# Most of Pakistan isn't a part of the Indian sub-continent



## PakSarzameen5823

This is a curious little fact I managed to stumble across. It turns out that geographically, most of Pakistan isn't a part of the Indian sub-continent. How? Let me explain:

Most of us know that the Indus river has been the traditional western boundary of the Indian sub-continent, and that this therefore means KPK, Balochistan and Gilgit Baltistan are not a part of the Indian sub-continent. However, what a lot of people don't actually know is that the total area of all these provinces is larger than the total area of all of Pakistan's provinces that are a part of the Indian sub-continent (Punjab+Sindh+AK+Islamabad capital territory).

*Total area of Pakistan: 796096 square km 

Area of Balochistan: 347190 square km

Area of KPK: 74521 square km 

Area of FATA (now a part of KPK): 27220 square km *

*Area of GB: 72971 square km

Total area of above provinces: 521902 square km
*
Sources:

https://web.archive.org/web/2010122...k/depts/pco/statistics/area_pop/area_pop.html

https://unpo.org/article/15483?id=15483

@django @Pakhtoon yum @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @ghazi52 @khanmubashir @RealNapster @Indus Pakistan @Talwar e Pakistan @Chakar The Great 


*
*


*

*

Reactions: Like Like:
22


----------



## JohnWick

Nice information!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## American Pakistani

Bhartis and even some Pakistanis believe that Indian Subcontinent means land area from Afghanistan to Myanmar.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Musalman

No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Indus Pakistan

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> This is a curious little fact I managed to stumble across. It turns out that geographically, most of Pakistan isn't a part of the Indian sub-continent. How? Let me explain:
> 
> Most of us know that the Indus river has been the traditional western boundary of the Indian sub-continent, and that this therefore means KPK, Balochistan and Gilgit Baltistan are not a part of the Indian sub-continent. However, what a lot of people don't actually know is that the total area of all these provinces is larger than the total area of all of Pakistan's provinces that are a part of the Indian sub-continent (Punjab+Sindh+AK+Islamabad capital territory).
> 
> *Total area of Pakistan: 796096 square km
> 
> Area of Balochistan: 347190 square km
> 
> Area of KPK: 74521 square km
> 
> Area of FATA (now a part of KPK): 27220 square km *
> 
> *Area of GB: 72971 square km
> 
> Total area of above provinces: 521902 square km
> *
> Sources:
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/2010122...k/depts/pco/statistics/area_pop/area_pop.html
> 
> https://unpo.org/article/15483?id=15483
> 
> @django @Pakhtoon yum @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @ghazi52 @khanmubashir @RealNapster @Indus Pakistan @Talwar e Pakistan @Chakar The Great
> 
> 
> *
> *
> 
> 
> *
> *


To begin with Indian sub-continent should not be used. I have worn myself out here trying to explain to Paks not to fcukin use terms like India sub-continent, desi, Asian, Muslim and the other synonyms I hear. If we don't own the name 'Pakistan' nobody else will. Specifically with referance to Indian Sub-continent post 1947 that term should have been dropped. These are geographic descriptors and a more neutral term like South Asia should be used. Simply because the term 'India' was branded in 1947 by a nation state called Bharat. Thus to prevent any ambiquity and to be neutral all the states that occupy trhe region South Asia should be used.

With referance to what you say it's not entirely this simple. From tectonic point of view what you said true. But in human geography and even physical geography rivers tend to bind and not separate. Consider Ganga. You can' divide northern plains of Ganga from the souther plains. Similiarly Indus is one physical water system that includes good chunk of Afghanistan. Kabul River is a tributary of Indus as much as Jhelum is.

Where Pakistan should focus on is Indus River simply because one can see Pakistan is underpinned by it. Pakistan occupies most of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can be used as a synomym for Indus Basin. That is why I use that handle. Some of the Indus Basin does extend into Afghanistan, China and India but as the map below shows Pakistan is central to the Indus Basin. In fact in Pakistan you can't really escape from the Indus Basin.

Reactions: Like Like:
28


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Indus Pakistan said:


> neutral term like South Asia should be used.



The problem with that is South Asia also includes Afghanistan and western Pakistan. A better neutral term would be Aryanistan, which could refer to all Indic populated areas, and Dravidian populated areas can get their own name. 



Indus Pakistan said:


> Similiarly Indus is one physical water system that includes good chunk of Afghanistan. Kabul River is a tributary of Indus as much as Jhelum is.



That is true, it does a little murky, but I'm going by traditional boundaries. 



Indus Pakistan said:


> Where Pakistan should focus on is Indus River simply because one can see Pakistan is underpinned by it. Pakistan occupies most of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can be used as a synomym for Indus Basin. That is why I use that handle. Some of the Indus Basin does extend into Afghanistan, China and India but as the map below shows Pakistan is central to the Indus Basin. In fact in Pakistan you can't really escape from the Indus Basin.







Musalman said:


> No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.



Muhajirs hardly constitute the majority. And if you're referring to Indics, most Indic Pakistanis come from tribes that merely assimilated into the Indic fold.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

Indus Pakistan said:


> I have worn myself out here trying to explain to Paks not to fcukin use terms like India sub-continent, desi, Asian, Muslim and the other synonyms I hear. If we don't own the name 'Pakistan' nobody else will.


As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

BringHarmony said:


> As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.



It's funny how only the Indians seem to see this. Must be another case of you guys stroking your ego to cope with Muslims permanently shattering your Akhand Bharat.

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Musalman said:


> No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.





Any evidence or proof of your claims? If so please post the link here.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Indus Pakistan

BringHarmony said:


> As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.


Absolutely true. On PDF they might claim differant but rarely will you get them calling themselves 'Pakistani'. So form of alternative will be used. This is to do with the abject failure in the state failing to form a identity and consolidated brand.



Musalman said:


> No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.


Except for the Mohajirs rest [94%] don't. And I assume you are a Mohajir who feels the need to foist that descriptor on rest of us. Now if you said most Pakistan's have South Asian heritage - yes I would agree with you.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Indus Pakistan said:


> Absolutely true. On PDF they might claim differant but rarely will you get them calling themselves 'Pakistani'. So form of alternative will be used. This is to do with the abject failure in the state failing to form a identity and consolidated brand.



Never heard of that before.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Musalman

Mohajirs???
We punjabis are Indian ancestry, Bajwa chattha jatt etc etc. So are the Sindhi. Only pushton and Baluch are Iranic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> It's funny how only the Indians seem to see this. Must be another case of you guys stroking your ego to cope with Muslims permanently shattering your Akhand Bharat.


Sorry, I am not able to parse your sentence. Can you translate it into English, please?



Indus Pakistan said:


> Absolutely true. On PDF they might claim differant but rarely will you get them calling themselves 'Pakistani'. So form of alternative will be used. This is to do with the abject failure in the state failing to form a identity and consolidated brand.


There are two ways to handle this situation. Either simply give a damn about identity and build yourself on simply policies. Thats what Canada did. We don't give a damn if we come out as 'Americans', our policies set us way different --not necessarily better-- than Americans.

Other is indoctrinate common identity among people and 'Otherize' other. It's time-consuming and impractical for a large population. United States has been hell-bent on this. They have achieved some success on this as well. The global melting pot where everyone is melted into American identity. That said, when they solidify again, the cracks are often visible.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## hussain0216

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Aryanistan



Are you drunk?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Big Tank

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> A better neutral term would be Aryanistan,



Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Surya 1

Indus Pakistan said:


> To begin with Indian sub-continent should not be used. I have worn myself out here trying to explain to Paks not to fcukin use terms like India sub-continent, desi, Asian, Muslim and the other synonyms I hear. If we don't own the name 'Pakistan' nobody else will. Specifically with referance to Indian Sub-continent post 1947 that term should have been dropped. These are geographic descriptors and a more neutral term like South Asia should be used. Simply because the term 'India' was branded in 1947 by a nation state called Bharat. Thus to prevent any ambiquity and to be neutral all the states that occupy trhe region South Asia should be used.
> 
> With referance to what you say it's not entirely this simple. From tectonic point of view what you said true. But in human geography and even physical geography rivers tend to bind and not separate. Consider Ganga. You can' divide northern plains of Ganga from the souther plains. Similiarly Indus is one physical water system that includes good chunk of Afghanistan. Kabul River is a tributary of Indus as much as Jhelum is.
> 
> Where Pakistan should focus on is Indus River simply because one can see Pakistan is underpinned by it. Pakistan occupies most of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can be used as a synomym for Indus Basin. That is why I use that handle. Some of the Indus Basin does extend into Afghanistan, China and India but as the map below shows Pakistan is central to the Indus Basin. In fact in Pakistan you can't really escape from the Indus Basin.



You seem to be a very knowledgeable guy. My regards.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Liquidmetal

BringHarmony said:


> As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.


U r talking bollocks mate, as usual stroking your tiny weener to get some nationalistic hard-on but explain the people who come out in their thousands with the green and white and chanting Pakistan Zindabad, when Pakistan wins the cup, or when it is Eid or some other major event. So please cut the crap and stop spreading false narratives. Cos you know I know a lot of Sikhs who hate India and want Khalistan and they live in Canada too and the UK and other parts of the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

hussain0216 said:


> Are you drunk?





Big Tank said:


> Lol



I only suggested such a term because the word "Aryan" has historically been used by Indics to refer to nobility.



Musalman said:


> Mohajirs???
> We punjabis are Indian ancestry, Bajwa chattha jatt etc etc. So are the Sindhi. Only pushton and Baluch are Iranic.



You seem to have forgotten about all the Awans, Arains, Syeds, Qureshis and people with Dardic, Baloch or Pashtun ancestry who inhabit the Punjab and Sindh. These guys make up the majority. Not ex-Hindus. 

Even ex-Hindu tribes like the Kamboj have origins from outside of the Indian sub-continent, and other groups like the Jats have sub-groups among them who also have origins from outside of the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Musalman said:


> Mohajirs???
> We punjabis are Indian ancestry, Bajwa chattha jatt etc etc. So are the Sindhi. Only pushton and Baluch are Iranic.





Punjabis make up less than 3% of india's population but around 60% of Pakistan's population. So at least 97% of india's population HAVE NOTHING in common with 100% of Pakistan's population in terms of race, physical appearence and genetics. But this is a moot point. 30% of Pakistan's population is Pathan and Baloch. They have dna from ancient Persian/Central Asian nomadic tribes. That doesn't make us Pakistanis; Persian or Middle Eastern just as it doesn't make us racially indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Big Tank

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> I only suggested such a term because the word "Aryan" has historically been used by Indics to refer to nobility.



Why do we even care about justifying that we're not Indians? Except the Punjabis who migrated from Lucknow and Urdu Speakers who migrated from Delhi, Bombai, Bihar etc. 

