# Why do Indians dislike Pakistani attachment to Muhammad Bin Qasim?



## Apprentice

As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim. But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'. 

Its not just Pakistanis Indians have this problem with. I remember a Kashmiri Facebook page where Kashmiris celebrated Muhammad Bin Qasim as their hero and Indians were outraged.

So make your choice. Who is your hero?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dervesh786

our ancestors were not Hindus, Hinduism played a lesser role in the history of Pakistan and its history compared to other faiths. in fact I dare say even Hindus do not know where they begin and where they end.

however I would say despite that raja Dahir should be acknowledged as a son of the soil irrespective of creed, as well as ranjeet Singh. Pakistan has a rich and diverse history. 

Pakistan is for all Pakistanis if Pakistani Hindus want to celebrate raja Dahir then great, if those ancestors with syed background want to acknowledge bin qasim fine. Pathans with ghauri/durrani, mirza/chughtais/baigs with Mughal empire. jats with scythians or Huns I don't have a problem with that....

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Apprentice said:


> As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim. But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.
> 
> Its not just Pakistanis Indians have this problem with. I remember a Kashmiri Facebook page where Kashmiris celebrated Muhammad Bin Qasim as their hero and Indians were outraged.
> 
> So make your choice. Who is your hero?


*Both*. It's like asking the British "who is your hero? William the Conqueror or Harold at Battle of Hastings. Both played a role in making of British history. Ditto MB-Qasim and R-Dahir.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Proudpakistaniguy

Apprentice said:


> As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim. But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.
> 
> Its not just Pakistanis Indians have this problem with. I remember a Kashmiri Facebook page where Kashmiris celebrated Muhammad Bin Qasim as their hero and Indians were outraged.
> 
> So make your choice. Who is your hero?


dont worry about insecure Indians because they will never be happy in boht cases. many Pakistani who call themselves jats/Raputs/gujjars etc aka from hindu ancestry...Indian call them fake and when they feel for Muslim and has emotional attachment with their religion Islam then they give them label of arab . They dont realize that Race/culture and religion are two different thing . Followers of Islam come from different cultures and races

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Apprentice

Atanz said:


> *Both*. It's like asking the British "who is your hero? William the Conqueror or Harold at Battle of Hastings. Both played a role in making of British history. Ditto MB-Qasim and R-Dahir.



Wrong. Pakistan was based on two nation theory. According to which each nation had different heroes. Here is what Quaid e Azam said: 

''It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders, and it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality, and this misconception of one Indian nation has troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans (Muslims) derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. *Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap.* 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 for the government of such a state.''

I believe its the enemies of Pakistan and two nation ttheory as well as enemies of Muslims who would want to identify with Raja Dahir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

@Apprentice In case you suffer from amnesia or missed your history lesson "Two Nation Theory" died in 1971. Now it is "Three Nation Theory".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Apprentice

Atanz said:


> @Apprentice In case you suffer from amnesia or missed your history lesson "Two Nation Theory" died in 1971. Now it is "Three Nation Theory".



In that case you should go to Bangladesh if you believe Bengalis are the 3rd nation. Pakistan is for those who believe in the exclusively Muslim nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## barbarosa

Atanz said:


> @Apprentice In case you suffer from amnesia or missed your history lesson "Two Nation Theory" died in 1971. Now it is "Three Nation Theory".


NO Sir! the two nation theory is a live, because the Bengali were not convert in Hinduism again in 1971 but they made a separate country for their selves.The two nation theory was made for Hindu nation and Muslim nation, Not for Indian nation and Pakistani nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## unbiasedopinion

Apprentice said:


> But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.


How funny is it, the orginal post talks about how confuse the hindus are , but in this thread so far, i see the confusion among the pakistani about their true identity..Please iron out your differences first before opening these kind of silly thread and then fighting among yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## barbarosa

valluvan said:


> Honest question to pakistanis , do you really believe you guys r from arab ancestry, as per my knowledge sindhis,punjabis, pathans all r no way related to arab culture, before 7th century your ancestors r either followed hinduism or budhism. After your ancestors defeated by Muhammad bin quassim majority of your ancestors embraced islam


Sir Islam does not related with any culture but the man of every culture can be Muslim, such as Indian Muslim, Afghani Muslim, American Muslim, Russian Muslim, Chines Muslim British Muslim etc.
We love Arabic language because 1- the holy Quran is in the Arabic language.
2- The Holy Prophet PBUH was an Arabic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jamwal's

barbarosa said:


> NO Sir! the two nation theory is a live, because the Bengali were not convert in Hinduism again in 1971 but they made a separate country for their selves.The two nation theory was made for Hindu nation and Muslim nation, Not for Indian nation and Pakistani nation.


There was never an intention to annex Bangladesh or to convert BD Muslims in 1971.India didn't even annexed Hindu majority districts of BD in 1971.

And if it was the intention,Indians would've revolted against our own Govt.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Erhabi

Atanz said:


> @Apprentice In case you suffer from amnesia or missed your history lesson "Two Nation Theory" died in 1971. Now it is "Three Nation Theory".



Two nation theory still exists. 1971 was a conspiracy against Pakistan Just like they are stirring up conspiracy in Balochistan today. East Pakistan was too far away to be defended from those bastards anyway If you still wish to live in ignorance thn go to India and eat beef biryani to find out the truth.


----------



## barbarosa

valluvan said:


> You r right islam does not discriminate anyone on the basis of ethnicity. Here it is not about religion, but historical events, you cannot deny sindhis,punjabis.pathans,Kashmiri (basically pakistanis ) r once either budhist or hindus , they fought against arab invaders and lost their war and changed the religion


You do not understand my point of view, How many Punjabi are Muslim in their Punjabi culture and how many Punjabi are Hindu in their Punjabi culture.
How many Sindhi are Muslim in their Sindhi culture and how many are Hindu in their Sindhi culture.
How many Bengali are Muslim in their own culture and how many Bengali are Hindu with their Bengali culture.


----------



## Red-Bull

Indians don't like the history of arab invaders

Pakistan owes it's existence to them

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
11


----------



## omega supremme

Apprentice said:


> So make your choice. Who is your hero?




Whom do you exactly ask this question ? If this question implies to Muslim then our hero shall be of course Mohammad Bin Qasim




Apprentice said:


> But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.




By India be specific is it Hindus or Muslims, for India is a nation of many religions and not specific to one religious group and why would hindus celebrate a Muslims victory for he destroyed their temples and converted them to Islam


----------



## Airdef95

Dervesh786 said:


> in fact I dare say even Hindus do not know where they begin and where they end.


I once read a book "Dimensions of Pakistan movement". First 14 pages are worth reading. 
Its interesting to know about Hindus, their history and their psyche. I even posted about it a few months ago and an Indian called me "delusional". Its funny to know how arrogant and ignorant they are about themselves. 
http://www.riazhaq.com/2010/07/hindutva-distortions-whitewash-history.html
They're even good in manipulating facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Iggy

Leave all that, first tell me who is Muhammad Bin Qasim.??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmaputra Mail

Muhammad Bin Qasim was a medieval Kar Sevak who destroyed and plundered temples just like Kar Sevaks destroyed Babri Masjid. It's a shame plunderers are glorified.


----------



## pak-marine

Apprentice said:


> As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim.
> 
> So make your choice. Who is your hero?



You have already answered however will ask u again if the choice is btw religion and pakistan .. What will you choose ?


----------



## Brahmaputra Mail

Dervesh786 said:


> our ancestors were not Hindus



Yup you were outsiders. Just like Ashkenazi Jews in British Mandate of Palestine.
Ashkenazi Jews were considered outsiders by Palestinian Arabs. Ashkenazi Jews demanded Israel. Muslims argue that outsiders have no right to demand for partition of their land.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

valluvan said:


> Honest question to pakistanis , do you really believe you guys r from arab ancestry, as per my knowledge sindhis,punjabis, pathans all r no way related to arab culture, before 7th century your ancestors r either followed hinduism or budhism. After your ancestors defeated by Muhammad bin quassim majority of your ancestors embraced islam


Bhai, who says that...? No one does; if we had a choice from being other than Pakistani - Arabs and Indians would be the last thing to choose. We just celebrate him the same way as we celebrate Mahmud or Saladin. Our ancestors were never really defeated by Muhammad bin Qassim; he just conquered portions of Sindh. Majority of our ancestors were not even Hindus; they primarily followed Buddhism, Animism, Shamanism, Zoroastrianism, and tribal religions. The only region where Hinduism was strong, was south Sindh.

Our ancestors embraced Islam because of the Sufi missionaries not because of Muhammad bin Qasim.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## omega supremme

valluvan said:


> Honest question to pakistanis , do you really believe you guys r from arab ancestry




Arabs are also part of Pakistani's as many Arabs settled down after coming over here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Apprentice

pak-marine said:


> You have already answered however will ask u again if the choice is btw religion and pakistan .. What will you choose ?



Religion.

Remember that Pakistan was made for religion.

Before 1947, at that time we were Indians and we had to choose between our country India and our religion.

Had our forefathers not chosen religion then there would have been no Pakistan.


Putting religion second to Pakistan is actually being anti-Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Sliver

@Apprentice - would you like anyone glorifying a guy who had destroyed mosques and decapitated Muslims? An invader for some is a leader for others. some Indians in PDF believe Pakistan was a "converted" set of peoples from the Indian land - originally Hindus/buddhists/jains who were converted by invaders who destroyed their temples and took away their brethren

What you are looking for here (going by your past posts) is little more than stirring up sentiments. Why do you care of Indians do not like what Pakistanis think or do?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Shankranthi

Sliver said:


> @Apprentice - would you like anyone glorifying a guy who had destroyed mosques and decapitated Muslims? An invader for some is a leader for others. some Indians in PDF believe Pakistan was a "converted" set of peoples from the Indian land - originally Hindus/buddhists/jains who were converted by invaders who destroyed their temples and took away their brethren
> 
> What you are looking for here (going by your past posts) is little more than stirring up sentiments. Why do you care of Indians do not like what Pakistanis think or do?



Its not a "Belief" that pdf Indians have, its just an historical fact. 

The mountain range in Pakistan is called "Hindu kush", in persian it means the "Mountain of Dead Hindus"

Why do you think that name came into existence ? 

To deny history is to deny your roots.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## barbarosa

I my self pay tribute to those authors of Medical and engineering books of India which are teaching in Pakistan Medical and engineering universities, but i am wondering on those historians of India ( after 1947) who are perfidy of their name HISTORIAN. They create a new history according to their thoughts.


----------



## Kambojaric

Atanz said:


> *Both*. It's like asking the British "who is your hero? William the Conqueror or Harold at Battle of Hastings. Both played a role in making of British history. Ditto MB-Qasim and R-Dahir.



Essentially how I feel about the two as well. If one studies history objectively without mixing it up with ones own personal beliefs and agendas, then undoubtedly both Dahir and Qasim in their own ways have played a part in the story of Pakistan. There is no point in denying either one, as then we are denying a part of ourselves and our history.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Apprentice

Shankranthi said:


> Its not a "Belief" that pdf Indians have, its just an historical fact.
> 
> The mountain range in Pakistan is called "Hindu kush", in persian it means the "Mountain of Dead Hindus"
> 
> Why do you think that name came into existence ?
> 
> To deny history is to deny your roots.



My roots are in Kashmir Valley.


As for the etymology you claim for Hindu Kush's name, then thats a myth.


----------



## Srinivas

Yes a rich tradition of singing praise about conquerors who killed, looted, and did all bad things to Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Apprentice

Srinivas said:


> Yes a rich tradition of singing praise about conquerors who killed, looted, and did all bad things to Pakistan.



It was India at that time. Pakistan, as an ideology, began with Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Apprentice

AkshayS said:


> What do you mean by Indians? Muslims of India consider him as a hero. Leftists have no problem with him.
> 
> Muhammad Bin Qasim ravaged Sindh. If Muslims of Pakistan have a stockholm syndrome. Why should others care?
> 
> Irrespective of attrocities commited on Hindus, Muhamad Bin Qasin, Ghazni and Ghouri were pious Muslims and champions of Islam. I don't see a reason why Muslims should not consider them as heroes.



