood spilling, it's happened everywhere, e.g the European discovery of the America's.



your map only shows migration, it doesnt show the vedic culture which is native to gangetic valley and nothing to do with Pakistan.

the migration theory has been changed since the invasion theory had to be proven false because of lack of evidence, invaion theory was initially made before the excavation of indus valley began in 1920s, after that, since archoloy found no invasion proofs, the theory was changed into migration.

again, no signs of migration have been proven through archeology, no massive amounts of horse bones or chariots have been discovered from any indo aryan migration sites.



Nilgiri said:


> There is problem with this assertion. Proto-South India never had a real copper or Bronze age like indus valley (or even gangetic plain did). South India went from neolithic straight to Iron age somewhere around 1000 BC (which mind you it did excellently with technology wise).



only disproves AMT.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> There is NO evidence which supports your claims. Only dubious indian conjecture. You are knowingly lying and spreading disinformation and fairy tales. You are unknowingly destroying indian myths yourself with your fairy tales, NONE of which can be substantiated.



Told you to search for Rakhigarhi If you can't well thats not my pain inn arse. 

The other guy is giving you links and you calling them fake, well I know you are in denial mode. 
Denialstani!


----------



## kalakaar

Nilgiri said:


> Not really, the transition from vedic to classical sanskrit (and derived prakrits) indeed did happen in the gangetic area...but original Vedic sanskrit (Esp Rg Vedic) has many references and connections to further west, even to what we call Persia (hence the connection to Zoroastrianism and Avestan language).





The largest city or town is in Haryana which is 1000 years older than Mohenjo daro which is considered as the biggest ever found. The Rig veda or Samveda were knowledge which were gained through meditation and transferred through oral recitation. Can't actually say where is the origin. 

The connection to further west is because of people coming to Taxila and doing business with India in that era. The seal symbols of our civilisation was also found in Egypt and Denmark. 

This means its clear people had diplomatic links just like today. Its not something very uncommon.


----------



## Nilgiri

U-571 said:


> only disproves AMT.



I never said AMT was a complete correct analysis.

Anyways I will let you guys debate more and flesh out more arguments here.


----------



## kalakaar

Kaptaan said:


> Gangadeshi's desperate for some civilization still trying to use Indus Pakistan to gain lustre. These aboriginals of Ganga are like Black Africans who try to use Egypt to derive some pride. They call that Afrocentrism. I call the Indian need to use us as way to polish their history "Gangacentrism".



Yeah that region was ancient India and people fought Mahabharat in Kurukshetra which is in Haryana. The largest relics are in Haryana not in Mohenjo daro.

More over it wouldnt matter much because every one of those who lived in that era believed in Vedas not in Quran. That's sufficient for me.



dsr478 said:


> Since when has any Punjabi claimed to be Iranic?



One has quoted me that he is spreading his traditional values of Iran and turkey  just go through the thread.
I am telling you, Pakistan is going through tremendous Identity Crisis.



dsr478 said:


> Wrong, it started in Pakistan:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Migration, invasion, whatever. It's all the same, and none of it is racist at all. People don't mass migrate to an area totally alien to them culturally without some blood spilling, it's happened everywhere, e.g the European discovery of the America's.




This is a western propaganda

It's not possible for a tribe to come to India from west and start vedic culture. If it was so, there would have been some evidences of rituals like agni havan.

Yes there are rituals related to Agni Pooja in Zoroastrians but they are Zoroashtrians not Sanatan Dharmi . Neither Yogis.

More over the Ganga river is said to be requested to land on earth by Rishi Bhagirathi in Himalayas. Who was a rishi of vedic era.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> Yeah that region was ancient India and people fought Mahabharat in Kurukshetra which is in Haryana. The largest relics are in Haryana not in Mohenjo daro.
> 
> More over it wouldnt matter much because every one of those who lived in that era believed in Vedas not in Quran. That's sufficient for me.
> 
> 
> 
> One has quoted me that he is spreading his traditional values of Iran and turkey  just go through the thread.
> I am telling you, Pakistan is going through tremendous Identity Crisis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a western propaganda
> 
> It's not possible for a tribe to come to India from west and start vedic culture. If it was so, there would have been some evidences of rituals like agni havan.
> 
> Yes there are rituals related to Agni Pooja in Zoroastrians but they are Zoroashtrians not Sanatan Dharmi . Neither Yogis.
> 
> More over the Ganga river is said to be requested to land on earth by Rishi Bhagirathi in Himalayas. Who was a rishi of vedic era.



So what if someone says that Punjabi traditional values are similar to that of Iran's or Turkey's? That's his opinion and not at all an identity crisis. You guys throw around that term without even knowing what it is. 

I'll tell you the biggest identity crisis, hating Pakistan to no end whilst naming your country after a Pakistani river, and then claiming Pakistani history just because you named yourself after said river. 

It's not propoganda, it's well established fact everyone other than Hindustan has accepted.



U-571 said:


> your map only shows migration, it doesnt show the vedic culture which is native to gangetic valley and nothing to do with Pakistan.
> 
> the migration theory has been changed since the invasion theory had to be proven false because of lack of evidence, invaion theory was initially made before the excavation of indus valley began in 1920s, after that, since archoloy found no invasion proofs, the theory was changed into migration.
> 
> again, no signs of migration have been proven through archeology, no massive amounts of horse bones or chariots have been discovered from any indo aryan migration sites.
> 
> 
> 
> only disproves AMT.



No, the map literally shows where the early Indo-Aryans were situated, and it was Pakistan, not Hindustan. 

No it hasn't, the theory has pretty much remained unchanged and has in fact been strengthened by archaeological, linguistic and genetic evidence. Everyone other than Hindustan believes in it, which should tell you something.

The theory has always been that large numbers of Aryans migrated, with some indigenous tribes mingling well with them, and others being forcefully assimilated/destroyed via warfare. The early Hindu scripture attests to the militarised nature of the Aryans, it contains many passages about warfare.


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> No, the map literally shows where the early Indo-Aryans were situated, and it was Pakistan, not Hindustan.



No, it doesn't, all vedic kingdoms were situated in gangetic valleys where the vedic literature was composed.


----------



## Indus Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> The largest relics are in Haryana not in Mohenjo daro.


Good for you. Now stick with Gangadesh. This thread is on Soanian Culture which is not in Gangadesh but in Ancient Pakistan. End of discussion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

kalakaar said:


> Told you to search for Rakhigarhi If you can't well thats not my pain inn arse.
> 
> The other guy is giving you links and you calling them fake, well I know you are in denial mode.
> Denialstani!






All the links are dubious and very questionable indian sources. Nothing makes sense. They need to be IRREFUTABLE, GENUINE, RELIABLE & HONEST ones. None of the above are. In fact they are from the same ilk that claimed indians invented cars, computers, aeroplanes, the internet and spaceships, 10,000 years ago. Go figure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Kaptaan said:


> Good for you. Now stick with Gangadesh. This thread is on Soanian Culture which is not in Gangadesh but in Ancient Pakistan. End of discussion.



You don't even know that Haryana is situated near Yamuna basins not Ganga. And you are a PDF Think Tank


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> No, it doesn't, all vedic kingdoms were situated in gangetic valleys where the vedic literature was composed.



No, you had Aryans in Pakistan such as the Gandhari's:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhari_people

The Rig Veda was originally composed along the Indus River, specifically in the Punjab:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Rigveda


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> No, you had Aryans in Pakistan such as the Gandhari's:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhari_people
> 
> The Rig Veda was originally composed along the Indus River, specifically in the Punjab:
> 
> https://www.britannica.com/topic/Rigveda



what ever is the history of rigveda, i particularly have zero interests in mythological texts and even historians and archaeologists refrain from citing rigveda as historical texts and , rigveda may have been composed in Punjab according to linguists (which i perticularly would doubt as linguists during british era had special racial agenda at hand so what ever their conclusions would be based on their bias) but the rest of hindu mythology all deals with events in gangetic plains meaning, the indo aryans tribals moved and settled ultimately in gangetic plains and from there archeologists have first evidences of a vedic culture, kingdoms so far there are none in the indus valley and pakistan, gandhari grave culture has been debunked as vedic culture as well.

As the direct DNA samples of harappa people from india have shown zero links with central asian steps i would consider migration theory nearly debunked until and unless this study too is challenged by any newer study, the excavation of bronze chariots and swords also debunks the AMT since it seem to show presence of warrior races before the supposed warrior class migration from central asia.


----------



## kalakaar

dsr478 said:


> No, you had Aryans in Pakistan such as the Gandhari's:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhari_people
> 
> The Rig Veda was originally composed along the Indus River, specifically in the Punjab:
> 
> https://www.britannica.com/topic/Rigveda



*Rigveda*, (Sanskrit: “The Knowledge of Verses”) also spelled *Ṛgveda*, the oldest of the sacred books of Hinduism, composed in an ancient form of Sanskrit about 1500 bce, in what is now the Punjab region of_ India and Pakistan_. It consists of a collection of 1,028 poems grouped into 10 “circles” (_mandala_s). It is generally agreed that the first and last books were created later than the middle books. The Rigveda was preserved orally before it was written down about 300 bce.

This is what is said. Where does it say Indus? You liar! And the actual Punjab comprised Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, current Punjab and part of UP too.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> what ever is the history of rigveda, i particularly have zero interests in mythological texts and even historians and archaeologists refrain from citing rigveda as historical texts and , rigveda may have been composed in Punjab according to linguists (which i perticularly would doubt as linguists during british era had special racial agenda at hand so what ever their conclusions would be based on their bias) but the rest of hindu mythology all deals with events in gangetic plains meaning, the indo aryans tribals moved and settled ultimately in gangetic plains and from there archeologists have first evidences of a vedic culture, kingdoms so far there are none in the indus valley and pakistan, gandhari grave culture has been debunked as vedic culture as well.
> 
> As the direct DNA samples of harappa people from india have shown zero links with central asian steps i would consider migration theory nearly debunked until and unless this study too is challenged by any newer study, the excavation of bronze chariots and swords also debunks the AMT since it seem to show presence of warrior races before the supposed warrior class migration from central asia.



Our modern understanding of the history of the region doesn't really on colonialist historians, also, not all of them were racist (in fact, some considered the Aryan migrations as an excellent argument against racism).

Wrong, the Rig Veda is literally integral to Vedic culture. Indo-Aryan culture started along the Indus River, as my previous map clearly showed.

No, it hasn't been debunked, the Gandhari people were almost certainly Vedic. In fact, the grave culture pretty conclusively proves the mixing between Aryans and non-Aryans mainly occurred along the Indus (since the grave culture has elements of Aryan and Harappan culture).

Wrong, you are horribly wrong. You are so wrong, it's actually mind boggling how you could even think such a thing:

https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/s...he-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece



kalakaar said:


> *Rigveda*, (Sanskrit: “The Knowledge of Verses”) also spelled *Ṛgveda*, the oldest of the sacred books of Hinduism, composed in an ancient form of Sanskrit about 1500 bce, in what is now the Punjab region of_ India and Pakistan_. It consists of a collection of 1,028 poems grouped into 10 “circles” (_mandala_s). It is generally agreed that the first and last books were created later than the middle books. The Rigveda was preserved orally before it was written down about 300 bce.
> 
> 
> This is what is said. Where does it say Indus? You liar!



Can you read?

"Rigveda, (Sanskrit: “The Knowledge of Verses”) also spelled Ṛgveda, the oldest of the sacred books of Hinduism, composed in an ancient form of Sanskrit about 1500 bce,* in what is now the Punjab region of*_* India and Pakistan*_*.*"

Do you know where the Punjab is? Along the Indus river you numpty.


----------



## kalakaar

dsr478 said:


> o you know where the Punjab is? Along the Indus river you numpty.



What Nonsense!! Are you mad??? 
The Punjab starts from Sindhu and Ends at Yamuna. With sub divisions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> What Nonsense!! Are you mad???
> The Punjab starts from Sindhu and Ends at Yamuna. With sub divisions.



The Punjab is part of the Indus Valley, IVC had it's biggest settlements in the region and tributaries of the Indus River do flow through it.


----------



## kalakaar

dsr478 said:


> The Punjab is part of the Indus Valley, IVC had it's biggest settlements in the region and tributaries of the Indus River do flow through it.


Yamuna and Saraswati are not tributaries of Sindhu nadi
The mightiest rivers was Saraswati which dried up and went underground this is what we are told since childhood and Next was Sindhu nadi.
You literally have no idea about vedic civilization. You are a Muslim!!

In many occasions when we are at the Ganga banks we do the Nadistuti as given in rigveda.

It's not the region, but traditions which we have developed we are continuing them. What you have to do with Nadi stuti?? It's not allowed in Islam


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> Our modern understanding of the history of the region doesn't really on colonialist historians, also, not all of them were racist (in fact, some considered the Aryan migrations as an excellent argument against racism).
> 
> Wrong, the Rig Veda is literally integral to Vedic culture. Indo-Aryan culture started along the Indus River, as my previous map clearly showed.
> 
> No, it hasn't been debunked, the Gandhari people were almost certainly Vedic. In fact, the grave culture pretty conclusively proves the mixing between Aryans and non-Aryans mainly occurred along the Indus (since the grave culture has elements of Aryan and Harappan culture).
> 
> Wrong, you are horribly wrong. You are so wrong, it's actually mind boggling how you could even think such a thing:
> 
> https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/s...he-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece
> 
> 
> 
> Can you read?
> 
> "Rigveda, (Sanskrit: “The Knowledge of Verses”) also spelled Ṛgveda, the oldest of the sacred books of Hinduism, composed in an ancient form of Sanskrit about 1500 bce,* in what is now the Punjab region of*_* India and Pakistan*_*.*"
> 
> Do you know where the Punjab is? Along the Indus river you numpty.



zero evidence of your BS.

if you have a single Punjabi vedic culture sites, please point out, gandhari grave culture has already been disproven as vedic culture

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> zero evidence of your BS.





I provided you with ample evidence (there is even more out there).

If you wish to dig your head in the sand, be my guest.



kalakaar said:


> Yamuna and Saraswati are not tributaries of Sindhu nadi
> The mightiest rivers was Saraswati which dried up and went underground this is what we are told since childhood and Next was Sindhu nadi.
> You literally have no idea about vedic civilization. You are a Muslim!!
> 
> In many occasions when we are at the Ganga banks we do the Nadistuti as given in rigveda.
> 
> It's not the region, but traditions which we have developed we are continuing them. What you have to do with Nadi stuti?? It's not allowed in Islam



Irrelevant, the Punjab is still part of the Indus region, not the Gangetic one like most of Hindustan. 

Funny, whenever we champion our Muslim identity, you claim we are Hindu converts. Then, when we show interest in this region's pre-Islamic history you say we are Muslims who are irrelevant to this region's history. Make up your mind! 

Again, irrelevant. In fact, it's even sadder that a Muslim knows your own history better than you do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> You don't even know that Haryana is situated near Yamuna basins not Ganga. And you are a PDF Think Tank


Mmm. People like you are the reason why Gangadesh has low IQ. Look at this map below. River Yamuna is a tributary river of Ganga therefore is in the Ganga Basin.










Almost all of Haryana falls in the Ganga Basin. The border between Haryana and Indian Punjab is where it tips over into Indus Basin. Therefore Indian Punjab and Sikhoo's can claim and indeed are Indus people. That leaves *95%* of India either Ganga or Dravid. Basically mostly Aboriginal shudra, Austroloid aboriginal stock with few drops of purity from our part of the world brought through people migrating. That 5% cream is what you show as 'face' of India including Bollywood. But we know what rest of India is. Ganga slumdogs and Dravid pygmies who until recently were walking about half naked and still just poop on the streets as matter of habit. Because of this primitive nature of your people we see this yearning to be part of the mighty Indus or somehow to link yourself to or associate with it.


----------



## U-571

Kaptaan said:


> Mmm. People like you are the reason why Gangadesh has low IQ. Look at this map below. River Yamuna is a tributary river of Ganga therefore is in the Ganga Basin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Almost all of Haryana falls in the Ganga Basin. The border between Haryana and Indian Punjab is where it tips over into Indus Basin. Therefore Indian Punjab and Sikhoo's can claim and indeed are Indus people. That leaves *95%* of India either Ganga or Dravid. Basically mostly Aboriginal shudra, Austroloid aboriginal stock with few drops of purity from our part of the world brought through people migrating. That 5% cream is what you show as 'face' of India including Bollywood. But we know what rest of India is. Ganga slumdogs and Dravid pygmies who until recently were walking about half naked and still just poop on the streets as matter of habit. Because of this primitive nature of your people we see this yearning to be part of the mighty Indus or somehow to link yourself to or associate with it.



Punjabi people are quarter bred westerm asia after being bastardised by successive invasions of the western asian empires, to think Punjabi people are therefore superior would be very misleading, Punjabi people were also conquered and bastardised three quarters from the eastern asian empires by successive indo aryan empires and thus they became indo aryans themselves.

your racial purity notion is nothing but laughable, because you are far from being racially pure, if you were racially pure, you would never support AMT in the first place, it means, the west asians over ran your dravidian ancestors bastardised you. your paler skin tone compared to indians in nothing but the impact of successive bastardisations happening over 2000 years by western empires which is the least pure to be honest.

the biggest proof your indic root is your mother tongue which is punjabi, which is not iranic but indo aryan, second hint of your indic bastardisation is your culture clothes, cuisines etc, all are heavily influenced by gangadeshi cuisine and very minutely influenced by iranic bastardisation.

Punjabi people have zero empires or zero kingdoms to boast, they were always under the shadow of indo aryan epmires, to think of yourself as superior is nothing but delusional.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

U-571 said:


> dravidian ancestors bastardised you


I have no Dravidian ancestors. Further IVC was *NOT *Dravidian. That is Dravid Aboriginal fantasty dream that they get wet on. My interest relates to the peoples of Indus Basin - that is *Pakhtuns, Punjabi, Baloch, Sindhi, Kashmiri*. I have no interest in Ganga or Dravid India. There is no harm in taking pride in your own.

I would strongly suggest you also take pride in where ever you are from., the Ganga; the Dravidia and feel pride in your land instead making yourself cheap by clutching at our heritage. I am a son of the soil from the banks of River Indus in Attock district and take pride in the land that gave civilization to the world. I have no further wish to pollute myself in a useless discussion with a Gangadeshi.

Evidence points to IVC having been influenced from Western Asia. Sites in Iran and Afghanistan like Mundigak point to the west/east movement of ideas. Mehr Garh in Balochistan and Rehman Dehri in Khyber Pakhtunkwa were precursors to IVC.










http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095714

_Ps. This should bust your Dravidian myth. Can you not understand that Dravidians were only slightly above Africans and simply not able to bear any civilization._

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

U-571 said:


> Punjabi people are quarter bred westerm asia after being bastardised by successive invasions of the western asian empires, to think Punjabi people are therefore superior would be very misleading, Punjabi people were also conquered and bastardised three quarters from the eastern asian empires by successive indo aryan empires and thus they became indo aryans themselves.
> 
> your racial purity notion is nothing but laughable, because you are far from being racially pure, if you were racially pure, you would never support AMT in the first place, it means, the west asians over ran your dravidian ancestors bastardised you. your paler skin tone compared to indians in nothing but the impact of successive bastardisations happening over 2000 years by western empires which is the least pure to be honest.
> 
> the biggest proof your indic root is your mother tongue which is punjabi, which is not iranic but indo aryan, second hint of your indic bastardisation is your culture clothes, cuisines etc, all are heavily influenced by gangadeshi cuisine and very minutely influenced by iranic bastardisation.
> 
> Punjabi people have zero empires or zero kingdoms to boast, they were always under the shadow of indo aryan epmires, to think of yourself as superior is nothing but delusional.





Where is the evidence of your claims? You say alot without a shread of credible evidence. Therefore you are lying wholeheartedly.


----------



## kalakaar

Kaptaan said:


> Almost all of Haryana falls in the Ganga Basin. The border between Haryana and Indian Punjab is where it tips over into



Being in Ganga basin doesn't make Punjab less Punjab  . Only fools like you make such statements who believe in Arabic supremacy. All the big empires of vedic era were located in this side and had influence till Afghanistan. Mahabharath is the evidence. And the punjab you are talking about is also ours illegally occupied by descendants of Invaders or those Hindu who got forcefully converted and forgot their traditions.

Invasion and Islamisation by a particular belief of the west Indian region now known as Pakistan made the people there started to believe in western powers and invaders and have started to speak their language of history. (I know you would favor Greeks but not Purshottam). And now they believe that culture moved from west to east. Poor chaps.

I again invite you back to the tradition of Advaita Vedanta follow the vedic tradition and keep your name Indra Kumar as given in the Vedas. 



dsr478 said:


> Funny, whenever we champion our Muslim identity, you claim we are Hindu converts. Then, when we show interest in this region's pre-Islamic history you say we are Muslims who are irrelevant to this region's history. Make up your mind!



It's tough to say whether Pakistani is an Arabi syed, or a converted pandit or a a mongol Origin or turkic. They are anything but not well followers of Vedas. The constant invasion of the North west Indian sub continent led to the destruction of many Vedic rituals. And now the Inhabitants there are identity less left overs.


----------



## U-571

Kaptaan said:


> I have no Dravidian ancestors. Further IVC was *NOT *Dravidian. That is Dravid Aboriginal fantasty dream that they get wet on. My interest relates to the peoples of Indus Basin - that is *Pakhtuns, Punjabi, Baloch, Sindhi, Kashmiri*. I have no interest in Ganga or Dravid India. There is no harm in taking pride in your own.
> 
> I would strongly suggest you also take pride in where ever you are from., the Ganga; the Dravidia and feel pride in your land instead making yourself cheap by clutching at our heritage. I am a son of the soil from the banks of River Indus in Attock district and take pride in the land that gave civilization to the world. I have no further wish to pollute myself in a useless discussion with a Gangadeshi.
> 
> Evidence points to IVC having been influenced from Western Asia. Sites in Iran and Afghanistan like Mundigak point to the west/east movement of ideas. Mehr Garh in Balochistan and Rehman Dehri in Khyber Pakhtunkwa were precursors to IVC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095714
> 
> _Ps. This should bust your Dravidian myth. Can you not understand that Dravidians were only slightly above Africans and simply not able to bear any civilization._



lmao, you yourself prove your harappan dravidian ancestors couldn't bear any civilizations and thus technology and ideas flowed from west asia to indus valley and the article discusses nothing about genetics of indus valley people.

you people are trying to rape your own history dear 

there have been many attempts to link mesopotamia with indus valley with the cradle of civilization notion, but all ultimately it was decided to put indus valley as a separate civilization, and cradle of civilization BS has been debunked since discovery of mayan mesoamerican and inca civilizations.

the article only proposes link but doesnt established and in their own words, the C14 data is lacking and not carbon dated to establish this as fact.

in reality indus valley sites are older than mesopotamia

https://www.dawn.com/news/1261513

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> Being in Ganga basin doesn't make Punjab less Punjab


You Ganga swamp creature I said Indian Punjab falls in Indus Basin. Have a look at the freakin map again. Haryana is in Ganga but when yopu cross into Indian Punjab you are entering Indus Basin.










U-571 said:


> there have been many attempts to link mesopotamia with indus valley with the cradle of civilization notion


Only banana munching Dravid with nothing but their naked a*ss cling on the myth of IVC being Dravidian. I already posted the link which shows IVC was influenced by the Near East. Now piss of to the South India with some unprounceable name like Tiriciripullissilypillitillgoooli.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095714


----------



## kalakaar

Kaptaan said:


> You Ganga swamp creature I said Indian Punjab falls in Indus Basin. Have a look at the freakin map again. Haryana is in Ganga but when yopu cross into Indian Punjab you are entering Indus Basin.




I think you have no idea about India.

Haryana and Punjab became two different states only after 1947 in Nov 1966, they were one till Yamuna banks and together was called as Punjab including Himachal before that. This is why they share common capital. You Fool!!

Get your facts write, you are PDF think tank don't talk like a stupid fellow.


----------



## U-571

Kaptaan said:


> I already posted the link which shows IVC was influenced by the Near East.



IVC sites older than mesopotamia

https://www.dawn.com/news/1261513

all IVC sites carbon dated as older than near east and not even located in Pakistan but india

which means your ancestors were dravidians.


----------



## Indus Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> Haryana and Punjab became two different states only after 1947 in Nov 1966


You Gangoo I am talking in the present. Not prior to division. Anyway I have no interest in your Ganga swamp. To take a poop there would be below my dignity. This thread is about a site near Soan River. End off. Now piss of to Ganga or Tiriprisilliichillipilldrum in Dravidia.



U-571 said:


> all IVC sites carbon dated as older than near east and not even located in Pakistan but india


Just because Dawn rehashes Indian bullshite it does not become legit. We know Indian proclivity to bending the truth.

https://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1720/17200040.htm


----------



## U-571

Kaptaan said:


> Just because Dawn rehashes Indian bullshite it does not become legit. We know Indian proclivity to bending the truth.



dawn must be indian conspiracy as well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

U-571 said:


> which means your ancestors were dravidians.


To date, despite the repeated ganga tantrums on this subject, no Dravidian link has ever been discovered. Not ethnic, linguistic or migratory. Your desperation is telling.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

UnitedPak said:


> To date, despite the repeated ganga tantrums on this subject, no Dravidian link has ever been discovered. Not ethnic, linguistic or migratory. Your desperation is telling.



search for asko parpola

how do you justify presence of dravidian speaking brahui people close to indus valley?


----------



## UnitedPak

U-571 said:


> search for asko parpola



I am well aware of historians who have tried finding connections between Dravidian scripts and the undeciphered Indus script. Yet the Indus script remains 100% undeciphered and untranslated to any degree.

People like him don't support your argument at all but it does confirm your desperation to be associated with Pakistani heritage.

Grasping at straws

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## U-571

UnitedPak said:


> I am well aware of historians who have tried finding connections between Dravidian scripts and the undeciphered Indus script. Yet the Indus script remains 100% undeciphered and untranslated to any degree.
> 
> People like him don't support your argument at all but it does confirm your desperation to be associated with Pakistani heritage.



how do you justify the presence of dravidian brahui people close to indus valley?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

U-571 said:


> how do you justify the presence of dravidian brahui people close to indus valley?



I don't need to justify them. You are the one with colourful Dravidian theories so the burden of proof is on yourself.
There could literally be a hundred different reason for this and there is no evidence to suggest that Brahui are heirs to Indus Valley.