Even Sindhis here are not Indians somehow, the Sindhi casts are ethnic Indus Valley based. Sindhis of Pakistan aren't the Sindhis in India. Even their Sindhi is different.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## BringHarmony

Liquidmetal said:


> U r talking bollocks mate, as usual stroking your tiny weener to get some nationalistic hard-on but explain the people who come out in their thousands with the green and white and chanting Pakistan Zindabad, when Pakistan wins the cup, or when it is Eid or some other major event. So please cut the crap and stop spreading false narratives. Cos you know I know a lot of Sikhs who hate India and want Khalistan and they live in Canada too and the UK and other parts of the world.


You do realize that a sports event does not last all year round, right? Its a one-off thing. People here in Canada and rest of the 'western' world do not live in fear of being called for any particular ethnicity. They call themselves whatever they want to suit their own agenda.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Big Tank said:


> Why do we even care about justifying that we're not Indians?



I'm just hammering the point home even further, so people like @Musalman get the memo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Big Tank

The Pakistani population consists of mostly Indo-Aryans. Pakistanis are 70% Caucasoid, 20% Australoid- Negroid, and 10% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition. Indians are 50% Australoid-Negroid by race, 35% Caucasoid, and 15% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Big Tank said:


> 70% Caucasoid, 20% Australoid- Negroid, and 10% Mongoloid in their overall genetic composition.



Those terms are used to refer to skull types, not genetics.


----------



## Big Tank

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Those terms are used to refer to skull types, not genetics.



Even by the genetics, except few punjabis and biharis. Pashtuns, Sindhis, Baluchis and Gilgitis got nothing to do with India. We're the civilization of Indus Valley not Ganga Valley Civilization.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## BringHarmony

Big Tank said:


> Even by the genetics, except few punjabis and biharis. Pashtuns, Sindhis, Baluchis and Gilgitis got nothing to do with India. We're the civilization of Indus Valley not Ganga Valley Civilization.


Aren't the "Punjabis" the biggest ethnicity in Pakistan? Almost all of the Pakistani --those who agree that they are Pakistani at least-- I have met here are Punjabi speaking and Punjabi looking folks. They look very similar to Indian here who call themselves "Desi". Most of the time they can understand each other's language too.


----------



## Big Tank

BringHarmony said:


> Aren't the "Punjabis" biggest ethnicity in Pakistan? Almost all of the Pakistani --those who agree that they are Pakistani at least-- I have met here are Punjabi speaking and Punjabi looking folks. They look very similar to Indian here who call themselves "Desi". Most of the time they can understand each other's language too.



That includes few Punjabis who migrated, most of the punjabis are ethnic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TMA

Musalman said:


> No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.


What do you mean, Pakistanis are the real Indians....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

Big Tank said:


> That includes few Punjabis who migrated, most of the punjabis are ethnic.


I could figure that. Their food, their living, their language and even their occupations have a certain pattern to them. Punjabi is certainly a strong and large ethnicity spanning across borders and even religions.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Aren't the "Punjabis" the biggest ethnicity in Pakistan? Almost all of the Pakistani --those who agree that they are Pakistani at least-- I have met here are Punjabi speaking and Punjabi looking folks. They look very similar to Indian here who call themselves "Desi". Most of the time they can understand each other's language too.






But Punjabis make up less than 3% of india's population so that is irrelevant. 30-40% of Pakistan's population have a racial/dna connection to Iran and afghanistan. That doesn't make us Pakistanis indian just as it doesn't make us Iranian, afghan or Middle Eastern.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Chhatrapati

And the Bengladeshi's who claim they are in South East Asia. @Nilgiri

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But Punjabis make up less than 3% of india's population so that is irrelevant. 30-40% of Pakistan's population have a racial/dna connection to Iran and afghanistan. That doesn't make us Pakistanis indian just as it doesn't make us Iranian, afghan or Middle Eastern.


Relax, no one is accusing you of being an Indian --politically speaking that is.

Though most of the Punjabi here in Canada have formed a common "identity" irrespective of their country of origin. I once dealt with Punjabi speaking civil engineers and architects. They have a professional association called "Society of Punjabi Engineers and Technologist". I was surprised to find that they have representation from both India and Pakistan.

https://speatbc.org/

Heck their own motto is

"SPEATBC is a non-profit organization, which has successfully brought together Engineers and Technologists from different disciplines from both Canada and the *Indian subcontinent**."*

Last I checked they were not asking for a blood sample in their membership form.

Even more interestingly, almost all of the Indians, Pakistani and Bangladeshi prefer to live together in Canada : Atleast what I have seen in BC. Irani crowd, however, prefer to live separate from the bunch.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chhatrapati

@PakSarzameen5823 You started thread based on Geography. Not racial.



BringHarmony said:


> I was surprised to find that they have representation from both India and Pakistan.


Don't mind PDF and subcontinent. When they are abroad, things are quite different.


----------



## Big Tank

BringHarmony said:


> I could figure that. Their food, their living, their language and even their occupations have a certain pattern to them. Punjabi is certainly a strong and large ethnicity spanning across borders and even religions.



As I said, having same kind of Food, Language etc doesn't make them the same. You go the Indian Punjab, what you find is dark toned Punjabis (not being racist, I don't care about skin). While if you go to the Pakistani Punjab, you find mid toned/light toned Punjabis much as compared to dark toned. Not saying that we're all kinda Persians or etc. My ancestors migrated from Uzbekistan to Sindh when the Sufi Saints migrated and influenced other muslims to travel to Sindh. Now, I am a Sindhi, my father is and my grandfather's father. I don't know any heck about Uzbekistan. I am a Sindhi. Does this make me Indian? Just because India got few Sindhis?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

Chhatrapati said:


> Don't mind PDF and subcontinent. When they are abroad, things are quite different.


Well, you folks remind me of Europe of 1800s and early 1900s. Warring and fighting among each other and having a common identity outside your region. Europeans did that at a time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kamikaze Pilot

Big Tank said:


> While if you go to the Pakistani Punjab, you find mid toned/light toned Punjabis


Yeah like Shoaib Akhtar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Utter nonsense 

Now a Punjab hater Afghani refugee hiding in Pakistan (@PakSarzameen5823) is trying to tell us who we are ??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

Big Tank said:


> As I said, having same kind of Food, Language etc doesn't make them the same. You go the Indian Punjab, what you find is dark toned Punjabis (not being racist, I don't care about skin). While if you go to the Pakistani Punjab, you find mid toned/light toned Punjabis much as compared to dark toned. Not saying that we're all kinda Persians or etc. My ancestors migrated from Uzbekistan to Sindh when the Sufi Saints migrated and influenced other muslims to travel to Sindh. Now, I am a Sindhi, my father is and my grandfather's father. I don't know any heck about Uzbekistan. I am a Sindhi. Does this make me Indian? Just because India got few Sindhis?


Okay, so there is a political identity. And there is an ethnic identity.

Punjabi is an ethnic identity: No wonder they stick together irrespective of their nation of origin, when outside their nation.
Pakistani is a political identity: No wonder in sports Pakistani wave their Pakistani flags for their national teams.

Both can co-exist. In the very same person and communities. To be honest, these identities are all hats. You wear different hats during different times of day and seasons and fashions.

My familial origin is from Scotland, like a number of Canadians. Canada is my national or political identity but I feel really at ease with Americans and Scottish too. You will be hard pressed to tell us apart. That is if we don't want you to tell us apart.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

BringHarmony said:


> Aren't the "Punjabis" the biggest ethnicity in Pakistan? Almost all of the Pakistani --those who agree that they are Pakistani at least-- I have met here are Punjabi speaking and Punjabi looking folks. They look very similar to Indian here who call themselves "Desi". Most of the time they can understand each other's language too.



In Pakistan, you're considered Punjabi just by being born and raised in the Punjab. It includes Baloch, Pashtuns and Kashmiris who have settled in the Punjab (they make a significant chunk of Punjab's population, probably about 40%). Even among ethnic Punjabis, most of them are descended from foreigners who assimilated into the region during the Islamic invasions, e.g Arains, Awans, Qureshis, Ansaris, Mughals and Syeds. 



Chhatrapati said:


> @PakSarzameen5823 You started thread based on Geography. Not racial.



Another insecure Indian who desperately wants to propagate his Akhand Bharat nonsense by undermining the facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Relax, no one is accusing you of being an Indian --politically speaking that is.
> 
> Though most of the Punjabi here in Canada have formed a common "identity" irrespective of their country of origin. I once dealt with Punjabi speaking civil engineers and architects. They have a professional association called "Society of Punjabi Engineers and Technologist". I was surprised to find that they have representation from both India and Pakistan.
> 
> https://speatbc.org/
> 
> Heck their own motto is
> 
> "SPEATBC is a non-profit organization, which has successfully brought together Engineers and Technologists from different disciplines from both Canada and the *Indian subcontinent**."*
> 
> Last I checked they were not asking for a blood sample in their membership form.
> 
> Even more interestingly, almost all of the Indians, Pakistani and Bangladeshi prefer to live together in Canada : Atleast what I have seen in BC. Irani crowd, however, prefer to live separate from the bunch.






That is still irrelevant considering that ONLY 3% of indians AT MOST have ANY dna, genetic or racial connections to Pakistanis. Also, I speak English and get along really well with English people, that doesn't however make me one of them. Getting along with someone or a group of some people doesn't mean you have any connections with them. Here in the UK, Pakistanis get along really well with Arabs and Brazialians/South Americans. We all speak English too. That doesn't make us the all the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chhatrapati

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Another insecure Indian who desperately wants to propagate his Akhand Bharat nonsense by undermining the facts.


LOL! Did I trigger you that much? 

Did I say anything about Akhand Bharat anywhere?  Chillax boi.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Chhatrapati said:


> Did I say anything about Akhand Bharat anywhere?



We know your ulterior motives of trying to Indian-wash all of Pakistan, even non-Indics aren't spared from your propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> That is still irrelevant considering that ONLY 3% of indians AT MOST have ANY dna, genetic or racial connections to Pakistanis. Also, I speak English and get along really well with English people, that doesn't however make me one of them. Getting along with someone or a group of some people doesn't mean you have any connections with them. Here in the UK, Pakistanis get along really well with Arabs and Brazialians/South Americans. We all speak English too. That doesn't make us the all the same.


Dude relax!
One can be both Punjabi and Pakistani Or Punjabi and Indian. Also, one can be non-Punjabi and either ethnicity. A single ethnic group *does not *define the political identity of a nation and a single nationality need not *necessarily *bind an ethnicity. Those days are over if they were ever there in the first place.

Being Punjabi does not mean you stop being Pakistani or Indian or heck Canadian.

Oh! and ethnicity is way deeper than just the language. Heck dare I say, ethnicity is way deeper than even nationality?

I am ethnic Scottish but that does not disqualify me from being a Canadian, or vice-versa. And being an ethnic Scottish does not make me a British subject, necessarily. Isn't it? Neither the British nationality is limited to Scottish or Welsh.