Tell that to Indians who comment on Dawn news pages and say trash about our love for Muhammad bin Qasim


----------



## barbarosa

I would like to say that there is no concept of heroism in Islam. If a person help to Islam he/she help him/her self.
The person who help or effort for Islam he/she will get compensation from God during this life and after death.


----------



## 911

Well to be frank Pakistan is there because of Islamic invasions. Pakistan was created for Islam is a fact. And that they share different heroes, history, civilization, etc etc

"The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap." - M. A. Jinnah.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hussain0216

For good or bad they were the initial sword thrust of muslims into the belly of hindus, 

Ceaser, Alexander, Napoleon, Saladeen, Suleman the Magnificent, Qasim, Baber conquerors will always leave a lasting mark on the world 

There conquest of india and whatever it bought with it was necessary 


We could never support a hindu over muslim conquerors

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Spring Onion

hussain0216 said:


> For good or bad they were the initial sword thrust of muslims into the belly of hindus,
> 
> Ceaser, Alexander, Napoleon, Saladeen, Suleman the Magnificent, Qasim, Baber conquerors will always leave a lasting mark on the world
> 
> There conquest of india and whatever it bought with it was necessary
> 
> 
> We could never support a hindu over muslim conquerors



The problem with Indian Hindus is that they see it as Muslim while the Problem with Pakistani Muslims is that they also see it as Muslim  .

We must see it as great expeditions and expansionist movements which are BTW had always been bloody in the history.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cloud4000

Apprentice said:


> In that case you should go to Bangladesh if you believe Bengalis are the 3rd nation. Pakistan is for those who believe in the exclusively Muslim nation.





barbarosa said:


> NO Sir! the two nation theory is a live, because the Bengali were not convert in Hinduism again in 1971 but they made a separate country for their selves.The two nation theory was made for Hindu nation and Muslim nation, Not for Indian nation and Pakistani nation.



This comes from Wikipedia's entry on Two-Nation Theory:

The *two-nation theory* (Urdu: دوقومی نظریہ‎ — _Dō-qaumī naẓariyah_, Devanagari: दो-क़ौमी नज़रिया, Bengali: দ্বিজাতি তত্ত্ব — _Dijati totto_) is the ideology that the primary identity and unifying denominator of Muslims in the South Asian subcontinent is their religion, rather than their language or ethnicity, and therefore Indian Hindus and Muslims are two distinct nations, regardless of ethnic or other commonalities.[1][2] The two-nation theory was a founding principle of the Pakistan Movement (i.e. the ideology of Pakistan as a Muslim nation-state in South Asia), and the partition of India in 1947.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-nation_theory

The creation of Bangladesh proves that religion is not enough to create a nation, but one has to actually take into account cultural factors like language, food, music, art, etc. Putting the Two-Nation theory in a large context, wouldn't the Caliphate still be here if the theory was valid? Even in current day Pakistan, there are still ethnic tension and linguistic difference even though everybody is a Muslim

On the the issue of Mohammed bin Qasim:

Personally, I don't care what historical figures Pakistan likes to attach itself to, it's their business. I just find it interesting how a bunch of converted people think they have Arab, Persian, and Turkish blood flowing through their veins.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## somebozo

Not only the Indians but also no body likes him in Sindh..MBQ is a post-Bhutto era hero created out of Islamic socialism..otherwise MBQ came with a sole purpose of conquest, loot, plunder and rape..

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Joe Shearer

Malik Abdullah said:


> Two nation theory still exists. 1971 was a conspiracy against Pakistan Just like they are stirring up conspiracy in Balochistan today. East Pakistan was too far away to be defended from those bastards anyway If you still wish to live in ignorance thn go to India and eat beef biryani to find out the truth.



Anytime.

I live in Hyderabad. This bastard will be happy to entertain any bastard who wants a good biryani, beef, mutton or chicken, or a pork vindaloo or pork chops. Anything goes with us bastards.



barbarosa said:


> You do not understand my point of view, How many Punjabi are Muslim in their Punjabi culture and how many Punjabi are Hindu in their Punjabi culture.
> How many Sindhi are Muslim in their Sindhi culture and how many are Hindu in their Sindhi culture.
> How many Bengali are Muslim in their own culture and how many Bengali are Hindu with their Bengali culture.



Now I'm really confused.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Bhai, who says that...? No one does; if we had a choice from being other than Pakistani - Arabs and Indians would be the last thing to choose. We just celebrate him the same way as we celebrate Mahmud or Saladin. Our ancestors were never really defeated by Muhammad bin Qassim; he just conquered portions of Sindh. Majority of our ancestors were not even Hindus; they primarily followed Buddhism, Animism, Shamanism, Zoroastrianism, and tribal religions. The only region where Hinduism was strong, was south Sindh.
> 
> Our ancestors embraced Islam because of the Sufi missionaries not because of Muhammad bin Qasim.



What religion did the Punjab follow, before the Sultanate?



Apprentice said:


> My roots are in Kashmir Valley.
> 
> 
> As for the etymology you claim for Hindu Kush's name, then thats a myth.



That sounded like a whine, not a rebuttal.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Joe Shearer

Airdef95 said:


> I once read a book "Dimensions of Pakistan movement". First 14 pages are worth reading.
> Its interesting to know about Hindus, their history and their psyche. I even posted about it a few months ago and an Indian called me "delusional". Its funny to know how arrogant and ignorant they are about themselves.
> http://www.riazhaq.com/2010/07/hindutva-distortions-whitewash-history.html
> They're even good in manipulating facts.



If I had read this before, I'd have done more than call you delusional, @Airdef95 . I'd have gone for you horse, foot and artillery. If you'd like to call me arrogant and ignorant about India, or south Asia, or history in general, please go ahead; a bit of seasoning goes well with all styles and types of cooking.

Haq is such a t*rd. 

By himself, I tend to ignore him with the purest contempt, because he builds a superstructure of nonsensical type and proportions, filled with venom, on a sound foundation. It is when he influences the unwary that I begin to get anxious about the huge mental damage that he causes.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Airdef95

Joe Shearer said:


> . I'd have gone for you horse, foot and artillery.


I like that.


----------



## SrNair

Apprentice said:


> As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim. But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.
> 
> Its not just Pakistanis Indians have this problem with. I remember a Kashmiri Facebook page where Kashmiris celebrated Muhammad Bin Qasim as their hero and Indians were outraged.
> 
> So make your choice. Who is your hero?



Confused ??
Why should we confused about your own doubt ?
We have clear picture about our history and culture .We knows who is right and wrong ?
Any why why should you cares about our opinion ?


----------



## Cherokee

Airdef95 said:


> I like that.



What a cringe worthy comeback somehow trying to overcompensate with the use of a smiley .

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Airdef95 said:


> I like that.



Old-fashioned phrase, fit for use by an old-fashioned person. 



Cherokee said:


> What a cringe worthy comeback somehow trying to overcompensate with the use of a smiley .



Why? I liked his amused response. Cringe-worthy? Aren't you being very harsh?



barbarosa said:


> I would like to say that there is no concept of heroism in Islam. If a person help to Islam he/she help him/her self.
> The person who help or effort for Islam he/she will get compensation from God during this life and after death.



Forgive me, but that sounds terribly contractual.


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Iggy said:


> Leave all that, first tell me who is Muhammad Bin Qasim.??


Exactly the average Indian perception.

Muhamud Bin Qasim is newly introduced name to modern Indians from Pakistan, probably because Arabs invasions of India had hardly any effect on Indian history considered how badly they were defeated.







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

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Airdef95

Joe Shearer said:


> Old-fashioned phrase, fit for use by an old-fashioned person.


What is so old fashioned in that? I only said that i like your resentment over my views about India.
After all _patriotism is a conviction that the country you were born in is superior to the others. _


----------



## Joe Shearer

Airdef95 said:


> What is so old fashioned in that? I only said that i like your resentment over my views about India.
> After all _patriotism is a conviction that the country you were born in is superior to the others. _



??

I was talking about my phrase.


----------



## Adonis

barbarosa said:


> NO Sir! the two nation theory is a live, because the Bengali were not convert in Hinduism again in 1971 but they made a separate country for their selves.The two nation theory was made for Hindu nation and Muslim nation, Not for Indian nation and Pakistani nation.



Though I don't have anything concerning...but want to point out you are contradicting your own statement above. Bangladesh was formed out of Muslim Pakistan Not Hindu India.....Two nation theory says Muslims and Hindus can't live together...did it say, Muslims and Muslims also can't live together??

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Gauss

Pakistanis' attachment with arabs is a prime example of how blinding and misleading religion can be. Even when belonging to the greatest race of human history they prefer associating themselves with a race that clearly comes second to theirs through the marathon of time. The Indo-European race has changed the destiny of man forever. By unlocking the secrets of nature this race has lifted the humanity to a whole different level of existence. The Semitic race, though impressive in its achievements can only come a distant second to the indo-europeans. But Pakistanis oblivious to their reality would make their sidekicks their lords.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
4


----------



## barbarosa

Adonis said:


> Though I don't have anything concerning...but want to point out you are contradicting your own statement above. Bangladesh was formed out of Muslim Pakistan Not Hindu India.....Two nation theory says Muslims and Hindus can't live together...did it say, Muslims and Muslims also can't live together??


According to your post, if i acknowledge your comments then the two nation theory was failed since 1947, because the millions of Muslims were lived in India after partition,They all were not migrated to Pakistan.


----------



## ifesvr

Gauss said:


> Pakistanis' attachment with arabs is a prime example of how blinding and misleading religion can be. Even when *belonging to the greatest race of human history *they prefer associating themselves with *a race that clearly comes second to theirs *through the marathon of time. The *Indo-European race has changed the destiny of man forever*. By unlocking the secrets of nature *this race has lifted the humanity to a whole different level of existence*. *The Semitic race*, though impressive in its achievements can only *come a distant second to the indo-europeans*. But Pakistanis oblivious to their reality would make their sidekicks their lords.




What are you...writing Mein Kampf 2? Who speaks this language nowadays..Seriously get yourself checked!!!


----------



## Gauss

ifesvr said:


> What are you...writing Mein Kampf 2? Who speaks this language nowadays..Seriously get yourself checked!!!


I am not a racist at all. I am only elucidating that this race had the most profound effect on the human saga so far. Race is not something with which to differentiate and base battle of survival on this differentiation. It is just a biological archetype. Its just like how you take pride when someone from your family achieves something big.
While we are at it why not enjoy this video. A tribute to Indo-europeans through their ancient pagan religion of hinduism.
PS. Ignore the old man at the start.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
2


----------



## Majet Raha

I can see two types of thoughts here, one who follows Arabs blindly and hence follow its invader MBQ. Others are little thoughful and say that their ancestry is of Hindu/Buddhist and or Jainism.
Let me tell you that word, or religion, Hindu is very new in this world. Our ancestors followd Vedik Dharma (Religion) which was followd till far east till Indonesia and till far west as Arabstan (Arvasthan meaning land of Horses), mind you when you read word 'stan' in any country ending it is Sanskrit word 'Sthan' meaning land. 
Now, we have all this land and its people followed same Vedic religion, but after advent of Islam the first thing that is happened is they lost Mecca (Makkheswar mandir) if you read history carefully the invadors first broke 360 idols at Mecca and kept only one which is 'Sangay Aswed' (what does this word signifies? Sanghey Aswed means 'Something which is not white' (Aswed menas not white) and is Black, the stone is black. and thus the name Sanghey Aswed.

If you remember the king of England also took their oath and kingsmanship sitting on stone of scone, which is another stone. 

Not going into tooo much of depth as this is going off topic.

We should stop glorifying the invaders and start respecting our defenders. And guys no hatred here and this should be a thread where we learn from each other.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
1


----------



## Gauss

Tricolor said:


> are u high ?
> i never saw single Pakistani praising Hinduism or ancient Indian Things.
> 
> FYI, Aryan is Indo-Iranian word only according to Modern Historians. and Indo-European is a fabricated term created in 1900s when Racism against Brown folks was Normal.