But despite the lack of any evidence let's assume that IVC were dravidian speaking. Does that make the IVC people ethnically closer to Brahui or closer to South Indians?


----------



## U-571

UnitedPak said:


> I don't need to justify them. You are the one with colourful Dravidian theories so the burden of proof is on yourself.
> There could literally be a hundred different reason for this and there is no evidence to suggest that Brahui are heirs to Indus Valley.
> 
> But despite the lack of any evidence let's assume that IVC were dravidian speaking. Does that make the IVC people ethnically closer to Brahui or closer to South Indians?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

UnitedPak said:


> I don't need to justify them. You are the one with colourful Dravidian theories so the burden of proof is on yourself.
> There could literally be a hundred different reason for this and there is no evidence to suggest that Brahui are heirs to Indus Valley.
> 
> But despite the lack of any evidence let's assume that IVC were dravidian speaking. Does that make the IVC people ethnically closer to Brahui or closer to South Indians?






That's the point. This indian false flagger like most indians is making severe outlandish claims and has no genuine and reliable evidence to back them up. It's reaching the point where by it is no longer viable arguing with them. History and TRUTH have shown that whatever an indian says or believes in, the opposite is usually true.


----------



## kalakaar

Kaptaan said:


> *You Gangoo I am talking in the present*. Not prior to division. Anyway I have no interest in your Ganga swamp. To take a poop there would be below my dignity. This thread is about a site near Soan River. End off. Now piss of to Ganga or Tiriprisilliichillipilldrum in Dravidia.




Now since after busting your propaganda and rhetoric and testing your knowledge about Punjab, I have started enjoying to debate with you.  Suddenly you start to talk about present when I mentioned that Haryana is a part of Punjab only traditionally. LOL! 

Of course you wouldn't have interest in talking to people who follow vedic rituals  and enlightening you with some real facts which are exposing your propaganda.


----------



## U-571

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> That's the point. This indian false flagger like most indians is making severe outlandish claims and has no genuine and reliable evidence to back them up. It's reaching the point where by it is no longer viable arguing with them. History and TRUTH have shown that whatever an indian says or believes in, the opposite is usually true.



yes i have, you just seem to remain ignorant like most pakistanis.



> Now we also know that before the Aryan advent into the subcontinent, the Dravidians lived in the north and northwest parts of the country. We have the Brahui, which is still spoken in Baluchistan and parts of Iran and nearby areas. It is a Dravidian language. Of course there has been a suggestion that the Brahuis could have migrated from south of the peninsula in later historical times, but experts discount this possibility because it is found by Burrow, Emeneau and others that Brahui is part of the North Dravidian group of languages which still survives in pockets like Kurukh and Malto in the north-east part of India. Therefore the chances are that the ancestors of the Brahui lived there during the time of the Harappan civilization.
> 
> https://www.harappa.com/content/indus-script-10


----------



## UnitedPak

kalakaar said:


> Suddenly you start to talk about present when I mentioned that Haryana is a part of Punjab only traditionally. LOL!



Nobody cares about Haryana or what the British called it. Only 10% of that state even speaks Punjabi. Wth are you even arguing?



U-571 said:


> yes i have, you just seem to remain ignorant like most pakistanis.



Says the person who doesn't know anything about his real Ganga heritage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ali Tariq

UnitedPak said:


> Nobody cares about Haryana or what the British called it. Only 10% of that state even speaks Punjabi. Wth are you even arguing?
> 
> 
> 
> Says the person who doesn't know anything about his real Ganga heritage.


Sorry Bhai for my interference but why are you feeding these trolls? Why are you wasting your precious time on these low life indians, who are ashamed of showing their true flag and trying to steal our history.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

U-571 said:


> yes i have, you just seem to remain ignorant like most pakistanis.







So when are you going to post GENUINE, IRREFUTABLE and RELIABLE evidence?There is NONE from you so far. Just meaningless conjecture. By the way, when are you going to change the flag on your icon to your REAL nationality, indian false-flagger?...........


----------



## kalakaar

UnitedPak said:


> Nobody cares about Haryana or what the British called it. Only 10% of that state even speaks Punjabi. Wth are you even arguing?



Punjab also has dialectal subdivision and few of them are majhi, malwi, daobi , pawandhi, bhatiani . In haryana they speak hindi mixed with bhatiani. And in Delhi also Bhatiani is so common.Dude you leave it, you are just embarrassing yourself. But every one understand hindi


----------



## U-571

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So when are you going to post GENUINE, IRREFUTABLE and RELIABLE evidence?There is NONE from you so far. Just meaningless conjecture. By the way, when are you going to change the flag on your icon to your REAL nationality, indian false-flagger?...........



seeing your ignorance, for you probably never


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

U-571 said:


> seeing your ignorance, for you probably never





So you're lying about your nationality and using a few dubious, unreliable and questionable sources to support your claims. It means everything you say is FAKE.........


----------



## U-571

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So you're lying about your nationality and using a few dubious, unreliable and questionable sources to support your claims. It means everything you say is FAKE.........



my nationality is pakistan and my ethnicity is indic people, yours as well if you are either punjabi or sindhi, but you remain in la la land im not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

U-571 said:


> my nationality is pakistan and my ethnicity is indic people, yours as well, but you remain in la la land im not.





Why am I in La La land? Please elaborate?


----------



## kalakaar

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Why am I in La La land? Please elaborate?



identity crisis is the answer.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

U-571 said:


> Punjabi people are quarter bred westerm asia after being *bastardised* by successive invasions of the western asian empires, to think Punjabi people are therefore *superior* would be very misleading, Punjabi people were also conquered and bastardised three quarters from the eastern asian empires by successive indo aryan empires and thus they became indo aryans themselves.
> 
> your racial purity notion is nothing but laughable, because you are far from being racially pure, if you were racially pure, you would never support AMT in the first place, it means, the west asians over ran your dravidian ancestors bastardised you. your paler skin tone compared to indians in nothing but the impact of successive bastardisations happening over 2000 years by western empires which is the *least pure* to be honest.



You sound like a f*cking Nazi? Do you ever re-read the stuff you write? It goes for the whole lot of you, including @kalakaar .

When you guys are talking with Iranians, Arabs, Afghans, Europeans, you go on and on about your racial, ethnic commonalities but when Pakistanis discuss it, all of a sudden you can't tolerate the same.

Pakistan is culturally, racially very similar to Iran and Afghanistan (both Iranic civilizations.) Yes, our ancestors founded IVC and subsequent empires but we migrated there.



U-571 said:


> my nationality is pakistan and my ethnicity is indic people, yours as well if you are either punjabi or sindhi, but you remain in la la land im not.



You are not fooling anyone. Change your flag and be honest with yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> You sound like a f*cking Nazi? Do you ever re-read the stuff you write? It goes for the whole lot of you, including @kalakaar .
> 
> When you guys are talking with Iranians, Arabs, Afghans, Europeans, you go on and on about your racial, ethnic commonalities but when Pakistanis discuss it, all of a sudden you can't tolerate the same.



you should read the post i replied too, im not being racist, the guy im replying to is being racist and calling us and even his own ancestors as inferior and himself pure blood.

as for arabs, turks, iranians, i dont give two hoots about them, its only pakistani obsession in linking their race with middle east people, but i consider myself indic, period.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

kalakaar said:


> I am serious about this, come back to originality! I Welcome you back to the vedic and dharmic life style.


What do you mean "come back to", my ancestors never followed you taboo lifestyle as evidenced by your own texts. 



kalakaar said:


> Now no matter what, who ever the Vahika or Gandharis worshiped, they were not Muslims, nor they believed in Kalma nor in Mohammad nor in Arab or in Mecca. They had their own rituals  and I will be first one to appreciate if you start following these rituals again


Who cares? The region has shifted religion many times. Europeans becoming Christian does not void their history, any sane person would laugh at your senseless argument. My ancestor's rituals were hated by Ganga Hindus.

I am glad that I am Muslim and thank Allah every day, I am happy with my 5 pillars and wouldn't want anything else. 



U-571 said:


> my nationality is pakistan and my ethnicity is indic people, yours as well if you are either punjabi or sindhi, but you remain in la la land im not.


what are Pashtuns?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Priest King

U-571 said:


> seeing your ignorance, for you probably never



You're not fooling anybody. Dasyu trash will remain Dasyu trash.



U-571 said:


> you should read the post i replied too, im not being racist, the guy im replying to is being racist and calling us and even his own ancestors as inferior and himself pure blood.



You're being an idiot...we aren't Gangetic Dasyu garbage like you. We're Indo Aryans. Genetics don't lie.



> as for arabs, turks, iranians, i dont give two hoots about them, its only pakistani obsession in linking their race with middle east people, but i consider myself indic, period.



Indic isn't even an ethnicity you Dasyu moron. It's a linguistic group.

Nobody gives a shit what you consider yourself. The Genetic Maps of Pakistan prove what we are.

Lol Indic...lmfao.

Indic = constituting the Indo-Aryan branch of the Indo-European languages.

And by the way...what's your FB name? I'll happily ban your monkey *** from my growing page. This guy is a fucking idiot. Some god damn immigrant from Bihar moves to Pakistan and TELLS ME what I am?

Better haul your *** back on that train back to Patna. This is the Indus bitch...live with us....pyo na baan sada. Paanchoda.



Proudpakistaniguy said:


> Soan River — witness to rise and fall of many civilisations
> 
> *It is said that rivers give birth to civilisations and if a river dries up or changes its path, the civilisation also dies eventually.* Obvious examples of such cities that have now gone extinct can be found in Cholistan desert where remains of several settlements of Indus Valley civilisation have been found along the dry bed of the ancient river Hakra.
> 
> However, those rivers that continue to exist become cradle of history as one civilisation after another rises and falls on their banks. Soan River has proven to be one such asset which has seen the rise and fall of many civilisations and cultures. But as fates have turned, once the site of a prehistoric civilisation, today Soan River has been reduced to nothing more than a sewer and a dump site for our ‘modern civilisation’.
> 
> Though Soan is considered to be one of Pakistan’s smaller rivers, this is an important stream of the Potohar region and historically has been the centre of pre-historic Soanian culture.
> 
> Emerging from the foothills of Patriata and Murree, Soan River eventually falls into Indus River near Makkar.
> 
> “The oldest evidence of life in Pakistan has been found in Soan River valley. It was here that some of the earliest signs of humans have been discovered during the excavations of prehistoric mounds,” said Director of Taxila Institute of Asian Civilization at Quaid-i-Azam University, Dr Ashraf Khan.
> 
> According to Dr Khan, Soan River Valley is where 500,000 year old relics of the Stone Age man have been found, identifying it as the place with the earliest human inhabitation in the region.
> 
> Soan River has many archeological as well as natural heritage sites along its banks and there is no denying that the areas of Rawalpindi and Islamabad are a rich den of precious history.
> 
> “The historic background of Rawalpindi and Islamabad can be traced back to the Paleolithic period, the oldest stone tools have been reported in Morgah, Sohan and on the banks of River Soan,” said Dr Ashraf.
> 
> “The Stone Age men of Soan Valley have been found to organise themselves in a homogeneous society where they formed groups and developed a culture called the Soan Culture,” explained Dr Khan. Beyond people, significant animal remains have also been found along Soan River. Experts reveal that one such discovery has been of a large fossil, probably remains of a rhinoceros, along the bank of River Soan near another historically site, the Pharwala Fort.
> 
> Unfortunately, instead of finding more about the hidden treasures around Soan River, these remains are under permanent danger of being destroyed.
> 
> Mr Zulminun, a resident of Soan Garden Housing Society, remarked: “Due to sewage disposal and piles of municipal waste being dumped into the river without any hesitation or fear of legal action by the authorities, I fear there will be nothing left for future generations to learn from here.”
> 
> Part of the problem is the sheer lack of awareness about the importance of Soan River and its surroundings. Archeological and heritage sites have never been given their due attention by the government and so people remain unaware of the significance of these remains that give clues to our prehistoric past.
> 
> Irfan Bhatti, a radio producer and the patron-in-chief of Potohar Adventures Club, condemned the negligence of the authorities for the ongoing damage.
> 
> It is not just a matter of destruction of our history, but the river is a natural home for many species: “Birds and animals of Potohar Region naturally make their homes along the river - just like the extinct animals that once lived here. But this window to our pre-historic past is facing increasing pressure from developers and polluters,” he added.
> 
> Theoretically, no new project is authorised without its Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports.
> 
> Thus when housing and other developmental projects fulfil this legal requirement, they commit that their projects will not cause any harm to environment or heritage.
> 
> This means that project planners should assume the responsibility of developing proper sewage and solid waste treatment and disposal systems. But in reality, such planning and development is simply not taking place and EPA and the government keeps its eyes closed to ongoing violations.
> 
> This matter needs to be addressed not just because of the significance of these sites but also because their full value has not even been completely discovered yet.
> 
> “Detailed scientific excavations are needed on these sites so that a stratified chronology of the history of this region can be established,” said Dr Khan, pointing out the abundant room for exploration and discovery that exists in these areas.
> 
> Experts claim that these prehistoric sites have immense value and are worthy of being selected as one of Unesco’s many world heritage sites - but without attention from authorities concerned, they will remain unnoticed and ignored.
> 
> https://www.dawn.com/news/707009



Soan is actually very old. They've apparently found two other stone age sites along with Rawat and Adailiya...Bajaur, Makli Hill in Karachi and another site in interior Sindh.

Anyways please ignore these Dasyus from now on. Lets stick with the topic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

kalakaar said:


> identity crisis is the answer.




So says the person who is making outlandish claims and claiming an identity/heritage which he has no reliable proof that even exists............

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

U-571 said:


> you should read the post i replied too, im not being racist, the guy im replying to is being racist and calling us and even his own ancestors as inferior and himself pure blood.
> 
> as for arabs, turks, iranians, i dont give two hoots about them, its only pakistani obsession in linking their race with middle east people, but i consider myself indic, period.



We still speak Irani languages in Pakistan. We are not pretending to be anyone we are not.

You should worry more about what you are, and let us be who we have always been.

Pakistan is the soil of our ancestors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So says the person who is making outlandish claims and claiming an identity/heritage which he has no reliable proof that even exists............



Just a post above this one there is another Pakistani who is Turkish  And you are a convert so this means either He was master or he is lying. There you go perfect example of Identity crisis in Pakistan. I hope you are not some syed from Arabia 

Pakistanis are big time wannabe everything


----------



## Indus Priest King

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We still speak Irani languages in Pakistan. We are not pretending to be anyone we are not.
> 
> You should worry more about what you are, and let us be who we have always been.
> 
> Pakistan is the soil of our ancestors.



That dasyu immigrant doesn't even realize that ancient Iranians (Avestans) and ancient Indus (Indo Aryans/Vedics) were practically cousins. Avestan (Zorastrianism) and Vedic faiths all derived from a common Central Asian religion. Vedic faith slightly differed because they (it's assumed) adopted many Harappan traits during the syncretization which occurred after the Aryan migration into the Indus Valley.

Even still, the genetic make up of Parsis and Pakistani ethnic groups are practically the same. Parsis are the closest living descendants of the Avestans.







I asked that piece of shit why do Parsis in India and Pakistani groups have a similar genetic makeup. Neither him, or his bum buddy were able to answer. They just ignore facts and peddle out their "InSMALLdic" bullshit.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kalakaar

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Who cares? The region has shifted religion many times. Europeans becoming Christian does not void their history, any sane person would laugh at your senseless argument. My ancestor's rituals were hated by Ganga Hindus.



Abey your ancestor rituals were to pray the rivers which is Haram in Islam . So either you are a traitor or your a victim


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Just a post above this one there is another Pakistani who is Turkish  And you are a convert so this means either He was master or he is lying. There you go perfect example of Identity crisis in Pakistan. I hope you are not some syed from Arabia
> 
> Pakistanis are big time wannabe everything



Who is Turkish? What area you even talking about?

And explain this genetic map...if you can. The only wannabes are you ugly fucking pseudo Aryan/Dasyu Gangladeshi trash. Bhenchodo apni shakalay khabi sheeshay mein dekhi hai?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> and Vedic faiths all derived from a common Central Asian religion



Soon you will say English was the mother tongue of Urdu because we have some english words in Urdu which are accepted as urdu words. LOL

Hey wannabe dharmic chill!


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Abey your ancestor rituals were to pray the rivers which is Haram in Islam . So either you are a traitor or your a victim



We're not talking about Islam you moron, we're talking about the history of this land. The Indus Valley has been home to

- Ancient Indus religion
- Vedic faith
- Buddhism
- Zoroastrianism
- Shamanism
- Hinduism

All these religions had come to the Indus Valley...and eventually some died out. What's your point?


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Abey your ancestor rituals were to pray the rivers which is Haram in Islam . So either you are a traitor or your a victim



We're not talking about Islam you moron, we're talking about the history of this land. The Indus Valley has been home to

- Ancient Indus religion
- Vedic faith
- Buddhism
- Zoroastrianism
- Shamanism
- Hinduism

All these religions had come to the Indus Valley...and eventually some died out. What's your point?


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Ancient Indus religion
> - Vedic faith
> - Buddhism
> - Zoroastrianism
> - Shamanism
> - Hinduism



This ideology gave rise to a civilisation which is dharmic you are not. You have rejected this ideology and so the basic pillar of a civilisation. You are just a wannabe Vedi. trivedi or Chaturvedi that you can decide 

By the way talking to a Muslim about Veda is like asking a Hindu to say Kalma. You can't speak out the slokas too as all are praises to agni or sky or water which Hindus do begning with Om. 

So you better stay away if you don't want to be addressed as Kufr by your fellow clerics.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> This ideology gave rise to a civilisation which is dharmic you are not. You have rejected this ideology and so the basic pillar of a civilisation. You are just a wannabe Vedi. trivedi or Chaturvedi that you can decide



Which ideology gave rise to what? You dasyus don't even make sense. Pseudo Aryans thinking they're white. LOL.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Which ideology gave rise to what? You dasyus don't even make sense. Pseudo Aryans thinking they're white. LOL.



You are Muslim and would remain a Muslim and it's Kufr for a Muslim to be an aryan simple 

I can feel you are missing our lifestyle but any ways, next Janam is there may be then.


----------



## TMA

kalakaar said:


> You are Muslim and would remain a Muslim and it's Kufr for a Muslim to be an aryan simple
> 
> I can feel you are missing our lifestyle but any ways, next Janam is there may be then.


No. It is not Kufr to be from a ethnic group, any ethnic group. A Muslim can be a Japanese, German, Ibo, Bharati, Aryan etc etc etc...

The religion of Abraham (PBUH) came to purify...



kalakaar said:


> This ideology gave rise to a civilisation which is dharmic you are not. You have rejected this ideology and so the basic pillar of a civilisation. You are just a wannabe Vedi. trivedi or Chaturvedi that you can decide
> 
> By the way talking to a Muslim about Veda is like asking a Hindu to say Kalma. You can't speak out the slokas too as all are praises to agni or sky or water which Hindus do begning with Om.
> 
> So you better stay away if you don't want to be addressed as Kufr by your fellow clerics.


If a Japanese becomes Muslims does he cease to be Japanese? Does all his "Japaneseness" go down the drain? Does he turn into an Arab?

Sure the religious aspect of Shinto or Buddhism that CONFLICT with Islam are to go, but all that does not, is to be "purified" and kept on...

Islam has spread the world over...are Chechens, Indonesians, Bharatis, Ghanians, Kosovars, Turks all turned into Arabs???

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> You are Muslim and would remain a Muslim and it's Kufr for a Muslim to be an aryan simple



Aryan is an ethnicity. Muslim is being a member of Islam. What are you even talking about?



> I can feel you are missing our lifestyle but any ways, next Janam is there may be then.



Your lifestyle was shooting arrows at the sun. Our lifestyle was building Harappa and Moenjhodaro.



TMA said:


> No. It is not Kufr to be from a ethnic group, any ethnic group. A Muslim can be a Japanese, German, Ibo, Bharati, Aryan etc etc etc...
> 
> The religion of Abraham (PBUH) came to purify...
> 
> 
> If a Japanese becomes Muslims does he cease to be Japanese? Does all his "Japaneseness" go down the drain? Does he turn into an Arab?
> 
> Sure the religious aspect of Shinto or Buddhism that CONFLICT with Islam are to go, but all that does not, is to be "purified" and kept on...
> 
> Islam has spread the world over...are Chechens, Indonesians, Bharatis, Ghanians, Kosovars, Turks all turned into Arabs???



He's trolling. If he actually believes the shit he's writing, then I question his sanity and I question this forum as to why he's allowed to continue posting here. He should be an a psyche ward.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## kalakaar

The name Indus valley was given because first site was found near Indus secondly Sindhu and Saraswati rivers were given high places and then came Yamuna. 

A Journey To Rakhigarhi: *Tracing The Origins Of The Indus Valley Civilisation*

Read more at: https://www.nativeplanet.com/travel...gins-of-indus-valley-civilisation-004736.html


_The much-awaited DNA study of the skeletal remains found at the Harappan site of Rakhigarhi, Haryana, shows no Central Asian trace, indicating the Aryan invasion theory was flawed and Vedic evolution was through indigenous people. _

Read more at:
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/64565413.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst


Shinde said Rakhigarhi was a bigger city than either Mohenjo-daro or Harrapa, two sites in Pakistan previously considered the centre of the Indus civilisation.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...indian-town-unlock-mystery-indus-civilisation


*Ancient skeletons found in India provide new insight into mindset of world's earliest humans*
*https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ndset-of-worlds-earliest-humans-10177362.html*


----------



## TMA

Indus Priest King said:


> This is about the history of the Indus Valley (Pakistan)...not Hindustan (Ganges Plain). Thanks.


What do you think about the term Hindustan? Does it not mean the Land of the Indus in Persian, as Hind is taken from Sindh which is in Pakistan...


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Aryan is an ethnicity. Muslim is being a member of Islam. What are you even talking about?





Indus Priest King said:


> Your lifestyle was shooting arrows at the sun. Our lifestyle was building Harappa and Moenjhodaro.



Oh really, this is why no Hindu is left in Sindh and are on reduction. Contradiction in post!



TMA said:


> No. It is not Kufr to be from a ethnic group, any ethnic group. A Muslim can be a Japanese, German, Ibo, Bharati, Aryan etc etc etc...



Then why have an arabi name when your ethnicity is Indian  Start keeping Indra, or Vayu or Sarasvati.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> The name Indus valley was given because first site was found near Indus secondly Sindhu and Saraswati rivers were given high places and then came Yamuna.
> 
> A Journey To Rakhigarhi: *Tracing The Origins Of The Indus Valley Civilisation*
> 
> Read more at: https://www.nativeplanet.com/travel...gins-of-indus-valley-civilisation-004736.html
> 
> 
> _The much-awaited DNA study of the skeletal remains found at the Harappan site of Rakhigarhi, Haryana, shows no Central Asian trace, indicating the Aryan invasion theory was flawed and Vedic evolution was through indigenous people. _
> 
> Read more at:
> //economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/64565413.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
> 
> 
> Shinde said Rakhigarhi was a bigger city than either Mohenjo-daro or Harrapa, two sites in Pakistan previously considered the centre of the Indus civilisation.
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...indian-town-unlock-mystery-indus-civilisation
> 
> 
> *Ancient skeletons found in India provide new insight into mindset of world's earliest humans*
> *https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ndset-of-worlds-earliest-humans-10177362.html*




https://scroll.in/article/874102/ar...o-know-about-the-new-study-on-indian-genetics


----------



## kalakaar

TMA said:


> What do you think about the term Hindustan? Does it not mean the Land of the Indus in Persian, as Hind is taken from Sindh which is in Pakistan...



The land is Bharat  and river is Sindhu and Sindh is a region in Bharat , invaders called whole region as Hind due to culture and religious differences.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Oh really, this is why no Hindu is left in Sindh and are on reduction. Contradiction in post!



Umm Hindus are not an ethnicity, they're a religious group. If a Sindhi Hindu converted to Sikhism, Islam, Christianity, does he lose his Sindhi DNA? You're dumber than a rock.



> Then why have an arabi name when your ethnicity is Indian  Start keeping Indra, or Vayu or Sarasvati.



I think you need a lesson on Pakistani names.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistani_name

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TMA

kalakaar said:


> You are occupier who is promoting arabic traditions and culture into the Pakistan. If not change your name to Indra Kumar. Finally Indra kumar is name of Rig Vedic era  . Would you do? No You won't because you do not really know the concept of Heritage and ancestry. We have maintained it you are destroying it.  Simple!
> 
> There I have destroyed your knowledge on heritage and ancestry to make you understand it's meaning better!





kalakaar said:


> Oh really, this is why no Hindu is left in Sindh and are on reduction. Contradiction in post!
> 
> 
> 
> Then why have an arabi name when your ethnicity is Indian  Start keeping Indra, or Vayu or Sarasvati.


By our names are Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Afghan/Pukhtoon and Indian. It just reflects the history...
And our tribe names are native...Rajput, Jatt, Butt, Mir, Afridi, Memon, Mengal etc etc etc....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> The land is Bharat  and river is Sindhu and Sindh is a region in Bharat , invaders called whole region as Hind due to culture and religious differences.



Bharat is the Ganges.

Sindh is the Indus...called Hind in Persian...called Ind in Greek and India in Latin.

Don't spread lies.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> https://scroll.in/article/874102/ar...o-know-about-the-new-study-on-indian-genetics



defunct through new dna findings in rakhigarhi may be Pakistan was has traces of turkic or arabic influence due to invasion in late 10th century



TMA said:


> By our names are Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Afghan/Pukhtoon and Indian. It just reflects the history...
> And our tribe names are native...Rajput, Jatt, Butt, Mir, Afridi, Memon, Mengal etc etc etc...



Doesn't make you a dharmic , sorry! You follow the rules of civil society of a civilisation you are part of it, if you don't you are not 

Civil it self means a set of human development through rules and regulations. Hence Civilisation.


----------



## TMA

kalakaar said:


> The land is Bharat  and river is Sindhu and Sindh is a region in Bharat , invaders called whole region as Hind due to culture and religious differences.