----------



## Chhatrapati

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> We know your ulterior motives of trying to Indian-wash all of Pakistan, even non-Indics aren't spared from your propaganda.


Don't put words in my mouth. I would hate to be reintegrated with you lot. You're a poor country, we already have a fair share of problems. 

Now, the term Indian Subcontinent is a geographic term not the people, Afghan was added to it considering it's sad state of affairs. Try not to be salty about it.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Chhatrapati said:


> Now, the term Indian Subcontinent is a geographic term not the people



I never said otherwise.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Dude relax!
> One can be both Punjabi and Pakistani Or Punjabi and Indian. Also, one can be non-Punjabi and either ethnicity. A single ethnic group *does not *define the political identity of a nation and a single nationality need not *necessarily *bind an ethnicity. Those days are over if they were ever there in the first place.
> 
> Being Punjabi does not mean you stop being Pakistani or Indian or heck Canadian.
> 
> Oh! and ethnicity is way deeper than just the language. Heck dare I say, ethnicity is way deeper than even nationality?
> 
> I am ethnic Scottish but that does not disqualify me from being a Canadian, or vice-versa. And being an ethnic Scottish does not make me a British subject, necessarily. Isn't it? Neither the British nationality is limited to Scottish or Welsh.





Modern day Pakistani Punjabis are racially different to modern day indian Punjabis (who make up less than 3% of india's population, anyway). This is due to indian Punjabis intermarrying with indian ethnicies/races who not common to Pakistanis; and Pakistani Punjabis intermarrying with ethnicites/races to the West of us who are racially alien to indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Modern day Pakistani Punjabis are racially different to modern day indian Punjabis (who make up less than 3% of india's population, anyway). This is due to indian Punjabis intermarrying with indian ethnicies/races who not common to Pakistanis; and Pakistani Punjabis intermarrying with ethnicites/races to the West of us who are racially alien to indians.


Racially or Genetically? They are not the same.

You do know that "Race" can be stretched. Also, race is a rather fickle concept and redefined to suite certain agenda.

I am "sharing" my race with Russians and Austrians and Germans but heck, genetically there will be differences among us. We are still considered the same race though. A person can tell if I am a German White or a Scottish White or Greek White by even looking at us. We are still the same race somehow. Because those who discuss the race have their agenda satisfied by keeping us "In Race".

BTW, how do you know that Only Indians are intermarrying with other Indian "non-Punjabis" and "Pakistani-Punjabis" are not also intermarrying with say Pushtuns or Iranian-looking-Pakistani? It's not always obvious by just looking.

For that matter, I know there is some Greek blood in my family. But by looks, I couldn't have told it apart. Only using a blood test we were able to find it.

Even from looks alone --which is how Race is usually identified-- at least I am not able to tell Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Punjabis apart.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Liquidmetal

BringHarmony said:


> You do realize that a sports event does not last all year round, right? Its a one-off thing. People here in Canada and rest of the 'western' world do not live in fear of being called for any particular ethnicity. They call themselves whatever they want to suit their own agenda.


No it was just examples to show how many thousands of people will celebrate Pakistan and to shoot down your lies and propaganda, so those thousands are chanting Pakistan Zindabad are not a good enough example for you but your tiny coterie of Pak friends is representative of the feelings of a diaspora made of millions of people. So my small base of Indians that want nothing to be Indian but be as white as possible shows that you lot outside are just a bunch of coconuts right. The truth is most Pakistanis are deeply offended when we are labelled by ignorant people as Indian, we have our identity and nationality and want nothing to do with the bigots next door.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Liquidmetal said:


> The truth is most Pakistanis are deeply offended


If they are they certainly don't show it. They like to watch Indian movies, they like run Indian restaurents, they like to eat Indian food, they like to say the are partitioned from India, they like to wear Indian cloths. In fact they can't live without using 'India' or 'Desi' which is another way of saying 'India'.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Racially or Genetically? They are not the same.
> 
> You do know that "Race" can be stretched. Also, race is a rather fickle concept and redefined to suite certain agenda.
> 
> I am "sharing" my race with Russians and Austrians and Germans but heck, genetically there will be differences among us. We are still considered the same race though. A person can tell if I am a German White or a Scottish White or Greek White by even looking at us. We are still the same race somehow. Because those who discuss the race have their agenda satisfied by keeping us "In Race".
> 
> BTW, how do you know that Only Indians are intermarrying with other Indian "non-Punjabis" and "Pakistani-Punjabis" are not also intermarrying with say Pushtuns or Iranian-looking-Pakistani? It's not always obvious by just looking.
> 
> For that matter, I know there is some Greek blood in my family. But by looks, I couldn't have told it apart. Only using a blood test we were able to find it.
> 
> Even from looks alone --which is how Race is usually identified-- at least I am not able to tell Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Punjabis apart.






But that is conjecture at most. I find extremely easy to tell the difference between a Pakistani Punjabi and an indian Punjabi. Even more easier to tell the diference butween a Pakistani and an indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gangetic

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But that is conjecture at most. I find extremely easy to tell the difference between a Pakistani Punjabi


I can tell apart Pothwari speakers in the north and Seraiki speakers in the south due to skin colour and facial features. But can you tell apart a Lahori and Amritsari?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Musalman said:


> No matter what majority of Pakistanis have Indian ancestry, so learn to live with it.


Please define "Indian ancestry" because according to numerous genetic studies; there is a clear distinction between Pakistanis and Indians.



BringHarmony said:


> As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.


That's BS, I have lived amongst numerous multi-cultural communities in the United States and Canada.



Chhatrapati said:


> Don't put words in my mouth. I would hate to be reintegrated with you lot. You're a poor country, we already have a fair share of problems.


and India is a rich country? 

Median wealth of a Pakistani is nearly 3x higher than an Indian's.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Indus Valley said:


> I can tell apart Pothwari speakers in the north and Seraiki speakers in the south due to skin colour and facial features. But can you tell apart a Lahori and Amritsari?





Very easily. Modern day Pakistani Punjabis are completely different to modern day indian Punjabis. They are not the same people they were 100 of more years ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Musalman said:


> Mohajirs???
> We punjabis are Indian ancestry, Bajwa chattha jatt etc etc. So are the Sindhi. Only pushton and Baluch are Iranic.


too bad even british dont agree with retards like yourself.

For example... Richard Burton who travelled the entire region and more... researched and wrote a book:
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.22744

He mentions how one can see the difference even in physical and facial features when one enters Sindh which has always remained a STATE... And is rightfully called the mother of south asia..

Sindh is probably the oldest state/kingdom/country in south asia with its own unique culture.. and has aborbed other races from as far as central asia... 

This is a book about Races living in Sindh/Indus... go through it..



BringHarmony said:


> As much as I have seen here in Canada, Pakistani only call themselves Pakistani in private conversation among themselves. Officially they call themselves "Punjabi", "Indian", "Desi" etc.


That is nonsense.

The word 'desi' is never used for 'people' by Pakistani... but always in sense of food... for example desi ghee,desi murghi etc... you will almost never find Pak calling themselves desis or farmi lol.

As for Panjabis... sire... its always the indian sikhs who call themselves Panjabis... and almost never indian.

For reasons they are proud of their panjabiness and have some sort of superiority complex vis other indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## BringHarmony

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> That is nonsense.
> 
> The word 'desi' is never used for 'people' by Pakistani... but always in sense of food... for example desi ghee,desi murghi etc... you will almost never find Pak calling themselves desis or farmi lol.
> 
> As for Panjabis... sire... its always the indian sikhs who call themselves Panjabis... and almost never indian.
> 
> For reasons they are proud of their panjabiness and have some sort of superiority complex vis other indians.


How many years have you live among Canadian Pakistani?


----------



## Rafi

There is no such thing as the indian subcontinent, it's a myth. 
And the non resident Pakistanis I have seen and known are ready to throw down if you called them indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## @@@

Pakistan is clearly Eurasian/Arab more-so than Indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> That is nonsense.
> 
> The word 'desi' is never used for 'people' by Pakistani... but always in sense of food... for example desi ghee,desi murghi etc... you will almost never find Pak calling themselves desis or farmi lol.
> 
> As for Panjabis... sire... its always the indian sikhs who call themselves Panjabis... and almost never indian.
> 
> For reasons they are proud of their panjabiness and have some sort of superiority complex vis other indians.


http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ot-Freshies-quot-For-UK-US-Canadian-etc-Desis

Poster is a Pakistani British.



> I was speaking to a few new graduate analysts at work. As someone who has been at the firm for a while, I kind of look out for a few of the new grads we take in, esp those from a *Desi* *background*.
> 
> The two young guys I was speaking to over lunch today (1 Pakistani, 1 Indian), both came to the UK as University students. They went to two of the better Universities in this country (Cambridge & LSE), but were both taken aback by the attitude of the *UK-born desis here.
> *
> They both came here with no family or friends, and were happy when they *saw fellow desis on campus.* People that they could relate too, they thought. They could be more approachable, more understanding, and even maybe more willing to help out a *fellow Pakistani/Indian* new to the country.




2. Book titled : * Desi* Liberal, Written by *Pakistani Author* Waqas Anees describing liberals in Pakistan.

3. https://diaryofadesidebugger.pk/

Dairy of a *Desi* Debugger. Written by a *Pakistani* student.

4. https://dikhawa.pk/blogs/parhlo/8-unbelievable-things-you-can-only-expect-from-*a-desi-guy*

There are too many to list.

You know how I found all of these? Simple!
Google :

desi pakistani site:.pk
desi guy site:.pk
desi author site:.pk

and so on....

The word Desi has been used to describe Pakistani people a lot by Pakistani themselves. Specially in foreign countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

Indus Pakistan said:


> Absolutely true. On PDF they might claim differant but rarely will you get them calling themselves 'Pakistani'. So form of alternative will be used. This is to do with the abject failure in the state failing to form a identity and consolidated brand.
> 
> Except for the Mohajirs rest [94%] don't. And I assume you are a Mohajir who feels the need to foist that descriptor on rest of us. Now if you said most Pakistan's have South Asian heritage - yes I would agree with you.


No every Pakistani that I have met, calls himself Pakistani. The hesitate when you ask where in pakistan, then when u tell them that your pakistani too, they open up.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BringHarmony

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> That's BS, I have lived amongst numerous multi-cultural communities in the United States and Canada.