The existence of an Indo-european people have been theorized on linguistic evidence. First linguists discerned that european, iranian and indian languages are a single family of languages. Then they proposed a single proto-indo-european language from which all these languages came from. And the speakers of that proto-indo-european language were logically recognized as the ancestors of all the indo-european people. Those ancestors of indo-european people had a religion similar to hinduism/brahmanism. Because hinduism is the religion brought by the branch of indo-european people that came towards south asia. Those people called themselves aria stylized aryan.


----------



## Maira La

Majet Raha said:


> Now, we have all this land and its people followed same Vedic religion, *but after advent of Islam the first thing that is happened is they lost Mecca (Makkheswar mandir)* if you read history carefully the invadors first broke 360 idols at Mecca and kept only one which is 'Sangay Aswed' (what does this word signifies?



Either you Sanghis are absolutely insane... or Modi was right:

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Majet Raha

Maira La said:


> Either you Sanghis are absolutely insane... or Modi was right:


Go ahead and mock me all the time, but the truth is what i'm saying.

Above image dialogue never happened and even i can put some idiotic memes like this. No rocket science.

When someone try to tell you your (and mine) ancestry why you guys always behave the you did above?

What were the people before Islam appeared on the scene? This temple pf Makkheshwar was always there with its god, nothing is changed now. The temple is still there and its god as well, also the circumbulation that you guys do with a white unstiched robe, shave your head, bring home sacred water from Zamzam, all these are typical Vedic religion rituals. Even now the Saudis are trying to remove the symbols of old Vedic religion by undertaking major changes in Mecca, google it.

Open your eyes and see the Vedic footprints from Mecca to Pakistan and you will see them everywhere. Even after 1500 years you were not able to remove them, tell a big story of what kind of religion it was.

Let me reiterate again, i dont care what path to god you follow now. But the god will remain the same. You still worship the same god as ancient times.

And dont get hurt if someone like me put posts like this. I'm not trying to hurt you, your feelings or your religion. I respect every religion as it is, but you should have broader horizon and liberated thinking.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tergon18

The type of Hinduism that was practiced in the Indus Region (Pakistan) was different to that of the Ganges and Dravidia. Adi Shankaraya, an 8th Century (something around that) marked the four corners of India and none of those corners were in present day Pakistan. Pakistan was more influenced by Buddhism (due to Gandharans) and Rig Vedic Hinduism since the Rig Veda was formed solely in Punjab, while India was still forested and inhabited by aborginal tribes. Rig Vedic Hinduism was monotheistic and had no references to caste. Mahabhatata and Ramayana (formed around the Ganges Region) refers to Punjab as Bahlika, the land where caste and traditional Hinduism isnt practiced. Thats why Punjabis, Sindhis etc. converted to Islam by efforts of various Sufi saints. Almost every village in Pakistan has a shrine of a Sufi saint.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tiger7

For most Indians it is rather amusing that Pakistanis celebrate the Arab invader Bin Qasim
who conquered the region of Pakistan in the 8th century. On the other hand Indians celebrate their ancestors like the Pratihara Dynasty of north India and the Chalukya Dynasty of south India which defeated the Arab invaders in the early 8th century and protected whole India. Pakistanis even produced movies about Bin Qasim who did nothing else than defeat and subjugate the ancestors of Pakistanis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mugwop

Maira La said:


> Either you Sanghis are absolutely insane... or Modi was right:


Aw man I wish I can give you a positive rating for this post. 
Even a crack head knows that all pagans were not hindus and before Islam saudi was ruled by arab pagans and arab atheists. I don't know why these sadists try to put false claims on lands they can't annex.

Dahir made too many mistakes that's why he lost against a young Qasim.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussain0216

Tiger7 said:


> For most Indians it is rather amusing that Pakistanis celebrate the Arab invader Bin Qasim
> who conquered the region of Pakistan in the 8th century. On the other hand Indians celebrate their ancestors like the Pratihara Dynasty of north India and the Chalukya Dynasty of south India which defeated the Arab invaders in the early 8th century and protected whole India. Pakistanis even produced movies about Bin Qasim who did nothing else than defeat and subjugate the ancestors of Pakistanis.



The ancestors of south Asians were pagan Jahils worshipping weird stone statues and all manner of weirdness 

The ancestors of thw arabs were not much different 

We celebrate the warriors who initiated the end of this nonsense and heralded the destruction of Hinduism in our lands.

Muslim warriors and armies however conquered the vast majority of india

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiger7

hussain0216 said:


> The ancestors of south Asians were pagan Jahils worshipping weird stone statues and all manner of weirdness
> 
> The ancestors of thw arabs were not much different
> 
> We celebrate the warriors who initiated the end of this nonsense and heralded the destruction of Hinduism in our lands.
> 
> Muslim warriors and armies however conquered the vast majority of india


Most of these invaders were Turks who were not interested in spreading Islam. They were not even real Muslims as they were described in Indian, Persian and even Arab texts as barbarians who were addicted to alcohol and opium. These Turkic invaders were only interested in loot and plunder and were responsible for the spread of several barbaric traditions in Afghanistan and Pakistan like Bacha Bazi. For the spread of Islam
there was no need for an invasion. Countries like Malaysia and Indonesia are Muslim today despite of the fact that there was never a Muslim invasion and these countries are more developed and stable than Afghanistan and Pakistan because there was never a Turkic invasion in those regions. Even in South Asia there are regions like Sri Lanka and
parts of southern India which are more developed and stable than Pakistan or Afghanistan because those regions
were never under Turkic rule. Today Afghanistan is the worst country in South Asia as it was for the longest time
under Turkic rule which led to the spread of tribalism and extremism.


----------



## Tiger Genie

Most muslims of India including where Pakistan was put in 1947 were converted to islam by succession of invaders. But we can safely conclude that most such converted people are long gone - current day muslims were born into islamic homes, so there is no sense in attributing any Hindu stuff to them.

Now many of them don't like to admit their ancestry because Indians start making fun of them which indians should stop. So they start making up wild motivations such as
 https://defence.pk/threads/why-do-indians-dislike-pakistani-attachment-to-muhammad-bin-qasim.427062/page-4#post-8437303

why make them ashamed of their own ancestry? they did not have any role in the conversion. It was the barbaric invaders who put the sword to their neck and thus brought infamy to islam. It is those invaders that should ashamed, not the muslims of Indian subcontinent who were mere victims

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hussain0216

Tiger Genie said:


> Most muslims of India including where Pakistan was put in 1947 were converted to islam by succession of invaders. But we can safely conclude that most such converted people are long gone - current day muslims were born into islamic homes, so there is no sense in attributing any Hindu stuff to them.
> 
> Now many of them don't like to admit their ancestry because Indians start making fun of them which indians should stop. So they start making up wild motivations such as
> https://defence.pk/threads/why-do-indians-dislike-pakistani-attachment-to-muhammad-bin-qasim.427062/page-4#post-8437303
> 
> why make them ashamed of their own ancestry? they did not have any role in the conversion. It was the barbaric invaders who put the sword to their neck and thus brought infamy to islam. It is those invaders that should ashamed, not the muslims of Indian subcontinent who were mere victims




What most hindus refuse to accept

That muslims see idol worship and paganism as beneath contempt and rhe idea of humans worshipping idols is abhorrent


Islam is a world wide faith which inspired people from Africa to Europe to South East Asia to Russia, it enlightened rhem and cut their beliefs in the old mumbo jumbo superstition and worship of idols and obscenities

People in the sub continent abandoned Hinduism because it was not worthy of humanity, it was not worthy of us

Our ancestors mercifully chose the path of the one God like multi millions across the world have

This was part of rhe 1000 years of humiliation forced upon the hindus, todays hindus who love fake stories and revisionist history refuse to accept that so many former hindus abandoned hinduism for a superior world wide faith out of choice not compulsion

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SrNair

Apprentice said:


> As we are Muslim first we are of course going to identify with Bin Qasim. But many Indians are still confused as to how we celebrate his victory even though our ancestors were 'Hindus'.
> 
> Its not just Pakistanis Indians have this problem with. I remember a Kashmiri Facebook page where Kashmiris celebrated Muhammad Bin Qasim as their hero and Indians were outraged.
> 
> So make your choice. Who is your hero?



Why should you concern about Indians opinion?
If you believe in Qasim so be it .If Indians hate them it is their choice .


----------



## my2cents

-


barbarosa said:


> NO Sir! the two nation theory is a live, because the Bengali were not convert in Hinduism again in 1971 but they made a separate country for their selves.The two nation theory was made for Hindu nation and Muslim nation, Not for Indian nation and Pakistani nation.



It was not that you can't live with hindus, but it was that you wanted separate nation to practice your religion and not come under hindu majority influence and culture. This insulation to protect your religion and culture is desired by your people and there is nothing wrong in that. Calling it two nation theory was a political motivation and a rallying cry to unify your people. In that sense it was brilliant move, but to extend it any further to unify your nation now and you fall flat because it rests on a shaky foundation. Sooner you abandon it, it is better.


----------



## Tiger Genie

hussain0216 said:


> What most hindus refuse to accept
> 
> That muslims see idol worship and paganism as beneath contempt and rhe idea of humans worshipping idols is abhorrent
> 
> 
> Islam is a world wide faith which inspired people from Africa to Europe to South East Asia to Russia, it enlightened rhem and cut their beliefs in the old mumbo jumbo superstition and worship of idols and obscenities
> 
> People in the sub continent abandoned Hinduism because it was not worthy of humanity, it was not worthy of us
> 
> Our ancestors mercifully chose the path of the one God like multi millions across the world have
> 
> This was part of rhe 1000 years of humiliation forced upon the hindus, todays hindus who love fake stories and revisionist history refuse to accept that so many former hindus abandoned hinduism for a superior world wide faith out of choice not compulsion



Can you blame them? ofcourse they don't accept this nonsense because it is just a bunch of foaming invective born of impotent anger. Also known as severe lack of identity manifesting as hatred and rage.

You have actually proven what I said about guys like you. This is exactly why I advise Indians to stop even the perception of making fun of muslims


----------



## khanz

No offence but it seems like a ridiculous question really-Indian hindus have every right to dislike it he came as an invader and conquered their lands.They're not muslims why would they support an arab victory over their own people ? obviously don't care about spread of islam like pakistanis do.It's absolutely as they should do and any native population would resist a foreign invader .
It's like asking native americans why they dislike white americans attachment to columbus or pilgrim settlers. 
btw I voted Raja Dahir.


----------



## somebozo

the so called attachment to MBQ only exisit in the newer generation of Pakistani punjabis..thanks to doctor history coming right out of raiwind madrasas...and the second group of people to love MBQ are urdu speaking mohajirs..who has no roots and no clue about the history of the region..any sane and rationa man would see MBQ as a invader who came to loot and plunder..why would somebody have an appreciation for such man???

Turning looters and plunderers into hero's is what we are seeing daily in Pakistan today...these so called Talibans are simply emulating the ways of MBQ, Mehmud Ghazni and Ghauri...why dont we allocate one more spot for the great mujahid Osama Binladen as well?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Finer

Kaptaan said:


> @Apprentice In case you suffer from amnesia or missed your history lesson "Two Nation Theory" died in 1971. Now it is "Three Nation Theory".



Technically, it didn't. While Bangladesh sought independence from Pakistan, Bangladesh is still Muslim nation and proud be one. Two nations theory is based on the religion grounds, and precisely why Pakistan was born. If Bangladesh became part of Indian, then it will question the narrative of "Two Nation Theory". Bangladesh is still Muslim independence nation which is the whole point fazed Indians technically.


----------



## Tiger7

hussain0216 said:


> What most hindus refuse to accept
> 
> That muslims see idol worship and paganism as beneath contempt and rhe idea of humans worshipping idols is abhorrent
> 
> 
> Islam is a world wide faith which inspired people from Africa to Europe to South East Asia to Russia, it enlightened rhem and cut their beliefs in the old mumbo jumbo superstition and worship of idols and obscenities
> 
> People in the sub continent abandoned Hinduism because it was not worthy of humanity, it was not worthy of us
> 
> Our ancestors mercifully chose the path of the one God like multi millions across the world have
> 
> This was part of rhe 1000 years of humiliation forced upon the hindus, todays hindus who love fake stories and revisionist history refuse to accept that so many former hindus abandoned hinduism for a superior world wide faith out of choice not compulsion


The only people who were humiliated for 1000 years were the ancestors of Pakistanis who were conquered, subjugated and ruled for 1000 years by Arabs, Turks and Mongols.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger7 said:


> The only people who were humiliated for 1000 years were the ancestors of Pakistanis who were conquered, subjugated and ruled for 1000 years by Arabs, Turks and Mongols.