And, pray, do tell where is Sindh on today's map? And Hind is derived from Sindh...



kalakaar said:


> defunct through new dna findings in rakhigarhi may be Pakistan was has traces of turkic or arabic influence due to invasion in late 10th century
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't make you a dharmic , sorry! You follow the rules of civil society of a cicilisation you are part of it, if you don't you are not


Vedic civilization commences in coterminous Pakistan. The first grammarian of the Sanskrit tongue was a co-terminous Pakistani, these do not and cannot change....
Millions of our VEDIC Dharmic ancestors accepted the religion of Abraham (PBUH), but their blood still runs in our veins...
and a lot of their culture is still retained...of course every civilization undergoes change with time...and besides our ancestors were a different kind of Dharmic to the Bharati kind and to the Indonesian/Malay kind...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> defunct through new dna findings in rakhigarhi may be Pakistan was has traces of turkic or arabic influence due to invasion in late 10th century



That study has been ridiculed throughout the world for being a joke. Some random bones were found in Rakaghiri, which by the way isn't even an Indus Valley site, it's a prehistoric Ganga site which predates the IVC. The conclusions are all based on nonsense. That's why Harappa.com and other leading Indus historians, archeologists and researchers have categorically REJECTED that nonsense.



> Doesn't make you a dharmic , sorry! You follow the rules of civil society of a cicilisation you are part of it, if you don't you are not



You weren't even part of it to begin with. What do you think you're Vedic? Have you seen your face in the mirror? You eat vegetables, have 5 castes and worship Dravidian gods.

Vedics ate beef, had 4 castes, buried their dead and worshiped gods like Indra and Varuna, similar to the Avestan gods.

LOL. Dasyu thinks he's Vedic. You're no different than Pakistanis who think they're Arab just because they're Muslim.

Just because you're Hindu doesn't make you an Indo-Aryan or a Vedic...you're a Dasyu piece a trash, and will always remain a Dasyu piece a trash.





TMA said:


> And, pray, do tell where is Sindh on today's map? And you Hind is derived from Sindh...
> 
> 
> Vedic civilization commences in coterminous Pakistan. The first grammarian of the Sanskrit tongue was a co-terminous Pakistani, these do not and cannot change....
> Millions of our VEDIC Dharmic ancestors accepted the religion of Abraham (PBUH), but their blood still runs in our veins...
> and a lot of their culture is still retained...of course every civilization undergoes change with time...and besides our ancestors were a different kind of Dharmic to the Bharati kind and to the Indonesian/Malay kind...



Actually, did you know that Sanskrit was actually first recorded in Syria? The Aryan migration brought Sanskrit to the Indus Valley whereby Vedic Sanskrit was founded.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kalakaar

TMA said:


> And, pray, to tell where is Sindh on today's map? And you Hind is derived from Sindh...



Hind was called by outsiders not by inland people. Every region like today in India had it's tradition but common was dharmic way of living. Kuru were kauravas, in Panchal were Panchalas etc etc all belong to rig vedic era. 

Still we prefer calling India as Bharat not Hindustan to be honest.


----------



## TMA

kalakaar said:


> Hind was called by outsiders not by inland people. Every region like today in India had it's tradition but common was dharmic way of living. Kuru were kauravas, in Panchal were Panchalas etc etc all belong to rig vedic era.
> 
> Still we prefer calling India as Bharat not Hindustan to be honest.


Thank you for calling your country Bharat. I wish more Bharatis would follow your lead....

Hind is from Sindh which is in Pakistan.

"India" originates from coterminous Pakistan. Vedic civilization begins in the "IndusLand" or Hindustan aka coterminous Pakistan...

We are the descendants of the Vedic peoples for the most part, their blood still runs in our veins....this does not change by changing one's Dharm.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

TMA said:


> Vedic civilization commences in coterminous Pakistan. The first grammarian of the Sanskrit tongue was a co-terminous Pakistani, these do not and cannot change....
> Millions of our VEDIC Dharmic ancestors accepted the religion of Abraham (PBUH), but their blood still runs in our veins...



I don't have a problem if their blood is running in you, thats what we Indians have been saying you are converts. The point I am making is , you pakistanis are trying to take Vedic culture same as Islam due to hatred against the Hindu and hate against India that India is culturally ahead be it education or power or ancient history. Vedas are said to have no earthly origin although the language was Sanskrit. 
Where it was originated even it is not given in Vedas.  I don't know how you know the exact plac eof origin lol


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> defunct through new dna findings in rakhigarhi may be Pakistan was has traces of turkic or arabic influence due to invasion in late 10th century



LOL have you even read the study or did you just read the poorly written article by a dasyu? That very study proves the Indus periphery was separate. You didn't even read it. LMFAO.

The actual genetic results seem to be: there are 2 samples (maybe only 1); they don't have steppe ancestry; they have mostly indigenous ancestry, especially maternally; they have minor Iranian ancestry. So depending on what they mean by indigenous vs Iranian, could mean they are mostly AASI with a little Iranian farmer type ancestry, or it could mean they are including ancient Iranian farmer type ancestry in the indigenous category and the "minor traces" refer to later elements like BMAC, Tepe Hissar, etc. The latter seems more likely but who knows. So probably like Indus periphery as suspected, maybe more AASI (they are much further east).


----------



## kalakaar

TMA said:


> Vedic civilization begins in the "IndusLand"



In veda it is clearly mentioned that Sindhu is the most western river and Ganga is eastern river, and very high regards and worship hymns were given for River Sarasvati in Nadistuti. You should read it  but for that you need to know devnagri skript  lol


----------



## Indus Priest King

Anyway, for those who want to know about the myths and lies being peddled out by India over the Aryan Migration, head over here. They've broken it down and completely debunked this junk of a study.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...ntral-Asian-trace-junks-Aryan-invasion-theory



kalakaar said:


> In veda it is clearly mentioned that Sindhu is the most western river and Ganga is eastern river, and very high regards and worship hymns were given for River Sarasvati in Nadistuti. You should read it  but for that you need to know devnagri skript  lol



Which hymn? Tell me. I think you're mixing up the Vedas with your Purana garbage. The Vedas speak about Sindhu and Saptha Sindhu being the holy land of Vedics.

Sindhu = Sindh
Saptha Sindhu = Punjab

There is no mention of the Ganga or Deccan in the Vedas except for the term "Dasyu Varta", which is what we called you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Anyway, for those who want to know about the myths and lies being peddled out by India over the Aryan Migration, head over here. They've broken it down and completely debunked this junk of a study.
> 
> https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...ntral-Asian-trace-junks-Aryan-invasion-theory



A wanabbe dasyu trying hard to call the evidence as myth


----------



## Indus Priest King

Aryavarta is a myth just like Akhand Bharat. Both terms are found nowhere in the Vedas. These are probably terms Dasyus made up when they were plagiarizing Greek epics and writing their Puranas, Manusmriti, Ramayana and Mahabharata. All garbage.

Vedas are the only authentic text when needing to quote any history of the Indus Valley. The rest of irrelevant.

That would be like me looking for books written by Engishmen about America. Why would I want to do that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Vedas with your Purana garbage.



Qurana garbage you meant? 

By the way can you read sanskrit and understand it?


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> A wanabbe dasyu trying hard to call the evidence as myth



If it's "evidence", why has it been refuted by almost every leading Harappan researcher?



kalakaar said:


> Qurana garbage you meant?
> 
> By the way can you read sanskrit and understand it?



I asked you for the hymn that talks about this "Bharat" you claim of. Don't lie here and think you'll get away with it. I'm very well versed in history...I get paid to sit and read historical documents all day long. Unlike you....so sad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

That would be like me looking for books written by Engishmen about America. Why would I want to do that?[/QUOTE]


Indus Priest King said:


> If it's "evidence", why has it been refuted by almost every leading Harappan researcher?



A muslim and a dasyu wanabe talking about veda and Pakistani muslim researchers investigating the dharmic site lolzzz



Indus Priest King said:


> If it's "evidence", why has it been refuted by almost every leading Harappan researcher?
> 
> 
> 
> I asked you for the hymn that talks about this "Bharat" you claim of. Don't lie here and think you'll get away with it. I'm very well versed in history...I get paid to sit and read historical documents all day long. Unlike you....so sad.



you well versed in sh*t 
after the bastardisation of west india now Pakistan the researchers are trying hard to claim vedic ancestory to over come their identity crisis. 

Where in Vedas word Pakistan is given?? first tell me that


----------



## TMA

kalakaar said:


> I don't have a problem if their blood is running in you, thats what we Indians have been saying you are converts. The point I am making is , you pakistanis are trying to take Vedic culture same as Islam due to hatred against the Hindu and hate against India that India is culturally ahead be it education or power or ancient history. Vedas are said to have no earthly origin although the language was Sanskrit.
> Where it was originated even it is not given in Vedas.  I don't know how you know the exact plac eof origin lol





kalakaar said:


> In veda it is clearly mentioned that Sindhu is the most western river and Ganga is eastern river, and very high regards and worship hymns were given for River Sarasvati in Nadistuti. You should read it  but for that you need to know devnagri skript  lol


One also needs to be able to understand Vedic Sanskrit...I take it you are an expert in this millennia old tongue??

Don't confuse Vedic civilization to the Puranic civilization...

The Vedas were the closest thing to monotheism (of the Dharmic religion) if not advocating pure monotheism...it was later on, mainly in what is now Bharat, where corruption of this pure monotheism took place....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> That would be like me looking for books written by Engishmen about America. Why would I want to do that?
> 
> 
> A muslim and a dasyu wanabe talking about veda and Pakistani muslim researchers investigating the dharmic site lolzzz
> 
> 
> 
> you well versed in sh*t
> after the bastardisation of west india now Pakistan the researchers are trying hard to claim vedic ancestory to over come their identity crisis.
> 
> Where in Vedas word Pakistan is given?? first tell me that



Give me the hymn number...I'm waiting.



kalakaar said:


> Where in Vedas word Pakistan is given?? first tell me that



Where in Sumerian texts does the word Iraq appear?
Where in Nile texts does the word Egypt appear?

Are you trolling or are you actually this dumb?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Give me the hymn number...I'm waiting.



I am also waiting give me the hymn number where Pakistan and islam is mentioned in any veda. 
Thsi simply questions the existence of pakistan in ancient times, and the region was ours 



Indus Priest King said:


> Are you trolling or are you actually this dumb?



I am replying you in your own language which you understand better. By the way do you understand sanskrit? I am sure not. No use of sharing any hymn.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> I am also waiting give me the hymn number where Pakistan and islam is mentioned in any veda.
> Thsi simply questions the existence of pakistan in ancient times, and the region was ours



No, you said the Vedas mention a place called "bharat". I'm asking you to give me the hymn number which says wither Bharat or Aryavarta. It seems they don't exist. Which proves my point.



kalakaar said:


> I am replying you in your own language which you understand better. By the way do you understand sanskrit? I am sure not. No use of sharing any hymn.



My language has EVIDENCE.

https://scroll.in/article/882497/do...ryan-invasion-theory-or-give-it-more-credence

You're just writing for the sake of writing because you're upset we know our history, and you're a piece a trash.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> My language has EVIDENCE.
> 
> https://scroll.in/article/882497/do...ryan-invasion-theory-or-give-it-more-credence
> 
> You're just writing for the sake of writing because you're upset we know our history, and you're a piece a trash.



oh well you are a Muslim who dislike the dharmic essence of vedas and it's rituals and thats the fact and now trying to claim some identity after years of identity crisis from indians lol!!!


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> oh well you are a Muslim who dislike the dharmic essence of vedas and it's rituals and thats the fact and now trying to claim some identity after years of identity crisis from indians lol!!!



So you don't have the hymn number then right? That's what I thought...you see the Vedas are a beautiful collection of truth. When they called you DASYUS they did for a reason. You were untrustworthy filthy kala trash...and that's why Indra repeatedly destroyed your Dasyupurahs and whooped Krishna's sorry ***.

Know your role Dasyu...

By the way that Rakhigarhi article you posted? Here's the response.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1006745875450720256

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1006742024337231872

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> So you don't have the hymn number then right? That's what I thought.



Where is the hymn which mentions Pakistan which your Qaid created out of no where. There is atleast existence of dharm which we follow where is Islam mentioned in vedas, where is pakistan, this means you guys are promoting arabic ideology as an occupier. 

Aur inko Kashmir chahiye LOL!!


----------



## Indus Priest King

*Contradictory conclusions*
A recent study of ancient DNA from 612 ancient individuals, *which has still to be peer-reviewed*, arrived at the same conclusion, saying an Aryan invasion, or migration, theory did indeed seem likely._ But that study did not have access to ancient DNA from Indus Valley sites, only individuals from nearby locations._ If the _Economic Times_ report is accurate, the Rakhigarhi study, the first one to properly examine the ancestry of individuals found at Indus Valley sites, now seems to affirm those findings.

Yet the report draws a few different conclusions altogether.


First, the newspaper report seems to make the argument that because the Indus Valley Civilisation population had no Steppe ancestry, that disproves the Aryan invasion theory. *In fact, it does the opposite*.
Second, the report speaks of Iranian strains in the DNA, which the newspaper says “may point to contact, not invasion.” Again, this *affirms the extant Aryan invasion/migration theory*, which believes the Indus Valley population was primarily South Asians mixed with Iranian agriculturalists, who at the end of the Indus Valley civilisation* saw an influx of Steppe ancestry*.
Shinde says the findings show a manner of burial that is similar to the early Vedic period, and that some burial rituals prevail even now in some communities, showing remarkable continuity. *This point is a reminder of the difficulty of using DNA to determine how culture or language travelled, but on the face of it, this finding suggests that cultural behaviour that was prevalent before the Steppe influx did not necessarily change much afterwards. *
Neeraj Rai, head of the DNA lab at Lucknow’s Birbal Sahni Institute of Paleosciences and a co-author of the study, says that the *condition of the skeletons at Rakhigarhi points to a “predominantly indigenous culture that voluntarily spread across other areas, not displaced or overrun by an Aryan invasion.”* Here he is suggesting that the Aryan invasion may not have been violent, since the skeletons do not seem to indicate warfare. But it is still unclear why that would discount the Steppe ancestry that shows up only at the end of the Indus Valley civilisation.
Finally, there is Shinde’s statement: “This indicates quite clearly, through archeological data, that the Vedic era that followed was a fully indigenous period with some external contact.”* It is unclear what this means at all, and how the DNA results play into this, and only a full reading of the paper is likely to clear up the questions around this. *


*LMFAO. Owned by your own Indian source. Damn.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> So you don't have the hymn number then right? That's what I thought...you see the Vedas are a beautiful collection of truth. When they called you DASYUS they did for a reason. You were untrustworthy filthy kala trash...and that's why Indra repeatedly destroyed your Dasyupurahs and whooped Krishna's sorry ***.
> 
> Know your role Dasyu...
> 
> By the way that Rakhigarhi article you posted? Here's the response.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1006745875450720256
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1006742024337231872




You sure are a wannabe dharmi. 

The fact is it say no central asian migration and thats what I posted.

Go through what I have posted before vomiting here. lol


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Where is the hymn which mentions Pakistan which your Qaid created out of no where. There is atleast existence of dharm which we follow where is Islam mentioned in vedas, where is pakistan, this means you guys are promoting arabic ideology as an occupier



Where in Sumerian texts does the word Iraq appear?
Where in Nile texts does the word Egypt appear?

You keep bringing Islam into this, I don't give a shit about Islam. Long before Islam came, Indus Valley was separate from the Ganges Plain. And you know that deep down inside, and are trying to cover it up, which makes it even all the more hilarious. 



> Aur inko Kashmir chahiye LOL!!



Half of Kashmir is already part of Pakistan. LMFAO.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> *Contradictory conclusions*
> A recent study of ancient DNA from 612 ancient individuals, *which has still to be peer-reviewed*, arrived at the same conclusion, saying an Aryan invasion, or migration, theory did indeed seem likely._ But that study did not have access to ancient DNA from Indus Valley sites, only individuals from nearby locations._ If the _Economic Times_ report is accurate, the Rakhigarhi study, the first one to properly examine the ancestry of individuals found at Indus Valley sites, now seems to affirm those findings.
> 
> Yet the report draws a few different conclusions altogether.
> 
> 
> First, the newspaper report seems to make the argument that because the Indus Valley Civilisation population had no Steppe ancestry, that disproves the Aryan invasion theory. *In fact, it does the opposite*.
> Second, the report speaks of Iranian strains in the DNA, which the newspaper says “may point to contact, not invasion.” Again, this *affirms the extant Aryan invasion/migration theory*, which believes the Indus Valley population was primarily South Asians mixed with Iranian agriculturalists, who at the end of the Indus Valley civilisation* saw an influx of Steppe ancestry*.
> Shinde says the findings show a manner of burial that is similar to the early Vedic period, and that some burial rituals prevail even now in some communities, showing remarkable continuity. *This point is a reminder of the difficulty of using DNA to determine how culture or language travelled, but on the face of it, this finding suggests that cultural behaviour that was prevalent before the Steppe influx did not necessarily change much afterwards. *
> Neeraj Rai, head of the DNA lab at Lucknow’s Birbal Sahni Institute of Paleosciences and a co-author of the study, says that the *condition of the skeletons at Rakhigarhi points to a “predominantly indigenous culture that voluntarily spread across other areas, not displaced or overrun by an Aryan invasion.”* Here he is suggesting that the Aryan invasion may not have been violent, since the skeletons do not seem to indicate warfare. But it is still unclear why that would discount the Steppe ancestry that shows up only at the end of the Indus Valley civilisation.
> Finally, there is Shinde’s statement: “This indicates quite clearly, through archeological data, that the Vedic era that followed was a fully indigenous period with some external contact.”* It is unclear what this means at all, and how the DNA results play into this, and only a full reading of the paper is likely to clear up the questions around this. *
> 
> 
> *LMFAO. Owned by your own Indian source. Damn.*




This proves that its a pre Harrappan civilisation and larger than mohenjo daro and that too in haryana 



Indus Priest King said:


> Where in Sumerian texts does the word Iraq appear?
> Where in Nile texts does the word Egypt appear?
> 
> You keep bringing Islam into this,



you don't follow the vedic traditions nor you have vedic knowledge we have it as we can read and write the language in which it's compiled  you stay happy with Quran lol


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> You sure are a wannabe dharmi.
> 
> The fact is it say no central asian migration and thats what I posted.
> 
> Go through what I have posted before vomiting here. lol



The report does prove Central Asian migration you twit. LMFAO. This story you posted makes ZERO sense. The 'Aryan' migration theory says that this migration happened AFTER the Indus Civilization and, therefore, there will be NO Steppe-related genetic presence in sites like Rakhigarhi - which is exactly what is found!

How dumb are you....seriously though.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> The report does prove Central Asian migration you twit. LMFAO. This story you posted makes ZERO sense. The 'Aryan' migration theory says that this migration happened AFTER the Indus Civilization and, therefore, there will be NO Steppe-related genetic presence in sites like Rakhigarhi - which is exactly what is found!
> 
> How dumb are you....seriously though



But this has nothing to do with Islam. You are Muslim what do you have to do with vedas 
I will be the happiest you are claiming yourself to be a convert

And I invite you back to the origin. Tomorrow please go to sindhu and pray


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> This proves that its a pre Harrappan civilisation and larger than mohenjo daro and that too in haryana



How do you come to that conclusion? DNA can tell you how big a town was? Enlighten me.



> you don't follow the vedic traditions nor you have vedic knowledge we have it as we can read and write the language in which it's compiled  you stay happy with Quran lol



Vedics ate beef, we eat beef.
Vedics buried their dead, we bury our dead
Vedics hated Dasyus, we hate Dasyus

Whether or not we do or don't is irreverent. Modern-day Greeks don't follow the ancient Greek religion, they're all Christians now. Does that mean they forfiet their history?

And you're not Vedics....you're Puranic Hindus.



kalakaar said:


> But this has nothing to do with Islam. You are Muslim what do you have to do with vedas  I will be the happiest you are claiming yourself to be a convert



Who said I was Muslim? I'm more related to the Vedas than you ever will Dasyu....follow your Tamil reilgion like a good little boy and leave the DNA talk to professionals.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> How do you come to that conclusion? DNA can tell you how big a town was? Enlighten me.



stop asking me dumb question wannabe dasyu


Indus Priest King said:


> Vedics ate beef, we eat beef.
> Vedics buried their dead, we bury our dead
> Vedics hated Dasyus, we hate Dasyus



yeah right thats why kekayi was married to sri dashrath 



Indus Priest King said:


> Who said I was Muslim? I'm more related to the Vedas than you ever will Dasyu....follow your Tamil reilgion like a good little boy and leave the DNA talk to professionals.



Lol now you are vedic which vedic tell me chaturvedi or trivedi LMFAO


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> And I invite you back to the origin. Tomorrow please go to sindhu and pray



We do pray at the Sindhu. His name is Khawaja Khizer for Muslims and Jhuelal for Hindus. LOL. You didn't know that did you? Because you're a Dasyu....you have nothing to do with this land or history. If you came today, you probably wouldn't even be able to worship at any of our temples.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> We do pray at the Sindhu. His name is Khawaja Khizer for Muslims and Jhuelal for Hindus. LOL.



abhey gahnteshwar
ab sunn

Jhulelal is considered as manifestation of Varun dev 


you don't even know a sh*t about vedic culture and debating foolishly.. go read Quran 

wannabe Indian


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> stop asking me dumb question wannabe dasyu



Stop writing dumb things...which is everything you write practically.



> yeah right thats why kekayi was married to sri dashrath



Who?



> Lol now you are vedic which vedic tell me chaturvedi or trivedi LMFAO



These are surnames....and these are all from Puranic traditions. That's why the distribution of these surnames are only found in North India. (*Chaturvedi* is a surname of Brahmin caste found in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand.)

Again...irrelevant.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> These are surnames....and these are all from Puranic traditions. That's why the distribution of these surnames are only found in North India. (*Chaturvedi* is a surname of Brahmin caste found in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand.)
> 
> Again...irrelevant.



Yeah just like Sharia is man made or Quran is changed by men as per their convenience right? LOL


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> abhey gahnteshwar
> ab sunn
> 
> Jhulelal is considered as manifestation of Varun dev
> 
> 
> you don't even know a sh*t about vedic culture and debating foolishly.. go read Quran
> 
> wannabe Indian



Jhulelal is a reincarination of Varuna...do you want to tell me who worships Varuna now? Where did Varuna come from?





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1866337073426268





Jhulelal (جهوللال), or Khawja Khizr (خواجہ خضر), is said to be the unifying force and is central to all cultural activities of the Sindhi community. Sindhi Hindus regard him as a water god, who is said to be an incarnation of Varuna; this ancient Vedic deity is _*said to have been adopted into the Indus Vedic culture from the Iranian Avestan's deity "Ahura Mazda"*_.


Ahura Mazda (Avestan) = Varuna (Vedic)

What about Dasyus?


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Who?


 Khadija


----------



## Indus Priest King

I wrote...



> These are surnames....and these are all from Puranic traditions. That's why the distribution of these surnames are only found in North India. (*Chaturvedi* is a surname of Brahmin caste found in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand.)
> 
> Again...irrelevant.



And you responded...



kalakaar said:


> Yeah just like Sharia is man made or Quran is changed by men as per their convenience right? LOL



How is this relevant to what I first stated?


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Jhulelal is a reincarination of Varuna...do you want to tell me who worships Varuna now? Where did Varuna come from?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1866337073426268
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jhulelal (جهوللال), or Khawja Khizr (خواجہ خضر), is said to be the unifying force and is central to all cultural activities of the Sindhi community. Sindhi Hindus regard him as a water god, who is said to be an incarnation of Varuna; this ancient Vedic deity is _*said to have been adopted into the Indus Vedic culture from the Iranian Avestan's deity "Ahura Mazda"*_.
> 
> 
> Ahura Mazda (Avestan) = Varuna (Vedic)
> 
> What about Dasyus?




wrong its Indra you ghonchuand stop googling  I know its tough for you to dig info finally how would a Musalim know about Vedic traditions lol

you want me to address Muhammad as Jesus ? 


Don't spread disinformation



Indus Priest King said:


> How is this relevant to what I first stated?


This is the way to talk to a Muslim who argues with a Hindu by claiming himself to be a Bedi  LOL


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> wrong its Indra you ghonchu
> 
> you want me to address Muhammad as Jesus ?
> 
> Don't spread disinformation
> 
> 
> This is the way to talk to a Muslim who argues with a Hindu by claiming himself to be a Bedi  LOL



Umm no...

_The origins of Ahura Mazda seem to be tied to the early beliefs of the proto-Indo-Iranian-Aryans. Scholarly consensus identifies a connection between Ahura Mazda and the Vedic gods Varuna. For instance, Kuiper (1983) puts forth the view that the proto-Indo-Iranian divinity is the nameless "Father Ahura," that is, Varuna of the Rigveda._


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> seem to be tied



enugh said, and who the f*** is Kuiper lol

Man you Pakistanis are really brainwashed by your own propaganda and identity crisis that now you need India and vedic ways of living to clear the black spot on you lol
Keep up the disinformation 

aur yeh Kashmir lenge


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Khadija



Huh?



kalakaar said:


> enugh said
> 
> Man you Pakistanis are really brainwashed by your own propaganda and identity crisis that now you need India and vedic ways of living to clear the black spot on you lol
> Keep up the disinformation



https://www.google.com/search?sourc...31k1j0i10k1j0i13k1j0i22i10i30k1.0.Ah8sjuBWq78

*It is generally accepted that the Ahura Mazda of the Avesta is indeed the Varuna of Rig Veda.
https://sreenivasaraos.com/tag/varuna-and-ahura-mazda/*

*According to William W Malandra both Varuna (in Vedic period) and Ahura Mazda (in old Iranian religion) represented same Indo-Iranian concept of a supreme "wise, all-knowing lord".

Boyce, Mary (2001), "Mithra the King and Varuna the Master", Festschrift für Helmut Humbach zum 80., Trier: WWT, pp. 239–257
*



kalakaar said:


> enugh said, and who the f*** is Kuiper lol
> 
> Man you Pakistanis are really brainwashed by your own propaganda and identity crisis that now you need India and vedic ways of living to clear the black spot on you lol
> Keep up the disinformation
> 
> aur yeh Kashmir lenge



Explain again how modern-day Indians are "Vedic".

You cremate, Vedics buried.
You eat salads, Vedics ate beef.
You have 5 hierarchical castes, Vedics had 4 non-hierarchical castes
You called Indus Valley (Vahikda Desa as per Puranas), Vedics called Ganges/Deccan (Dasyu Varta as per Vedas)

Why are Indians so obsessed with trying to steal other peoples cultures? Why aren't you proud of your own Tamil religion and Dravidian history?