Well, Asians have this 'Inside' / 'Outside' behaviour. Among themselves they have different behaviour and outside they have different. If you look at my first post, you will see I said that in private they call themselves Pakistani but publically, they use all sorts of words : "Desi", "Indian", "Punjabi" and so on...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Army research

Indus Pakistan said:


> To begin with Indian sub-continent should not be used. I have worn myself out here trying to explain to Paks not to fcukin use terms like India sub-continent, desi, Asian, Muslim and the other synonyms I hear. If we don't own the name 'Pakistan' nobody else will. Specifically with referance to Indian Sub-continent post 1947 that term should have been dropped. These are geographic descriptors and a more neutral term like South Asia should be used. Simply because the term 'India' was branded in 1947 by a nation state called Bharat. Thus to prevent any ambiquity and to be neutral all the states that occupy trhe region South Asia should be used.
> 
> With referance to what you say it's not entirely this simple. From tectonic point of view what you said true. But in human geography and even physical geography rivers tend to bind and not separate. Consider Ganga. You can' divide northern plains of Ganga from the souther plains. Similiarly Indus is one physical water system that includes good chunk of Afghanistan. Kabul River is a tributary of Indus as much as Jhelum is.
> 
> Where Pakistan should focus on is Indus River simply because one can see Pakistan is underpinned by it. Pakistan occupies most of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can be used as a synomym for Indus Basin. That is why I use that handle. Some of the Indus Basin does extend into Afghanistan, China and India but as the map below shows Pakistan is central to the Indus Basin. In fact in Pakistan you can't really escape from the Indus Basin.


Sir to say I have tried a lot to explain this to my age mates would he and understatement I have to say , yet our people's are more inclined to learn about priyanka chopras marriage than what separates us from the gangetic hordes posted to destroy us and how our pushtun brothers sit in Afghanistan occupied by parsi and dari invaders ,

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But that is conjecture at most. I find extremely easy to tell the difference between a Pakistani Punjabi and an indian Punjabi. Even more easier to tell the diference butween a Pakistani and an indian.


Lets do one thing. I will prepare a collage of faces containing Pakistani faces and non-Pakistani faces. Lets see how many of those you can correctly identify. That way we can put an end to this argument once and for all. Agreed?


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

BringHarmony said:


> You do realize that a sports event does not last all year round, right? Its a one-off thing. People here in Canada and rest of the 'western' world do not live in fear of being called for any particular ethnicity. They call themselves whatever they want to suit their own agenda.


What are you talking about? Where are you from in Canada? Every Canadian loses his marbles if you call him American, the common Canadian hates the Americans. They consider them cocky and irritating. Although when the Americans go abroad they classify themselves as canadians, cause we get treated better.


----------



## BringHarmony

Pakhtoon yum said:


> What are you talking about? Where are you from in Canada? Every Canadian loses his marbles if you call him American, the common Canadian hates the Americans. They consider them cocky and irritating. Although when the Americans go abroad they classify themselves as canadians, cause we get treated better.


I am from BC, specifically North Van.
And no, we don't hate or anything, but we correct people if they are making incorrect assumption. We do like to jeer Americans and they do jeer back at us. Most of the time, most of us, Americans and Canadians do not wave our nationality when we meet strangers. And no, no one loses marbles over such a honest mistake: Mistaking Canadians for Americans or vice-versa. We do get irritated when people pester us knowingly.

How the hell you came to this conclusion that common Canadians hate Americans?

http://www.pewglobal.org/interactives/us-image/

Only very recently --mostly due to Donald Trump-- US image has gone down and still about 40% of Canadians hold a positive image of US. Historically a majority (Mostly > 60%) has held a positive image of the US.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Lets do one thing. I will prepare a collage of faces containing Pakistani faces and non-Pakistani faces. Lets see how many of those you can correctly identify. That way we can put an end to this argument once and for all. Agreed?






That means nothing because it would be created with biases which would make that teste unreliable. Also the sample size would not suffice. You can even post pictures of Arabs and Iranians who look dark and "South Asian". Doesn't mean they are indian racially. I have lived in London over 35 years and been to Pakistan over 30 times. I have seen countless indians and Pakistanis and it is very EASY to tell the two apart.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

BringHarmony said:


> I am from BC, specifically North Van.
> And no, we don't hate or anything, but we correct people if they are making incorrect assumption. We do like to jeer Americans and they do jeer back at us. Most of the time, most of us, Americans and Canadians do not wave our nationality when we meet strangers. And no, no one loses marbles over such a honest mistake: Mistaking Canadians for Americans or vice-versa. We do get irritated when people pester us knowingly.
> 
> How the hell you came to this conclusion that common Canadians hate Americans?
> 
> http://www.pewglobal.org/interactives/us-image/
> 
> Only very recently --mostly due to Donald Trump-- US image has gone down and still about 40% of Canadians hold a positive image of US. Historically a majority (Mostly > 60%) has held a positive image of the US.


This is interesting, you seem to talk of something else the reality. We here in the plains do not like them at all and it's a fact


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> That means nothing because it would be created with biases which would make that teste unreliable. Also the sample size would not suffice. You can even post pictures of Arabs and Iranians who look dark and "South Asian". Doesn't mean they are indian racially. I have lived in London over 35 years and been to Pakistan over 30 times. I have seen countless indians and Pakistanis and it is very EASY to tell the two apart.


If it is that easy to tell two apart by just looking then you should perform significantly better than a control. And relax, I will include proof how a person is of a particular nationality by the source picture where they come from.

We can remove bias in a simple manner. Lets take a set of say 100 faces of Indian Punjabis and 100 faces of say Pakistani punjabis where no visible cultural features like head-scarf, turbans, beards etc are present. Then randomly create a collage of say 20 Pakistani and 10 Indians. You can repeat the expriment with a fresh set of 20 Pakistani and 10 Indians to further remove bias. We can take best of say 3 attempts.



Pakhtoon yum said:


> This is interesting, you seem to talk of something else the reality. We here in the plains do not like them at all and it's a fact


If by we you mean Pakistani - Canadians, I can certainly understand. But as you can see in Pew polls, historically US had a very positive image in Canada.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Indus Valley said:


> I can tell apart Pothwari speakers in the north and Seraiki speakers in the south due to skin colour and facial features. But can you tell apart a Lahori and Amritsari?



Yeah.



DESERT FIGHTER said:


> For reasons they are proud of their panjabiness and have some sort of superiority complex vis other indians.



This trend is also the case with Marathas, Kashmiris, Brahmins, Rajputs, etc. If they're Indian and they have a prestigious background, they tend to flex it (but this isn't just an Indian thing, all people do this).



BringHarmony said:


> Lets do one thing. I will prepare a collage of faces containing Pakistani faces and non-Pakistani faces. Lets see how many of those you can correctly identify. That way we can put an end to this argument once and for all. Agreed?



No, because you can easily just selectively choose people to fit your narrative, all brown people tend to look vaguely the same, and because looks are entirely subjective.



BringHarmony said:


> Lets take a set of say 100 faces of Indian Punjabis and 100 faces of say Pakistani punjabis where *no visible cultural features like head-scarf, turbans, beards etc are present.*



Those cultural features are part of what makes us look different. 

I've got a better idea. Dump in other brown people (all of a similarish shade) too into your little collage of faces, with the same criteria applied to all of them. You're going to notice how difficult it is to distinguish between them.


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

BringHarmony said:


> If it is that easy to tell two apart by just looking then you should perform significantly better than a control. And relax, I will include proof how a person is of a particular nationality by the source picture where they come from.
> 
> We can remove bias in a simple manner. Lets take a set of say 100 faces of Indian Punjabis and 100 faces of say Pakistani punjabis where no visible cultural features like head-scarf, turbans, beards etc are present. Then randomly create a collage of say 20 Pakistani and 10 Indians. You can repeat the expriment with a fresh set of 20 Pakistani and 10 Indians to further remove bias. We can take best of say 3 attempts.
> 
> 
> If by we you mean Pakistani - Canadians, I can certainly understand. But as you can see in Pew polls, historically US had a very positive image in Canada.


By we I mean canadians, nice try at a provocations that was almost cute.


----------



## Placemat

American Pakistani said:


> Bhartis and even some Pakistanis believe that Indian Subcontinent means land area from Afghanistan to Myanmar.


It's from Arabia to japan



Dewaneh said:


> Pakistan is clearly Eurasian/Arab more-so than Indian.


 Too much nonsense . Happy ny

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

BringHarmony said:


> you will see I said that in private they call themselves Pakistani but publically, they use all sorts of words : "Desi", "Indian", "Punjabi" and so on...


Yes they use words such as Desi and Punjabi, but never call themselves Indians...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rusty

Pakistan is neither middle Eastern, South Asian, or Central Asian. We are just Pakistani

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

BringHarmony said:


> http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ot-Freshies-quot-For-UK-US-Canadian-etc-Desis
> 
> Poster is a Pakistani British.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Book titled : * Desi* Liberal, Written by *Pakistani Author* Waqas Anees describing liberals in Pakistan.
> 
> 3. https://diaryofadesidebugger.pk/
> 
> Dairy of a *Desi* Debugger. Written by a *Pakistani* student.
> 
> 4. https://dikhawa.pk/blogs/parhlo/8-unbelievable-things-you-can-only-expect-from-*a-desi-guy*
> 
> There are too many to list.
> 
> You know how I found all of these? Simple!
> Google :
> 
> desi pakistani site:.pk
> desi guy site:.pk
> desi author site:.pk
> 
> and so on....
> 
> The word Desi has been used to describe Pakistani people a lot by Pakistani themselves. Specially in foreign countries.



Stop polluting this thread with your conspiracy theories.

In Pakistan, Des or Desi simply means country (I.e. Pakistan.)

Par des means outside of Pakistan.

Apna Des means our own Pakistan.

From what I gather, you Indians and BD refer to yourselves as Deshi, not Desi.


----------



## Darwin

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But that is conjecture at most. I find extremely easy to tell the difference between a Pakistani Punjabi and an indian Punjabi. Even more easier to tell the diference butween a Pakistani and an indian.


Fully agree. I can easily differentiate a Indian or a Pakistani or even some South Americans. Though have to confess once I met a Brazilian who looked so Indian it was scary.
Pointers for others -
Pakistanis are -
Tall, fair, well built, straight noses, Greek like features mostly. And language is sweet. 

Indians -
Short, brown or dark,not at all well built, flat noses.
Language is also coarser.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> This trend is also the case with Marathas, Kashmiris, Brahmins, Rajputs, etc. If they're Indian and they have a prestigious background, they tend to flex it (but this isn't just an Indian thing, all people do this).



Stop promoting this fantasy that we are Indians or ex-Hindus, you are as bad as the Hindu fanatics.

Every citizen of this nation of Pakistan is a Pakistani, full stop.

You ask a Pakistani Rajput if he is Indian, he would rather cut his own throat than say it.

We did not fight for hundreds of years to spread Islam and defeat the enemies of Muslims to be called ex-Hindu or Indian by you.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yogijaat

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Stop promoting this fantasy that we are Indians or ex-Hindus, you are as bad as the Hindu fanatics.
> 
> Every citizen of this nation of Pakistan is a Pakistani, full stop.
> 
> You ask a Pakistani Rajput if he is Indian, he would rather cut his own throat than say it.
> 
> We did not fight for hundreds of years to spread Islam and defeat the enemies of Muslims to be called ex-Hindu or Indian by you.


100 years of Islam and you still can't get over with caste system? Don't tell me that they are tribes, not caste BS.