Yes totally; brave Indians were never conquered by Muslims; it was only Pakistan was that conquered. Modern day India was never conquered by Arabs, Turks and Mongols. They remained unscratched.

These maps are all fake anti-Indian/Hindu propaganda

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Tiger7

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Yes totally; brave Indians were never conquered by Muslims; it was only Pakistan was that conquered. Modern day India was never conquered by Arabs, Turks and Mongols. They remained unscratched.
> 
> These maps are all fake anti-Indian/Hindu propaganda


Dont be ridiculous. The Mughal and Delhi Sultanate rule over the major part of India only lasted for 30 years as the Delhi Sultanate was defeated by the Vijayanagar Empire, the Rajputs and the eastern Ganga Dynasty and the Mughals were defeated by the Maratha Empire. On the other hand the ancestors of Pakistanis were ruled for 1000 years by Arabs, Turks and Mongols.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger7 said:


> Dont be ridiculous. The Mughal and Delhi Sultanate rule over the major part of India only lasted for 30 years as the Delhi Sultanate was defeated by the Vijayanagar Empire, the Rajputs and the eastern Ganga Dynasty and the Mughals were defeated by the Maratha Empire. On the other hand the ancestors of Pakistanis were ruled for 1000 years by Arabs, Turks and Mongols.


Stop with the BS kid; your capital itself was ruled for 600 years by the Mughals.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiger7

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Stop with the BS kid; your capital itself was ruled for 600 years by the Mughals.


Again wrong. Delhi was ruled for 200 years by the Mughals until they were defeated by the Maratha Empire in the early 18th century.


----------



## WhyCry

Kaptaan said:


> *Both*. It's like asking the British "who is your hero? William the Conqueror or Harold at Battle of Hastings. Both played a role in making of British history. Ditto MB-Qasim and R-Dahir.


Good selection of words, yes both played the part in history but it means who you call the hero? which means who is fighting for the correct reasons.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger7 said:


> Again wrong. Delhi was ruled for 200 years by the Mughals until they were defeated by the Maratha Empire in the early 18th century.


I meant by Muslims; still 30 years and 200 years is a huge difference. Muslims ruled Delhi for over 600 years.


----------



## Tiger7

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> I meant by Muslims; still 30 years and 200 years is a huge difference. Muslims ruled Delhi for over 600 years.


This does not matter as Delhi does not even comprise 2% of India`s land mass. On the other hand whole Pakistan was indeed ruled for 1000 years by Arabs, Turks and Mongols.


----------



## Tergon18

It was a political conflict and should be viewed with proper context with regards to it's time and era. Things aren't as black and white or good vs evil as people make them out to be.

Raja Dahir was a Brahmanic 'Hindu' King who was ruling a population mostly comprised of Jatts and Meds who were Buddhists, on whom it is said that he put several restrictions on and oppressed. The original motivation or cause of the invasion seems to be the raid of several Arab ships by Dahir's forces. During the invasion the local Jatts, Meds and Buddhist rulers of Nerun, Sewastan (Sehwan), Kaka Kolak etc. are said to have allied with the Arab forces against Dahir as noted in the Chachnama.

I agree with Kaptaan, both played an important part in the history of the region and should be left as thus. Modern day cultural, sociological or political dynamics should not be projected on to them. So my answer is neither.


----------



## SQ8

Let me save all this BS for Pakistanis..

Indians dislike Pakistanis period. We could lick their bums like a certain ex-area of Pakistan does and they still wont like us; that is the level of regressive hate that they now hold for Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## my2cents

Oscar said:


> Let me save all this BS for Pakistanis..
> 
> Indians dislike Pakistanis period. We could lick their bums like a certain ex-area of Pakistan does and they still wont like us; that is the level of regressive hate that they now hold for Pakistan.



Remember the statement by your general Zia that they would bleed India with thousand cuts. Don't play holy and mighty on us.


----------



## SQ8

my2cents said:


> Remember the statement by your general Zia that they would bleed India with thousand cuts. Don't play holy and mighty on us.


My general Zia? 
The man came as a dictator on a nation that had little knowledge; it is when supposed literates like you spew venom at times that would make the most hateful of ISIS supporters look benign.


----------



## my2cents

Oscar said:


> My general Zia?
> The man came as a dictator on a nation that had little knowledge; it is when supposed literates like you spew venom at times that would make the *most hateful of ISIS supporters look benign*.



It the generals in your country who hold the strings and whatever we spew on this forum will not change that. That is the frustration from our side.


----------



## Indika

Oscar said:


> Let me save all this BS for Pakistanis..
> 
> Indians dislike Pakistanis period. We could lick their bums like a certain ex-area of Pakistan does and they still wont like us; that is the level of regressive hate that they now hold for Pakistan.


No my dear its your meaningless in born hate which leads to think like that.

Musharraf was applauded when it was revealed he spent time on indian side of border. After kargil war Indians recommended bravery of pakistani soldiers inspite of pakistan abandoning them. Sports players applaud each other. So your reasoning falls flat.

Now culture , tradition , strength,victory , history ...etc all these things lead to creation of emotional character. Pakistan has none of it for major part of history. culture is to hate,tradition is to keep fighting, strength is terrorism,victory? stale mate is an achievement, history trying to claim India's.

Inferiority complex has lead to pakistan claiming bin qasim, ghaznavi...etc as heroes bcos all their ventures ended in disaster. This is akin to common ppl applauding heroes fighting in films bcos they are too cowards to fight in real life.

As far as your licking comments are concerned , Why do you want to stoop so low? its highly distasteful even for a comparison. India does not like bum or boot (military?) lickers whether it is US or china or SA.

I suggest pakistan to grow up, dont allow sheiks to hunt ,not to give up own land to china and finally abandoning ones own soldiers on the field deserves no respect. Indian PM walked across to the border to talk peace while your chief was busy capturing abandoned posts.

By the way porus lost the war we are still proud of that. We did not worship alexander. marathas , tipu lost to british we did not worship british either. Surrendering or losing is no humiliation but claiming some phorenwala who massacred locals as hero is emptiness with no known bounds.

Its not as if pakistan is bad in every thing, there are ppl whose achievements are worth to be proud of. But it seems their hate like yours has got better of it and makes them so blind that they cannot see who the true heroes are.

India has regressive hate? does pakistan has a mirror? hate for india has lead to its current state.

India and pakistan have serious differences but dont let that leave a bad legacy for your future generations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SQ8

my2cents said:


> It the generals in your country who hold the strings and whatever we spew on this forum will not change that. That is the frustration from our side.


Your frustration towards them is irrelevant, your frustration only strengthens that hate.. perhaps we should all prepare for nuclear war then as we are all frustrated.



Indika said:


> No my dear its your meaningless in born hate which leads to think like that.
> 
> Musharraf was applauded when it was revealed he spent time on indian side of border. After kargil war Indians recommended bravery of pakistani soldiers inspite of pakistan abandoning them. Sports players applaud each other. So your reasoning falls flat.
> 
> Now culture , tradition , strength,victory , history ...etc all these things lead to creation of emotional character. Pakistan has none of it for major part of history. culture is to hate,tradition is to keep fighting, strength is terrorism,victory? stale mate is an achievement, history trying to claim India's.
> 
> Inferiority complex has lead to pakistan claiming bin qasim, ghaznavi...etc as heroes bcos all their ventures ended in disaster. This is akin to common ppl applauding heroes fighting in films bcos they are too cowards to fight in real life.
> 
> As far as your licking comments are concerned , Why do you want to stoop so low? its highly distasteful even for a comparison. India does not like bum or boot (military?) lickers whether it is US or china or SA.
> 
> I suggest pakistan to grow up, dont allow sheiks to hunt ,not to donate land to china and finally abandoning ones own soldiers on the field deserves no respect. Indian PM walked across to the border to talk peace while your chief was busy capturing abandoned posts.
> 
> By the way porus lost the war we are still proud of that. We did not worship alexander. marathas , tipu lost to british we did not worship british either. Surrendering or losing is no humiliation but claiming some phorenwala who massacred locals as hero is emptiness with no known bounds.
> 
> Its not as if pakistan is bad in every thing, there are ppl whose achievements are worth to be proud of. But it seems their hate like yours has got better of it and makes them so blind that they cannot see who the true heroes are.
> 
> India and pakistan have serious differences but dont let that leave a bad legacy for your future generations.


The red is just your self righteous pompousness that is boring me, please take that to someone who has time for it.

The fact that you had to wait till the end to put that little condescending bit in green only solidifies my statement and affirms that the entire post is based on hypocrisy.


----------



## Stephen Cohen

Oscar said:


> Your frustration towards them is irrelevant, your frustration only strengthens that hate.. perhaps we should all prepare for nuclear war then as we are all frustrated.



But dont you agree that The Policy of death by a thousand cuts 
was supported by all Pakistanis as a tool to get Kashmir


----------



## SQ8

Stephen Cohen said:


> But dont you agree that The Policy of death by a thousand cuts
> was supported by all Pakistanis as a tool to get Kashmir


No. How do you know its all Pakistanis. I take over your house, tell you that I am better than you and then marry your daughter off to an old man saying its what religion says.. and you comply because you are illiterate, uneducated or are afraid.. did you want your daughter married off?


----------



## Stephen Cohen

Oscar said:


> No. How do you know its all Pakistanis. I take over your house, tell you that I am better than you and then marry your daughter off to an old man saying its what religion says.. and you comply because you are illiterate, uneducated or are afraid.. did you want your daughter married off?



I didnt get your point ; do you mean to say that Pakistani citizens actually 
opposed the Jihad against India


----------



## SQ8

Stephen Cohen said:


> I didnt get your point ; do you mean to say that Pakistani citizens actually
> opposed the Jihad against India


What Jihad? do you even read anything besides Indian news?
You dont!

That usage of Jihad only affirms that all that there is , is blind hate; Pakistanis by contrast know MUCH MUCH more about the world and opposing culture than the average Indian. The Kashmir conflict has RARELY been sold as Jihad within official circles. Our urban population knows the Kashmir conflict as a situation of people oppressed and want the UN to understand and work it out. There is MUCH MUCH more want of peace here than there will ever be in India, I am glad to be born in a society that forced us to learn about the world from every perspective. Our initial news came not from some propaganda national channel but well written news or magazines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stephen Cohen

Oscar said:


> What Jihad? do you even read anything besides Indian news?
> You dont!
> 
> That usage of Jihad only affirms that all that there is , is blind hate; Pakistanis by contrast know MUCH MUCH more about the world and opposing culture than the average Indian. The Kashmir conflict has RARELY been sold as Jihad within official circles. Our urban population knows the Kashmir conflict as a situation of people oppressed and want the UN to understand and work it out. There is MUCH MUCH more want of peace here than there will ever be in India, I am glad to be born in a society that forced us to learn about the world from every perspective. Our initial news came not from some propaganda national channel but well written news or magazines.



We in India Believe that Pakistani citizens were fully supportive of the Post 1989
violence in Kashmir

The people who crossed over into India were Pakistanis ; Afghans and only a few Kashmiris

Secondly there was financial support as well ; it goes on to this day

The LET and JEM get money from the people

Basically it is like this -- Though harsh but true

That Is IF Pakistan Army's Plan had succeeded-- that is
If things had gone according to plan it is India that should have been hurting now, not Pakistan.

The Pakistan army’s 28 years-old low-cost, high-impact strategy of covert warfare would have liberated Kashmir and secured Afghanistan from Indian influence.