Dasyu :p

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Huh?



Bro stop behaving like a retard, you are embarrassing yourself and whole your Muslim community. 


Indus Priest King said:


> *It is generally accepted that the Ahura Mazda of the Avesta is indeed the Varuna of Rig Veda.
> https://sreenivasaraos.com/tag/varuna-and-ahura-mazda/*
> 
> *According to William W Malandra both Varuna (in Vedic period) and Ahura Mazda (in old Iranian religion) represented same Indo-Iranian concept of a supreme "wise, all-knowing lord".
> *
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Boyce, Mary (2001), "Mithra the King and Varuna the Master", Festschrift für Helmut Humbach zum 80., Trier: WWT, pp. 239–257
> *



Not proven just a study. 

Ahura Mazda is supreme and main God , Varun dev is one of the devas along with Agni , and Indra which orders Varun deva and Indra is related to all seasons and your own sense , as per vedas. This is not Quran dude.


----------



## Indus Priest King

For those who want an indepth read between the Vedic Indus and the Dasyu Ganga, here's my article.





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1766899513370025


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> You cremate, Vedics buried.


even in lothal the are evidences that people cremate



Indus Priest King said:


> For those who want an indepth read between the Vedic Indus and the Dasyu Ganga, here's my article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1766899513370025



''Nilofar Abbasi asks'', a Muslim trying to divide Hindus lol. propaganda!!

The difference is , Hindus in pak have been enslaved by their master from Turkey and bastardisation took place. Now hatred against India and their own identity crisis leads them to semi literate mode of living asking stupid questions and making stupid posts.


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Bro stop behaving like a retard, you are embarrassing yourself and whole your Muslim community.



You refuse to answer my questions, you divert away to Islam whenever you can't answer a question. If anybody is reading this, they'll know who the retard is, and it's definitely not me. DASYU.



> Not proven just a study



What do you mean not proven? It's accepted. If you don't accept it, that's your problem. Varuna and Ahura Mazda both derive from a common Indo-European god. Deal with it.

Show me evidence otherwise. So far you haven't given me any hymn number, I debunked your Rakhigari trash and now this. Not a great morning for you kid.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> You called Indus Valley (Vahikda Desa as per Puranas), Vedics called Ganges/Deccan (Dasyu Varta as per Vedas)



That region is also ours only. Just because of Islam it got divided from us. 



Indus Priest King said:


> If you don't accept it, that's your problem



Yeah why should I , we have freedom not to accept thing until self learnt we are not Muslims like you 



Indus Priest King said:


> I debunked your Rakhigari trash and now this. Not a great morning for you kid.



You may debunk everything in India lol you are a Pakistani Muslim. Selective articles and links are required by semi litrates like you you know sh*t about vedic traditions. For us it's day today life. 

I really welcome you to dharmic way of living. Come back to original, forget Quran and Sharia and Mohammad. Start Chanting Om Agnidevaye Namah! And I will accept all your claims


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> even in lothal the are evidences that people cremate



Provide me the peer review study which you read that proves cremations occurred at Lothal at during either the Indus Valley or Vedic Civilization. The funny part is, Lothal was abandoned by the time the Vedic civilization came around, which further proves how dumb are you. Did you crack the Indus script? Funny...so far, it's been 40 years...the Institute of Sindhology would love your Rosetta Stone.



> ''Nilofar Abbasi asks'', a Muslim trying to divide Hindus lol. propaganda!!



What's propaganda? It's a well established fact that Vedic and Puranic Hinduism are vastly different. Deal with it.



> The difference is , Hindus in pak have been enslaved by their master from Turkey and bastardisation took place. Now hatred against India and their own identity crisis leads them to semi literate mode of living asking stupid questions and making stupid posts.



Umm...no...Hindus in Pakistan are just different altogether. This is something you can't comprehend. You think your bullshit Ganges religion you worship in North India is common to every other place in Asia. Go to Myanmar, Indonesia, Malaysia even Southern India and the Hinduism is all very different.

Hinduism is broken down into four regional variants:

Indus (dominated by Vedic)

Ganges North India (Puranic)
Deccan South India (Dravidian customs/Puranic)

Far East Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia etc. (Local customs/Puranic)


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> Provide me the peer review study which you read that proves cremations occurred at Lothal at during either the Indus Valley or Vedic Civilization. The funny part is, Lothal was abandoned by the time the Vedic civilization came around, which further proves how dumb are you. Did you crack the Indus script? Funny...so far, it's been 40 years...the Institute of Sindhology would love your Rosetta Stone.
> 
> 
> 
> What's propaganda? It's a well established fact that Vedic and Puranic Hinduism are vastly different. Deal with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Umm...no...Hindus in Pakistan are just different altogether. This is something you can't comprehend. You think your bullshit Ganges religion you worship in North India is common to every other place in Asia. Go to Myanmar, Indonesia, Malaysia even Southern India and the Hinduism is all very different.
> 
> Hinduism is broken down into four regional variants:
> 
> Indus (dominated by Vedic)
> 
> Ganges North India (Puranic)
> Deccan South India (Dravidian customs/Puranic)
> 
> Far East Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia etc. (Local customs/Puranic)




So start chanting Om Agnidevaye Namah from today and I will accept all your claims. Rather I would appreciate it!


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> That region is also ours only. Just because of Islam it got divided from us.



If it's yours, why did you call us Mlechas and forbid your pseudo-Aryan black Brahmins from stepping foot in Vahika Desa? LOL your land?



kalakaar said:


> Yeah why should I , we have freedom not to accept thing until self learnt we are not Muslims like you



Whether you should or shouldn't is irreverent. Facts out there exist and you not accepting them only makes this even more sweeter.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> If it's yours, why did you call us Mlechas and forbid your pseudo-Aryan black Brahmins from stepping foot in Vahika Desa? LOL your land?



We are sorry but we will save you from the arabs and turks now come back to dharmic way of life 



Indus Priest King said:


> Facts out there exist and you not accepting them only makes this even more sweeter.



It will be more sweeter if you change your name to Indra Kumar or Varun Kumar 
You appreciate Vedas so much , so let's chant Om


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> You may debunk everything in India lol you are a Pakistani Muslim. Selective articles and links are required by semi litrates like you you know sh*t about vedic traditions. For us it's day today life.



India (Latin) comes from Greek (Ind) which comes from Old Persian (Hindu) which comes from Sanskrit (Sindhu)

Since Sindhu = Indus Valley

and Indus Valley = Pakistan

Ergo...Sindhu = Pakistan

Thus the real India is actually Pakistan. I'm not debunking anything from India. I'm debunking lies from Dasyuvarta (today called Bharat or the Republic of India).



> I really welcome you to dharmic way of living. Come back to original, forget Quran and Sharia and Mohammad. Start Chanting Om Agnidevaye Namah! And I will accept all your claims



Who said I was Muslim? Your whole argument revolves around me being a Muslim. Guess what...I'm not. Read my posts sometimes you twat.



kalakaar said:


> We are sorry but we will save you from the arabs and turks now come back to dharmic way of life



"Save us"....we don't need saving from Dasyus. You need to save yourselves from the false religion your practicing. Fake Hinduism. LOL.



kalakaar said:


> It will be more sweeter if you change your name to Indra Kumar or Varun Kumar



I don't ever remember telling you what my name was.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> ndia (Latin) comes from Greek (Ind) which comes from Old Persian (Hindu) which comes from Sanskrit (Sindhu)
> 
> Since Sindhu = Indus Valley
> 
> and Indus Valley = Pakistan
> 
> Ergo...Sindhu = Pakistan
> 
> Thus the real India is actually Pakistan. I'm not debunking anything from India. I'm debunking lies from Dasyuvarta (today called Bharat or the Republic of India



Because the polical power is in Indraprashta lol and also the executive power. We influenced the western regions of Subcontinet 



Indus Priest King said:


> "Save us"....we don't need saving from Dasyus. You need to save yourselves from the false religion your practicing. Fake Hinduism. LOL.



Oh come on you have been looted by turks and arabs and what not, in the name of religion. Burkha, sharia and Mohammad was introduced to you. And you have accepted it, didn't like that identity that you invited more identity crisis


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Because the polical power is in Indraprashta lol and also the executive power. We influenced the western regions of Subcontinet



Mythical city that is found in Mahabharata. Not found in Vedas = Irreverent to me.

PS: Dasyus called it Khandavaprastha.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> I don't ever remember telling you what my name was



Of course you are a wanabe Hindu


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Oh come on you have been looted by turks and arabs and what not, in the name of religion. Burkha, sharia and Mohammad was introduced to you. And you have accepted it, didn't like that identity that you invited more identity crisis



The Indus Valley has always been open to religions...what's your point? The only identity crisis I'm seeing are North Indians who are increasingly becoming agitated that DNA evidence proves they're neither related to the Indus Valley or that they're not Aryans.

You're upset because you're more closely related to Dravidians and Tamils in South India. This angers you because you were taught all you life they were inferior. Am I right?

Well...Karma has its ways to correcting injustice. It seems like YOU were the inferior ones all along.





kalakaar said:


> Of course you are a wanabe Hindu



I live on the holy land of Sindhu...and worship the river that feeds this land. I think we all know who the wannabe Hindu is here.


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> The Indus Valley has always been open to religions...what's your point?



Of course not anymore
Now its Islamic republic LOL


----------



## Indus Priest King

kalakaar said:


> Of course not
> Now its Islamic republic LOL



Yeah and? This land was called Sindhu, Mehluna, Synthia, Hindush....I don't get what your argument is.

You are aware of the fact that changing your faith doesn't change your DNA right? I can only hope you're still trolling at this point....if you actually believe that, then God help you.

Anyhow...I'm off to work. I'll come own your *** later in the evening. Cheerio.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kalakaar

Indus Priest King said:


> I live on the holy land of Sindhu...and worship the river that feeds this land



Yes a Muslim living in Sindh calling himself chanter of Om agni devaye namah. Bravo! 

You are changing Islam , a lot of people would be angry with you in pakistan if you need help let us know ok? 



Indus Priest King said:


> Yeah and? This land was called Sindhu, Mehluna, Synthia, Hindush....I don't get what your argument is.
> 
> You are aware of the fact that changing your faith doesn't change your DNA right? I can only hope you're still trolling at this point....if you actually believe that, then God help you.
> 
> Anyhow...I'm off to work. I'll come own your *** later in the evening. Cheerio



DNA has nothing to do with tradition also. The civilisation is formed with an essence of theology and civic rules. If you don't know how to be in the civilisation no matter what your DNA is you are no more civilized and not the part of civilisation. being a Muslim you can't be a vedic why? because Islam does not permit you to chant the hymns, and when you can't chant hymns you can't praise the Varun god and when you cant do that you are don't know what to follow. You fall into identity crisis like most of the Pakistanis are, syeds, turkic and what not nonsense. 

No matter how much links you post or what ever you try to debate, you can't prove yourself to be vedic because you are a Mohammadan. It's the way of life that makes you vedic not your ancestors. 

Ciao!


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> It's tough to say whether Pakistani is an Arabi syed, or a converted pandit or a a mongol Origin or turkic. They are anything but not well followers of Vedas. The constant invasion of the North west Indian sub continent led to the destruction of many Vedic rituals. And now the Inhabitants there are identity less left overs.



"Identity less" LOL, we know what we are, proud Muslims (minus a few ethnic nationalists, but their identity is also based on a coherent one).

You're the ones without an identity, you keep claiming your neighbours based on this stupid naming rhetoric. You are the FYROM of South Asia.

Also, spoiler alert, but in Islam we are not so petty as to take our heroes based on which group of people they belong to. We take them based upon who had similar (i.e Islamic) ideals to us, because at the end of the day we are all Bani Adam!

Even by your stupid logic, as proven before (check my posts with positive ratings) we do have ancestry from these Islamic invaders. Many of them weren't even invaders, a lot of them were local or had large numbers of locals working for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

kalakaar said:


> Just a post above this one there is another Pakistani who is Turkish  And you are a convert so this means either He was master or he is lying. There you go perfect example of Identity crisis in Pakistan. I hope you are not some syed from Arabia
> 
> Pakistanis are big time wannabe everything







So where is the evidence for all your claims? If you can't find any it means you are lying and making it all up. How can anyone believe anything your kind says when your ilk also claims that indians invented the internet, computers, submarines and spaceships 10,000 years ago? :

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...net-thousands-of-years-ago-1.3467467?mode=amp

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalakaar

dsr478 said:


> "Identity less" LOL, we know what we are, proud Muslims (minus a few ethnic nationalists, but their identity is also based on a coherent one).
> 
> You're the ones without an identity, you keep claiming your neighbours based on this stupid naming rhetoric. You are the FYROM of South Asia.
> 
> Also, spoiler alert, but in Islam we are not so petty as to take our heroes based on which group of people they belong to. We take them based upon who had similar (i.e Islamic) ideals to us, because at the end of the day we are all Bani Adam!
> 
> Even by your stupid logic, as proven before (check my posts with positive ratings) we do have ancestry from these Islamic invaders. Many of them weren't even invaders, a lot of them were local or had large numbers of locals working for them.



Your identity is based on recently found links from google 

What a stupid logic, yeah right every mulsim invader claims to be idegenous now as Pakistan is the product of that invasion talking sh*t on internet. 

You need evidences to claim things that too from western media and western studies, the India itself is a Land of Saraswati and Ganga and soon we will claim the Indus too. 



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So where is the evidence for all your claims? If you can't find any it means you are lying and making it all up. How can anyone believe anything your kind says when your ilk also claims that indians invented the internet, computers, submarines and spaceships 10,000 years ago? :
> 
> https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...net-thousands-of-years-ago-1.3467467?mode=amp



LOL
Let me fall to the category of you I would have to question the existence of Mohammad, And the evidence of some voice coming to him then  .. Muslims living on falsehhood of some rumour coming from Arab. And this supermacist ideology to supress anything non Islamic in traditon led to the demise of Vedic culture in North West India, now Pakistan.



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So where is the evidence for all your claims? If you can't find any it means you are lying and making it all up. How can anyone believe anything your kind says when your ilk also claims that indians invented the internet, computers, submarines and spaceships 10,000 years ago? :
> 
> https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...net-thousands-of-years-ago-1.3467467?mode=amp



LOL
Let me fall to the category of you I would have to question the existence of Mohammad, And the evidence of some voice coming to him then  .. Muslims living on falsehhood of some rumour coming from Arab. And this supermacist ideology to supress anything non Islamic in traditon led to the demise of Vedic culture in North West India, now Pakistan.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

kalakaar said:


> What a stupid logic, yeah right every mulsim invader claims to be idegenous now as Pakistan is the product of that invasion talking sh*t on internet.
> 
> You need evidences to claim things that too from western media and western studies, the India itself is a Land of Saraswati and Ganga and soon we will claim the Indus too.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> Let me fall to the category of you I would have to question the existence of Mohammad, And the evidence of some voice coming to him then  .. Muslims living on falsehhood of some rumour coming from Arab. And this supermacist ideology to supress anything non Islamic in traditon led to the demise of Vedic culture in North West India, now Pakistan.



Not all of them, but many of them. For example:

Khilijis, Durranis, Suri's and Ghurids - Pashtuns (2nd largest ethnic group in Pakistan, Ahmed Shah Durrani and Sher Shah Suri were also born in Pakistani Punjab, they conquered large portions of Hindustan)

http://www.pashtunforums.com/pashtun-history-/38336-ghuri-pashtun-persian.html
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Khalji-dynasty
http://pakteahouse.net/2009/11/25/ahmad-shah-durrani-a-king-of-high-rank/
http://historypak.com/sher-shah-suri/

Mysoreans - Hyder Ali's father was Punjabi (they defeated the Maratha's and fought bravely against the British)

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...nd-tumakuru-district/articleshow/61574823.cms

Rind dynasty - Baluchis (at one point they sacked Delhi)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_Chakar_Rind
https://real-politique.blogspot.com/2009/12/mir-chakar-khan-rind-warrior-hero-of.html

Shah Mir dynasty - Gujjars from Swat (they almost completely wiped out Hinduism/Buddhism from Kashmir, with one ruler even earning the title of iconoclast for the number of idols he destroyed)

http://lostkashmirihistory.com/sultan-sikandar-man-myth/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Mir_dynasty
https://jktribals.page.tl/History-of-Gujjars.htm

Lodi dynasty - Half Pashtun half Punjabi dynasty (ruled over eastern Pakistan and northern Hindustan)

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Lodi-dynasty
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikandar_Lodi

Aurangzeb Alamgir - Was born in the Indus Valley

http://lostislamichistory.com/aurangzeb-and-islamic-rule-in-india/

Shah Jahan - Came from Lahore

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Shah-Jahan

Many of the foreigners also had indigenous Muslims in their military. For example:

Muhammad Bin Qasim utilised Gujjar and Baluchi mercenaries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_bin_Qasim#The_campaign

Mahmud Ghaznavi had large numbers of Indo-Aryans fight in his army:

http://www.barmazid.com/2016/11/ghaznavids-had-large-number-of-hindus.html

Babur employed Punjabis and Pashtuns into his military:

http://firdosh101.blogspot.com/2009/05/history-of-gakhars.html

Shahbaz Khan was a Punjabi and one of the Mughal Empire's greatest generals during Akbar's reign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahbaz_Khan_Kamboh

We are also descended from the foreign Islamic invaders (but most of our ancestry is still native):







Same can be said for Hindustani Muslims:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3163234

*"The study showed that the Muslim Gujjars differ significantly from their counterpart, the Hindu Gujjars"*

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20067368

*"we observed a certain degree of genetic contribution from Iran to both Muslim populations"*

Next time make you sure you actually know what you are talking about.

It's funny you mention Western studies, who is the one denying the Aryan migrations again?

Sigh, for the umpteenth time:

*FOR MOST OF HISTORY, THE INDUS REGION WAS SEPARATE TO HINDUSTAN
*
Here are some maps showing all/most or at the very least significant portions of the Indus Valley not being a part of any dynasty in Hindustan:





















Indo-Parthians: Gandhara: Timurid Empire:

















Hepthalites:






Sassanid Empire:






Ummayad Caliphate (yellow):






Abbasid Caliphate:





















We have been a part of many great empires/civilisations, which has only further diversified the ancestry and the culture of our people. We take great pride in this.

Your pagan ideals are complete crap and are as a result dying whilst our faith continues to expand. If you really want to know why our faith is the truth, I'll start you off with this selection of videos:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7F4B62A190046A64

Watch them, and then get back to me. Only then will I give you more proof of Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LASER1

A good read. Nice article @Indus Priest King

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LASER1

Indus Priest King said:


> Vedics ate beef, we eat beef.
> Vedics buried their dead, we bury our dead
> Vedics hated Dasyus, we hate Dasyus
> 
> Whether or not we do or don't is irreverent. Modern-day Greeks don't follow the ancient Greek religion, they're all Christians now. Does that mean they forfiet their history?
> 
> And you're not Vedics....you're Puranic Hindus.


No, Vedics ate meat in general which may even include wild boar and pigs. The sacredness of cow started hundreds of years later in order to preserve the agriculture.
Vedics burned their dead. They burried only children. Here's the verse. Hope you can read. Or I'll give you the translation.
अयुर्वसान उप वेतु शेषः सं गछतान्तन्वा जातवेदः ||
यत ते कर्ष्णः शकुन आतुतोद पिपीलः सर्प उत वाश्वापदः |
अग्निष टद विश्वादगदं कर्णोतु सोमश्च योब्राह्मणानाविवेश ||
अग्नेर्वर्म परि गोभिर्व्ययस्व सं परोर्णुष्व पीवसामेदसा च |
नेत तवा धर्ष्णुर्हरसा जर्ह्र्षाणो दध्र्ग्विधक्ष्यन पर्यङखयाते ||
इममग्ने चमसं मा वि जिह्वरः परियो देवानामुतसोम्यानाम |
एष यश्चमसो देवपानस्तस्मिन देवा अम्र्तामादयन्ते ||

I think you better stick to Indus Valley and other things like the one's you posted. Do not talk about things you don't know and make a fool out of yourselves. Vedics never hated anyone, Vedas do not call people to hate anyone. Desyus? You mean Dasa/Dasi are servants. It is only a term, unlike in English, in Sanskrit, Servant is associated to divine as well as dirty works.

Alas, I thought your thread was meant for the informative purpose, but this is just showing off some false bravado and pride. I think I should call it identity issue. Same as @kalakaar.



TMA said:


> One also needs to be able to understand Vedic Sanskrit...I take it you are an expert in this millennia old tongue??
> 
> Don't confuse Vedic civilization to the Puranic civilization...


What is the difference between Vedic civilization and Puranic civilization? 

And Vedic Sanskrit is Sanskrit it's only standardized version is Classical Sanskrit. And one can understand Vedic Sanskrit if he knows Classical Sanskrit.


----------



## Pakistani E

kalakaar said:


> 1.Your fore father was an invader who illegally occupied the land. Since when you became the owner?
> 2. And if you are a convert then the invaders forcefully converted your forefathers into their way of theology and traditions. Then you are a slave. You own nothing.
> 3. And if your forefathers converted by choice this means you people have left the vedic traditions because you don#t find them worth following. In this case you have no right to own them either.
> 
> You are going through identity crisis mate.  There is a saying, '' dhobhi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka ''.
> 
> Neither you are from Ganga ghaat nor Sindhu ghaat, and arbis don't consider you as pure muslims lol.



I know this user is banned, but I have an inkling that this is the same user with multiple ids. Anyway, I hope when he returns with his other id, he replies to me.

1. Both my paternal and maternal haplogroups have been documented to be in the Subcontinent for thousands of years. My autosomal DNA is 97.5 South Asian.
2. Again, my father's side were converted to Islam by a Sufi saint over 900 years ago, one who's name we now carry as our tribal heritage. My mother's family were Kashmiri Hindus less than 200 years ago and actually became Muslim under a Hindu regime at the height of its power.
3. Traditions change with time. It is a hallmark of human civilization to induce change. Some gradually, some more violent and sudden. It doesn't change my heritage. Original humans are believed to be descended from archaic apes, why do I not see you swinging from trees, wearing nothing and screaming in a nonsensical language, and honouring the traditions of your ape ancestors? Oh wait...

As for identity crises, it is you who seems to be labouring under the illusion that your opinion or the opinions of Arabs on what I think about myself affects me. I know who I am and where I come from.

I am not from Ganga Jamna, nor do I want to be from there. As for the Indus river, one of its major tributaries runs less than 30 miles from my ancestral village. It is time you accept your identity, as another twisted knave from the deep jungles of the Ganga swampland. Again, I implore you to be proud of your twig wearing ancestors. Have a good day, look forward to giving you a talk down to another of your accounts.

الوداع

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Sher Shah Awan said:


> I know this user is banned, but I have an inkling that this is the same user with multiple ids. Anyway, I hope when he returns with his other id, he replies to me.
> 
> 1. Both my paternal and maternal haplogroups have been documented to be in the Subcontinent for thousands of years. My autosomal DNA is 97.5 South Asian.
> 2. Again, my father's side were converted to Islam by a Sufi saint over 900 years ago, one who's name we now carry as our tribal heritage. My mother's family were Kashmiri Hindus less than 200 years ago and actually became Muslim under a Hindu regime at the height of its power.
> 3. Traditions change with time. It is a hallmark of human civilization to induce change. Some gradually, some more violent and sudden. It doesn't change my heritage. Original humans are believed to be descended from archaic apes, why do I not see you swinging from trees, wearing nothing and screaming in a nonsensical language, and honouring the traditions of your ape ancestors? Oh wait...
> 
> As for identity crises, it is you who seems to be labouring under the illusion that your opinion or the opinions of Arabs on what I think about myself affects me. I know who I am and where I come from.
> 
> I am not from Ganga Jamna, nor do I want to be from there. As for the Indus river, one of its major tributaries runs less than 30 miles from my ancestral village. It is time you accept your identity, as another twisted knave from the deep jungles of the Ganga swampland. Again, I implore you to be proud of your twig wearing ancestors. Have a good day, look forward to giving you a talk down to another of your accounts.
> 
> الوداع



Nice post. Allama Iqbal was also descended from Kashmiri Brahmins. He mentions it in his poems.

I am also 100% Pakistani in my lineage. My first cousin took one of these genetic tests which said he had 3% Swedish DNA from maternal side (our common side.) I am thinking that it is some sort of Proto-Indo-European ancestry.

Converting to a faith does not negate your blood lineage. I don’t see how this concept is so difficult for Indians to comprehend.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Converting to a faith does not negate your blood lineage. I don’t see how this concept is so difficult for Indians to comprehend.



And what's funny is Bharatis constantly claim that we pretend to be Arab because we now follow Islam.

Following Islam doesn't make Pakistani as Arabs.

Following Hinduism, doesn't make Bharatis as Indo Aryans/Vedic.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MSafir

We are Muslims alhamdolillah we have nothing to do with any Veda or the ruins lying in Sindh. Just can be taken care as UNESCO heritage site for the purpose of record.


----------



## Indus Priest King

MSafir said:


> We are Muslims alhamdolillah we have nothing to do with any Veda or the ruins lying in Sindh. Just can be taken care as UNESCO heritage site for the purpose of record.



I ain't Muslim. I'm Pakistani and an Indus nationalist. Get back on your banana boat Bihari.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mugen

MSafir said:


> We are Muslims alhamdolillah we have nothing to do with any Veda or the ruins lying in Sindh. Just can be taken care as UNESCO heritage site for the purpose of record.


If it is our history, we should accept it and be proud of it. We are Pakistanis first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indus Priest King

Mugen said:


> If it is our history, we should accept it and be proud of it. We are Pakistanis first.



He's an indian...just posing as his father.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

Mugen said:


> If it is our history, we should accept it and be proud of it. We are Pakistanis first.



That's what I said but to our faith and tradition it's not relevant we can only take care of it but cannot follow it. More over this guy called me bihari. He forgets that there are so many Muslims in Pakistan who are from UP and Bihar and Bengalis. Infact my maternal side is basically from Meerut and paternal from Jammu. Migrated just few years before partition. Does it make me less Pakistani?

How do you differentiate between a Pakistani Muslim from 5000 years old Hindu civilization and a Muslim from UP or Bihar whose ancestors migrated to Pakistan.