----------



## Rusty

Yogijaat said:


> 100 years of Islam and you still can't get over with caste system? Don't tell me that they are tribes, not caste BS.


No cast system here. We purged that hateful ideology long ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## @@@

Yogijaat said:


> 100 years of Islam and you still can't get over with caste system? Don't tell me that they are tribes, not caste BS.


We have been Muslim since 700 AD. Pathetic practice of the disgraceful Hinduist caste system is not practiced in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BringHarmony

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Stop polluting this thread with your conspiracy theories.
> 
> In Pakistan, Des or Desi simply means country (I.e. Pakistan.)
> 
> Par des means outside of Pakistan.
> 
> Apna Des means our own Pakistan.
> 
> From what I gather, you Indians and BD refer to yourselves as Deshi, not Desi.


There is no conspiracy theory. If there is one, refute with evidence. BTW, usage of the language is dependent on people. Desi is a loan word in Canadian, American, British, Australian vernacular. It roughly means Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi or Indian subcontinental.

And, no thanks, I am not Desi.

May I ask, why Pakistani show such a high degree of irritation when presented with facts or counter evidence to their strongly held believes. The other guy here is not even ready to put his claim to test but he very strongly believes in it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Yogijaat said:


> 100 years of Islam and you still can't get over with caste system? Don't tell me that they are tribes, not caste BS.



Because you racists conflate tribe with caste doesn’t make us wrong for ascribing to our tribal ancestry.

Go lynch/rape some Indian Muslims or kill/strip some Dalits and log off PDF. We don’t need this place sullied with your nonsense.



BringHarmony said:


> There is no conspiracy theory. If there is one, refute with evidence. BTW, usage of the language is dependent on people. Desi is a loan word in Canadian, American, British, Australian vernacular. It roughly means Indian, Indian subcontinental.
> 
> And, no thanks, I am not Desi.
> 
> May I ask, why Pakistani show such a high degree of irritation when presented with facts or counter evidence to their strongly held believes. The other guy here is not even ready to put his claim to test but he very strongly believes in it.



Des is an Urdu word meaning own country. If a Pakistani uses it, it refers to Pakistan (his homeland.)

Bangla Desh is an example of the proper use of the form of that word found in Bengali, meaning homeland of Bengalis.

Having lived in Pakistan, I don’t need to prove to a foreigner like yourself about our thinking as a nation.

It is misused in the West and people are starting to understand the nuance.

Now mostly it is used by Indians who try to co-opt Pakistanis and their culture to stretch the definition of race and culture, or by Bangladeshis who try to find commonality with Pakistanis.

The difference between Pakistanis and Indians/BD is night and day. We have more in common with some European, Arab, Persian, Turkic, North African countries than you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Those cultural features are part of what makes us look different.
> 
> I've got a better idea. Dump in other brown people (all of a similarish shade) too into your little collage of faces, with the same criteria applied to all of them. You're going to notice how difficult it is to distinguish between them.


If you followed the discussion in which my comment was made, it was a counter claim to the argument made by a venerable Pakistani poster about how 'genetics' and 'race' separates Indian Punjabi from Pakistani Punjabi and in general Indian from Pakistani. And how a well-trained Pakistani can ALWAYS tell a Pakistani from an Indian Punjabi just by one glance because apparently Indian Punjabi are 'mixed'. To test this, you need to keep other variables constant, hence cultural motifs need to be kept constant. 

BTW, I agree, that Indian and Pakistani Punjabi culture while having major similarities have many important differences too. Religion being the biggest part perhaps.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

BringHarmony said:


> If you followed the discussion in which my comment was made, it was a counter claim to the argument made by a venerable Pakistani poster about how 'genetics' and 'race' separates Indian Punjabi from Pakistani Punjabi and in general Indian from Pakistani. And how a well-trained Pakistani can ALWAYS tell a Pakistani from an Indian Punjabi just by one glance because apparently Indian Punjabi are 'mixed'. To test this, you need to keep other variables constant, hence cultural motifs need to be kept constant.
> 
> BTW, I agree, that Indian and Pakistani Punjabi culture while having major similarities have many important differences too. Religion being the biggest part perhaps.



Indian Punjabis are mixed with Southern Dravidian races and tend to be darker and have Indian facial features like UP and Gujuratis.

Pakistanis Punjabis tend to be lighter and have more Irani facial features typical of Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, Baloch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Des is an Urdu word meaning own country. If a Pakistani uses it, it refers to Pakistan (his homeland.)


Sure that may be the origin of the word but as it is used in English vernacular, it does not mean Of My Homeland.

If a Native American comes and tells that he is a Desi, it won't mean he is from the homeland. It will mean he is confused. In English vernehcular Desi is used exclusively by the people of Indian Subcontinent and that includes Indians, Pakistani and Bangaldeshi.



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Having lived in Pakistan, I don’t need to prove to a foreigner like yourself about our thinking as a nation.


I am not commenting on your nation. I am commenting on your nations diaspora living in foreign countries. Certainly I have quite a bit of visibility in that, they are living in my country and I see almost all the aspects of their life.



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> It is misused in the West and people are starting to understand the nuance.


Thats how vernaculars works. Do you think you are using all the words according to their original meaning? If that was the case no one would be "Surfing the web". Languages and their usage evolve. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> The different between Pakistanis and Indians/BD is night and day. We have more in common with some European, Arab, Persian, Turkic, North African countries than you.


Pakistani have way less common with me certainly. I am of Scottish origin. Honestly, how is it possible that you will have more in common with people living thousand of Kilometres but not with people who were living with you in British empire of India. You may certainly have some commonality with Persians. But for a large chunk of Pakistani, closest people are the ones from Indian Punjab.



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Indian Punjabis are mixed with Southern Dravidian races and tend to be darker and have Indian facial features like UP and Gujuratis.
> 
> Pakistanis Punjabis tend to be lighter and have more Irani facial features typical of Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, Baloch.


Sure! Lets see some faces from Lahore!

So here is what I did. I searched Lahore Market Crowd in images.google.com and too the first image with faces visible. It happens to be the first image itself.







Lets see Delhi Market Crowd. And apply the same process.





Here is one for London (Europe) BTW, to which you claim being close, the same process : 





Now tell me which one is day/night difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chhatrapati

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> and India is a rich country?
> 
> Median wealth of a Pakistani is nearly 3x higher than an Indian's.


Yeah, sure. HDI, per capita GDP, life expectancy, literacy etc.... are in dirt poor category and many indicators suggest you're similar to Nigeria in many aspects. Anyway, my point is not India is rich, but a regional integration will make India too poor than before. So, anyone who thinks such a scenario is stupid.


----------



## @@@

Some handpicked low-quality images above.

Here is crowd of Pakistan cricket fans. 






And now here are the Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Dewaneh said:


> Some handpicked low-quality images above.
> 
> Here is crowd of Pakistan cricket fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And now here are the Indians.



Shhh. Mr. “Scottish” Hindutva is trying to prove Pakistanis are the long lost children of India.

Don’t disrupt his glass house.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HalfMoon

Ancient India included Central Asia but current day Pakistanis are mostly of Arab origin and are not natives to the subcontinent.


----------



## @@@

HalfMoon said:


> Ancient India included Central Asia but current day Pakistanis are mostly of Arab origin and are not natives to the subcontinent.


WRONG! Diodorus' _Biblioteca Histórica_ refutes your claim! The Greek geographer strictly defined India and Gandaria as two _different_ nations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Sikh crowd






...VS...

Lahore crowd






Islamabad crowd






Peshawar crowd






Quetta crowd






As you can see, Pakistanis are a single racial stock (Indus/Iranic.)

We are different than Sikhs who have different facial features, body type, weight, and height than us.



HalfMoon said:


> Ancient India included Central Asia but current day Pakistanis are mostly of Arab origin and are not natives to the subcontinent.



Ridiculous statement.

There is no such thing as ancient India.

Indus was never part of Ganges civilization.

Most Pakistanis are Indus/Irani original natives of the land, just like Kashmiris.

Since ancient times, Irani tribes migrated in waves to Pakistan, which resulted in our unique phenotype and culture.

Your Hindutva pseudo-history has no hold here.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## swnjo

"Indian" Subcontinent , awesome, our own personal subcontinent along with an ocean to go. great.


----------



## Progressive1

From my experience roughly 75% of Pakistanis of differentiable from Indians, especially in large crowds. It would be wrong to say that all Pakistanis are easily differentiable from all Indians. More accurate would be to say most Pakistanis look different from Most Indians.



BringHarmony said:


> Racially or Genetically? They are not the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Even from looks alone --which is how Race is usually identified-- at least I am not able to tell Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Punjabis apart.


Most europeans cant be taken authority on how Non europeans look because just like to many non europeans all Euros look same, to many Euros , non european look same. But regardless you are som Indian false flagger acting as white.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yogijaat

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Because you racists conflate tribe with caste doesn’t make us wrong for ascribing to our tribal ancestry.
> 
> Go lynch/rape some Indian Muslims or kill/strip some Dalits and log off PDF. We don’t need this place sullied with your nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Des is an Urdu word meaning own country. If a Pakistani uses it, it refers to Pakistan (his homeland.)
> 
> Bangla Desh is an example of the proper use of the form of that word found in Bengali, meaning homeland of Bengalis.
> 
> Having lived in Pakistan, I don’t need to prove to a foreigner like yourself about our thinking as a nation.
> 
> It is misused in the West and people are starting to understand the nuance.
> 
> Now mostly it is used by Indians who try to co-opt Pakistanis and their culture to stretch the definition of race and culture, or by Bangladeshis who try to find commonality with Pakistanis.
> 
> The difference between Pakistanis and Indians/BD is night and day. We have more in common with some European, Arab, Persian, Turkic, North African countries than you.


jo khet jute wo jat, jo gaay charawe wo gujjar and raja ka beta rajput, this is hindu caste system. If you associate with any of them then you are still carrying the baggage of caste system. 


BringHarmony said:


> Sure that may be the origin of the word but as it is used in English vernacular, it does not mean Of My Homeland.
> 
> If a Native American comes and tells that he is a Desi, it won't mean he is from the homeland. It will mean he is confused. In English vernehcular Desi is used exclusively by the people of Indian Subcontinent and that includes Indians, Pakistani and Bangaldeshi.
> 
> 
> I am not commenting on your nation. I am commenting on your nations diaspora living in foreign countries. Certainly I have quite a bit of visibility in that, they are living in my country and I see almost all the aspects of their life.
> 
> 
> Thats how vernaculars works. Do you think you are using all the words according to their original meaning? If that was the case no one would be "Surfing the web". Languages and their usage evolve.
> 
> 
> Pakistani have way less common with me certainly. I am of Scottish origin. Honestly, how is it possible that you will have more in common with people living thousand of Kilometres but not with people who were living with you in British empire of India. You may certainly have some commonality with Persians. But for a large chunk of Pakistani, closest people are the ones from Indian Punjab.
> 
> 
> Sure! Lets see some faces from Lahore!
> 
> So here is what I did. I searched Lahore Market Crowd in images.google.com and too the first image with faces visible. It happens to be the first image itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see Delhi Market Crowd. And apply the same process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is one for London (Europe) BTW, to which you claim being close, the same process :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell me which one is day/night difference.


i can clearly see the similarity between the first and last.. esp. the ladies.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Stop promoting this fantasy that we are Indians or ex-Hindus, you are as bad as the Hindu fanatics.
> 
> Every citizen of this nation of Pakistan is a Pakistani, full stop.
> 
> You ask a Pakistani Rajput if he is Indian, he would rather cut his own throat than say it.
> 
> We did not fight for hundreds of years to spread Islam and defeat the enemies of Muslims to be called ex-Hindu or Indian by you.