Instead, there has been a fierce blowback -- Bad luck or Murphy's Law


----------



## halupridol

Oscar said:


> Let me save all this BS for Pakistanis..
> 
> Indians dislike Pakistanis,, period. We could lick their bums like a certain ex-area of Pakistan does and they still wont like us; that is the level of regressive hate that they now hold for Pakistan.


Indians




north Indians
the current India-Pakistan relations(or the lack of it) is the culmination of centuries of infighting,fear n mistrust within bhaiyyas(yes thr r othrs too,,but bhaiyya is the flag bearer)
n i agree this innate hate wont just go away,,,not by li(king bums nor by solving kashmir.
so,,probably bhaiyyas dislike bhaiyyas


----------



## Kabira

Indika said:


> By the way porus lost the war we are still proud of that.



Marathu bhai why are you proud of the fact ancient Pakistani lost the battle?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Allen Iverson

Proudpakistaniguy said:


> dont worry about insecure Indians because they will never be happy in boht cases. many Pakistani who call themselves jats/Raputs/gujjars etc aka from hindu ancestry...Indian call them fake and when they feel for Muslim and has emotional attachment with their religion Islam then they give them label of arab . They dont realize that Race/culture and religion are two different thing . Followers of Islam come from different cultures and races


Indian's don't even care about what religion or race you belong, as long as you keep your tools inside your territory.. First of all, as an Indian and a Hindu settled abroad, we have a notion in my motherland, that Islam was a religion of invaders which is true and hence we don't treat it a peaceful religion, we treat Islam with a caution, because of this so called historical hype that it was the religion of Invaders who invaded our mother land..
But Islam reached Indian sub continent long before Ghauris and Ghaznis in the form Arabic traders through sea.. I've seen a very old Masjid in Cochin, which is the port city.. But whether those traders impacted in spreading of any religion in India, the answer is no.. Because, they were just traders with business interests and religious thoughts were not so easily handled in those days.. So, the only way these many muslims, were created in Indian sub continent is by the force of sword and whip, which were handled by the invaders like Mughals, Turks etc..
According to us, the creation of Pakistan itself is a huge blunder, and due to Pussies like Nehru and Gandhi we were made to face it.. If at all a nation was created on the basis of Religion only, then all the muslims of Indian sub continent should've gone to Pakistan or east Pakistan, which didn't happen because it was a terrible idea..

So now we basically have this moment of irritation, when a muslim calls himself proud of his ancestory with Bin Qasim, because he neither have the blood lines of Qasim nor his followers.. They were simply Hindus who were converted by force and instead of dying while resisting the force they succumbed to it and made themselves muslims.. When someone robs you of your home and make himself the owner of that home, and just to stay in that home, you agreed to live by his terms and conditions and after sometime call yourself proud of it, makes us all laugh at those who says so, with puny..
@Abingdonboy @Sri @Rajaraja Chola @Trichy @TejasMk3



Malik Abdullah said:


> Two nation theory still exists. 1971 was a conspiracy against Pakistan Just like they are stirring up conspiracy in Balochistan today. East Pakistan was too far away to be defended from those *bastards* anyway If you still wish to live in ignorance thn go to India and eat beef biryani to find out the truth.


It is you who should fit the description of the bolded part above.. Not yet started full scale but Yes, we are trying to do in balochistan, what you are doing in Kashmir for decades.. Atleast stop whining like a female dog and face it with guts, Puny low life..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kabira

Allen Iverson said:


> Indian's don't even care about what religion or race you belong, as long as you keep your tools inside your territory.. First of all, as an Indian and a Hindu settled abroad, we have a notion in my motherland, that Islam was a religion of invaders which is true and hence we don't treat it a peaceful religion, we treat Islam with a caution, because of this so called historical hype that it was the religion of Invaders who invaded our mother land..
> But Islam reached Indian sub continent long before Ghauris and Ghaznis in the form Arabic traders through sea.. I've seen a very old Masjid in Cochin, which is the port city.. But whether those traders impacted in spreading of any religion in India, the answer is no.. Because, they were just traders with business interests and religious thoughts were not so easily handled in those days.. So, the only way these many muslims, were created in Indian sub continent is by the force of sword and whip, which were handled by the invaders like Mughals, Turks etc..
> According to us, the creation of Pakistan itself is a huge blunder, and due to Pussies like Nehru and Gandhi we were made to face it.. If at all a nation was created on the basis of Religion only, then all the muslims of Indian sub continent should've gone to Pakistan or east Pakistan, which didn't happen because it was a terrible idea..
> 
> So now we basically have this moment of irritation, when a muslim calls himself proud of his ancestory with Bin Qasim, because he neither have the blood lines of Qasim nor his followers.. They were simply Hindus who were converted by force and instead of dying while resisting the force they succumbed to it and made themselves muslims.. When someone robs you of your home and make himself the owner of that home, and just to stay in that home, you agreed to live by his terms and conditions and after sometime call yourself proud of it, makes us all laugh at those who says so, with puny..
> @Abingdonboy @Sri @Rajaraja Chola @Trichy @TejasMk3



Brother you're likely some tribal hindu like 90% of Indians forced to believe in fake identity of hindu (persian word) forced upon you by muslim invaders. People like you should be thankful to invaders from freeing you from brahmins. About your second point about forced conversions, I wonder why there are so many punjabi khatris baniyas migrants in India now days from west punjab, most docile people in punjab yet remained hindus. Proof there was no forced conversion.


----------



## Allen Iverson

save_ghenda said:


> Brother you're likely some tribal hindu like 90% of Indians forced to believe in fake identity of hindu (persian word) forced upon you by muslim invaders. People like you should be thankful to invaders from freeing you from brahmins. About your second point about forced conversions, I wonder why there are so many punjabi khatris baniyas migrants in India now days from west punjab, most docile people in punjab yet remained hindus. Proof there was no forced conversion.


I don't know what you refer about North Indian Ethnic people of Punjab, and Neither do I care.. My ancestoral origins is from south India, and my ancestors have faced, the mass killing and rapings by Tippu Sultan's army as a part of religious cleansing.. There is a famous folklore in our parts on how the whole city escaped from Tippu sultan's army.. I'll tell you someother day.. But as for your notion on Brahmins and Indians, it is childish.. Brahmin is a group of people called priests whose duties where to preach and educate people.. There is nothing called Brahmanism.. It is a hype.. Untoouchability is some useless custom I don't know how it crept inside our society, but there is no reference of that in Hindu scriptures.. So keep your analysis about Hinduism to yourself.. Because I don't want to post my analysis on Islam in return, which will create unnecessary troll wars..


----------



## Kabira

Allen Iverson said:


> I don't know what you refer about North Indian Ethnic people of Punjab, and Neither do I care.. My ancestoral origins is from south India, and my ancestors have faced, the mass killing and rapings by Tippu Sultan's army as a part of religious cleansing.. There is a famous folklore in our parts on how the whole city escaped from Tippu sultan's army.. I'll tell you someother day.. But as for your notion on Brahmins and Indians, it is childish.. Brahmin is a group of people called priests whose duties where to preach and educate people.. There is nothing called Brahmanism.. It is a hype.. Untoouchability is some useless custom I don't know how it crept inside our society, but there is no reference of that in Hindu scriptures.. So keep your analysis about Hinduism to yourself.. Because I don't want to post my analysis on Islam in return, which will create unnecessary troll wars..



Ok as expected you're tribal from south india who have huge debt to brahmins ( north indian aryan invader descendants) for bringing civilisation/religion to south india. Kind of make you look hypocrite now. Did you know farming in south asia was brought in by Neolithic Iranians? Now we have ancient DNA to prove this. See if not for invaders your people would still dance toka moka in jungles.


----------



## Indika

Oscar said:


> The red is just your self righteous pompousness that is boring me, please take that to someone who has time for it.


You shall have your views/opinion/heroes and so shall I have mine. By the way I like wording "righteous pompousness" compared to the other words. I shall be an optimist makes me feel better.



Oscar said:


> he fact that you had to wait till the end to put that little condescending bit in green only solidifies my statement and affirms that the entire post is based on hypocrisy.


Apologies , if those statement looks highly condescending but we are just having a normal conversation. If the facts are wrong you have right to reject them with your own. The word condescending is highly negative just like the bum lickers comment, such words reflects less optimism(observation I am not selling you anything). By the way I did not even attempt to buy off kashmir! 

Any way I dont see any point in continuing conversation when you build walls with such grand words. 



save_ghenda said:


> Marathu bhai why are you proud of the fact ancient Pakistani lost the battle?


I am not marathi. ancient pakistani ? 
Neither bhagat singh is named as pakistani nor porus. 
Now for the simple question, why has not pakistan not named missiles after porus if he is a hero?


----------



## Allen Iverson

save_ghenda said:


> Ok as expected you're tribal from south india who have huge debt to brahmins ( north indian aryan invader descendants) for bringing civilisation/religion to south india. Kind of make you look hypocrite now. Did you know farming in south asia was brought in by Neolithic Iranians? Now we have ancient DNA to prove this. See if not for invaders your people would still dance toka moka in jungles.


Yea, I also heard stories that, Adam and eve were the first human beings created by God and there were lot of scientific evidences Christian communities are bringing up to justify the same.. 
Even if I consider all that you've said now as true, We are better off with Brahmin fed Hinduism which preaches us to see all the faiths on an equal ground.. Thank god I didn't become a product of Rape and Murder instead a product of perseverance and Revival..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tergon18

save_ghenda said:


> Ok as expected you're tribal from south india who have huge debt to brahmins ( north indian aryan invader descendants) for bringing civilisation/religion to south india. Kind of make you look hypocrite now. Did you know farming in south asia was brought in by Neolithic Iranians? Now we have ancient DNA to prove this. See if not for invaders your people would still dance toka moka in jungles.



Yes you are correct, but you cant call them Iranians since Iran didnt exist back then. But yes, Gedrosian Baloch is a Eurasian/North-Eastern Anatolian component and is the single major component of every Pakistani population.

Anyway, this thread was kind of dumb to begin with and has now degenerated into utter stupidity and I suggest that the mods close this before a shitfest erupts.


----------



## Kabira

Indika said:


> I am not marathi. ancient pakistani ?
> Neither bhagat singh is named as pakistani nor porus.
> Now for the simple question, why has not pakistan not named missiles after porus if he is a hero?



Bhai I have grown up in land where Porus ruled, same district (current day Gujrat/Kharian) yet you're claiming him to be some marathi or Indian? Naming missiles after non-muslims in Pakistan is considered haram from religious point of view but it doesn't mean Porus was one of you. You're are still Indian at the end of the day, likely never to see land where Porus grow up and ruled forget about any direct connection.



Tergon18 said:


> Yes you are correct, but you cant call them Iranians since Iran didnt exist back then. But yes, Gedrosian Baloch is a Eurasian/North-Eastern Anatolian component and is the single major component of every Pakistani population.
> 
> Anyway, this thread was kind of dumb to begin with and has now degenerated into utter stupidity and I suggest that the mods close this before a shitfest erupts.



True, its just that papers are naming it Neolithic Iran DNA because skeleton found were from current day Iran but component peaks in Baloch/Brahui of Pakistan.


----------



## Rusty

Indian reaction to the countless Hindu warlords and Kings killing and invading each other over thousands of years





Indian Reaction to one Muslim invader.


----------



## Tergon18

save_ghenda said:


> Bhai I have grown up in land where Porus ruled, same district (current day Gujrat/Kharian) yet you're claiming him to be some marathi or Indian? Naming missiles after non-muslims in Pakistan is considered haram from religious point of view but it doesn't mean Porus was one of you. You're are still Indian at the end of the day, likely never to see land where Porus grow up and ruled forget about any direct connection.
> 
> 
> 
> True, its just that papers are naming it Neolithic Iran DNA because skeleton found were from current day Iran but component peaks in Baloch/Brahui of Pakistan.



Yup, but man it is rather pointless to argue with these Indian trolls since they are utterly clueless to everything other than the Hindootva propoganda that they spew here 24/7 and you have to explain to them everything from the start and even then you'll probably be called names or whatever other things these guys come up with.

Quite annoying and clingy they are. Also, the thread is idiotic as well in the first place.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger7 said:


> Again wrong. Delhi was ruled for 200 years by the Mughals until they were defeated by the Maratha Empire in the early 18th century.