I don't understand this logic. he is just insulting us and calling himself some Indus nationalist. That's what Sindhi nationalism was all about. Which world are we living?



Indus Priest King said:


> I ain't Muslim. I'm Pakistani and an Indus nationalist. Get back on your banana boat Bihari.



What on earth in Indus nationalist?  The origin of Indus is in China go there then and do your pooja.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

MSafir said:


> How do you differentiate between a Pakistani Muslim from 5000 years old Hindu civilization and a Muslim from UP or Bihar whose ancestors migrated to Pakistan.



He should not insult you for being Bihari. I agree with that.

Our “5000 year history” is not Hindu. Hinduism only came about due to contact with Islam. Before this, each place had its own separate polytheistic religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TMA

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Nice post. Allama Iqbal was also descended from Kashmiri Brahmins. He mentions it in his poems.
> 
> I am also 100% Pakistani in my lineage. My first cousin took one of these genetic tests which said he had 3% Swedish DNA from maternal side (our common side.) I am thinking that it is some sort of Proto-Indo-European ancestry.
> 
> Converting to a faith does not negate your blood lineage. I don’t see how this concept is so difficult for Indians to comprehend.


Man, some Pakistanis don't get this concept either..



MSafir said:


> That's what I said but to our faith and tradition it's not relevant we can only take care of it but cannot follow it. More over this guy called me bihari. He forgets that there are so many Muslims in Pakistan who are from UP and Bihar and Bengalis. Infact my maternal side is basically from Meerut and paternal from Jammu. Migrated just few years before partition. Does it make me less Pakistani?
> 
> How do you differentiate between a Pakistani Muslim from 5000 years old Hindu civilization and a Muslim from UP or Bihar whose ancestors migrated to Pakistan.
> 
> I don't understand this logic. he is just insulting us and calling himself some Indus nationalist. That's what Sindhi nationalism was all about. Which world are we living?
> 
> 
> 
> What on earth in Indus nationalist?  The origin of Indus is in China go there then and do your pooja.


The origin of the river is in Chinese Tibet but the civilizations associated with that river all emanated from coterminous Pakistan, not Chinese Tibet.



MSafir said:


> We are Muslims alhamdolillah we have nothing to do with any Veda or the ruins lying in Sindh. Just can be taken care as UNESCO heritage site for the purpose of record.


The river Indus is not just in Sindh, although there it is at its largest, the river runs basically through Pakistan from North to South...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> The origin of the river is in Chinese Tibet but the civilizations associated with that river all emanated from coterminous Pakistan, not Chinese Tibet.



True. 

But I got irked because he used derogatory remarks for me as my maternal side is from Meerut and Paternal from Jammu, is Pakistan only for those Muslims who were once Pandits or chanting vedic mantra living near Indus? What kind of nonsense is this? And what is Indus nationalism? As he mentioned. 
I guess Pakistan was created for Muslim not for some Vedic Pandus like @Indus Priest King. We wanted to get rid of these so called statue worshipers or polytheist people worshiping fire water and 5th element. Otherwise there wouldn't be a need to create Pakistan. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Our “5000 year history” is not Hindu. Hinduism only came about due to contact with Islam. Before this, each place had its own separate polytheistic religion.



Polytheistic religion was all over there and to get rid of it Islam came to civilize them.


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> True.
> 
> But I got irked because he used derogatory remarks for me as my maternal side is from Meerut and Paternal from Jammu, is Pakistan only for those Muslims who were once Pandits or chanting vedic mantra living near Indus? What kind of nonsense is this? And what is Indus nationalism? As he mentioned.
> I guess Pakistan was created for Muslim not for some Vedic Pandus like @Indus Priest King. We wanted to get rid of these so called statue worshipers or polytheist people worshiping fire water and 5th element. Otherwise there wouldn't be a need to create Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> Polytheistic religion was all over there and to get rid of it Islam came to civilize them.


I understand, but also understand, the MOST Pakistanis were already on coterminous Pakistani soil way before the dissolution of the contemptible entity known as British India. Their heritage must be respected.
Islam did not come to eradicate previous cultures and ethnicities, just to purify them...it is a shame that Pakistanis have in many cases dumped the good aspects of their heritage....

No what the founding fathers wanted was not to get rid of such people, rather for Muslims to have a country where they would be safe from their extremist elements, there is a BIG difference....besides the Vedas teach Monotheism...and this has been corrupted in the other books of the so called Hindus...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> I understand, but also understand, the MOST Pakistanis were already on coterminous Pakistani soil way before the dissolution of the contemptible entity known as British India. Their heritage must be respected.
> Islam did not come to eradicate previous cultures and ethnicities, just to purify them...it is a shame that Pakistanis have in many cases dumped the good aspects of their heritage....
> 
> No what the founding fathers wanted was not to get rid of such people, rather for Muslims to have a country where they would be safe from their extremist elements, there is a BIG difference....besides the Vedas teach Monotheism...and this has been corrupted in the other books of the so called Hindus...



So the muslims who came after the partition or just few years before the partition should follow the rules and start following your vedic traditions just to end from one Pandu land to other? I have no idea what vedas teach. Nor I am interested in it. For me its Quran.Are you even a Muslim? It is us muslims who have created Pakistan for betterment of Muslims are protect rights of Muslim from so called cow dung worshipers and fire worshipers. You feel no shame for ignoring the sacrifice of those Muslims who migrated during partition and got killed in the process. Shame on you!


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> So the muslims who came after the partition or just few years before the partition should follow the rules and start following your vedic traditions just to end from one Pandu land to other? I have no idea what vedas teach. Nor I am interested in it. For me its Quran.Are you even a Muslim? It is us muslims who have created Pakistan for betterment of Muslims are protect rights of Muslim from so called cow dung worshipers and fire worshipers. You feel no shame for ignoring the sacrifice of those Muslims who migrated during partition and got killed in the process. Shame on you!


Yes I am Muslim Alhamudlillah and our religion teaches us respect....
I did not say they should follow the Vedas or worship cows, stop projecting ignorance onto my statements...
One should RESPECT, be MINDFUL, of the history of the Land that one migrates to...that is all....
Those who made the sacrifice are Martyrs and they will have a great reward, INSHALLAH.
But please let us whose ancestry is from the ancient civilizations of coterminous Pakistan, learn about that history. (And one can also learn Muslim history as well, they are not mutually exclusive)...Islam has come to purify not to eradicate....
You do not have to learn it, but please don't stop the rest (who are the majority of your countrymen)....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> I did not say they should follow the Vedas or worship cows, stop projecting ignorance onto my statements...
> One should RESPECT, be MINDFUL, of the history of the Land that one migrates to...that is all....



So where did I not respect the Vedas? I just said, it is irrelevant for Muslims, we have our traditions and way of life. And this is why we created Pakistan because Islamic traditions are different from them we knew from the day islam arrived that coexistence is not possible with them. And what I get to hear is I should go back to where I came from. It's our Pakistan we created it who the hell is he to tell us to leave? Population of Nashukras is increasing in Pakistan day by day


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> So where did I not respect the Vedas? I just said, it is irrelevant for Muslims, we have our traditions and way of life. And this is why we created Pakistan because Islamic traditions are different from them we knew from the day islam arrived that coexistence is not possible with them. And what I get to hear is I should go back to where I came from. It's our Pakistan we created it who the hell is he to tell us to leave? Population of Nashukras is increasing in Pakistan day by day


It might not be YOUR tradition and history, but it is for MANY of your countrymen.
Let those countrymen (who are the MAJORITY of Pakistan) learn about their history. Please just let us learn in peace....
Perhaps you should ask him who the hell is he, not me.
By creating Pakistan does not mean you wipe out your previous history....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> It might not be YOUR tradition and history, but it is for MANY of your countrymen.
> Let those countrymen (who are the MAJORITY of Pakistan) learn about their history. Please just let us learn in peace....
> Perhaps you should ask him who the hell is he, not me.
> By creating Pakistan does not mean you wipe out your previous history....



What is the history of Muslims who came in after 1947? People like you are responsible for the confusion in the society. Majority of people have no interest in those foolish stories. And definitely you would be creating division among the people of this society just like you did with bengalis and then people who migrated from India after 47. Our history starts from bin qasim and before that we were pagans which most Muslims would not like to hear. And definitely that brings us closer to Hindus. Pakistan was created not because of some Indus region, it was created because of Muslim Identity. So we have to adhere that only.


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> What is the history of Muslims who came in after 1947? People like you are responsible for the confusion in the society. Majority of people have no interest in those foolish stories. And definitely you would be creating division among the people of this society just like you did with bengalis and then people who migrated from India after 47. Our history starts from bin qasim and before that we were pagans which most Muslims would not like to hear. And definitely that brings us closer to Hindus. Pakistan was created not because of some Indus region, it was created because of Muslim Identity. So we have to adhere that only.


I disagree. You can decide what is your history for the people who came post 1947. You can learn about your history.
But please don't specify for the rest of your countrymen what they can learn and cannot learn about THEIR history.
Your history may start from Bin Qasim, but for MOST of your countrymen it goes back before... I used to think like you but I am learning things I did not know from before....

Learning one's history is not division, but preventing people from learning theirs' will lead to division....

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
6


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

MSafir said:


> What is the history of Muslims who came in after 1947? People like you are responsible for the confusion in the society. Majority of people have no interest in those foolish stories. And definitely you would be creating division among the people of this society just like you did with bengalis and then people who migrated from India after 47. Our history starts from bin qasim and before that we were pagans which most Muslims would not like to hear. And definitely that brings us closer to Hindus. Pakistan was created not because of some Indus region, it was created because of Muslim Identity. So we have to adhere that only.





What evidence do you have that the non-Muslim ancestors of modern day Pakistanis who were the inhabitants of the IVC have ANY connection with modern-day indians/hindus?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

MSafir said:


> What is the history of Muslims who came in after 1947? People like you are responsible for the confusion in the society. Majority of people have no interest in those foolish stories. And definitely you would be creating division among the people of this society just like you did with bengalis and then people who migrated from India after 47. Our history starts from bin qasim and before that we were pagans which most Muslims would not like to hear. And definitely that brings us closer to Hindus. Pakistan was created not because of some Indus region, it was created because of Muslim Identity. So we have to adhere that only.



We have a 7,000 year history before 1947.
Neither the Arabs, Persians, Turks have forgotten their pre-Islamic history, so why should we?

The error is with you who believes that our previous history was Hindu. It most certainly was not. 70 years have gone by and as Pakistan becomes more homogeneous of a nation, we need to rediscover our ancient history.

Don’t talk about Bangladesh here. There is absolutely no correlation. With all due respect to them, they are a totally different culture and race than us. Islam was not strong enough to erase those differences, as they naturally became close to their blood brothers in India.

We as a distinct nation did not randomly emerge in 1947 or when Muhammad bin Qasim landed in Sindh. Our history has lead us to our unique place in the Islamic world.

We are a people whose whole history has been moving towards a divinely ordained goal. No matter what challenges we faced, Allah swt is blessing our steps and easing our pain.

It was inevitable that we, this great nation from the Indus (Sappta Sindhu), would become Muslims and one of the strongest, courageous Muslim nations in history. Greatness whether in the Mughal Sultanat or Pakistani nation is our destiny.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> we have nothing to do with ... the ruins lying in Sindh



A bunch of Indians making the same argument get banned
You join the forum a few days later
Two days after joining you make this comment
Welcome to the watchlist mate

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Indus Pakistan

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> IVC have ANY connection with modern-day indians/hindus?


Question -

Black African Jamaican slave adopts his master's language - English
Black African Jamaican slave adopts his masters religion - Christianity
Black African Jamican slave adopts his masters culture - English


Today does his English speaking, Christian worshipping Black Jamaican have right to claim Stonehenge, Sir Isaac Newton, Oliver Cromwell, Tower of London etc as his heritage?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Kaptaan said:


> Question -
> 
> Black African Jamaican slave adopts his master's language - English
> Black African Jamaican slave adopts his masters religion - Christianity
> Black African Jamican slave adopts his masters culture - English
> 
> 
> Today does his English speaking, Christian worshipping Black Jamaican have right to claim Stonehenge, Sir Isaac Newton, Oliver Cromwell, Tower of London etc as his heritage?






That's the most perfect analogy ever......lol......lol................

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We have a 7,000 year history before 1947.
> Neither the Arabs, Persians, Turks have forgotten their pre-Islamic history, so why should we?
> 
> The error is with you who believes that our previous history was Hindu. It most certainly was not. 70 years have gone by and as Pakistan becomes more homogeneous of a nation, we need to rediscover our ancient history.
> 
> Don’t talk about Bangladesh here. There is absolutely no correlation. With all due respect to them, they are a totally different culture and race than us. Islam was not strong enough to erase those differences, as they naturally became close to their blood brothers in India.
> 
> We as a distinct nation did not randomly emerge in 1947 or when Muhammad bin Qasim landed in Sindh. Our history has lead us to our unique place in the Islamic world.
> 
> We are a people whose whole history has been moving towards a divinely ordained goal. No matter what challenges we faced, Allah swt is blessing our steps and easing our pain.
> 
> It was inevitable that we, this great nation from the Indus (Sappta Sindhu), would become Muslims and one of the strongest, courageous Muslim nations in history. Greatness whether in the Mughal Sultanat or Pakistani nation is our destiny.



You are wrong.

Pakistan was created because of religious differences. People in Aligarh and Meerut supported Pakistan because we are Muslims. We did not want to serve or come under that regime which is worshiping fire.
Stop changing the meaning of Pakistan!


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

MSafir said:


> Oh suddenly your history changes according to your convenience. Where was your history during 1989 when Zia ul Haq was doing amendment in the constitution? Where was the history of coexistence in 1947? My ancestors fought for Pakistan in Aligarh and Meerut my people were killed by the hands of sikhs and so called vedas affiliated people in Punjab. And you are trying to claim back the same history which we got rid of.
> Amazing! What a Ehsan Faramosh you people are.
> 
> 
> 
> What?






The above is meaningless conjecture. The REALITY is that us Pakistanis ARE the direct descendents of the IVC. Being a Muslim or not does not change that fact. In fact it succinctly explains our unique cultural and racial heritage. What you are suggesting is almost as ridiculous as saying that Italians are not descended from the Ancient Romans because they are Catholics and the Ancient Romans weren't. Does not make any sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> And you are trying to claim back the same history which we got rid of.





MSafir said:


> You will say the BS and I would agree? You are wrong.
> 
> Pakistan was created because of religious differences. People in Aligarh and Meerut supported Pakistan because we are Muslims. We did not want to serve or come under that regime which is worshiping fire.
> Stop changing the meaning of Pakistan!



So you joined two days ago just to start flaming people on this thread with your ignorant understanding of how heritage works?
Do you have the same message for all European Christians who are also following a middle eastern religion?

Pakistan movement was one aspect of our history. Granted it was a defining moment, but we did not "get rid" of anything prior to this. And under no circumstances did modern Indians become the inheritors of what you think "we got rid of".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MSafir

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> The above is meaningless conjecture. The REALITY is that us Pakistanis ARE the direct descendents of the IVC. Being a Muslim or not does not change that fact. In fact it succinctly explains our unique cultural and racial heritage



Stupid rant. Being a Muslim it definitely changes the fact and the fact is: the reason whole Muslims in the sub continent demanded Pakistan irrespective of their cultural background. What congestion do people in Hayderabad have with fire worshipers that the Nawab there supported the cause of Pakistan? He supported it only because he was Muslim, nothing else.




UnitedPak said:


> So you joined two days ago just to start flaming people on this thread with your ignorant understanding of how heritage works?



Listen you dude, derogatory language was used against me here I was called here Muahajir and was asked to go back. I am not even interested in this topic or what ruins say, least interested here. Though I respect it but its irrelevant to me. But if some one says that I should go back to Bihar or Utter Pradesh is something I am not going to accept.

One should hold himself from making such disgraceful remarks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Indus Priest King said:


> Get back on your banana boat Bihari.



Go back to Hindustan Mr Vedic.



MSafir said:


> Stupid rant. Being a Muslim it definitely changes the fact and the fact is: the reason whole Muslims in the sub continent demanded Pakistan irrespective of their cultural background. What congestion do people in Hayderabad have with fire worshipers that the Nawab there supported the cause of Pakistan? He supported it only because he was Muslim, nothing else.
> Stop being ehsan faramosh.
> 
> 
> 
> Listen you dude, derogatory language was used against me here I was called here Muahajir and was asked to go back. I am not even interested in this topic or what ruins say, least interested here. Though I respect it but its irrelevant to me. But if some one says that I should go back to Bihar or Utter Pradesh is something I am not going to accept.
> 
> One should hold himself from making such disgraceful remarks.



Asalamu Alaikum

Ignore some of the chest thumping ethnic nationalists on this forum, almost every single Pakistani would consider you their brother, myself included. We are Muslim first and foremost, and alhamdulillah most Pakistanis still feel this way (but many of us need guidance on how to practise Islam). 

Pakistan was made as a nation for Muslims in South Asia, based on the concept that we are simply too different to other communities in the region to coexist with them as a minority. Ethnicity did not play a significant role, otherwise Pakistan wouldn't be the multi-ethnic society that it is today. 

In terms of history, we should view the history of Islam/Muslims in the region as OUR history, since these people would not only be our ancestors, but also the very reason our nation exists and more importantly the ones who acted in the name of Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful). After that, one is free to enjoy the history of their own ethnic group/tribal affiliation so long as it doesn't give him any arrogance and it doesn't involve praising people who fought against Islam/Muslims.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> Granted it was a defining moment, but we did not "get rid" of anything prior to this. And under no circumstances did modern Indians become the inheritors of what you think "we got rid of".



It was defining movement for Muslim and only Muslim having Islamic traditions otherwise people in hayderabad, Bengal, Bombay presidency would have not come together only to listen and get comments after 70 years about them being inferior or not from the land. People supported Pakistan not because some one in then British India was proud of his Hindu veda fire ancestry!!!


dsr478 said:


> Go back to Hindustan Mr Vedic.
> 
> 
> 
> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> Ignore some of the chest thumping ethnic nationalists on this forum, almost every single Pakistani would consider you their brother, myself included. We are Muslim first and foremost, and alhamdulillah most Pakistanis still feel this way (but many of us need guidance on how to practise Islam).
> 
> Pakistan was made as a nation for Muslims in South Asia, based on the concept that we are simply too different to other communities in the region to coexist with them as a minority. Ethnicity did not play a significant role, otherwise Pakistan wouldn't be the multi-ethnic society that it is today.
> 
> In terms of history, we should view the history of Islam/Muslims in the region as OUR history, since these people would not only be our ancestors, but also the very reason our nation exists and more importantly the ones who acted in the name of Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful). After that, one is free to enjoy the history of their own ethnic group/tribal affiliation so long as it doesn't give him any arrogance and it doesn't involve praising people who fought against Islam/Muslims.



Waliqum Salam

Sorry to end with that urdu liner, I take it back. I agree with you but these so called intellectuals come out suddenly from nowhere and forget the sacrifice of those millions on both sides during partition. Those people sacrificed or forced to sacrifice are today insulted on this forum. I have to be straight as this is what I felt. They did not sacrifice to claim or glorify some Vedas or sanskrit.

If in the end Muslims in the subcontinent had to define themselves as some Veda reader or Fire worshipper then there was no need to create Pakistan at all there are plenty in India and would have done it openly. And people who lived in interior Pakistan did not suffer at all, they got all the free nation to boast with.

Unfortunately this is the only reason why Indian call us people with problem with identity because no one knows why Pakistan was created. I have no problem with any one trying to tell about his history but if that person says I should go back to bihar and all then this is something beyond limits. We all know Pakistan remained a mixed ethnic group due to invasions and at this point of time it sheer stupidity to even talk about DNA. Even Monkeys have 99% DNA similar to Humans, so are we monkey? This is not how things go. We are what we follow that's it. I am pretty damn sure the guy who called me to go back is neither a Muslim nor any Hindu or veda follower who could read any Veda. he should change the way he talks.

Tc!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

@dsr478 @MSafir 

Guys. You are really pushing your luck now. First of all this is a HISTORY subforum. Pick up a dictionary if you need to look up the word and I mean this in the most sincere way. History means, *in the past.* I question your commitment to Islam if something as basic as our actual past somehow shakes the foundation of your faith or makes you feel insecure about Islam. 

This is another topic entirely and not relevant to a thread that begins with the word "Stoneage".

i.e Deal with your religious insecurities elsewhere.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> I question your commitment to Islam if something as basic as our actual past somehow shakes the foundation of your faith or makes you feel insecure about Islam.



It does not shake the religious belief what is shakes is the existence of Pakistan and ideology of two nation theory. The muslims in subcontinent ignored the whole stone age and pre medieval history during Pakistan movement and then created Pakistan by focusing on Islamic studies. One can study for the purpose of academics but fusing it with Pakistan's background would be contradictory. And then people like me will be asked to go back to bihar/utter pradesh, etc. 

"_Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature.... It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes.... To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state._" MA Jinnah 1940, Lahore


----------



## Indus Priest King

Funny how some


MSafir said:


> It does not shake the religious belief what is shakes is the existence of Pakistan and ideology of two nation theory. The muslims in subcontinent ignored the whole stone age and pre medieval history during Pakistan movement and then created Pakistan by focusing on Islamic studies. One can study for the purpose of academics but fusing it with Pakistan's background would be contradictory. And then people like me will be asked to go back to bihar/utter pradesh, etc.
> 
> "_Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature.... It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes.... To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state._" MA Jinnah 1940, Lahore



Weren't you the one who denies Pakistan controls point 5353 in Kargil? Now you're desperately trying to say we shouldn't know our history?

Lol. Filthy Gangaldeshi.

If you knew anything about the Indus Valley...you'd know it was tolerant and welcoming to all people. If your ancestors supposedly migrated to Pakistan (the Indus Valley) they were coming to our land because the Ganges plain was a shithole...and still is.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

Indus Priest King said:


> Weren't you the one who denies Pakistan controls point 5353 in Kargil? Now you're desperately trying to say we shouldn't know our history?
> 
> Lol. Filthy Gangaldeshi.



NO I WASN'T, I said Pakistan controls point 5353 on LOC and I also marked it on google maps. Don't behave like a retard now and twist my words. I know you are on weed. And behave properly don't you have manners how to talk?



Indus Priest King said:


> If you knew anything about the Indus Valley...you'd know it was tolerant and welcoming to all people. If your ancestors supposedly migrated to Pakistan (the Indus Valley) they were coming to our land because the Ganges plain was a shithole...and still is



Are you on hallucinating drugs? When Pakistan was formed people also migrated to East Pakistan. What the hell are you on earth?

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> The muslims in subcontinent ignored the whole stone age and pre medieval history during Pakistan movement and then created Pakistan by focusing on Islamic studies



Ignoring something doesn't make it go away. Indus history, i.e *belonging to the land* will always remain Pakistani history, as in belonging to the people of Pakistan. Pakistan movement, east Pakistan etc are modern events that do not impact the past. Your understanding of basic concepts is seriously underwhelming.

And it's obvious already that you are a false flagger, probably the same false flagger who was banned earlier.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> Pakistan movement, east Pakistan etc are modern events that do not impact the past. Your understanding of basic concepts is seriously underwhelming.
> 
> And it's obvious already that you are a false flagger, probably the same false flagger who was banned earlier.



Hey you need to behave okay don't talk rubbish unnecessarily.

I have quoted Qaid e Azam and he clearly says we have no relation of any sort of with any one else except from us being Islamic. This was the sole reason why Bengali Muslim and other Muslims from subcontinent segregated themselves and created Pakistan leaving their ground heritage behind.

You should be thankful to them rather behaving like a Nashukra.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

MSafir said:


> It was defining movement for Muslim and only Muslim having Islamic traditions otherwise people in hayderabad, Bengal, Bombay presidency would have not come together only to listen and get comments after 70 years about them being inferior or not from the land. People supported Pakistan not because some one in then British India was proud of his Hindu veda fire ancestry!!!
> 
> 
> Waliqum Salam
> 
> Sorry to end with that urdu liner, I take it back. I agree with you but these so called intellectuals come out suddenly from nowhere and forget the sacrifice of those millions on both sides during partition. Those people sacrificed or forced to sacrifice are today insulted on this forum. I have to be straight as this is what I felt. They did not sacrifice to claim or glorify some Vedas or sanskrit.
> 
> If in the end Muslims in the subcontinent had to define themselves as some Veda reader or Fire worshipper then there was no need to create Pakistan at all there are plenty in India and would have done it openly. And people who lived in interior Pakistan did not suffer at all, they got all the free nation to boast with.
> 
> Unfortunately this is the only reason why Indian call us people with problem with identity because no one knows why Pakistan was created. I have no problem with any one trying to tell about his history but if that person says I should go back to bihar and all then this is something beyond limits. We all know Pakistan remained a mixed ethnic group due to invasions and at this point of time it sheer stupidity to even talk about DNA. Even Monkeys have 99% DNA similar to Humans, so are we monkey? This is not how things go. We are what we follow that's it. I am pretty damn sure the guy who called me to go back is neither a Muslim nor any Hindu or veda follower who could read any Veda. he should change the way he talks.
> 
> Tc!



The original idea of Pakistan was quite simple. I’m sure you know the acronym.

Only one guy you are speaking to here is a Non-Muslim. The rest of us are Muslims. Your faith is not being questioned so let’s relax.

I take great offense to your criticism of people of “interior Pakistan” as you call it. We are one nation and you are an important part of our nation as an Urdu speaker. We all sacrificed for this nation over the last 70 years.

Most of those people killed in partition violence were Punjabi and Kashmiri, most of those killed by terrorism on our borders were Pukhtoon, Urdu speakers left their homes, so we all suffered for Pakistan. Why create differences between us?

I am interested in our pre-Islamic history and gaining much from this discussion. I am comfortable as a Muslim living in a modern society who is educating himself about his ancestors’ beliefs and way of life. I fail to see how this is offensive to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MSafir

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> I take great offense to your criticism of people of “interior Pakistan” as you call it. We are one nation and you are an important part of our nation as an Urdu speaker. We all sacrificed for this nation over the last 70 years.
> 
> Most of those people killed in partition violence were Punjabi and Kashmiri, most of those killed by terrorism on our borders were Pukhtoon, Urdu speakers left their homes, so we all suffered for Pakistan. Why create differences between us?