I was specifically referring to Indian Rajputs, and I only call Rajputs ex-Hindu because that's what they are. No harm in admitting it. But prior to that, many of them did follow other religions.


----------



## HalfMoon

Dewaneh said:


> WRONG! Diodorus' _Biblioteca Histórica_ refutes your claim! The Greek geographer strictly defined India and Gandaria as two _different_ nations.



Lol. I do not need to learn my history from non-Indians.

Hint: Check who was Gandhari ?



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Ridiculous statement.
> 
> There is no such thing as ancient India.
> 
> Indus was never part of Ganges civilization.
> 
> Most Pakistanis are Indus/Irani original natives of the land, just like Kashmiris.
> 
> Since ancient times, Irani tribes migrated in waves to Pakistan, which resulted in our unique phenotype and culture.
> 
> Your Hindutva pseudo-history has no hold here.



Unfortunately your rants and propaganda will have no effect on the reality.

Pakistanis being Indo-Iranians is the joke of the millennia. 

Pakistanis are Arabs. This is the main reason why Pakistanis follow Sunnism, are proud of their Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim and hate anything to do with Indo-Iranians history or culture.


----------



## JohnWick

HalfMoon said:


> Lol. I do not need to learn my history from non-Indians.
> 
> Hint: Check who was Gandhari ?
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately your rants and propaganda will have no effect on the reality.
> 
> Pakistanis being Indo-Iranians is the joke of the millennia.
> 
> Pakistanis are Arabs. This is the main reason why Pakistanis follow Sunnism, are proud of their Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim and hate anything to do with Indo-Iranians history or culture.


Hostory is so simple your ancestors were the slaves of mughals and than “goore loog”.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis are Arabs. This is the main reason why Pakistanis follow Sunnism, are proud of their Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim and hate anything to do with Indo-Iranians history or culture.



Ok. I’m done with you.

If I want to listen to radical Hindutva Modi propaganda, I can go to one of your local cow lynchings. Enjoy your cow piss soda and cow feces on rice. Best of luck.


----------



## halupridol

Offourse Pakistani bhayyas are not actually bhayya,,,,they r of afghan,arab,turkic,central asian or neolithic farmers,,,absolutely not bhayya,,,,true story

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> I was specifically referring to Indian Rajputs, and I only call Rajputs ex-Hindu because that's what they are. No harm in admitting it. But prior to that, many of them did follow other religions.



Worry about your own tribe. Let us worry about Rajputs or Punjabis.



Yogijaat said:


> jo khet jute wo jat, jo gaay charawe wo gujjar and raja ka beta rajput, this is hindu caste system. If you associate with any of them then you are still carrying the baggage of caste system.
> 
> i can clearly see the similarity between the first and last.. esp. the ladies.



I don’t speak your language.

This is our tribal identity of which we are proud.

Pagan Arabs, Turks, Europeans, Africans, SE Asians, and Persians also abandoned their old outdated religions for Islam, but they never changed their surnames.

Why should we?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HalfMoon

JohnWick said:


> Hostory is so simple your ancestors were the slaves of mughals and than “goore loog”.



Of course Indians were colonized and became slaves of the Arabs but we were, are and will be Indians and natives of the Indian subcontinent while you Pakistanis were, are and will always be the Arab invaders of the Indian subcontinent.


----------



## JohnWick

HalfMoon said:


> Of course Indians were colonized and became slaves of the Arabs but we were, are and will be Indians and natives of the Indian subcontinent while you Pakistanis were, are and will always be the Arab invaders of the Indian subcontinent.


I think thats right
But thaey were homo erectus!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

JohnWick said:


> I think thats right



He’s an absolute fascist and also an idiot. He has no idea about actual history.

Nations are made and shaped over thousands of years, not in one day.

This is what happens when religious hate and zealotry and this false vision of Akhand Baharata (which never existed) blind a person from reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnWick

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> He’s an absolute fascist and also an idiot. He has no idea about actual history.
> 
> Nations are made and shaped over thousands of years, not in one day.
> 
> This is what happens when religious hate and zealotry and this false vision of Akhand Baharata (which never existed) blind a person from reality.


Thats why I used the word “here” 
Anyway .. homo erectus which were than evolved into humans lived there.


----------



## HalfMoon

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> He’s an absolute fascist and also an idiot. He has no idea about actual history.
> 
> Nations are made and shaped over thousands of years, not in one day.
> 
> This is what happens when religious hate and zealotry and this false vision of Akhand Baharata (which never existed) blind a person from reality.



Calling names does not change the facts. I am from South India and If anyone can claim being native of this land it is me and my people and certainly not Arab settlers from Arabia who call themselves Pakistanis today.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

halupridol said:


> Offourse Pakistani bhayyas are not actually bhayya,,,,they r of afghan,arab,turkic,central asian or neolithic farmers,,,absolutely not bhayya,,,,true story



Another crying Indian who can't stomach the facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## halupridol

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Another crying Indian who can't stomach the facts.


Oh sorry ,,,i forgot to add nordic ancestry.
Btw absolutely not bhayya


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

HalfMoon said:


> Calling names does not change the facts. I am from South India and If anyone can claim being native of this land it is me and my people and certainly not Arab settlers from Arabia who call themselves Pakistanis today.



Suddenly, every Hindu fundamentalist becomes a South Indian.

You are more close related to Aboriginal Austranesians than the natives of Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnWick

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Suddenly, every Hindu fundamentalist becomes a South Indian.
> 
> You are more close related to Aboriginal Austranesians than the natives of Pakistan.


Yeah also noticed that ,they all belonged to south India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HalfMoon

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Another crying Indian who can't stomach the facts.



Pakistanis are Arabs. Here are some indisputable facts

1) Pakistanis take pride in being descendants of Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim who invaded Indian subcontinent and made Indians as the slaves of the Arabs

2) Pakistanis follow tribe system like their Arab forefathers rather than the caste system followed in Indian subcontinent the natives. For example, even Muslims from India and Bangladesh follow caste system for marriages but there is no caste system in Pakistan

3) Pakistan love Arab culture and hate anything to do with Indian subcontinent culture. This is an important fact. People in Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Iran are all Muslims but they still take great pride in their local culture and history but in case of Pakistanis they hate any and all local culture and history prior to the conquest of the land by Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim. Pakistan's history starts with this event.


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

halupridol said:


> Oh sorry ,,,i forgot to add nordic ancestry.
> Btw absolutely not bhayya



Keep squealing.


----------



## HalfMoon

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Suddenly, every Hindu fundamentalist becomes a South Indian.
> 
> You are more close related to Aboriginal Austranesians than the natives of Pakistan.



I don't become one. I am one. I am the bhumiputra.

Your hate for me and my native people of the subcontinent is very apparent. This again proves that Pakistanis are the Arab invaders who occupied the land of my forefathers.


----------



## JohnWick

HalfMoon said:


> I don't become one. I am one. I am the bhumiputra.
> 
> Your hate for me and my native people of the subcontinent is very apparent. This again proves that Pakistanis are the Arab invaders who occupied the land of my forefathers.


Nahh they were just spreading democracy and freedom in india just like US is doing!


----------



## HalfMoon

JohnWick said:


> Yeah also noticed that ,they all belonged to south India.



I am in south India because your Arab forefathers displaced my forefathers from my native lands and called it Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnWick

HalfMoon said:


> I am in south India because your Arab forefathers displaced my forefathers from my native lands and called it Pakistan.


The people of 
Pakhtoons ,Sindhis and Balochi and punjab regions which is in Pak were not your forefathers!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

HalfMoon said:


> 1) Pakistanis take pride in being descendants of Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim who invaded Indian subcontinent and made Indians as the slaves of the Arabs



I know you are trolling but I'm going to break this apart anyway.

1. No, we don't think we're descended from Muhammad Bin Qasim. We like him for the same reasons Americans like Christopher Colombus, he brought Islam to the region and without him Pakistan wouldn't exist.



HalfMoon said:


> 2) Pakistanis follow tribe system like their Arab forefathers rather than the caste system followed in Indian subcontinent the natives. For example, even Muslims from India and Bangladesh follow caste system for marriages but there is no caste system in Pakistan



2. Can't speak for Bangladesh, but Pakistan doesn't have castes, only tribes. India still has a caste system though.



HalfMoon said:


> 3) Pakistan love Arab culture and hate anything to do with Indian subcontinent culture.



3. No, Pakistanis don't "love" Arab culture, your technique of sarcasm only works if you're playing off actual stereotypes, but in this case you're not.



HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis they hate any and all local culture and history prior to the conquest of the land by Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim



No, we don't. Point number 3 applies to this case too. We just consider his invasions good because they brought Islam to the region. We are Muslim first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HalfMoon

JohnWick said:


> Nahh they were jus spreading democracy and freedom in india just like US is doing!



Freedom my foot. Your Arab forefathers invaded my lands and made my forefathers slaves, displaced them from my native lands and forced my forefathers take refuge in other lands of the subcontinent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnWick

HalfMoon said:


> Freedom my foot. Your Arab forefathers invaded my lands and made my forefathers slaves, displaced them from my native lands and take refuge in other lands of the subcontinent.


I was just saying that .,,Thats were the US doing in the modren era in the name of democracy and freedom.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

HalfMoon said:


> Freedom my foot. Your Arab forefathers invaded my lands and made my forefathers slaves, displaced them from my native lands and take refuge in other lands of the subcontinent.





Do you have ANY evidence/proof to back up your claims? If not you are lying and making EVERYTHING up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> He’s an absolute fascist and also an idiot. He has no idea about actual history.
> 
> Nations are made and shaped over thousands of years, not in one day.
> 
> This is what happens when religious hate and zealotry and this false vision of Akhand Baharata (which never existed) blind a person from reality.



He is not fascist lol just some butthurt Bharat


----------



## HalfMoon

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Do you have ANY evidence/proof to back up your claims? If not you are lying and making EVERYRHING up.



Proof of what? You can google and there are tons of material confirming that Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim invaded India and made my forefathers as slaves. I do not think any Pakistani even disputes this fact. In fact this is an event of great pride for the Pakistanis. Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was their great forefather who conquered India. Pakistanis created and dedicate Pakistan in his name.