The fact that you are arguing over who was ruled by 'Evil Muslims Foreigners' (who built evil architectural wonders) the longest shows the inferiority complex you Indians have. 

I could also say (using your logic) that Indians were 'humiliated, conquered, subjugated and ruled' (using your own words) by the British because they ruled modern day India much longer than they ruled modern day Pakistan.


----------



## Allen Iverson

Rusty said:


> Indian reaction to the countless Hindu warlords and Kings killing and invading each other over thousands of years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indian Reaction to one Muslim invader.


Countless Hindu kingdoms, were literally descendants of the same race at the end of the day or at the maximum, they are all Hindus and basically didn't destroy our religious symbols and though they fought with each other they had respected the Yudh dharma (Rules of War).. When Muslim invaders came they are totally different from our race and they don't have any respect or regards for our belief.. As per Yudh dharma, a king should not attack another king or his forces if he had surrendered or if he had lost his weapons in the battle.. The king has to give another chance to re weaponise and fight when he is ready.. But the invaders had no such rules..

Your Ghazni, got defeated 16 times and fled back to where he came, before finally he realised that there is no way that he can defeat the Hindu kingdom in a straight forward war.. He studied all the weaknesses like they wont harm a cow, a child, a woman etc.. They will not attack a civilian who raises both his arms in surrender.. Using all these loopholes he finally waged the war and won.. I don't see any surprise to the reaction.. In fact the reaction of Hindus should be much more aggressive..



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> The fact that you are arguing over who was ruled by 'Evil Muslims Foreigners' (who built evil architectural wonders) the longest shows the inferiority complex you Indians have.
> 
> I could also say (using your logic) that Indians were 'humiliated, conquered, subjugated and ruled' (using your own words) by the British because they ruled modern day India much longer than they ruled modern day Pakistan.


Muslims built architectural wonders.?? Come to south India and see our temples, you'll relearn the meaning of elegance and humongous architectural pieces.. Qutb minar and taj mahal are nothing in front of them.. You can google, tanjore Brihadeeswara Temple just for one example..



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> I could also say (using your logic) that Indians were 'humiliated, conquered, subjugated and ruled' (using your own words) by the British because they ruled modern day India much longer than they ruled modern day Pakistan.


yes agreed... And the same Brits are far inferior in economy as well as military might than today's India.. This is called as perseverance.. We hindus, lost battles, but never gave up on our religion and our way of life.. Ultimately those who ruled us ended being ruled by us(Corporates).. The dimensions of the fight changes but the fight is still on...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Allen Iverson said:


> Muslims built architectural wonders.?? Come to south India and see our temples, you'll relearn the meaning of elegance and humongous architectural pieces.. Qutb minar and taj mahal are nothing in front of them.. You can google, tanjore Brihadeeswara Temple just for one example..


When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this . 



Allen Iverson said:


> yes agreed... And the same Brits are far inferior in economy as well as military might than today's India.. This is called as perseverance.. We hindus, lost battles, but never gave up on our religion and our way of life.. Ultimately those who ruled us ended being ruled by us(Corporates).. The dimensions of the fight changes but the fight is still on...


In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiger7

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> The fact that you are arguing over who was ruled by 'Evil Muslims Foreigners' (who built evil architectural wonders) the longest shows the inferiority complex you Indians have.
> 
> I could also say (using your logic) that Indians were 'humiliated, conquered, subjugated and ruled' (using your own words) by the British because they ruled modern day India much longer than they ruled modern day Pakistan.


Not really. The major part of India was ruled for almost the same amount of time as Pakistan by the British. What is funny is the fact that Pakistan was ruled for almost 2000 years by foreign invaders like the Greeks, Persians, Huns, Arabs, Turks and Mongols because Pakistan was mostly dominated by tribal communities who did not stand a chance against these invaders.


----------



## Allen Iverson

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.


Care to quote any neutral sources?? Or you'll be considered a **** fanboy who doesn't have much to do except bash India in any which way, and you'll be trolled without mercy, Agreed??..


----------



## Tiger7

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .
> 
> 
> In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.


According to your logic Pakistan is worse than sub-saharan Africa as Pakistan has a lower GDP per capita, a lower literacy rate and a lower HDI than India.


----------



## Tergon18

Indika said:


> By the way porus lost the war we are still proud of that.



Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.

WHAT.THE.F***

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Allen Iverson

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .


There is an hour long documentary video available in you tube created Harvard University Architectural research students.. Just type Brihadeeswara temple tanjore American documentary.. You'll come to know.. 
And coming to your initial notion, not every tourist or foreigner thinks about Mughal buildings.. If a Pakistani comes to India then they might think so..


----------



## Jamwal's

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> When a tourist or 'foreigner' thinks of India; he thinks of the Taj Mahal and other Mughal buildings. The fact that i've never heard (being an American) of Brihadeeswara Temple builds on this .
> 
> 
> In quantity yes; India has a 'superior' military and economy than the British. In quality; India ranks even poorer than sub-saharan Africa.


Typical Pakistani who knows nothing.

Most of Indian heritage sites are pre Islamic, even thousand years before Islam.

Taj Mahal is what ! More People visit architectural marvels in Maharashtra and Deccan apart from Buddhist Hindu sites all over the country.


Even Mughal architecture is a blend of Perisan and Indian. Not remotely related to present day Pakistan.



Tergon18 said:


> Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.
> 
> WHAT.THE.F***


Porus was follower of Hercules according to Greek sources. Krishna which Greeks mistook as Hercules.

So either way he was follower of Indian religion.


----------



## Tiger7

Tergon18 said:


> Ok, let me get this. You have a problem with some Pakistanis who appear to take pride in Ghauri, Ghazni, Salahuddin Ayubi (probably) and even MBQ since they are not related in the genetic sense to them and Pakistanis arent the descendants of them but you oppenly take pride in Porus, a supposed 'Hindu', whatever that term means, who probably was a Buddhist given historic context, despite yourself being an Indian with zero genetic relation to Porus and not being descended from him.
> 
> WHAT.THE.F***


Perhaps he wanted to imply that he is proud about the fact that the ruler from Pakistan Porus lost the war against the Greeks while the ruler from India Chandragupta Maurya was able to defeat the Greeks.


----------



## Tergon18

Jamwal's said:


> Porus was follower of Hercules according to Greek sources. Krishna which Greeks mistook as Hercules.
> 
> So either way he was follower of Indian religion.



A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.

About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.

Secondly, even if we discard all that, and you say that Porus was a 'Hindu' (not a legit term anyway), so Indians can take pride in him, this logic can be used to say that since Ghauri, Ghazni, Aurangzeb etc. were Muslim and so Pakistanis can take pride in them.



Tiger7 said:


> Perhaps he wanted to imply that he is proud about the fact that the ruler from Pakistan Porus lost the war against the Greeks while the ruler from India Chandragupta Maurya was able to defeat the Greeks.



That may very well be his intention.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jamwal's

Tergon18 said:


> A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.
> 
> About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.


Firstly, i don't take pride in any thing from present day Pakistan maybe be some for they admire the local resistance of rulers.

Secondly, it's not me making the conclusion but historians. The greek account clearly mentioned Indians worship :-

1.Dionysus (Shiva)

2. Hercules (Krishna)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megasthenes'_Herakles

According to Arrian, Diodorus, and Strabo, Megasthenes described an Indian tribe called Sourasenoi, who especially worshipped Herakles in their land, and this land had two cities, Methora and Kleisobora, and a navigable river, the Jobares. As was common in the ancient period, the Greeks sometimes described foreign gods in terms of their own divinities, and there is a little doubt that the Sourasenoi refers to theShurasenas, a branch of the Yadu dynasty to which Krishna belonged; Herakles to Krishna, or Hari-Krishna: Mehtora to Mathura, where Krishna was born; Kleisobora to Krishnapura, meaning “the city of Krishna”; and the Jobares to the Yamuna, the famous river in the Krishna story. Quintus Curtius also mentions that when Alexander the Great confronted Porus, Porus’s soldiers were carrying an image of Herakles in their vanguard. ”

*
— Krishna: a sourcebook, Edwin Francis Bryant, Oxford University Press US, 20*


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger7 said:


> According to your logic Pakistan is worse than sub-saharan Africa as Pakistan has a lower GDP per capita, a lower literacy rate and a lower HDI than India.


Pakistan's economy is 37% undocumented; so we could never know the absolute amount of GDP per capita in Pakistan.

What I meant was poverty; India's poverty is worse than the level of Sub-Saharan Africa.


----------



## Jamwal's

In any case, later Indo - Greeks did followed Indian religion be it Hindu pantheon or Buddhist.

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

And constructed marks of their allegiance.

More than 2000 years old.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Tiger Genie said:


> Most muslims of India including where Pakistan was put in 1947 were converted to islam by succession of invaders. But we can safely conclude that most such converted people are long gone - current day muslims were born into islamic homes, so there is no sense in attributing any Hindu stuff to them.





Tiger Genie said:


> why make them ashamed of their own ancestry? they did not have any role in the conversion. It was the barbaric invaders who put the sword to their neck and thus brought infamy to islam. It is those invaders that should ashamed, not the muslims of Indian subcontinent who were mere victims


Yes totally; that's why almost every village has a shrine(s) dedicated to the person who converted that village to Islam (mostly Sufis).

Muslim invaders mostly were attracted by riches; they had no reason to convert the locals. Under the Umayyads; conversation to Islam was actually beginning to be discouraged (due to taxes). Many invaders destroyed and looted temples and mosques alike. They didn't come to convert people; they came for the same reason previous invaders arrived.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WhyCry

Tergon18 said:


> A version of the Greek deity Herakles was found in Northern Gangetic India by an ambassador of the Selucids to the Mauryans, though connection to Krishna or any other deity is vague and not solid.
> 
> About Porus however, the most you can get is a vague description of Porus' army having a Herakles-like figure on their shields at the Hydaspes (Jhelum). To jump to a conclusion that it is Krishna, is absurd. Indians use this logic to say that a figure of a human in Mohenjodaro is Shiva, which is totally absurd as well.
> 
> Secondly, even if we discard all that, and you say that Porus was a 'Hindu' (not a legit term anyway), so Indians can take pride in him, this logic can be used to say that since Ghauri, Ghazni, Aurangzeb etc. were Muslim and so Pakistanis can take pride in them.
> 
> 
> 
> That may very well be his intention.


Man you profile pic definately defines how big your brain is.

Anyways since i do have have to give you logic, here it is. Pakistan is formed less than 70 years but not pakistani. They did not come from heaven leaving the 72 virgins or even there ancestors. Who were they? They were part of Bharat(not saying India... Warna burnol deni padegi). I do not want to get into how islam came into existance in bharat as it will make more bad mouthing for it as far as logic goes. I respect islam as a religion.

Pakistan is claiming the arab inheritence, turks pride, iran/persian legacy and afganistans past to justify its existence. Hence that superiority is more in the face of pakistani by the rest of the islamic world. The names that claimed above were the attackers to bharat. They terrorize and looted the golden bird of the world. You are celebrating and justfying your evil. This is truly foolish.


----------



## Tergon18

Jamwal's said:


> Firstly, i don't take pride in any thing from present day Pakistan maybe be some for they admire the local resistance of rulers.
> 
> Secondly, it's not me making the conclusion but historians. The greek account clearly mentioned Indians worship :-
> 
> 1.Dionysus (Shiva)
> 
> 2. Hercules (Krishna)
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megasthenes'_Herakles
> 
> According to Arrian, Diodorus, and Strabo, Megasthenes described an Indian tribe called Sourasenoi, who especially worshipped Herakles in their land, and this land had two cities, Methora and Kleisobora, and a navigable river, the Jobares. As was common in the ancient period, the Greeks sometimes described foreign gods in terms of their own divinities, and there is a little doubt that the Sourasenoi refers to theShurasenas, a branch of the Yadu dynasty to which Krishna belonged; Herakles to Krishna, or Hari-Krishna: Mehtora to Mathura, where Krishna was born; Kleisobora to Krishnapura, meaning “the city of Krishna”; and the Jobares to the Yamuna, the famous river in the Krishna story. Quintus Curtius also mentions that when Alexander the Great confronted Porus, Porus’s soldiers were carrying an image of Herakles in their vanguard. ”
> 
> *
> — Krishna: a sourcebook, Edwin Francis Bryant, Oxford University Press US, 20*



Thanks for that article, which I had already read. There are two different mentions of Herakles-like or basically Herakles figures by the Greeks. The one which you make mention of is Megasthenes' Herakles and is from a Seleucid ambassador's contact with the Mauryans.