You are entitled to take great offense and it's justified and when I resort to same on being asked to leave, that's unjustified? Am I creating the difference or your are creating? I just told the truth the only people who suffered from interior Pakistan were either those so called hindus veda readers and sikhs who left Pakistan or those Muslims who had relatives coming to Pakistan. What's wrong in this? The majority of violence took place at the border.


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> Hey you need to behave okay don't talk rubbish unnecessarily.
> 
> I have quoted Qaid e Azam and he clearly says we have no relation of any sort of with any one else except from us being Islamic. This was the sole reason why Bengali Muslim and other Muslims from subcontinent segregated themselves and created Pakistan leaving their ground heritage behind.
> 
> You should be thankful to them rather behaving like a Nashukra.



Your knowledge of Qaid-e-Azam and the Pakistan movement has made it clear that you are a falseflagger.

Nowhere did Qaid-e-Azam say that Pakistan is abandoning its heritage. Yes we welcomed people in need and gained independence separate from a hindu majority India, but I will repeat, the Pakistan movement did not impact anything in the past. There was no time travel involved. You are conflating religious identity with ancestral origins. Both have their place. Generally speaking, religious people do not give non-Islamic history much attention but I have met very few people who deny it.

Muhajirs did not quite "leave their heritage behind", otherwise they wouldn't call themselves Muhajirs. And I am against anyone leaving their heritage behind. Everyone should know where they have come from.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> Yes we welcomed people in need and gained independence separate from a hindu majority India, but I will repeat, the Pakistan movement did not impact anything in the past.



Of course it did this is why Muslims in India's south region came out in open and adopted Islamic culture after Migration. It was always Islam first and its traditions as per Quran rather than local culture. This is why people created Pakistan. Otherwise they were not less Muslims sitting in Bengal or Bihar or Bombay or Assam. 

You are not well versed in the history. Please get your facts correct.


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> It does not shake the religious belief what is shakes is the existence of Pakistan and ideology of two nation theory. The muslims in subcontinent ignored the whole stone age and pre medieval history during Pakistan movement and then created Pakistan by focusing on Islamic studies. One can study for the purpose of academics but fusing it with Pakistan's background would be contradictory. And then people like me will be asked to go back to bihar/utter pradesh, etc.
> 
> "_Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature.... It is quite clear that Hindus and Muslims derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes and different episodes.... To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state._" MA Jinnah 1940, Lahore


In my opinion this history can be additional to the two nation theory....even if our ancestors did not convert to Islam, coterminous Pakistan was still different....it was only the colonial entity known as British India which made "us" the same....



dsr478 said:


> Go back to Hindustan Mr Vedic.
> 
> 
> 
> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> Ignore some of the chest thumping ethnic nationalists on this forum, almost every single Pakistani would consider you their brother, myself included. We are Muslim first and foremost, and alhamdulillah most Pakistanis still feel this way (but many of us need guidance on how to practise Islam).
> 
> Pakistan was made as a nation for Muslims in South Asia, based on the concept that we are simply too different to other communities in the region to coexist with them as a minority. Ethnicity did not play a significant role, otherwise Pakistan wouldn't be the multi-ethnic society that it is today.
> 
> In terms of history, we should view the history of Islam/Muslims in the region as OUR history, since these people would not only be our ancestors, but also the very reason our nation exists and more importantly the ones who acted in the name of Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful). After that, one is free to enjoy the history of their own ethnic group/tribal affiliation so long as it doesn't give him any arrogance and it doesn't involve praising people who fought against Islam/Muslims.


By Hindustan do you mean the Land of the Indus or Bharat....?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> In my opinion this history can be additional to the two nation theory....even if our ancestors did not convert to Islam, coterminous Pakistan was still different....it was only the colonial entity known as British India which made "us" the same....



I don't read too much into it. Because Muslims have more to introspect about themselves and their Islamic traditions and there is conflict of ideas between right way of following Islam.

I have no idea old ruins but what I know that those who were Muslims in Pakistan remained in Pakistan and those who were not they left as they were more comfortable with the otherside.


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> Of course it did this is why Muslims in India's south region came out in open and adopted Islamic culture after Migration. It was always Islam first and its traditions as per Quran rather than local culture. This is why people created Pakistan. Otherwise they were not less Muslims sitting in Bengal or Bihar or Bombay or Assam.
> 
> You are not well versed in the history. Please get your facts correct.



You clearly know nothing of Pakistani culture or the Quran. Typical ganga e-warrior obsessed with Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> I don't read too much into it. Because Muslims have more to introspect about themselves and their Islamic traditions and there is conflict of ideas between right way of following Islam.
> 
> I have no idea old ruins but what I know that those who were Muslims in Pakistan remained in Pakistan and those who were not they left as they were more comfortable with the otherside.


You don't have to read it, but please, others can read to their hearts' content.


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> You clearly know nothing of Pakistani culture or the Quran. Typical ganga e-warrior obsessed with Islam.



Call me what ever, I am Muslim that's all. I follow traditions as described in Quran you may continue living like a pandu from yindu, I have no problem with that. Looks like you were supposed to cross over but left behind due to trouble. And now spewing your anger on us for creating Pakistan.



TMA said:


> You don't have to read it, but please, others can read to their hearts' content.


 
I simply said that those Hindus or other non muslim living in Pakistan before partition left the land as they are comfortable with Hindus and muslims living on the other side came to Pakistan to cherish Islamic culture leaving their regional identities behind.


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> Call me what ever, I am Muslim that's all. I follow traditions as described in Quran you may continue living like a pandu from yindu, I have no problem with that. Looks like you were supposed to cross over but left behind due to trouble. And now spewing your anger on us for creating Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> I simply said that those Hindus or other non muslim living in Pakistan before partition left the land as they are comfortable with Hindus and muslims living on the other side came to Pakistan to cherish Islamic culture leaving their regional identities behind.



More nonsense only to be expected from a ganga.

Islam contributed to the culture of Pakistan for over a 1000 years via several Arabic, Persian and Turkic empires. It was not defined by Islam. 

Pakistan movement was about preserving this *existing* Muslim identity of the region, not creating a new one.

You clearly have no understanding of Pakistani culture or Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> More nonsense only to be expected from a ganga.
> 
> Islam contributed to the culture of Pakistan for over a 1000 years via several Arabic, Persian and Turkic empires. It was not defined by Islam.
> 
> Pakistan movement was about preserving this *existing* Muslim identity of the region, not creating a new one.
> 
> You clearly have no understanding of Pakistani culture or Islam.



And this is the reason people ignored indigenous tradition of fire ganga jhelum river worship to create Pakistan land of pure as per Islam not veda or poran . And this is the reason why Hindus from Pakistan migrated to India and Muslims from India migrated to Pakistan.


----------



## Indus Priest King

TMA said:


> In my opinion this history can be additional to the two nation theory....even if our ancestors did not convert to Islam, coterminous Pakistan was still different....it was only the colonial entity known as British India which made "us" the same....



This is exactly my point. I have no issues with Hindus or Muslims. Rather, it's the culture of North India (Ganges toilet bowl) which is the real issue which both North Indian Hindus and North Indian Muslims share. They're both intolerant and violent communities. They're the ones who have been intolerant all this time, going all the way back to creation of the hierarchical caste system, which they plagiarized from us. Our caste system was not heirarchial and it never had the word "Sudra" in it. This was an invention of the Puranic Ganges.

The Indus Valley for over 9000 years was a peace loving, tolerant, welcoming territory. We welcomed everyone here, including them in 1947 and I have no issues with that. But accept the history of THIS land...that's my point.



MSafir said:


> Of course it did this is why Muslims in India's south region came out in open and adopted Islamic culture after Migration. It was always Islam first and its traditions as per Quran rather than local culture. This is why people created Pakistan. Otherwise they were not less Muslims sitting in Bengal or Bihar or Bombay or Assam.
> 
> You are not well versed in the history. Please get your facts correct.



First off, where did all the Hindus of the Indus Valley mainly live? Punjab and Sindh. The migration of Hindus from Sindh and Punjab began AFTER violence erupted in Jammu, when Dogra forces massacred 500,000 Muslims and forced the remaining to march towards Sialkot.

When they arrived in Sialkot, they told what had happened and this news spread like wildfire across Punjab and was sadly taken out on the remaining Sikhs and Hindus as revenge.

In Sindh, most of the Hindus that left were from Karachi, who had originally migrated from India. Interior Sindh Hindus didn't leave...out of the estimated 1 million Sindhi Hindu population, around 650,000 remained.

Your lies and your selective outrage is hilarious.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Taimur Khurram

TMA said:


> By Hindustan do you mean the Land of the Indus or Bharat....?



Bharat, obviously. 

There aren't many Hindus left in most of the Indus.


----------



## MSafir

Indus Priest King said:


> First off, where did all the Hindus of the Indus Valley mainly live? Punjab and Sindh. The migration of Hindus from Sindh and Punjab began AFTER violence erupted in Jammu, when Dogra forces massacred 500,000 Muslims and forced the remaining to march towards Sialkot.



What ever it is Muslims were trying to bring purity to dogra vedic and all sort of fire worshipers and water worshipers and ganga worshipers. What's your point? But finally we managed to reach delhi we ruled your fire worshippers and many of them we showed them purity otherwise you were just pagans, cow worshipers.



Indus Priest King said:


> n Sindh, most of the Hindus that left were from Karachi, who had originally migrated from India. Interior Sindh Hindus didn't leave...out of the estimated 1 million Sindhi Hindu population, around 650,000 remained



I don't care, for me all of you were same. Fire water and what not worshipers. You should be thankful to Islam that we kept you like our brothers and showed you light of knowledge.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> I question your commitment to Islam if something as basic as our actual past somehow shakes the foundation of your faith or makes you feel insecure about Islam..



It doesn't, but it pisses me off to see ethnic nationalists act like Pakistan wasn't made for Muslims first and foremost, but rather this modern invention known as Indus nationalism. 

Are we different to Hindustan beyond the fact that we are Muslim? Yes, but that's not the reason Pakistan was made.

It get's even worse when you get jokers like @Indus Priest King insulting Islam whilst still acting like a Pakistani patriot (as if the average in Pakistan would put up with his blasphemy), and others completely badmouthing Muhajirs and Afghan refugees who are a part of our society like every other group.


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> It doesn't, but it pisses me off to see ethnic nationalists act like Pakistan wasn't made for Muslims first and foremost, but rather this modern invention known as Indus nationalism.
> 
> Are we different to Hindustan beyond the fact that we are Muslim? Yes, but that's not the reason Pakistan was made.
> 
> It get's even worse when you get jokers like @Indus Priest King insulting Islam whilst still acting like a Pakistani patriot (as if the average in Pakistan would put up with his blasphemy), and others completely badmouthing Muhajirs and Afghan refugees who are a part of our society like every other group.


Muhajirs are those who emigrated, their children should not use this term to define themselves, but take up the respective identities of those people whom they migrated into...
Afghan refugees ought NOT to be part of Pakistani society and should be honorably repatriated....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

MSafir said:


> Waliqum Salam
> 
> Sorry to end with that urdu liner, I take it back. I agree with you but these so called intellectuals come out suddenly from nowhere and forget the sacrifice of those millions on both sides during partition. Those people sacrificed or forced to sacrifice are today insulted on this forum. I have to be straight as this is what I felt. They did not sacrifice to claim or glorify some Vedas or sanskrit.
> 
> If in the end Muslims in the subcontinent had to define themselves as some Veda reader or Fire worshipper then there was no need to create Pakistan at all there are plenty in India and would have done it openly. And people who lived in interior Pakistan did not suffer at all, they got all the free nation to boast with.
> 
> Unfortunately this is the only reason why Indian call us people with problem with identity because no one knows why Pakistan was created. I have no problem with any one trying to tell about his history but if that person says I should go back to bihar and all then this is something beyond limits. We all know Pakistan remained a mixed ethnic group due to invasions and at this point of time it sheer stupidity to even talk about DNA. Even Monkeys have 99% DNA similar to Humans, so are we monkey? This is not how things go. We are what we follow that's it. I am pretty damn sure the guy who called me to go back is neither a Muslim nor any Hindu or veda follower who could read any Veda. he should change the way he talks.
> 
> Tc!



Exactly, our Pakistani identity is based on Islam first and foremost, this Indus nationalism stuff is a modern invention and has nothing to do with being Pakistani, there are plenty of Hindustanis who also live in the Indus region, this whole movement is an ethnic/geographical one, not a national one. 

I agree, discussing DNA is pointless. At the end of the day, we are all Bani Adam and we should all be following Islam first and foremost, for not only is it correct, but it would also differentiate us far more from Hindustanis than anything else could.



TMA said:


> Afghan refugees ought NOT to be part of Pakistani society and should be honorably repatriated....



Asalamu Alaikum

Why? Many of them are well integrated and consider themselves to be Pakistani, they are also Muslim just like us. Even from an ethnic standpoint, most Afghans come from an ethnic group that is abundant in Pakistan, such as Pashtuns, Baluchis, Gujjars, Hindkos, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> Exactly, our Pakistani identity is based on Islam first and foremost, this Indus nationalism stuff is a modern invention and has nothing to do with being Pakistani, there are plenty of Hindustanis who also live in the Indus region, this whole movement is an ethnic/geographical one, not a national one.
> 
> I agree, discussing DNA is pointless. At the end of the day, we are all Bani Adam and we should all be following Islam first and foremost, for not only is it correct, but it would also differentiate us far more from Hindustanis than anything else could.


Islam does not negate the previous identities, it comes not to exterminate but to purify...if you don't wish to learn about that is fine, but let others learn....

Indus nationalism, although I personally don't like the term as it is open to misuse, refers to ALL of Pakistan, not just Sindh....as the river Indus runs through ALL of Pakistan....



dsr478 said:


> Exactly, our Pakistani identity is based on Islam first and foremost, this Indus nationalism stuff is a modern invention and has nothing to do with being Pakistani, there are plenty of Hindustanis who also live in the Indus region, this whole movement is an ethnic/geographical one, not a national one.
> 
> I agree, discussing DNA is pointless. At the end of the day, we are all Bani Adam and we should all be following Islam first and foremost, for not only is it correct, but it would also differentiate us far more from Hindustanis than anything else could.
> 
> 
> 
> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> Why? Many of them are well integrated and consider themselves to be Pakistani, they are also Muslim just like us. Even from an ethnic standpoint, most Afghans come from an ethnic group that is abundant in Pakistan, such as Pashtuns, Baluchis, Gujjars, Hindkos, etc.


Wa alaikum Assalaam
Why?

1.Afghanistan does not and has not accepted Pakistan since 1947. Your muslim neighbour despises the fact you exist as a nation called Pakistan.
2.Afghanistan has been in a cold war with Pakistan basically since 1947 (except for a few years).
3. Refugees are not legal immigrants but persons who are to return to their homeland whenever possible....
4. They can consider themselves whatever they want, if they truly accept Pakistan, then they ought to return and RE-APPLY as LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, this will allow proper vetting....
5. Does not matter most refugees are Pukhtoon, the Afghan Pukhtoons in Afghanistan have showed extreme dislike to the existence of Pakistan and betrayed their ethnic kin to the British....

Pakistan can survive Bharat and "Indus Nationalism" and learning about her non Islamic history, but what she CANNOT survive, are millions of people from a country which has never accepted you and is in a state of cold war with you...

This is not about individuals but nations, Pakistan needs to protect herself demographically, even if there was no terrorism emanating from Afghanistan....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> Muhajirs are those who emigrated, their children should not use this term to define themselves, but take up the respective identities of those people whom they migrated into...



What kind of logic is this? People emigrated only because of the reason that is to accept the way of living as described in Quran not in Ved or Poran. Even in India the muslims lived with a different identity. Otherwise all of us would be worshiping chanting mantras doing soorya namaskar. 

You should know that in India there was this surya namaskar controversy. Muslims immediately denied not to practice it. For muslim it's not allowed be it tradition of the land.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

MSafir said:


> Stupid rant. Being a Muslim it definitely changes the fact and the fact is: the reason whole Muslims in the sub continent demanded Pakistan irrespective of their cultural background. What congestion do people in Hayderabad have with fire worshipers that the Nawab there supported the cause of Pakistan? He supported it only because he was Muslim, nothing else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Listen you dude, derogatory language was used against me here I was called here Muahajir and was asked to go back. I am not even interested in this topic or what ruins say, least interested here. Though I respect it but its irrelevant to me. But if some one says that I should go back to Bihar or Utter Pradesh is something I am not going to accept.
> 
> One should hold himself from making such disgraceful remarks.




If ALL Muslims in the so called "subcontinent" demanded Pakistan, then there would be no such thing as "india Muslims".


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> It doesn't, but it pisses me off to see ethnic nationalists act like Pakistan wasn't made for Muslims first and foremost, but rather this modern invention known as Indus nationalism.
> 
> Are we different to Hindustan beyond the fact that we are Muslim? Yes, but that's not the reason Pakistan was made.
> 
> It get's even worse when you get jokers like @Indus Priest King insulting Islam whilst still acting like a Pakistani patriot (as if the average in Pakistan would put up with his blasphemy), and others completely badmouthing Muhajirs and Afghan refugees who are a part of our society like every other group.



Then there is also a thing called reality. Its almost like you have never stepped a foot in Pakistan.

Pakistan was not made for Muslims. And there is no such thing as "Islamic culture". It literally does not exist.

*Pakistan was made to protect the existing Muslim identity of the five Provinces that make up Pakistan. The clue is in the name itself. *

Muhajirs were fully expected to come and integrate with EXISTING local Muslim cultures of Punjab, Sindh, Khyber, Kashmir and Balochistan. Only concession was the usage of the Mughal language called Urdu which we would all share.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Taimur Khurram

TMA said:


> Islam does not negate the previous identities, it comes not to exterminate but to purify...if you don't wish to learn about that is fine, but let others learn....
> 
> Indus nationalism, although I personally don't like the term as it is open to misuse, refers to ALL of Pakistan, not just Sindh....as the river Indus runs through ALL of Pakistan....
> 
> 
> Wa alaikum Assalaam
> Why?
> 
> 1.Afghanistan does not and has not accepted Pakistan since 1947. Your muslim neighbour despises the fact you exist as a nation called Pakistan.
> 2.Afghanistan has been in a cold war with Pakistan basically since 1947 (except for a few years).
> 3. Refugees are not legal immigrants but persons who are to return to their homeland whenever possible....
> 4. They can consider themselves whatever they want, if they truly accept Pakistan, then they ought to return and RE-APPLY as LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, this will allow proper vetting....
> 5. Does not matter most refugees are Pukhtoon, the Afghan Pukhtoons in Afghanistan have showed extreme dislike to the existence of Pakistan and betrayed their ethnic kin to the British....



Parts of neighbouring Hindustan also part of the Indus too you know, which is the main issue with this whole concept of Pakistan being the sole inheritor of the Indus. 

1. The Afghan government are not the same as the people (other than the upper class, most Afghans do not really hold strongly negative views about Pakistan).

2. Ever since the USSR occupation of Afghanistan, all the major fighting stopped. 

3. Right, but if some of them have assimilated why not give them citizenship? 

4. Why not just vet them while they're actually in the country? 

5. Again, not most of them.



UnitedPak said:


> Then there is also a thing called reality. Its almost like you have never stepped a foot in Pakistan.
> 
> Pakistan was not made for Muslims. And there is no such thing as "Islamic culture". It literally does not exist.
> 
> *Pakistan was made to protect the existing Muslim identity of the five Provinces that make up Pakistan. The clue is in the name itself. *
> 
> Muhajirs were fully expected to come and integrate with EXISTING local Muslim cultures of Punjab, Sindh, Khyber, Kashmir and Balochistan. Only concession was the usage of the Mughal language of Urdu which we would all share.



I've been to and lived in Pakistan for quite a bit of my life (mostly as a child though).

Yes, it was. It was called the Muslim League for a reason.

Islamic "culture" as you like to call it would just be following the Quran and the Sunnah, so yes it does exist. 

*Then why are there so many Muhajirs in Pakistan? Better yet, why was Bangladesh also a part of Pakistan? 
*
No, they weren't, otherwise there would have been far more communal tensions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dsr478 said:


> Exactly, our Pakistani identity is based on Islam first and foremost, this Indus nationalism stuff is a modern invention and has nothing to do with being Pakistani, there are plenty of Hindustanis who also live in the Indus region, this whole movement is an ethnic/geographical one, not a national one.
> 
> I agree, discussing DNA is pointless. At the end of the day, we are all Bani Adam and we should all be following Islam first and foremost, for not only is it correct, but it would also differentiate us far more from Hindustanis than anything else could.
> 
> 
> 
> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> Why? Many of them are well integrated and consider themselves to be Pakistani, they are also Muslim just like us. Even from an ethnic standpoint, most Afghans come from an ethnic group that is abundant in Pakistan, such as Pashtuns, Baluchis, Gujjars, Hindkos, etc.



Everything you said was taken up by Pakistanis until 1971, where all was proven false. The reality is Islam is not strong enough of a motivator to keep people united in one country. Besides Islam, culture and way of life are just as important.

Pakistan (wanting nothing to do with Hindus) and Bangladesh (a nation idolizing Hindus) could never be in the same country, despite a common religion.

Indian Muslims of today have even less in common with us. Those who came to Pakistan, believed so strongly in it that they left their homes or were forced to leave by Hindus. Your identity is just as Pakistani as anyone else’s.

Unfortunately what I have seen among Muhajirs/ Urdu speakers in our current time is a slip into secularism, sectarianism, and ethnic politics mainly due to MQM. Because of such organizations, Most Muhajirs ostracized themselves from Pakistani politics, culture, religious movements. With the fall of racial parties like MQM and ANP, I am hoping their support base also becomes more nationalist and supports other parties.

I am hoping for more unity among all Pakistanis.

You are 100% correct that your ethnicity should not be insulted. Most of us have no problem with you as a fellow Pakistani.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MSafir

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> If ALL Muslims in the so called "subcontinent" demanded Pakistan, then there would be no such thing as "india Muslims".



Yeah and then there would be conflicts on the basis of region like right now on this thread. Bangalis would slaughter Punjabis, biharis would get irked from sindhis and so on. And this was the reason why Pakistan was created, one idendity that is Muslim. It was not specifically for Punjabis or Sindhis or Pakhtoons.



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Everything you said was taken up by Pakistanis until 1971, where all was proven false. The reality is Islam is not strong enough of a motivator to keep people united in one country. Besides Islam, culture and way of life are just as important.



Pakistan was created with identity of Muslim nation or Muslim majority nation. If you after 70 years of creation of Pakistan argue that regional traditions are also important then you are late. Why because lots of Muslims who emigrated and left their regional home behind example from hayderabad or Kashmir or Rajasthan, etc would simply object to it that what was the need to leave, we were happy where so ever we were. 

This is not a strong argument.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

MSafir said:


> Yeah and then there would be conflicts on the basis of region like right now on this thread. Bangalis would slaughter Punjabis, biharis would get irked from sindhis and so on. And this was the reason why Pakistan was created, one idendity that is Muslim. It was not specifically for Punjabis or Sindhis or Pakhtoons.



By settling in our country, anyone can also be a custodian of this glorious heritage just as Arabs, Turks, Persians, Greeks, and others before.

You are a citizen of Pakistan and a Pakistani. All the pride of the previous civilizations of this land are your heritage also.



MSafir said:


> Yeah and then there would be conflicts on the basis of region like right now on this thread. Bangalis would slaughter Punjabis, biharis would get irked from sindhis and so on. And this was the reason why Pakistan was created, one idendity that is Muslim. It was not specifically for Punjabis or Sindhis or Pakhtoons.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan was created with identity of Muslim nation or Muslim majority nation. If you after 70 years of creation of Pakistan argue that regional traditions are also important then you are late. Why because lots of Muslims who emigrated and left their regional home behind example from hayderabad or Kashmir or Rajasthan, etc would simply object to it that what was the need to leave, we were happy where so ever we were.
> 
> This is not a strong argument.



These are not regional traditions, but the history of the Indus River. Your country has a history that predates Islam. Accept your fellow Pakistanis’ right to be proud of that history. Maybe one day you will also learn to appreciate it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> You are a citizen of Pakistan and a Pakistani. All the pride of the previous civilizations of this land are your heritage also



If you really want to talk about heritage then Muahajirs were better off with wherever they were. They came to Pakistan with only one thing in mind that is all are Muslims. I don't deny that heritage of land must be respected. Where in my whole argument I showed any disrespect, it was rather me who was asked to go back to bihar and ganga what not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Everything you said was taken up by Pakistanis until 1971, where all was proven false. The reality is Islam is not strong enough of a motivator to keep people united in one country. Besides Islam, culture and way of life are just as important.
> 
> Pakistan (wanting nothing to do with Hindus) and Bangladesh (a nation idolizing Hindus) could never be in the same country, despite a common religion.
> 
> Indian Muslims of today have even less in common with us. Those who came to Pakistan, believed so strongly in it that they left their homes or were forced to leave by Hindus. Your identity is just as Pakistani as anyone else’s.
> 
> Unfortunately what I have seen among Muhajirs/ Urdu speakers in our current time is a slip into secularism, sectarianism, and ethnic politics mainly due to MQM. Because of such organizations, Most Muhajirs ostracized themselves from Pakistani politics, culture, religious movements. With the fall of racial parties like MQM and ANP, I am hoping their support base also becomes more nationalist and supports other parties.
> 
> I am hoping for more unity among all Pakistanis.
> 
> You are 100% correct that your ethnicity should not be insulted. Most of us have no problem with you as a fellow Pakistani.



Asalamu Alaikum

It still applies post 1971, the only Bengalis that advocated separatism were ethnic nationalists who valued their ethnicity over their deen, which is clear cut kufr. So yes, Islam is still a uniting factor for Muslims (provided they actually practise their religion). 

As for Hindustani Muslims, again, the ones who hate Pakistanis are not practising Muslims, same with Pakistanis who hate other Pakistanis just because they aren't from the same ethnic group as them. 

I'm not a Muhajir, most of my family are Gujjars from across Pakistan (mostly the Punjab, but also Azad Kashmir and KPK), with a few of them from a few generations ago being Baluchi.

If you want to get technical, yes some of my mothers family did migrate from Hindustani Punjab but that doesn't really count since Punjabis are the largest ethnicity in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Your country has a history that predates Islam. Accept your fellow Pakistanis’ right to be proud of that history.