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> As you can see, Pakistanis are a single racial stock (Indus/Iranic.)
> 
> We are different than Sikhs who have different facial features, body type, weight, and height than us.



No, Pakistanis are not a single racial stock.
Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are of the same race/ethnicity. 
In fact, Pakistanis from _the South of Indus_ are closer to North Indians (racially, ethnically and linguistically) compared to Pakhtuns and Balochs.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

HalfMoon said:


> Proof of what? You can google and there are tons of material confirming that Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim invaded India and made my forefathers as slaves. I do not think any Pakistani even disputes this fact. In fact this is an event of great pride for the Pakistanis. Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was their great forefather who conquered India. Pakistanis created and dedicate Pakistan in his name.






But can you prove that EVERY single modern day Pakistani is from "invader" lineage as per your insinuations?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

HalfMoon said:


> Freedom my foot. Your Arab forefathers invaded my lands and made my forefathers slaves, displaced them from my native lands and forced my forefathers take refuge in other lands of the subcontinent.



Mods, if this poster can’t prove his assertions, I believe it warrants a ban.

@Horus @WebMaster @Dubious @waz

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## waz

HalfMoon said:


> I am in south India because your Arab forefathers displaced my forefathers from my native lands and called it Pakistan.



Pakistanis are not Arabs, stop writing rubbish on here. This is a fallacy and you can't prove it genetically or historically. 
The lands were not yours or your so called "forefathers", they belonged to our forefathers.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Foxtrot Delta

Geologically, pgysically and acurately speakimg in terms of continents and sub contients. Pakistan is 21% central asian, 40% falls under greator middle east/persia region rest of 39% falls under indian sub continent aka south asia. I should know my dad says so , he is a Senior geologist in Ajk minerals investigation Department and also an oil exploration scientist in usa state of texas on an oil rig called five star employee of british petrolium. He has phd in geology and masters in environmental engineering. I take his word regarding geology and geography always.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HalfMoon

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> 1. No, we don't think we're descended from Muhammad Bin Qasim. We like him for the same reasons Americans like Christopher Colombus, he brought Islam to the region and without him Pakistan wouldn't exist.



Columbus was a caucasian like majority of Americans. Similarly Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was an Arab like majority of Pakistanis. Finally you are accepting what I was saying all along.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> 2. Can't speak for Bangladesh, but Pakistan doesn't have castes, only tribes. India still has a caste system though.



Again thanks for agreeing. Pakistanis follow the tribe system like their Arab brothers and their Arab forefathers who have immigrated to the Indian subcontinent since the conquest by their great forefather Muḥammad ibn Qāsim. Only native people from Indian subcontinent follow caste system. The fact that caste system is missing in Pakistan is clear proof that Pakistanis are Arabs and not natives to this land.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> 3. No, Pakistanis don't "love" Arab culture, your technique of sarcasm only works if you're playing off actual stereotypes, but in this case you're not.



Saudis sponsored your nuke program, Saudi intervene/rescue whenever there is crisis in Pakistan and General RS is helping Saudis fight the Turks/Iranians and you want the world to believe that Pakistanis don't love Arabs?



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> No, we don't. Point number 3 applies to this case too. We just consider his invasions good because they brought Islam to the region. We are Muslim first.



Show me people from one Muslim country other than Pakistan who have given up their History and Culture for Islam?

Turkish are proud of their Central Asian roots and rulers.

Iranians still feel proud about Cyrus the great.

Bangladeshis are proud of their Bengali language.

Indonesians still play their Ramayana dramas.

This list goes on and on.

And now you want people to believe that Pakistanis gave up their native history and culture, started a new chapter with Muḥammad ibn Qāsim stepping a foot on this soil and became self hating people of their past history and culture just for the sake of Islam? No one believes that. This is going to be a tough sell for you.

The fact is Pakistanis are Arabs and love Muḥammad ibn Qāsim as he was their Arab general and forefather who brought them to this land.

Pakistanis do not consider any subcontinent culture and history prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim as their own as it not their own.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KediKesenFare3

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> This is a curious little fact I managed to stumble across. It turns out that geographically, most of Pakistan isn't a part of the Indian sub-continent. How? Let me explain:
> 
> Most of us know that the Indus river has been the traditional western boundary of the Indian sub-continent, and that this therefore means KPK, Balochistan and Gilgit Baltistan are not a part of the Indian sub-continent. However, what a lot of people don't actually know is that the total area of all these provinces is larger than the total area of all of Pakistan's provinces that are a part of the Indian sub-continent (Punjab+Sindh+AK+Islamabad capital territory).
> 
> *Total area of Pakistan: 796096 square km
> 
> Area of Balochistan: 347190 square km
> 
> Area of KPK: 74521 square km
> 
> Area of FATA (now a part of KPK): 27220 square km *
> 
> *Area of GB: 72971 square km
> 
> Total area of above provinces: 521902 square km
> *
> Sources:
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/2010122...k/depts/pco/statistics/area_pop/area_pop.html
> 
> https://unpo.org/article/15483?id=15483
> 
> @django @Pakhtoon yum @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @ghazi52 @khanmubashir @RealNapster @Indus Pakistan @Talwar e Pakistan @Chakar The Great
> 
> 
> *
> *
> 
> 
> *
> *



A good reminder, my friend. May I say that even _culturally _- by far the most important criterion - Pakistan is different from the sub-continent. Personally, I consider Pakistan as an equal part of the Turko-Persian narrative.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

HalfMoon said:


> Columbus was a caucasian like majority of Americans. Similarly Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was an Arab like majority of Pakistanis. Finally you are accepting what I was saying all along.
> 
> 
> 
> Again thanks for agreeing. Pakistanis follow the tribe system like their Arab brothers and their Arab forefathers who have immigrated to the Indian subcontinent since the conquest by their great forefather Muḥammad ibn Qāsim. Only native people from Indian subcontinent follow caste system. The fact that caste system is missing in Pakistan is clear proof that Pakistanis are Arabs and not natives to this land.
> 
> 
> 
> Saudis sponsored your nuke program, Saudi intervene/rescue whenever there is crisis in Pakistan and General RS is helping Saudis fight the Turks/Iranians and you want the world to believe that Pakistanis don't love Arabs?
> 
> 
> 
> Show me people from one Muslim country other than Pakistan who have given up their History and Culture for Islam?
> 
> Turkish are proud of their Central Asian roots and rulers.
> 
> Iranians still feel proud about Cyrus the great.
> 
> Bangladeshis are proud of their Bengali language.
> 
> Indonesians still play their Ramayana dramas.
> 
> This list goes on and on.
> 
> And now you want people to believe that Pakistanis gave up their native history and culture, started a new chapter with Muḥammad ibn Qāsim stepping a foot on this soil and became self hating people of their past history and culture just for the sake of Islam? No one believes that. This is going to be a tough sell for you.
> 
> The fact is Pakistanis are Arabs and love Muḥammad ibn Qāsim as he was their Arab general and forefather who brought them to this land.
> 
> Pakistanis do not consider any subcontinent culture and history prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim as their own as it not their own.






Modern day indian/ hindu culture is not or HAS NEVER been OUR culture or that of our ancestors who have ALWAYS lived in the area that is modern day Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HalfMoon

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Modern day indian/ hindu culture is not or HAS NEVER been OUR culture or that of our ancestors who have ALWAYS lived in the area that is modern day Pakistan.



So what is your history and culture prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim's army setting its foot on the Indian subcontinent? Certainly, you do not consider Raja Dahar, Chanakya , Chandragupta, Ashoka etc. as your forefathers.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

HalfMoon said:


> So what is your history and culture prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim's army setting its foot on the Indian subcontinent? Certainly, you do not consider Raja Dahar, Chanakya , Chandragupta, Ashoka etc. as your forefathers.






That culture that existed is just as alien to modern day indians as is Islam. Those that existed in ancient times in what is now modern day Pakistan, were NOT the ancestors of modern day indians: they were NOT the ancestors of gujuratis, south indians, tamils etc. They were OUR ancestors.

Here is the evidence:

https://www.economist.com/asia/2018...ches-a-treasured-theory-about-indians-origins

The compelling evidence clearly states we were here long before Islam. Whatever you say to contrary, is completely refuted by the evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Foxtrot Delta

Indians fools dont seem to understand. In normal situations we pakistaniz call ourselves, kashmiriz, punjabiz, sindhiz, hazarahz, Afghans, tajiks, kalashi, balti, pakhtoon, baloch etc etc

But when indians claim we all have something in common with india and start to attack us all pakistaniz, no matter if i am a kashmiri ot punjabi or kalashi or baloch or punjabi , etc that moment i become a true patriotic pakistani we took pakistan in the name of islam. We split british india into two pieces so that we (muslims of british india) all of us mentioned above can say we are not indians. We want a new identity we started a journey in 1947 to form a new nation, new identity differnt totally differnt from india/baharat/hindustan.

We are pakistaniz first. F U indians. We would like to be differnt cuz in our hearts our minds our souls we want to be differnt than india we don't like india and its extremeist hindu ideals. F off.

Pakistan is a new born infant nation. Others, arabs iranins afghans egyptions and chinese even indians have 1000s of years of identity and nationhood.

We here in pakistan took this land to be above kashmiriz,punjabjz, baloch, indians, egyptions or turks. We took Pakistan to be nothing more than Muslims! *Pakistan ka matlab kya? La Ilaha Illallah.

The moment india claims pakistan to be some what of indian anything. My blood boils and stop being a kashmiri that instant and i am a pakistani in that moment. Im sure its the same for all groups i pakistan. 
*
Indians should wize up and quit irritating us all. Indians might push us pakistaniz closer to each other in brotherhood cuz of it not good for india.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Yankee-stani

Foxtrot Delta said:


> Indians fools dont seem to understand. In normal situations we pakistaniz call ourselves, kashmiriz, punjabiz, sindhiz, hazarahz, Afghans, tajiks, kalashi, balti, pakhtoon, baloch etc etc
> 
> But when indians claim we all have something in common with india and start to attack us all pakistaniz, no matter if i am a kashmiri ot punjabi or kalashi or baloch or punjabi , etc that moment i become a true patriotic pakistani we took pakistan in the name of islam. We split british india into two pieces so that we (muslims of british india) all of us mentioned above can say we are not indians. We want a new identity we started a journey in 1947 to form a new nation, new identity differnt totally differnt from india/baharat/hindustan.
> 
> We are pakistaniz first. F U indians. We would like to be differnt cuz in our hearts our minds our souls we want to be differnt than india we don't like india and its extremeist hindu ideals. F off.
> 
> Pakistan is a new born infant nation. Others, arabs iranins afghans egyptions and chinese even indians have 1000s of years of identity and nationhood.
> 
> We here in pakistan took this land to be above kashmiriz,punjabjz, baloch, indians, egyptions or turks. We took Pakistan to be nothing more than Muslims! *Pakistan ka matlab kya? La Ilaha Illallah.
> 
> The moment india claims pakistan to be some what of indian anything. My blood boils and stop being a kashmiri that instant and i am a pakistani in that moment. Im sure its the same for all groups i pakistan.
> *
> Indians should wize up and quit irritating us all. Indians might push us pakistaniz closer to each other in brotherhood cuz of it not good for india.