The second is of first century Roman historian Quintus Curtius mentioning that soldiers of Porus' army had an image of Herakles or a Herakles-like figure perhaps, on their shields. This is the most you get regarding Porus and Herakles. Remember, these are two different referrences.

Now to consider this as being synonymous with Krishna or even for Dionysus to be with Shiva is rather far fetched. Most scholars won't agree on this as the reference, especially to Porus and not to the Mauryans, is rather vague.

The Greeks found a figure like this painted on the shields or banners of the army of Porus:





And you immediately take it to be Krishna.

Google Megasthenes' Herakles and you will find hundreds of Hindootva sites claiming that the Greek god Herakles is basically Krishna and all Greek mythology is copied/plagiarised from Hindu mythology.

As I have said earlier, this exact same logic is used by Hindootvas to say that people of Mohenjodaro worshipped Shiva or his lingam, due to a seal of a human male figure having been found there. Historians consider this claim as dubious and totally false too. Same is the case with this one.



Dev Destroyer said:


> Man you profile pic definately defines how big your brain is.



Thanks for making that totally irrelevant and retarded opening remark lol.



> Anyways since i do have have to give you logic, here it is. *Pakistan is formed less than 70 years but not pakistani.*


Wow. That makes perfect sense.



> They did not come from heaven leaving the 72 virgins





> I respect islam as a religion



Sure you do.



> They were part of Bharat(not saying India... Warna burnol deni padegi).


Yes, ofcourse the British used to call the regions that they ruled as 'Sri Mata Jee Bharat Varsha', sing Vande Mataram and shout Bharat Mata Ki Jai at the top of their lungs every day before lunch.



> The names that claimed above were the attackers to bharat. They terrorize and looted the golden bird of the world. You are celebrating and justfying your evil. This is truly foolish.



If you had actually bothered reading my comment properly, I was saying that his dubious logic on taking pride in Porus could be used to justify Pakistanis taking pride in Ghazni, Ghori and others. I said nothing of the sort that you are accusing me of. You seem to lack basic comprehension skills as well. Take your rants against Islam somewhere else, we have enough Indian trolls on this website.


----------



## Allen Iverson

Malik Abdullah said:


> Kashmiris dont want to live with you imbeciles. There is actually nothing common between an average indian who poops on the street and a Kashmiri. and dont ever call me what your mom is.


Your post is full of crap.. I'm not even going to respond to that.. your fellow PDF mods have given free hands to low lifes like you, to comment whatever nonsense you can.. But we Indians in the PDF can't do that right?? So enjoy your filthy life..


----------



## Proudpakistaniguy

Allen Iverson said:


> Indian's don't even care about what religion or race you belong, as long as you keep your tools inside your territory.. First of all, as an Indian and a Hindu settled abroad, we have a notion in my motherland, that Islam was a religion of invaders which is true and hence we don't treat it a peaceful religion, we treat Islam with a caution, because of this so called historical hype that it was the religion of Invaders who invaded our mother land..
> But Islam reached Indian sub continent long before Ghauris and Ghaznis in the form Arabic traders through sea.. I've seen a very old Masjid in Cochin, which is the port city.. But whether those traders impacted in spreading of any religion in India, the answer is no.. Because, they were just traders with business interests and religious thoughts were not so easily handled in those days.. So, the only way these many muslims, were created in Indian sub continent is by the force of sword and whip, which were handled by the invaders like Mughals, Turks etc..
> According to us, the creation of Pakistan itself is a huge blunder, and due to Pussies like Nehru and Gandhi we were made to face it.. If at all a nation was created on the basis of Religion only, then all the muslims of Indian sub continent should've gone to Pakistan or east Pakistan, which didn't happen because it was a terrible idea..
> 
> So now we basically have this moment of irritation, when a muslim calls himself proud of his ancestory with Bin Qasim, because he neither have the blood lines of Qasim nor his followers.. They were simply Hindus who were converted by force and instead of dying while resisting the force they succumbed to it and made themselves muslims.. When someone robs you of your home and make himself the owner of that home, and just to stay in that home, you agreed to live by his terms and conditions and after sometime call yourself proud of it, makes us all laugh at those who says so, with puny..
> @Abingdonboy @Sri @Rajaraja Chola @Trichy @TejasMk3
> 
> 
> It is you who should fit the description of the bolded part above.. Not yet started full scale but Yes, we are trying to do in balochistan, what you are doing in Kashmir for decades.. Atleast stop whining like a female dog and face it with guts, Puny low life..



Your post is full of non sense. If you have problem with past invaders then you should not have good relationship with countries like Afghanistan, Iran, middle east and central asia where these invaders came from. Your all enmity is just for Pakistani who are actually native of this region but adopted religion Islam. Secondly Islamic ideological bond between two Muslims is based on aqeedah/same religion irrespective of whether they are genetically or culturally different to each others thats why many Muslims belong to different cultures/races/colour/languages share many similarities with each others because of having same religious beliefs and they can often marry to each others so dont be a narrow mind bigot and accept this fact that religion is also your identity like others identities i.e race/culture/tribe/lanaguge etc


----------



## Allen Iverson

Proudpakistaniguy said:


> Your post is full of non sense. If you have problem with past invaders then you should not have good relationship with countries like Afghanistan, Iran, middle east and central asia where these invaders came from. Your all enmity is just for Pakistani who are actually native of this region but adopted religion Islam. Secondly Islamic ideological bond between two Muslims is based on aqeedah/same religion irrespective of whether they are genetically or culturally different to each others thats why many Muslims belong to different cultures/races/colour/languages share many similarities with each others because of having same religious beliefs and they can often marry to each others so dont be a narrow mind bigot and accept this fact that religion is also your identity like others identities i.e race/culture/tribe/lanaguge etc


No dude, you are not getting the core point.. You can respect an enemy, in a war if he is powerful, win or lose doesn't matter as long as you fought bravely and fought upto your level best in a war..
So my hatred is not for those invaders.. They just did what is good for them and their tribe, that is somewhat justifiable.. But my hatred is towards Bitches of my own religion that betrays the religion which gave them identity and life.. They simply got converted when someone raped their wife or threatened hem with a sword in their neck.. It is disgusting, how could one possibly adapt the same faith an animal that massacred his family is following.. one should stop the animal or die trying.. But when you convert yourself it makes others look like the act of violence upon his family is justified by the head of the family himself by converting to the faith of invaders.. that cowardly act is what is irritating us all.. We are all Hindus and our forefathers also belonged to the same land, and we stood our ground by not giving up on our faith when there was oppression forced upon us by the invaders.. Don't you feel it is a good trait, and betraying a person's faith is Bitchy..?? And my problem now, with those who call out openly that Invaders like Bin Qasim or Malik kafur is their ancestor makes it all the more saucy...


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

*You need some education; not the BS they feed you from Hinduvati Academy or Zee-TV News*



Dev Destroyer said:


> Pakistan is formed less than 70 years but not pakistani.


So is India. That reminds me; the name 'India' is coined by the so-called evil 'invaders'. 


Dev Destroyer said:


> They did not come from heaven leaving the 72 virgins or even there ancestors.


Pakistanis are made up of 4 *main* ethnic groups. Pashtuns, Punjabis, Sindhis and the Baloch. Each are somewhat close but at the same time retain segments of unique culture/ethnicity. 

All 4 of these ethnic groups share genetic links with the first people to settle the Indus Valley (98% of modern-day Pakistan) whom migrated from modern-day Oman branching out from Haplogroup-L. 
Other than having high frequencies in Tajikistan, Chechnya and portions of West Indian coast; this haplogroup is unique to Pakistan. 

We all came from Africa. 

Migratory terms; 'modern day Pakistanis' came from a combination of migrations from Oman and invasions by the Aryans. 







The Indus Plains have always retained a distinct ethnic group in South Asia; both before and after the Aryan Invasions.





We look different, we have different voices and accents, we have different genetic mutations (such as lactose tolerance), we are built differently, although some groups of population may have similarities - *we are overall different people*. 

That should put an end to your "being the same people" rants.



Dev Destroyer said:


> Who were they? They were part of Bharat(not saying India... Warna burnol deni padegi).


There was no such thing as 'Bharat' either (except in the fairy tales told by Hinduvatis). 

The Indus region of South Asia has been ruled by over 76 Kingdoms/Empires in history. 
29 being indigenous, 44 being foreigners from the West of Indus, *3 being foreigners from East of Indus* (Gupta, Maurya and Maratha - whose control over the Indus only lasted briefly). 

Like I said; the Indus region has always retained a distinct people with distinct kingdoms/empires separate from the rest of South Asia due to it's geographical features and containment.


Dev Destroyer said:


> I do not want to get into how islam came into existance in bharat as it will make more bad mouthing for it as far as logic goes.


Muslim Empires came into South Asia through conquest. Muslims came into South Asia through Sufism.



Dev Destroyer said:


> kistan is claiming the arab inheritence, turks pride, iran/persian legacy and afganistans past to justify its existence.


How and where?



Dev Destroyer said:


> They terrorize and looted the golden bird of the world.


South Asia was a divided group of conflicting states devastated by war. Muslim conquests united the region and brought a golden age of architecture, growth and economy.



Allen Iverson said:


> But my hatred is towards Bitches of my own religion that betrays the religion





Allen Iverson said:


> which gave them identity and life..


How does Hinduism give someone identity and life?


Allen Iverson said:


> They simply got converted


Not 'simply' the conversation of modern-day Pakistan into Islam was a long and slow process. First tracing links to trade routes then the missionary migrations eastward. Jizya tax also played a role. 

Our ancestors evolved and grew a brain; they left behind disgusting barbaric superstitious rituals and beliefs and adopted the religion of Islam. 


Allen Iverson said:


> threatened hem with a sword in their neck.


More bullshit from desperate Hindus trying to explain why so many people left and are continuing to leave behind superstition and barbarism. 

Hindus in the past converted for the same reason Hindus are converting by the thousands to this day. 


Allen Iverson said:


> that cowardly act is what is irritating us all..


rephrase that to "*this smart act has been frustrating us all*" 


Allen Iverson said:


> We are all Hindus and our forefathers also belonged to the same land,


Pakistanis are not Hindus and we don't belong to the same land. Our forefathers followed Hinduism, Buddhism, Folk Religions, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism; but that was history and that does not necessarily mean we have the same identity and nationality. 


Allen Iverson said:


> like Bin Qasim or Malik kafur is their ancestor makes it all the more saucy...


Who says they are our ancestors?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Tergon18

Allen Iverson said:


> No dude, you are not getting the core point.. You can respect an enemy, in a war if he is powerful, win or lose doesn't matter as long as you fought bravely and fought upto your level best in a war..
> So my hatred is not for those invaders.. They just did what is good for them and their tribe, that is somewhat justifiable.. But my hatred is towards Bitches of my own religion that betrays the religion which gave them identity and life.. They simply got converted when someone raped their wife or threatened hem with a sword in their neck.. It is disgusting, how could one possibly adapt the same faith an animal that massacred his family is following.. one should stop the animal or die trying.. But when you convert yourself it makes others look like the act of violence upon his family is justified by the head of the family himself by converting to the faith of invaders.. that cowardly act is what is irritating us all.. We are all Hindus and our forefathers also belonged to the same land, and we stood our ground by not giving up on our faith when there was oppression forced upon us by the invaders.. Don't you feel it is a good trait, and betraying a person's faith is Bitchy..?? And my problem now, with those who call out openly that Invaders like Bin Qasim or Malik kafur is their ancestor makes it all the more saucy...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Allen Iverson

Tergon18 said:


>


Yaaa.. ??? That's because you are living in that part of the world.. Try getting out of it, your meter will function all right...