Let me explain:
And why this region only whole south asia has a history which predates Islam. If originally I belong to central Indian region for example then it also has history which predates Islam. Now what?


----------



## TMA

MSafir said:


> What kind of logic is this? People emigrated only because of the reason that is to accept the way of living as described in Quran not in Ved or Poran. Even in India the muslims lived with a different identity. Otherwise all of us would be worshiping chanting mantras doing soorya namaskar.
> 
> You should know that in India there was this surya namaskar controversy. Muslims immediately denied not to practice it. For muslim it's not allowed be it tradition of the land.


By this I mean, if a Muhajir migrated to Lahore, he ought to learn the local language and customs, at least those that are not against his faith, if he went to Peshwar, he ought to learn the local language and customs,at least those that are not against his faith....
and if he does not want to learn, then at least respect them,

You know most of the people in co-terminous Pakistan circa 1947 were also Muslims...



dsr478 said:


> Parts of neighbouring Hindustan also part of the Indus too you know, which is the main issue with this whole concept of Pakistan being the sole inheritor of the Indus.
> 
> 1. The Afghan government are not the same as the people (other than the upper class, most Afghans do not really hold strongly negative views about Pakistan).
> 
> 2. Ever since the USSR occupation of Afghanistan, all the major fighting stopped.
> 
> 3. Right, but if some of them have assimilated why not give them citizenship?
> 
> 4. Why not just vet them while they're actually in the country?
> 
> 5. Again, not most of them.
> 
> 
> 
> I've been to and lived in Pakistan for quite a bit of my life (mostly as a child though).
> 
> Yes, it was. It was called the Muslim League for a reason.
> 
> Islamic "culture" as you like to call it would just be following the Quran and the Sunnah, so yes it does exist.
> 
> *Then why are there so many Muhajirs in Pakistan? Better yet, why was Bangladesh also a part of Pakistan?
> *
> No, they weren't, otherwise there would have been far more communal tensions.


*Nations deals with nations....
People deal with people...*
I have met Afghans and I have got on well with them..individually....

1. In my experience most common Afghans at least in the UK (who come on Pakistani papers) despise Pakistan....
2. Hence the term COLD WAR....
3. Because their nation is in a cold war with Pakistan....it matters not if they speak the language...have you seen who supports PTM(TTP)? A lot of Afghan refugees who have assimilated very well...
4.Because that defeats the purpose of vetting....
5. In my experience most Afghans Pukhtoons (in the UK) hate Pakistan...they will get along personally fine with you...but when we talk about nations, they hate Pakistan.....

Like I said, nations deal with nations....it is time for Pakistan to learn from Iran on this matter......

http://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/amcdouga/Hist347/additional rdgs/article culture imperative.pdf
@dsr478 
@MSafir 

By a German American convert Sheikh Dr Umar Faruq Abdullah. This is mainly concerned with Islam in America as he is an American, however its concepts can be applied globally. 
By the way he is a scholar who is very Orthodox...

"For centuries, Islamic civilization harmonized indigenous forms of cultural expression with the universal norms of its sacred law. It struck a balance between temporal beauty and ageless truth and fanned a brilliant peacock’s tail of unity in diversity from the heart of China to the shores of the Atlantic. Islamic jurisprudence helped facilitate this creative genius. In history, Islam showed itself to be culturally friendly and, in that regard, has been likened to a crystal clear river. Its waters (Islam) are pure, sweet, and life-giving but—having no color of their own—reflect the bedrock (indigenous culture) over which they flow. In China, Islam looked Chinese; in Mali, it looked African. Sustained cultural relevance to distinct peoples, diverse places, and different times underlay Islam’s long success as a global civilization... 
...By contrast, much contemporary Islamist rhetoric falls far short of Islam’s ancient cultural wisdom, assuming at times an unmitigated culturally predatory attitude. Such rhetoric and the movement ideologies that stand behind it have been deeply influenced by Western revolutionary dialectic and a dangerously selective retrieval and reinterpretation of Islamic scripture in that light. At the same time, however, the Islamist phenomenon is, to no small degree, a byproduct of the grave cultural dislocation and dysfunction of the contemporary Muslim world."

" For them, “culture” is a loaded word, something dangerous, inherently problematic, and “un-Islamic” (a deeply ingratiated Islamist neologism). Culture, for them, is a toxic pollutant that must necessarily be purged, since Islam and culture are mutually exclusive in their minds. Some foolishly or ahistorically regard Islamic culture—legacies like the Taj Mahal, for example—to have been chief causes of Muslim decline and fall in history. Their mindset reflects the general malaise of the modern period and the breakdown of traditional Muslim cultures, leaving chronic existential alienation and cultural dysfunction in its wake."



dsr478 said:


> Parts of neighbouring Hindustan also part of the Indus too you know, which is the main issue with this whole concept of Pakistan being the sole inheritor of the Indus.
> 
> 1. The Afghan government are not the same as the people (other than the upper class, most Afghans do not really hold strongly negative views about Pakistan).
> 
> 2. Ever since the USSR occupation of Afghanistan, all the major fighting stopped.
> 
> 3. Right, but if some of them have assimilated why not give them citizenship?
> 
> 4. Why not just vet them while they're actually in the country?
> 
> 5. Again, not most of them.
> 
> 
> 
> I've been to and lived in Pakistan for quite a bit of my life (mostly as a child though).
> 
> Yes, it was. It was called the Muslim League for a reason.
> 
> Islamic "culture" as you like to call it would just be following the Quran and the Sunnah, so yes it does exist.
> 
> *Then why are there so many Muhajirs in Pakistan? Better yet, why was Bangladesh also a part of Pakistan?
> *
> No, they weren't, otherwise there would have been far more communal tensions.


A small part of Bharat is part of the Indus Land...the heart land is and was in coterminous Pakistan....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MSafir

TMA said:


> By this I mean, if a Muhajir migrated to Lahore, he ought to learn the local language and customs, at least those that are not against his faith, if he went to Peshwar, he ought to learn the local language and customs,at least those that are not against his faith....
> and if he does not want to learn, then at least respect them



I am not talking against any language but for definitely those customs which are not according to the fath.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

TMA said:


> By this I mean, if a Muhajir migrated to Lahore, he ought to learn the local language and customs, at least those that are not against his faith, if he went to Peshwar, he ought to learn the local language and customs,at least those that are not against his faith....
> and if he does not want to learn, then at least respect them,



He only has to learn Urdu and respect the customs of other cultures so long as they do not contradict Islam. 



TMA said:


> You know most of the people in co-terminous Pakistan circa 1947 were also Muslims...



I am aware of that.



TMA said:


> *Nations deals with nations....
> People deal with people...*
> I have met Afghans and I have got on well with them..individually....
> 
> 1. In my experience most common Afghans at least in the UK (who come on Pakistani papers) despise Pakistan....
> 2. Hence the term COLD WAR....
> 3. Because their nation is in a cold war with Pakistan....it matters not if they speak the language...have you seen who supports PTM(TTP)? A lot of Afghan refugees who have assimilated very well...
> 4.Because that defeats the purpose of vetting....
> 5. In my experience most Afghans Pukhtoons (in the UK) hate Pakistan...they will get along personally fine with you...but when we talk about nations, they hate Pakistan.....



1. In my experience most of them like Pakistanis, but dislike the Pakistani establishment, just like most Pakistanis.

2. Not applicable, it implies both nations are out to get each other without directly fighting, no such thing is occurring. 

3. A lot of Pakistani Pashtuns support them too.

4. Not necessarily. Vet them, and if they don't meet the standards, send them back to Afghanistan ASAP.

5. Yeah, but most Pakistanis hate the Pakistani establishment too. 



TMA said:


> Like I said, nations deal with nations....it is time for Pakistan to learn from Iran on this matter......
> 
> http://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/amcdouga/Hist347/additional rdgs/article culture imperative.pdf
> @dsr478
> @MSafir
> 
> By a German American convert Sheikh Dr Umar Faruq Abdullah. This is mainly concerned with Islam in America as he is an American, however its concepts can be applied globally.
> By the way he is a scholar who is very Orthodox...
> 
> "For centuries, Islamic civilization harmonized indigenous forms of cultural expression with the universal norms of its sacred law. It struck a balance between temporal beauty and ageless truth and fanned a brilliant peacock’s tail of unity in diversity from the heart of China to the shores of the Atlantic. Islamic jurisprudence helped facilitate this creative genius. In history, Islam showed itself to be culturally friendly and, in that regard, has been likened to a crystal clear river. Its waters (Islam) are pure, sweet, and life-giving but—having no color of their own—reflect the bedrock (indigenous culture) over which they flow. In China, Islam looked Chinese; in Mali, it looked African. Sustained cultural relevance to distinct peoples, diverse places, and different times underlay Islam’s long success as a global civilization...
> ...By contrast, much contemporary Islamist rhetoric falls far short of Islam’s ancient cultural wisdom, assuming at times an unmitigated culturally predatory attitude. Such rhetoric and the movement ideologies that stand behind it have been deeply influenced by Western revolutionary dialectic and a dangerously selective retrieval and reinterpretation of Islamic scripture in that light. At the same time, however, the Islamist phenomenon is, to no small degree, a byproduct of the grave cultural dislocation and dysfunction of the contemporary Muslim world."
> 
> " For them, “culture” is a loaded word, something dangerous, inherently problematic, and “un-Islamic” (a deeply ingratiated Islamist neologism). Culture, for them, is a toxic pollutant that must necessarily be purged, since Islam and culture are mutually exclusive in their minds. Some foolishly or ahistorically regard Islamic culture—legacies like the Taj Mahal, for example—to have been chief causes of Muslim decline and fall in history. Their mindset reflects the general malaise of the modern period and the breakdown of traditional Muslim cultures, leaving chronic existential alienation and cultural dysfunction in its wake."



I highly disagree.

Wherever Islam has gone, it has either had to change the indigenous cultures or be warped into something completely different, sometimes even both occurs. 

It also helped facilitate more unity among Muslims, e.g many Muslims of different ethnic groups/nationalities all use a generally similar alphabet. If Islam is to change with every culture it meets, the Ummah will become a broken and disjointed mess (even more so than it already is). 

This doesn't mean you have to give up all aspects of your culture, you just have to purge it of everything that is haram and make Islam and your culture inseparable (the Pashtuns have done this beautifully, as have the Arabs). 

The Taj Mahal is a shrine, and as a result haram. So much for your guy being orthodox (although, he might just be ignorant about that). 



TMA said:


> A small part of Bharat is part of the Indus Land...the heart land is and was in coterminous Pakistan....



I agree, but it's pretty big when compared to modern day Pakistan (easily a sizeable chunk of our nation in terms of area).


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> He only has to learn Urdu and respect the customs of other cultures so long as they do not contradict Islam.
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. In my experience most of them like Pakistanis, but dislike the Pakistani establishment, just like most Pakistanis.
> 
> 2. Not applicable, it implies both nations are out to get each other without directly fighting, no such thing is occurring.
> 
> 3. A lot of Pakistani Pashtuns support them too.
> 
> 4. Not necessarily. Vet them, and if they don't meet the standards, send them back to Afghanistan ASAP.
> 
> 5. Yeah, but most Pakistanis hate the Pakistani establishment too.
> 
> 
> 
> I highly disagree.
> 
> Wherever Islam has gone, it has either had to change the indigenous cultures or be warped into something completely different, sometimes even both occurs.
> 
> It also helped facilitate more unity among Muslims, e.g many Muslims of different ethnic groups/nationalities all use a generally similar alphabet. If Islam is to change with every culture it meets, the Ummah will become a broken and disjointed mess (even more so than it already is).
> 
> This doesn't mean you have to give up all aspects of your culture, you just have to purge it of everything that is haram and make Islam and your culture inseparable (the Pashtuns have done this beautifully, as have the Arabs).
> 
> The Taj Mahal is a shrine, and as a result haram. So much for your guy being orthodox (although, he might just be ignorant about that).
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but it's pretty big when compared to modern day Pakistan (easily a sizeable chunk of our nation in terms of area).


With greatest respect, I will take the opinion of a Scholar of Islam above yours.....

Here he is teaching the Ashari/Maturidi Aqeedah of AhlSunnah Wa AlJamah....





The audio is dodgy but still worth it...



dsr478 said:


> He only has to learn Urdu and respect the customs of other cultures so long as they do not contradict Islam.
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. In my experience most of them like Pakistanis, but dislike the Pakistani establishment, just like most Pakistanis.
> 
> 2. Not applicable, it implies both nations are out to get each other without directly fighting, no such thing is occurring.
> 
> 3. A lot of Pakistani Pashtuns support them too.
> 
> 4. Not necessarily. Vet them, and if they don't meet the standards, send them back to Afghanistan ASAP.
> 
> 5. Yeah, but most Pakistanis hate the Pakistani establishment too.
> 
> 
> 
> I highly disagree.
> 
> Wherever Islam has gone, it has either had to change the indigenous cultures or be warped into something completely different, sometimes even both occurs.
> 
> It also helped facilitate more unity among Muslims, e.g many Muslims of different ethnic groups/nationalities all use a generally similar alphabet. If Islam is to change with every culture it meets, the Ummah will become a broken and disjointed mess (even more so than it already is).
> 
> This doesn't mean you have to give up all aspects of your culture, you just have to purge it of everything that is haram and make Islam and your culture inseparable (the Pashtuns have done this beautifully, as have the Arabs).
> 
> The Taj Mahal is a shrine, and as a result haram. So much for your guy being orthodox (although, he might just be ignorant about that).
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but it's pretty big when compared to modern day Pakistan (easily a sizeable chunk of our nation in terms of area).


Ahhh nice try with the 'establishment'... er no! And No!
They do not accept the EXISTENCE of a nation called PAKISTAN. It is not JUST the Establishment but the whole NATION...Their borders should include upto Attock and Balochistan...where does Afghanistan get these borders from despising an Establishment?

Nations deal with nations, people with people...you as a person are more than welcome to treat Afghan refugees as you want...but as a Nation, Pakistan needs to protect herself from a Muslim neighbour who has been harming her since 1947....



dsr478 said:


> He only has to learn Urdu and respect the customs of other cultures so long as they do not contradict Islam.
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. In my experience most of them like Pakistanis, but dislike the Pakistani establishment, just like most Pakistanis.
> 
> 2. Not applicable, it implies both nations are out to get each other without directly fighting, no such thing is occurring.
> 
> 3. A lot of Pakistani Pashtuns support them too.
> 
> 4. Not necessarily. Vet them, and if they don't meet the standards, send them back to Afghanistan ASAP.
> 
> 5. Yeah, but most Pakistanis hate the Pakistani establishment too.
> 
> 
> 
> I highly disagree.
> 
> Wherever Islam has gone, it has either had to change the indigenous cultures or be warped into something completely different, sometimes even both occurs.
> 
> It also helped facilitate more unity among Muslims, e.g many Muslims of different ethnic groups/nationalities all use a generally similar alphabet. If Islam is to change with every culture it meets, the Ummah will become a broken and disjointed mess (even more so than it already is).
> 
> This doesn't mean you have to give up all aspects of your culture, you just have to purge it of everything that is haram and make Islam and your culture inseparable (the Pashtuns have done this beautifully, as have the Arabs).
> 
> The Taj Mahal is a shrine, and as a result haram. So much for your guy being orthodox (although, he might just be ignorant about that).
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but it's pretty big when compared to modern day Pakistan (easily a sizeable chunk of our nation in terms of area).


Did you read his paper by chance or what I just posted?



dsr478 said:


> He only has to learn Urdu and respect the customs of other cultures so long as they do not contradict Islam.
> 
> 
> 
> I am aware of that.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. In my experience most of them like Pakistanis, but dislike the Pakistani establishment, just like most Pakistanis.
> 
> 2. Not applicable, it implies both nations are out to get each other without directly fighting, no such thing is occurring.
> 
> 3. A lot of Pakistani Pashtuns support them too.
> 
> 4. Not necessarily. Vet them, and if they don't meet the standards, send them back to Afghanistan ASAP.
> 
> 5. Yeah, but most Pakistanis hate the Pakistani establishment too.
> 
> 
> 
> I highly disagree.
> 
> Wherever Islam has gone, it has either had to change the indigenous cultures or be warped into something completely different, sometimes even both occurs.
> 
> It also helped facilitate more unity among Muslims, e.g many Muslims of different ethnic groups/nationalities all use a generally similar alphabet. If Islam is to change with every culture it meets, the Ummah will become a broken and disjointed mess (even more so than it already is).
> 
> This doesn't mean you have to give up all aspects of your culture, you just have to purge it of everything that is haram and make Islam and your culture inseparable (the Pashtuns have done this beautifully, as have the Arabs).
> 
> The Taj Mahal is a shrine, and as a result haram. So much for your guy being orthodox (although, he might just be ignorant about that).
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but it's pretty big when compared to modern day Pakistan (easily a sizeable chunk of our nation in terms of area).







His bit starts from 16 mins...


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> Islamic "culture" as you like to call it would just be following the Quran and the Sunnah, so yes it does exist.


And how many countries follow this "culture" that you seem to have invented?



dsr478 said:


> *Then why are there so many Muhajirs in Pakistan? Better yet, why was Bangladesh also a part of Pakistan? *


The majority of Muslims from India stayed in their native lands. Bangladesh was never meant to be part of Pakistan under the original plan. But the fact that they became independent disproves your "Muslim homeland" theory.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dsr478 said:


> Asalamu Alaikum
> 
> It still applies post 1971, the only Bengalis that advocated separatism were ethnic nationalists who valued their ethnicity over their deen, which is clear cut kufr. So yes, Islam is still a uniting factor for Muslims (provided they actually practise their religion).
> 
> As for Hindustani Muslims, again, the ones who hate Pakistanis are not practising Muslims, same with Pakistanis who hate other Pakistanis just because they aren't from the same ethnic group as them.
> 
> I'm not a Muhajir, most of my family are Gujjars from across Pakistan (mostly the Punjab, but also Azad Kashmir and KPK), with a few of them from a few generations ago being Baluchi.
> 
> If you want to get technical, yes some of my mothers family did migrate from Hindustani Punjab but that doesn't really count since Punjabis are the largest ethnicity in Pakistan.



Wa alaikum Assalam brother.

You are 100% correct. I’m not disagreeing with anything you wrote. There are different aspects to Islam than the mere religion itself.

Not all Muslims share the same goals and aspirations, and forcing said Muslims to be part of the same nation is problematic. The basic differences between Pakistan and Bangladesh were too great to bridge. It’s a civilizational and historical issue.

The issue of MQM and ANP is also similar. These groups never accepted themselves as Pakistani and will take any action to lessen the role of Islam on our society.

Pakistan is an Islamic society, nothing will change that. We can only unify with those who share our ideals and cultural values, hence why Pakistan and Kashmir identify with each other.

Our whole non-Islamic history also has been leading us to this eventuality. It was inevitable that we would become one of the strongest Muslim nations and now the spotlight is on us to go to even higher heights.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> Pakistan was created with identity of Muslim nation or Muslim majority nation. If you after 70 years of creation of Pakistan argue that regional traditions are also important then you are late. Why because lots of Muslims who emigrated and left their regional home behind example from hayderabad or Kashmir or Rajasthan, etc would simply object to it that what was the need to leave, we were happy where so ever we were.



Regional traditions ARE important. Have you ever been to Pakistan? Pakistan was not "created" for Indian Muhajirs. Sorry about your loss, but you were welcomed to an independent nation so you would not have to be subject to tyranny as we see in Kashmir today. At no point were Muhajirs to define a new identity for the 95% natives who live in the Indus region. You are seriously deluded if you think that's the case.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Wa alaikum Assalam brother.
> 
> You are 100% correct. I’m not disagreeing with anything you wrote. There are different aspects to Islam than the mere religion itself.
> 
> Not all Muslims share the same goals and aspirations, and forcing said Muslims to be part of the same nation is problematic. The basic differences between Pakistan and Bangladesh were too great to bridge. It’s a civilizational and historical issue.
> 
> The issue of MQM and ANP is also similar. These groups never accepted themselves as Pakistani and will take any action to lessen the role of Islam on our society.
> 
> Pakistan is an Islamic society, nothing will change that. We can only unify with those who share our ideals and cultural values, hence why Pakistan and Kashmir identify with each other.
> 
> Our whole non-Islamic history also has been leading us to this eventuality. It was inevitable that we would become one of the strongest Muslim nations and now the spotlight is on us to go to even higher heights.



I wouldn't call Pakistan an Islamic society, yes many of us are great Muslims but many of us are also terrible Muslims. 

Our society as a whole definitely has some brushing up to do.



UnitedPak said:


> And how many countries follow this "culture" that you seem to have invented?
> 
> 
> The majority of Muslims from India stayed in their native lands. Bangladesh was never meant to be part of Pakistan under the original plan. But the fact that they became independent disproves your "Muslim homeland" theory.



You were the one that chalked up the term, not me.

Anyway, loads of people follow the Quran and Sunnah, and those of us that do seem to have more in common with each other than each one of us does with others that come from the same background as us (that's my personal experience anyway). 

The ones far away from the border, yes, but the ones close to it went to Pakistan almost entirely. 

Not at all, in fact it proves it even further. Many of the Bengalis simply weren't (and many still aren't) Muslim first, they subscribed to the theory of ethnic nationalism that you yourself are promoting. If everyone thought your way, Pakistan would become balkanised.



TMA said:


> Ahhh nice try with the 'establishment'... er no! And No!
> They do not accept the EXISTENCE of a nation called PAKISTAN. It is not JUST the Establishment but the whole NATION...Their borders should include upto Attock and Balochistan...where does Afghanistan get these borders from despising an Establishment?
> 
> Nations deal with nations, people with people...you as a person are more than welcome to treat Afghan refugees as you want...but as a Nation, Pakistan needs to protect herself from a Muslim neighbour who has been harming her since 1947....
> 
> 
> Did you read his paper by chance or what I just posted?



Uh, yes. I've met and know many Afghans very well. Some of them do feel robbed of Baluchistan, KPK and FATA but most of them have gotten over it.

As I've said numerous times, the Afghan government doesn't reflect the people. 

Only the bit you posted.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> Regional traditions ARE important. Have you ever been to Pakistan? Pakistan was not "created" for Indian Muhajirs. Sorry about your loss, but you were welcomed to an independent nation so you would not have to be subject to tyranny as we see in Kashmir today. At no point were Muhajirs to define a new identity for the 95% natives who live in the Indus region. You are seriously deluded if you think that's the case.



You are entitled to your thinking and I am entitled to my thinking but the facts are facts and every one knows why Pakistan was created. You may wish to have arrogance out of nothing who got a nation for free without any effort and hard work and on sacrifice of other fellow Muslims. Empty utensils make louder voices, like you are.

..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> Anyway, loads of people follow the Quran and Sunnah, and those of us that do seem to have more in common with each other than each one of us does with others that come from the same background as us (that's my personal experience anyway).





MSafir said:


> You are entitled to your thinking and I am entitled to my thinking but the facts are facts and every one knows why Pakistan was created. You may wish to have arrogance out of nothing who got a nation for free without any effort and hard work and on sacrifice of other fellow Muslims. Empty utensils make louder voices, like you are.
> 
> ..



Well, that's your observations, opinions and delusions but this is certainly not what Rehmat had in mind when he wrote "in the name of our common heritage, on behalf of our thirty million Muslim brethren who live in ...the five Northern units of India."







No Bengal, no Indian muslims, no "muslim homeland", no clean slates, nothing about giving up said heritage to Indians.

He was quite specific about the "meaning" of Pakstan

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
3


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> Five northern units of India? Oh well so you were an Indian before Pakistani as per whatever chit you posted. I am impressed as that makes you an Indian muslim before becoming a Pakistani.



Once again you try to derail an argument with your nonsense. Yes it was called INDIA during the British Raj. Getting tired of your blatant ganga tactics.

Also, that's a leaflet by Chaudhry Ali Rehmat, the guy who coined the name of Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> Well, that's your observations, opinions and delusions but this is certainly not what Rehmat had in mind when he wrote "in the name of our common heritage, on behalf of our thirty million Muslim brethren who live in ...the five Northern units of India."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Bengal, no Indian muslims, no "muslim homeland", no clean slates, nothing about giving up said heritage to Indians.
> 
> He was quite specific about the "meaning" of Pakstan



One Robin does not make a Summer, Rehmat is not indicative of the Muslim League's objective. 

And even he still mentions Muslims in the first paragraph of his pamphlet, even though there were (and still are) non-Muslims in Pakistan (not that there's anything wrong with that of course).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> One Robin does not make a Summer, Rehmat is not indicative of the Muslim League's objective.
> 
> And even he still mentions Muslims in the first paragraph of his pamphlet, even though there were (and still are) non-Muslims in Pakistan (not that there's anything wrong with that of course).



Seriously bro. Rehmat was the founder of Pakistan movement. Its written as clear as day what Pakistan movement was about. It's literally in the name, yet all you see is a homeland for Quran and Sunnah? It's beyond a joke now.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## MSafir

UnitedPak said:


> Once again you try to derail an argument with your nonsense. Yes it was called INDIA during the British Raj. Getting tired of your blatant ganga tactics.
> 
> Also, that's a leaflet by Chaudhry Ali Rehmat, the guy who coined the name of Pakistan.



You are low on facts and arguments, and by the way Ch Rehmat was born in Hoshiarpur, India who was disappointed of the fact that Pakistan is smaller in size due to non inclusion of Hindu Punjab and Hindu administered Kashmir as he thought. This proves the fact that Muslim factor was more important than the ethnic one.


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> I wouldn't call Pakistan an Islamic society, yes many of us are great Muslims but many of us are also terrible Muslims.
> 
> Our society as a whole definitely has some brushing up to do.
> 
> 
> 
> You were the one that chalked up the term, not me.
> 
> Anyway, loads of people follow the Quran and Sunnah, and those of us that do seem to have more in common with each other than each one of us does with others that come from the same background as us (that's my personal experience anyway).
> 
> The ones far away from the border, yes, but the ones close to it went to Pakistan almost entirely.
> 
> Not at all, in fact it proves it even further. Many of the Bengalis simply weren't (and many still aren't) Muslim first, they subscribed to the theory of ethnic nationalism that you yourself are promoting. If everyone thought your way, Pakistan would become balkanised.
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, yes. I've met and know many Afghans very well. Some of them do feel robbed of Baluchistan, KPK and FATA but most of them have gotten over it.
> 
> As I've said numerous times, the Afghan government doesn't reflect the people.
> 
> Only the bit you posted.


Like I said Nations deal with Nations, people with people...

I request that you make time and watch the video series on Aqeedad and on the cultural imperative... and also read the whole article...that way you can make an informed opinion..


----------



## UnitedPak

MSafir said:


> You are low on facts and arguments, and by the way Ch Rehmat was born in Hoshiarpur, India who was disappointed of the fact that Pakistan is smaller in size due to non inclusion of Hindu Punjab and Hindu administered Kashmir as he thought. This proves the fact that Muslim factor was more important than the ethnic one.



He was a Punjabi Muslim born in British India, but you know what... Take this one for Team Ganga. I know you freaks love claiming everything for your lacking nation.

Your posts still makes no sense. The British partitioned Punjab, not the Muslim league.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

MSafir said:


> Five northern units of India? Oh well so you were an Indian before Pakistani as per whatever chit you posted. I am fascinated as that makes you an Indian muslim before becoming a Pakistani.



You are not going to win any points by twisting logic. Republic of India and India of the British Raj were two different states.

Hoshiarpur is the northernmost region of East Punjab bordering Kashmir and used to be a Muslim majority area before Indian Sikhs and Hindus massacred its Muslim population to make way for India’s occupation.

Your insinuation that those people are Indians is an insult to them and Pakistanis, Kashmiris everywhere.



dsr478 said:


> I wouldn't call Pakistan an Islamic society, yes many of us are great Muslims but many of us are also terrible Muslims.
> 
> Our society as a whole definitely has some brushing up to do.



Yes, this is true. No disagreement here.

I term Pakistan as an Islamic country based on the constitution and our laws. This is especially true when measured against most other Muslim nations which are ethnic states. There are only three Islamic Republics in the world, the other two are Iran and Afghanistan.

The ideology of Pakistan is Islam. Our founding principles are the laws of the Prophet saws, as said by Quaid e Azam. All Pakistanis agree on this basic principle.

Pakistan can both be a refuge for Muslims escaping oppression and tyranny, and the beginning of a concrete example for the rest of the world of a progressive Muslim society in equilibrium with its historic past and modernity. This was Allama Iqbal’s way of thinking.

In sha Allah, I think we can all come to a common ground of the paramount role of Islam in our society and future. However, I ask that we also study and learn from our pre-Islamic past as well which has all lead to this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> I term Pakistan as an Islamic country based on the constitution and our laws. This is especially true when measured against most other Muslim nations which are ethnic states. There are only three Islamic Republics in the world, the other two are Iran and Afghanistan.
> 
> The ideology of Pakistan is Islam. Our founding principles are the laws of the Prophet saws, as said by Quaid e Azam. All Pakistanis agree on this basic principle.
> 
> Pakistan can both be a refuge for Muslims escaping oppression and tyranny, and the beginning of a concrete example for the rest of the world of a progressive Muslim society in equilibrium with its historic past and modernity. This was Allama Iqbal’s way of thinking.
> 
> In sha Allah, I think we can all come to a common ground of the paramount role of Islam in our society and future. However, I ask that we also study and learn from our pre-Islamic past as well which has all lead to this point.



We are a pseudo-Islamic state, i.e we only implement the parts of Sharia that we like, whilst we ignore the rest. Many other Muslim countries do this, we are nothing special in that regard.

Inshallah, we will become much more Islamic in the nearby future.



UnitedPak said:


> Seriously bro. Rehmat was the founder of Pakistan movement. Its written as clear as day what Pakistan movement was about. It's literally in the name, yet all you see is a homeland for Quran and Sunnah? It's beyond a joke now.



Rehmat was also the one who concocted this map, with several independent Muslims nations across the sub-continent (it was a rough idea hence why it's a little odd in terms of borders):






Was this idea ever realised? No. Clearly he wasn't as integral as you think he was.



TMA said:


> I request that you make time and watch the video series on Aqeedad and on the cultural imperative... and also read the whole article...that way you can make an informed opinion..



I already have an opinion thank you, but I might watch it later when I'm bored.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> We are a pseudo-Islamic state, i.e we only implement the parts of Sharia that we like, whilst we ignore the rest. Many other Muslim countries do this, we are nothing special in that regard.
> 
> Inshallah, we will become much more Islamic in the nearby future.
> 
> 
> 
> Rehmat was also the one who concocted this map, with several independent Muslims nations across the sub-continent (it was a rough idea hence why it's a little odd in terms of borders):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was this idea ever realised? No. Clearly he wasn't as integral as you think he was.
> 
> 
> 
> I already have an opinion thank you, but I might watch it later when I'm bored.


There is a difference between informed opinion and just opinion...but that is up to you....

And coming back to the topic...let those who wish to learn about their history learn it, and those that do not wish to learn it, don't. But please don't think ill of those wishing to learn about it...(although you can think what you want)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

TMA said:


> There is a difference between informed opinion and just opinion...but that is up to you....
> 
> And coming back to the topic...let those who wish to learn about their history learn it, and those that do not wish to learn it, don't. But please don't think ill of those wishing to learn about it...(although you can think what you want)



I'm already informed enough, thank you.

I never discouraged learning history, I discourage people being a bunch of ethnic nationalists based on history, because it's such a moronic idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> I never discouraged learning history, I discourage people being a bunch of ethnic nationalists based on history, because it's such a moronic idea.



But ethnicity has played a major role. You might think it's stupid, but its reality *the world over* and Pakistan is no different. In the process you even trashed Pakistani culture, giving preference to "Quran and Sunnah" as our culture, which once again is not based on reality or the original thinking of the founding fathers of Pakistan.

And do note how you ended up supporting and assisting the now-banned false flagger in your arguments.

I appreciate that Islam takes more importance in your views, but I dont get why you want to derail and delegitimize Pakistan's heritage in the process. You are paving the way for Indians to call us illegitimate invaders in our lands. Kudos to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> But ethnicity has played a major role. You might think it's stupid, but its reality *the world over* and Pakistan is no different. In the process you even trashed Pakistani culture, giving preference to "Quran and Sunnah" as our culture, which once again is not based on reality or the original thinking of the founding fathers of Pakistan.
> 
> And do note how you ended up supporting and assisting the now-banned false flagger in your arguments.
> 
> I appreciate that Islam takes more importance in your views, but I dont get why you want to derail and delegitimize Pakistan's heritage in the process. You are paving the way for Indians to call us illegitimate invaders in our lands. Kudos to you.



No it hasn't, otherwise the Punjab wouldn't be split between Pakistan and Hindustan, the Muhajirs wouldn't have come to Pakistan, all the Brahmins and Parsis would have moved to Pakistan (they are genetically more similar to Pakistanis than other Hindustanis), etc. 

I don't care what anyone else thinks, Quran and Sunnah takes precedence over all else for me, including my ethnic culture. 

Don't care who I ended up supporting, these are my views.

I don't care what they think about us, their views about Pakistan/Pakistanis are already pretty moronic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dsr478 said:


> No it hasn't, otherwise the Punjab wouldn't be split between Pakistan and Hindustan, the Muhajirs wouldn't have come to Pakistan, all the Brahmins and Parsis would have moved to Pakistan (they are genetically more similar to Pakistanis than other Hindustanis), etc.
> 
> I don't care what anyone else thinks, Quran and Sunnah takes precedence over all else for me, including my ethnic culture.
> 
> Don't care who I ended up supporting, these are my views.
> 
> I don't care what they think about us, their views about Pakistan/Pakistanis are already pretty moronic.



Yes brother, but our culture is based on Quran and Sunnah. Whatever moral failings we have are a result of leaving Islam and adopting the culture of others (British, Hindus,etc.)

If you compare us to other Muslims like Arabs, Turks, Persians, etc. then we are definitely closer to Islam than them. Pakistanis genuinely care about Palestine, Kashmir, Burma, and even Indian, Bangladeshi Muslims than most others.

It’s a result of our history and the struggles which shaped us over time. By divorcing ourselves from our culture, we risk losing not only our Islamic identity but becoming Non-Muslims altogether.

You mentioned someplace that you are Salafi. I grew up with a lot of Salafis, and almost all of them are Non-Muslims and living a sinful life now. Extreme views tend to have a boomerang effect. Islam is a moderate religion and we should stay seeped in our Islamic history and society to exact change.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> No it hasn't, otherwise the Punjab wouldn't be split between Pakistan and Hindustan, the Muhajirs wouldn't have come to Pakistan, all the Brahmins and Parsis would have moved to Pakistan (they are genetically more similar to Pakistanis than other Hindustanis), etc.
> 
> I don't care what anyone else thinks, Quran and Sunnah takes precedence over all else for me, including my ethnic culture.
> 
> Don't care who I ended up supporting, these are my views.
> 
> I don't care what they think about us, their views about Pakistan/Pakistanis are already pretty moronic.



Once again. The Muslim league did not partition Punjab. It was the British. Entire Muslim districts like Pathankot were handed to India for devious reasons. Just look the Sikh empire before the British.







Muhajirs were refugees in need and we welcomed them. It was a political event not a religious one.
Parsis are culturally very different, hence them having to escape Persia in the first place.
Brahmins??? I don't even know if that is an ethnic group located in any particular region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> Once again. The Muslim league did not partition Punjab. It was the British. Entire Muslim districts like Pathankot were handed to India for devious reasons. Just look the Sikh empire before the British.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muhajirs were refugees in need and we welcomed them. It was a political event not a religious one.
> Parsis are culturally very different, hence them having to escape Persia in the first place.
> Brahmins??? I don't even know if that is an ethnic group located in any particular region.



The British didn't give the rest of the Punjab to Pakistan for an obvious reason, it wasn't Muslim majority.

No, Muhajirs came because Pakistan was built as a nation for Muslims. If it had nothing to do with religion, you'd have non-Muslims migrating to Pakistan too, but that didn't happen.

And Pashtuns are culturally different to Punjabis, as are Baluchis, Hazara's, etc. Pakistan is a melting pot of different cultures. What unites most of us is the fact that we believe in Islam (whether or not we actually practice it properly is a different story). If culture was the dominant factor, there wouldn't be a Pakistan.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

dsr478 said:


> The British didn't give the rest of the Punjab to Pakistan for an obvious reason, it wasn't Muslim majority.
> 
> No, Muhajirs came because Pakistan was built as a nation for Muslims. If it had nothing to do with religion, you'd have non-Muslims migrating to Pakistan too, but that didn't happen.
> 
> And Pashtuns are culturally different to Punjabis, as are Baluchis, Hazara's, etc. Pakistan is a melting pot of different cultures. What unites most of us is the fact that we believe in Islam (whether or not we actually practice it properly is a different story). If culture was the dominant factor, there wouldn't be a Pakistan.






But all these above mention ethnicities have FAR MORE in common with one another than they do with ANY of the races that make modern day india. The nationalist bond that binds these groups together can ONLY be understood by REAL Pakistanis and not outsiders. Both Religion & Race are important.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Yes brother, but our culture is based on Quran and Sunnah. Whatever moral failings we have are a result of leaving Islam and adopting the culture of others (British, Hindus,etc.)
> 
> If you compare us to other Muslims like Arabs, Turks, Persians, etc. then we are definitely closer to Islam than them. Pakistanis genuinely care about Palestine, Kashmir, Burma, and even Indian, Bangladeshi Muslims than most others.
> 
> It’s a result of our history and the struggles which shaped us over time. By divorcing ourselves from our culture, we risk losing not only our Islamic identity but becoming Non-Muslims altogether.
> 
> You mentioned someplace that you are Salafi. I grew up with a lot of Salafis, and almost all of them are Non-Muslims and living a sinful life now. Extreme views tend to have a boomerang effect. Islam is a moderate religion and we should stay seeped in our Islamic history and society to exact change.



Some aspects of our culture are Islamic, others are not. For example, not allowing our children to have sexual relations outside of marriage is Islamic, but not allowing them to marry outside their tribe/ethnic group is haram as is building and worshipping shrines. 

There is no general comparison, each group has it's fair share of practising and non-practising Muslims. I've lived in an Arab country for several years, many of them genuinely care about Muslims suffering in places outside of the Arab world.

Salafism is not extreme, it's Islam as the Salaf originally practised it. If some people who were Salafi become Murtads then that's not the fault of Salafism.



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But all these above mention ethnicities have FAR MORE in common with one another than they do with ANY of the races that make modern day india. The nationalist bond that binds these groups together can ONLY be understood by REAL Pakistanis and not outsiders. Both Religion & Race are important.



One could argue both are important, but religion clearly takes the precedent since Muhajirs are only similar to us linguistically (they speak Urdu), and Punjabis among other groups in Hindustan didn't come flocking to Pakistan unless they were Muslim.


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> The British didn't give the rest of the Punjab to Pakistan for an obvious reason, it wasn't Muslim majority.



Still in line with the Muslim league's vision of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the 5 northwestern regions.

The fact that India has nearly 200 million Muslims today does not seem to register to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

dsr478 said:


> Some aspects of our culture are Islamic, others are not. For example, not allowing our children to have sexual relations outside of marriage is Islamic, but not allowing them to marry outside their tribe/ethnic group is haram as is building and worshipping shrines.
> 
> There is no general comparison, each group has it's fair share of practising and non-practising Muslims. I've lived in an Arab country for several years, many of them genuinely care about Muslims suffering in places outside of the Arab world.
> 
> Salafism is not extreme, it's Islam as the Salaf originally practised it. If some people who were Salafi become Murtads then that's not the fault of Salafism.
> 
> 
> 
> One could argue both are important, but religion clearly takes the precedent since Muhajirs are only similar to us linguistically (they speak Urdu), and Punjabis among other groups in Hindustan didn't come flocking to Pakistan unless they were Muslim.





Punjabis in Pakistan are now very different to Punjabis in india. The only commonality now being language. This is due to Pakistani Punjabis interbreeding with Muslim tribes to the West of us and indian Punjabis breeding with hindus in india.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> Still in line with the Muslim league's vision of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the 5 northwestern regions.
> 
> The fact that India has nearly 200 million Muslims today does not seem to register to you.



If it was just the 5 northwestern regions, why was Bangladesh part of Pakistan as well?

Oh please, many of those people don't even count as Muslim.


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> If it was just the 5 northwestern regions, why was Bangladesh part of Pakistan as well?
> 
> Oh please, many of those people don't even count as Muslim.



Why are you asking me? I am quoting to you exactly what Rehmat suggested. That is not up for discussion.

Under his plan Bengal would have gained independence too, but not as part of Pakistan. And just as he predicted, they are now independent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DarkPrince

dsr478 said:


> No it hasn't, otherwise the Punjab wouldn't be split between Pakistan and Hindustan, the Muhajirs wouldn't have come to Pakistan, all the Brahmins and Parsis would have moved to Pakistan (they are genetically more similar to Pakistanis than other Hindustanis), etc.
> 
> I don't care what anyone else thinks, Quran and Sunnah takes precedence over all else for me, including my ethnic culture.
> 
> Don't care who I ended up supporting, these are my views.
> 
> I don't care what they think about us, their views about Pakistan/Pakistanis are already pretty moronic.



Partition of Punjab was a mistake. Pakistan is incomplete without Delhi.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

DarkPrince said:


> Partition of Punjab was a mistake. Pakistan is incomplete without Delhi.



Pakistan is incomplete without *Kashmir*.

Fixed that for you. We are fine without Delhi or Dhaka. Alhamdulilah.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DarkPrince

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Pakistan is incomplete without *Kashmir*.
> 
> Fixed that for you. We are fine without Delhi or Dhaka. Alhamdulilah.



You do understand that Delhi is true Muslim capital of India right? 

If you can conquer Delhi then you'll get Kashmir as a bonus.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

DarkPrince said:


> You do understand that Delhi is true Muslim capital of India right?
> 
> If you can conquer Delhi then you'll get Kashmir as a bonus.






So says the person who belongs to the race and nation that worships & idolizes indian hindus..............


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> The British didn't give the rest of the Punjab to Pakistan for an obvious reason, it wasn't Muslim majority.
> 
> No, Muhajirs came because Pakistan was built as a nation for Muslims. If it had nothing to do with religion, you'd have non-Muslims migrating to Pakistan too, but that didn't happen.
> 
> And Pashtuns are culturally different to Punjabis, as are Baluchis, Hazara's, etc. Pakistan is a melting pot of different cultures. What unites most of us is the fact that we believe in Islam (whether or not we actually practice it properly is a different story). If culture was the dominant factor, there wouldn't be a Pakistan.


If there was no Islam coterminous Pakistan would still be different to Bharat save the British India bit....Just like France and Germany are different or Germany and Poland....

Also how can I be be informed on an article or video if one has not read it?

I agree that ethnic nationalism is a bad thing but learning Pakistani history is not the same thing...and if someone thinks it is well then he is going out of touch....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DarkPrince

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So says the person who belongs to the race and nation that worships & idolizes indian hindus..............



There's no such thing as pure race in the subcontinent you halfwit.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

DarkPrince said:


> There's no such thing as pure race in the subcontinent you halfwit.




You speak for bengalis and your race whatever that maybe. Whatever "subcontinent" races are......lol...... You may be the proud minions of the hindu indians, we however are NOT. We are different to you people racially, genetically, culturally etc. It's not your right, authority or prerogative to tell the Pakistanis about our racial origins.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DarkPrince

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> You speak for bengalis and your race whatever that maybe. Whatever "subcontinent" races are......lol...... You may be the proud minions of the hindu indians, we however are NOT. We are different to you people racially, genetically, culturally etc. It's not your right, authority or prerogative to tell the Pakistanis about our racial origins.



I speak for myself. You do understand Hinduism was founded in Punjab right?


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

DarkPrince said:


> I speak for myself. You do understand Hinduism was founded in Punjab right?





Yes we created it but no longer follow it. We gave it to the gangalanders who have ALWAYS been racially different to us, before Islam and even before hinduism.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

TMA said:


> If there was no Islam coterminous Pakistan would still be different to Bharat save the British India bit....Just like France and Germany are different or Germany and Poland....
> 
> Also how can I be be informed on an article or video if one has not read it?
> 
> I agree that ethnic nationalism is a bad thing but learning Pakistani history is not the same thing...and if someone thinks it is well then he is going out of touch....



Yes, we would still be different, but not as different as we are now. We also wouldn't be our own independent nation.

I'm informed on the topic. 

I never said it's wrong to learn history, I'm just getting annoyed with these ethnic nationalists.



UnitedPak said:


> Under his plan Bengal would have gained independence too, but not as part of Pakistan. And just as he predicted, they are now independent.



Right, but his idea did not go through, the Muslim League still decided to incorporate Bangladesh as part of Pakistan, and his other Muslim states that he envisioned never came through. This shows just how much influence he had.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> We also wouldn't be our own independent nation.



Pure speculation, but the subcontinent had rarely ever been united, maybe for a total of less than 90 years before the British arrived. Individual regions like Indus were usually invaded or conquered as a whole by foreigners even before Islam arrived (Central Asian Steppe tribes, Persians, Greeks, Kushans, Arabs). Nationalism is however a modern concept. We cannot compare the past empires to modern nations.



dsr478 said:


> Right, but his idea did not go through, the Muslim League still decided to incorporate Bangladesh as part of Pakistan, and his other Muslim states that he envisioned never came through. This shows just how much influence he had.



Incorporating Bengal into Pakistan had nothing to do with Pakistan being a "homeland for Muslims". Bengal saw an opportunity and took it. A Hindu majority democracy was completely new territory and phase in the history of South Asia which had seen Muslim rule for the previous 1000 years. The Muslim majority states wanted to protect their identities and did what was necessary.

The name Pakistan would have been completely illogical if what you are suggesting was true.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TMA

dsr478 said:


> Yes, we would still be different, but not as different as we are now. We also wouldn't be our own independent nation.
> 
> I'm informed on the topic.
> 
> I never said it's wrong to learn history, I'm just getting annoyed with these ethnic nationalists.
> 
> 
> 
> Right, but his idea did not go through, the Muslim League still decided to incorporate Bangladesh as part of Pakistan, and his other Muslim states that he envisioned never came through. This shows just how much influence he had.


One can argue if it weren't for British India there would be no Pakistan...


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> Pure speculation, but the subcontinent had rarely ever been united, maybe for a total of less than 90 years before the British arrived.
> 
> 
> 
> Incorporating Bengal into Pakistan had nothing to do with Pakistan being a "homeland for Muslims". Bengal saw an opportunity and took it. A Hindu majority democracy was completely new territory and phase in the history of South Asia which had seen Muslim rule for the previous 1000 years. The Muslim majority states wanted to protect their identities and did what was necessary.
> 
> The name Pakistan would have been completely illogical if what you are suggesting was true.



Right, but once the British left we would have joined Hindustan if we weren't Muslim. It was called the Muslim League for a reason.

Yes, it does. It proves ethnicity meant very little. I'll admit, Bangladesh was more of a glorified colony than an actual integral part of the Pakistani nation, but that doesn't change the fact that they were still SUPPOSED to be a part of Pakistan, as a province as equal as all the others.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> Right, but once the British left we would have joined Hindustan if we weren't Muslim. It was called the Muslim League for a reason.



No chance. Do you see Nepal or Sri Lanka joining them?
I have already explained to you what the objectives of the original Muslim league were. You are far too obsessed with references to "Muslim" or "Islam", that you cannot accept reality.

If you want to consider Pakistan a homeland for Muslims, then fine. It's not like we ever deny help to those around us. But don't trash the heritage of Pakistani people in the process. It's not against your Islamic identity in any way. It's the past and you should accept it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> No chance. Do you see Nepal or Sri Lanka joining them?
> I have already explained to you what the objectives of the original Muslim league were. You are far too obsessed with references to "Muslim" or "Islam", that you cannot accept reality.
> 
> If you want to consider Pakistan a homeland for Muslims, then fine. It's not like we ever deny help to those around us. But don't trash the heritage of Pakistani people in the process. It's not against your Islamic identity in any way. It's the past and you should accept it.



Sri Lanka is separated by sea, but Nepal is a good point. 

Our history is that of the Muslims in the region. There's a reason Muhammad Bin Qasim is referred to as the first Pakistani. All this other stuff is ethnic history, not national history.


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> Sri Lanka is separated by sea, but Nepal is a good point.
> 
> Our history is that of the Muslims in the region. There's a reason Muhammad Bin Qasim is referred to as the first Pakistani. All this other stuff is ethnic history, not national history.



I will tell you the same thing I tell the Hindu nationalists on here. Your religion/ideology inspired discussions can take place in the relevant threads. Stay out of the history threads as they are clearly not for you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dsr478 said:


> Sri Lanka is separated by sea, but Nepal is a good point.
> 
> Our history is that of the Muslims in the region. There's a reason Muhammad Bin Qasim is referred to as the first Pakistani. All this other stuff is ethnic history, not national history.


 
Ok so your history started with Muhammad bin qasim. This may be true for you, but not true for the rest of us.

We have great interest about the ways our ancestors lived in the IVC, Gandhara, Persian, Alexander the Great, Scythia, Kushan, White Hun eras.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TMA

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Ok so your history started with Muhammad bin qasim. This may be true for you, but not true for the rest of us.
> 
> We have great interest about the ways our ancestors lived in the IVC, Gandhara, Persian, Alexander the Great, Scythia, Kushan, White Hun eras.


Well said/written!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## my2cents

dsr478 said:


> Sri Lanka is separated by sea, but Nepal is a good point.
> 
> Our history is that of the Muslims in the region. There's a reason Muhammad Bin Qasim is referred to as the first Pakistani. All this other stuff is ethnic history, not national history.



Nepal had a treaty with Qing dynasty of China from the fall out of Sino-Nepal war of 1800's. British wanted to avoid confrontation with Qing dynasty. It is also one of the reasons that they did not conquer Kashmir, Nepal, Sikkim and Burma.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We have great interest about the ways our ancestors lived in the IVC, Gandhara, Persian, Alexander the Great, Scythia, Kushan, White Hun eras.



As do I, but that's ethnic history, not national history.

The fact is we owe our country's existence to the Muslims in the region that existed prior to us.



UnitedPak said:


> I will tell you the same thing I tell the Hindu nationalists on here. Your religion/ideology inspired discussions can take place in the relevant threads. Stay out of the history threads as they are clearly not for you.



This is relevant. You're denying history by claiming Pakistan was founded on a basis other than Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

dsr478 said:


> This is relevant. You're denying history by claiming Pakistan was founded on a basis other than Islam.



Forget the blatant disregard you have for actual written manuscripts by Pakistan's founders who suggest otherwise, but then you insist on repeating stuff which sounds like borderline _shirk_.

Islam was never in danger. Islam does not need a country. Pakistan's founders never "saved" Islam. They certainly never claimed to have saved Islam. To suggest that we have saved Islam is synonymous with claiming that the founders were heavenly inspired, or achieved prophethood. None of this ever happened and these views are worryingly self-important.

Protecting the Islamic identity of people is very different from protecting Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MultaniGuy

UnitedPak said:


> Forget the blatant disregard you have for actual written manuscripts by Pakistan's founders who suggest otherwise, but then you insist on repeating stuff which sounds like borderline _shirk_.
> 
> Islam was never in danger. Islam does not need a country. Pakistan's founders never "saved" Islam. They certainly never claimed to have saved Islam. To suggest that we have saved Islam is synonymous with claiming that the founders were heavenly inspired, or achieved prophethood. None of this ever happened and these views are worryingly self-important.
> 
> Protecting the Islamic identity of people is very different from protecting Islam.


There are different periods in Pakistan's history. The Pre-Islamic history of Pakistan can also be examined.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

UnitedPak said:


> Forget the blatant disregard you have for actual written manuscripts by Pakistan's founders who suggest otherwise, but then you insist on repeating stuff which sounds like borderline _shirk_.
> 
> Islam was never in danger. Islam does not need a country. Pakistan's founders never "saved" Islam. They certainly never claimed to have saved Islam. To suggest that we have saved Islam is synonymous with claiming that the founders were heavenly inspired, or achieved prophethood. None of this ever happened and these views are worryingly self-important.
> 
> Protecting the Islamic identity of people is very different from protecting Islam.



What on Earth are you babbling on about? I said Pakistan was founded as a state for Muslims and was supposed to be ruled by Islamic law, where the heck does any of that stuff come in?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