----------



## Proudpakistaniguy

Allen Iverson said:


> No dude, you are not getting the core point.. You can respect an enemy, in a war if he is powerful, win or lose doesn't matter as long as you fought bravely and fought upto your level best in a war..
> So my hatred is not for those invaders.. They just did what is good for them and their tribe, that is somewhat justifiable.. But my hatred is towards Bitches of my own religion that betrays the religion which gave them identity and life.. They simply got converted when someone raped their wife or threatened hem with a sword in their neck.. It is disgusting, how could one possibly adapt the same faith an animal that massacred his family is following.. one should stop the animal or die trying.. But when you convert yourself it makes others look like the act of violence upon his family is justified by the head of the family himself by converting to the faith of invaders.. that cowardly act is what is irritating us all.. We are all Hindus and our forefathers also belonged to the same land, and we stood our ground by not giving up on our faith when there was oppression forced upon us by the invaders.. Don't you feel it is a good trait, and betraying a person's faith is Bitchy..?? And my problem now, with those who call out openly that Invaders like Bin Qasim or Malik kafur is their ancestor makes it all the more saucy...


You need to grow up as this hatred will take you no where. Its choice of people to follow whatever religion suit them and conversion is happening even today so i dont get this betrayal thing? Would you never remain the father of your son if your son choose Islam as religion tomorrow? You again assume that every person in past converted into Islam from previous beliefs because they were either coward or wanted some political benefits .This is extreme ideology which hinuvata are feeding in brain of naive Hindus by twisting the history and portraying every Muslim invaders/ruler as entirely evil or every person who adopted Islam as traitor/cowards. Try to do some introspection why you got invaded/conqured so easily when you were great in numbers? Were not you divided among yourselves and were busy oppressing your own kind? Even today you have this caste system deep rooted in your society where someone is inferior just because of taking birth in so called lower class.


----------



## Tergon18

Allen Iverson said:


> Yaaa.. ??? That's because you are living in that part of the world.. Try getting out of it, your meter will function all right...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## future_bound

Interesting thread
The ancestors of most Pakistanis may have been hindus or buddhists. My ancestors were also probably hindus but i am forever thankful to the Mughals for converting us to the true and great religion called Islam.

Big up Ghauri, Ghaznavi, Muhammad bin qasim, Babar, Aurangzeb and Abdali

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Azad-Kashmiri

Because Muhammed bin Qassam rahima'Allah brought us Islam and showed us the divine way. May Allah bless him and grant him highest paradise. Amin

Muslims never invaded lands, they opened it up for Islam so that people choose to accept or pay jaziya. No one is forced into Islam, as Allah says (TQM)...there is no compulsion in religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rusty

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> *You need some education; not the BS they feed you from Hinduvati Academy or Zee-TV News*
> 
> 
> So is India. That reminds me; the name 'India' is coined by the so-called evil 'invaders'.
> 
> Pakistanis are made up of 4 *main* ethnic groups. Pashtuns, Punjabis, Sindhis and the Baloch. Each are somewhat close but at the same time retain segments of unique culture/ethnicity.
> 
> All 4 of these ethnic groups share genetic links with the first people to settle the Indus Valley (98% of modern-day Pakistan) whom migrated from modern-day Oman branching out from Haplogroup-L.
> Other than having high frequencies in Tajikistan, Chechnya and portions of West Indian coast; this haplogroup is unique to Pakistan.
> 
> We all came from Africa.
> 
> Migratory terms; 'modern day Pakistanis' came from a combination of migrations from Oman and invasions by the Aryans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Indus Plains have always retained a distinct ethnic group in South Asia; both before and after the Aryan Invasions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We look different, we have different voices and accents, we have different genetic mutations (such as lactose tolerance), we are built differently, although some groups of population may have similarities - *we are overall different people*.
> 
> That should put an end to your "being the same people" rants.
> 
> 
> There was no such thing as 'Bharat' either (except in the fairy tales told by Hinduvatis).
> 
> The Indus region of South Asia has been ruled by over 76 Kingdoms/Empires in history.
> 29 being indigenous, 44 being foreigners from the West of Indus, *3 being foreigners from East of Indus* (Gupta, Maurya and Maratha - whose control over the Indus only lasted briefly).
> 
> Like I said; the Indus region has always retained a distinct people with distinct kingdoms/empires separate from the rest of South Asia due to it's geographical features and containment.
> 
> Muslim Empires came into South Asia through conquest. Muslims came into South Asia through Sufism.
> 
> 
> How and where?
> 
> 
> South Asia was a divided group of conflicting states devastated by war. Muslim conquests united the region and brought a golden age of architecture, growth and economy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does Hinduism give someone identity and life?
> 
> Not 'simply' the conversation of modern-day Pakistan into Islam was a long and slow process. First tracing links to trade routes then the missionary migrations eastward. Jizya tax also played a role.
> 
> Our ancestors evolved and grew a brain; they left behind disgusting barbaric superstitious rituals and beliefs and adopted the religion of Islam.
> 
> More bullshit from desperate Hindus trying to explain why so many people left and are continuing to leave behind superstition and barbarism.
> 
> Hindus in the past converted for the same reason Hindus are converting by the thousands to this day.
> 
> rephrase that to "*this smart act has been frustrating us all*"
> 
> Pakistanis are not Hindus and we don't belong to the same land. Our forefathers followed Hinduism, Buddhism, Folk Religions, Zoroastrianism, Sikhism; but that was history and that does not necessarily mean we have the same identity and nationality.
> 
> Who says they are our ancestors?



This is one of the best replies to these Internet Hindus I have ever seen. 

I would just like to add that these same Hindus who are crying about conversions also caused the extinction of Buddhism in it's native land. They forcibly converted all the Buddhists to Hinduism (Pakistani ancestors were Buddhist before they were forced to become Hindus). It's such a pity that Buddhism only survives outside the subcontinent. 

Of course Internet Hindus will never admit to this, instead making up fairy tales of how the Buddhists just dissapeared one day.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Quote:-






Sepoys in Trenchs - Gordon Corrigan.

As late as 1840s Indian Army soldiers regarded service in* Sindh* and* Punjab *( essentially what is now Pakistan) as *"foreign service"* and expected extra pay accordingly. Strangely in 1947 after this region had been annexed by the British by force the same people somehow regard it as sin against India and nature that it went it's way like it had prior to British arriving.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pakdefender

Raja Dahir obviously did not have support from the people , a ruler loses support if he/she is unjust and cruel

If he had support from the people , Mohammad bin Qasim would not have been successful.

So when Mohammad Bin Qasim deposed him off , people saw it as good riddance to bad rubbish 
and most importantly they saw the light of Islam

this is a source of immense butt hurt to indians , hence they dont like Pakistan's attachment to Mohammad Bin Qasim

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## abhishekgoel80

Bin Qasim was just one para in my history book (in 10 years) talking about the conquest of sind. Dahir is unknown(or forgotten) to 99% Indians. They both are insignificant.

I would like Pakistani friends to listen to the video before forming their opinion.


----------



## barbarosa

Raja dahir was the raja of Sindh only, not the Maha Raja of the hole India.Mohammad bin Qasim conquer Sindh but why Islam spreed in the hole India, because of it's Justice.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BlackIndian

Only north indians! Because they were humiliated by the Islamic invaders.


----------



## 911

BlackIndian said:


> Only north indians! Because they were humiliated by the Islamic invaders.


Typical false flagger.


----------



## BlackIndian

911 said:


> Typical false flagger.



You mean the North Indians invaders who now claim to be original inhabitants of this sacred land..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 911

BlackIndian said:


> You mean the North Indians invaders who now claim to be original inhabitants of this sacred land..


North Indians are original inhabitants of north India, yes, and not invaders.


----------



## BlackIndian

911 said:


> North Indians are original inhabitants of north India, yes, and not invaders.


Take a DNA test, you ignorant Bimaru.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SirHatesALot

BlackIndian said:


> Take a DNA test, you ignorant Bimaru.


----------



## 911

BlackIndian said:


> Take a DNA test, you ignorant Bimaru.


DNA test compared to whom?


----------



## BlackIndian

911 said:


> DNA test compared to whom?


North Indians share many common genes with central asians and eastern europeans.

Now buzz off you mongrel.


----------



## 911

BlackIndian said:


> Take a DNA test, you ignorant Bimaru.


North Indians' DNA don't match with Central Asians.



BlackIndian said:


> North Indians share many common genes with central asians and eastern europeans.
> 
> Now buzz off you mongrel.


----------



## BlackIndian

911 said:


> North Indians' DNA don't match with Central Asians.


Central Asian populations are supposed to have been major contributors to the Indian gene pool, particularly to the northern Indian gene pool, and the migrants had supposedly moved into India through what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan. Using mitochrondrial DNA variation data collated from various studies, we have shown that populations of Central Asia and Pakistan show the lowest coefficient of genetic differentiation with the north Indian populations, a higher differentiation with the south Indian populations, and the highest with the northeast Indian populations. Northern Indian populations are genetically closer to Central Asians than populations of other geographical regions of India... . Consistent with the above findings, a recent study using over 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers has found a north to south gradient of genetic proximity of Indian populations to western Eurasians. This feature is likely related to the proportions of ancestry derived from the western Eurasian gene pool, which, as this study has shown, is greater in populations inhabiting northern India than those inhabiting southern India.

I hope they taught you English at your local pathshala in Bimaru land.


----------



## ekhindustani

Malik Abdullah said:


> Two nation theory still exists. 1971 was a conspiracy against Pakistan Just like they are stirring up conspiracy in Balochistan today. East Pakistan was too far away to be defended from those bastards anyway If you still wish to live in ignorance thn go to India and eat beef biryani to find out the truth.


you only have to visit Chandni Chowk to satisfy all your beef cravings.


----------



## 911

BlackIndian said:


> Central Asian populations are supposed to have been major contributors to the Indian gene pool, particularly to the northern Indian gene pool, and the migrants had supposedly moved into India through what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan. Using mitochrondrial DNA variation data collated from various studies, we have shown that populations of Central Asia and Pakistan show the lowest coefficient of genetic differentiation with the north Indian populations, a higher differentiation with the south Indian populations, and the highest with the northeast Indian populations. Northern Indian populations are genetically closer to Central Asians than populations of other geographical regions of India... . Consistent with the above findings, a recent study using over 500,000 biallelic autosomal markers has found a north to south gradient of genetic proximity of Indian populations to western Eurasians. This feature is likely related to the proportions of ancestry derived from the western Eurasian gene pool, which, as this study has shown, is greater in populations inhabiting northern India than those inhabiting southern India.
> 
> I hope they taught you English at your local pathshala in Bimaru land.


Although i know you are a false flagger, i will reply you last time.

99.99% of DNA is similar in humans, North Indians and South Indians DNA matches way lot more than any other group. Don't copy paste Wikipedia. Secondly, if even there have been migration some 10,000+ years ago into North India from somewhere, this land was not inhabited. Skin color is not the only determinant, there are many other various factors which are not observable which are common in North Indians and South Indians.


----------



## BlackIndian

911 said:


> Although i know you are a false flagger, i will reply you last time.
> 
> 99.99% of DNA is similar in humans, North Indians and South Indians DNA matches way lot more than any other group. Don't copy paste Wikipedia. Secondly, if even there have been migration some 10,000+ years ago into North India from somewhere, this land was not inhabited. Skin color is not the only determinant, there are many other various factors which are not observable which are common in North Indians and South Indians.


I don't associate myself with inferior North Indians.


----------



## Mugwop

dahir's own people sided with Qasim

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mamluk

911 said:


> 99.99% of DNA is similar in humans, North Indians and South Indians DNA matches way lot more than any other group. Don't copy paste Wikipedia. Secondly, if even there have been migration some 10,000+ years ago into North India from somewhere, this land was not inhabited. Skin color is not the only determinant, there are many other various factors which are not observable which are common in North Indians and South Indians.



That 0.01% means a lot you know.

Fyi, 99% of our DNA matches with Chimpanzees. .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jericho

I am not sure if they dislike it, but if they do, then its probably due to their own inferiority complex


----------