You know whats sad countries like Bosnia,Croatia and Serbia which did not exist 30 years ago are more nationalistic than we are sigh @Indus Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Foxtrot Delta

OsmanAli98 said:


> You know whats sad countries like Bosnia,Croatia and Serbia which did not exist 30 years ago are more nationalistic than we are sigh @Indus Pakistan



Don't worry they are going through a phase we went through in 1970s when we were about 25 years old. Im good at history keep learning it everyday.

Pakistan is unique those smaller nations above have very few ethnicities. In pakistan we have so many nations. Just like india is, but india is very big compared to us. Those nations inside decided they want to retain old indian cultures and identity hindu dominant society. We chose a new dynamic new identity.

Serbia croatia bosnia are too small and have different dynamics and reasons to become nations. We have a differnt dynamic.

And i know pretty bad asss patriots back home in pakistan. U under-estimate pakistan or may be u don't know us very well?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

KediKesenFare said:


> A good reminder, my friend. May I say that even _culturally _- by far the most important criterion - Pakistan is different from the sub-continent. Personally, I consider Pakistan as an equal part of the Turko-Persian narrative.



The British Empire really did us over by banning Farsi. Now you've got so many people who just view us as Indians with a separatist complex.

Never the less, Turkey, Pakistan and Iran all have Iranic ethnic groups (the Kurds in Turkey, the Persians in Iran, and the Pashtun and Baloch in Pakistan), all practice some form of Islam, all three were the homes of the Islamic gunpowder empires (the Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals), all three of us represent some of the oldest civilisations in history (Anatolia, Persia and the Indus) and we are the most militarily powerful countries in the Muslim world as well some of the most intellectually active (Turkey and Iran publish numerous books, a Pakistani won a Nobel Prize in Physics, etc).

Ultimately, we do need to step up our alliance for mutual benefit and put an end to the Arab hegemony over the Muslim world's politics.



HalfMoon said:


> Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was an Arab like majority of Pakistanis.



No, but he was a Muslim like the majority of Pakistanis. So by applying your Colombus logic, it still works without us having to be Arab.

If you insist on a racial connection, you do have Pakistanis descended from Arabs who came to the region during Islamic rule (such as Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, Awans, Arains, etc). And Muhammad Bin Qasim's skull type would have been Caucasoid, just like most Pakistanis.



HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis follow the tribe system like their Arab brothers



I know you're trolling, but yes, our tribal system is very similar to theirs.



HalfMoon said:


> nly native people from Indian subcontinent follow caste system.



No, only Hindus follow it.



HalfMoon said:


> Saudis sponsored your nuke program



We could have done it without them.



HalfMoon said:


> , Saudi intervene/rescue whenever there is crisis in Pakistan



No they don't.



HalfMoon said:


> General RS is helping Saudis fight the Turks/Iranians



No he's not.



HalfMoon said:


> ou want the world to believe that Pakistanis don't love Arabs?



You said Arab culture, not Arab people.



HalfMoon said:


> Show me people from one Muslim country other than Pakistan who have given up their History and Culture for Islam?



Show me some proof that we have given up our culture. Last time I checked, the Pashtuns are still Pashtun, the Hazaras are still Hazara, the Baloch are still Baloch, the Dardics are still Dardic, the Punjabis are still Punjabi, etc. What makes us different from other Muslim countries is that we are significantly more diverse than all of them, hence why Pakistanis as a whole don't really have a unified culture to the same extent as Turks, Persians, Arabs, etc. A good nation to compare us to is Afghanistan, they too are extremely varied and lack a unified culture, but nobody calls them Arab do they?



HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis do not consider any subcontinent culture and history prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim as their own as it not their own.



Then how do you explain @Indus Pakistan ?



HalfMoon said:


> So what is your history and culture prior to Muḥammad ibn Qāsim's army setting its foot on the Indian subcontinent?



We are the people of the Indus. Our region has been the site of many migrations throughout history, which has contributed to our melting pot of ethnicities and cultures. Our history is the history of this region. Muhammad Bin Qasim's arrival to the region is considered important because his arrival brought the arrival of Islam, which not only added a whole new influx of migrants to the Indus, but also gave us our unifying ideology and primary identity, and that is Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

KediKesenFare said:


> A good reminder, my friend. May I say that even _culturally _- by far the most important criterion - Pakistan is different from the sub-continent. Personally, I consider Pakistan as an equal part of the Turko-Persian narrative.



Agreed 100%.

All of our famous scholars, philosophers, statesmen, sultans, amirs, judges, and renowned personalities are all in the Turkish-Persian tradition.

Our oral traditions and folk tales are also thoroughly Persian and Turkish.

Even the Prophet Muhammad saws referred to us separately as Sindh (Pakistan-Indus) wal Hind (Bharat-Ganges.)

Therefore the separation existed thousands of years ago.

I also do not like the claims of some Pakistani posters that half of Pakistan is related to India. It is not.

We have had atleast 1,400 years of separation from Hindu dominated Bharat and lived under Islamic Afghan-based rulers for most of that time.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> The British Empire really did us over by banning Farsi.



This was one of the main problems.

The British cut our cultural ties with Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan. We have been drifting apart ever since (except for Pukhtoon areas of Afghanistan.)

My grandparents and great-grandparents all spoke fluent Farsi. It was very common at that time before partition for Muslims to have their children learn Farsi. This explains Allama Iqbal’s fluency to a large extent.

Now mostly Urdu has replaced it, but it is our duty to recover that part of our history, educate our younger generation, and build those cultural ties.

Even now, Turks and Iranians become shocked when they realize how close Pakistan is to them in culture and civilization. We share many of the same customs and fables.

I am confident that our new government will finally do something to expand our influence in the Near East.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> We are the people of the Indus. Our region has been the site of many migrations throughout history, which has contributed to our melting pot of ethnicities and cultures. Our history is the history of this region. Muhammad Bin Qasim's arrival to the region is considered important because his arrival brought the arrival of Islam, which not only added a whole new influx of migrants to the Indus, but also gave us our unifying ideology and primary identity, and that is Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Humble Analyst

Indus Pakistan said:


> To begin with Indian sub-continent should not be used. I have worn myself out here trying to explain to Paks not to fcukin use terms like India sub-continent, desi, Asian, Muslim and the other synonyms I hear. If we don't own the name 'Pakistan' nobody else will. Specifically with referance to Indian Sub-continent post 1947 that term should have been dropped. These are geographic descriptors and a more neutral term like South Asia should be used. Simply because the term 'India' was branded in 1947 by a nation state called Bharat. Thus to prevent any ambiquity and to be neutral all the states that occupy trhe region South Asia should be used.
> 
> With referance to what you say it's not entirely this simple. From tectonic point of view what you said true. But in human geography and even physical geography rivers tend to bind and not separate. Consider Ganga. You can' divide northern plains of Ganga from the souther plains. Similiarly Indus is one physical water system that includes good chunk of Afghanistan. Kabul River is a tributary of Indus as much as Jhelum is.
> 
> Where Pakistan should focus on is Indus River simply because one can see Pakistan is underpinned by it. Pakistan occupies most of the Indus Basin. Pakistan can be used as a synomym for Indus Basin. That is why I use that handle. Some of the Indus Basin does extend into Afghanistan, China and India but as the map below shows Pakistan is central to the Indus Basin. In fact in Pakistan you can't really escape from the Indus Basin.


Agree, nice post with passion

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MultaniGuy

Please do not use the term "Indian subcontinent".

Use the term "South Asia" or the "Subcontinent"

Thanks.



BringHarmony said:


> Sure that may be the origin of the word but as it is used in English vernacular, it does not mean Of My Homeland.
> 
> If a Native American comes and tells that he is a Desi, it won't mean he is from the homeland. It will mean he is confused. In English vernehcular Desi is used exclusively by the people of Indian Subcontinent and that includes Indians, Pakistani and Bangaldeshi.
> 
> 
> I am not commenting on your nation. I am commenting on your nations diaspora living in foreign countries. Certainly I have quite a bit of visibility in that, they are living in my country and I see almost all the aspects of their life.
> 
> 
> Thats how vernaculars works. Do you think you are using all the words according to their original meaning? If that was the case no one would be "Surfing the web". Languages and their usage evolve.
> 
> 
> Pakistani have way less common with me certainly. I am of Scottish origin. Honestly, how is it possible that you will have more in common with people living thousand of Kilometres but not with people who were living with you in British empire of India. You may certainly have some commonality with Persians. But for a large chunk of Pakistani, closest people are the ones from Indian Punjab.
> 
> 
> Sure! Lets see some faces from Lahore!
> 
> So here is what I did. I searched Lahore Market Crowd in images.google.com and too the first image with faces visible. It happens to be the first image itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see Delhi Market Crowd. And apply the same process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is one for London (Europe) BTW, to which you claim being close, the same process :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell me which one is day/night difference.


Sorry buddy, we Pakistanis have nothing in common with you Indians.

Even genetics studies could convincingly show this.

As more North Indians and South Indians and East Indians intermarry, the difference between Pakistan and India will only grow.



HalfMoon said:


> Ancient India included Central Asia but current day Pakistanis are mostly of Arab origin and are not natives to the subcontinent.


Don't bullshit here. We Pakistanis are not arabs.

We Pakistanis are Punjabis, Sindhis, Pathans, Kashmiris, and Baloch. We have a unique culture and identity. Don't try to water down my country's culture and identity.



HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis are Arabs. Here are some indisputable facts
> 
> 1) Pakistanis take pride in being descendants of Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim who invaded Indian subcontinent and made Indians as the slaves of the Arabs
> 
> 2) Pakistanis follow tribe system like their Arab forefathers rather than the caste system followed in Indian subcontinent the natives. For example, even Muslims from India and Bangladesh follow caste system for marriages but there is no caste system in Pakistan
> 
> 3) Pakistan love Arab culture and hate anything to do with Indian subcontinent culture. This is an important fact. People in Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Iran are all Muslims but they still take great pride in their local culture and history but in case of Pakistanis they hate any and all local culture and history prior to the conquest of the land by Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim. Pakistan's history starts with this event.


Pakistanis are not arabs you misinformed guy.

We are not arabs. @waz has already answered you.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rusty

HalfMoon said:


> Freedom my foot. Your Arab forefathers invaded my lands and made my forefathers slaves, displaced them from my native lands and forced my forefathers take refuge in other lands of the subcontinent.


You do realize that you ancestors were also invaders why brought sankrit and Hinduism.

If you want to talk indigenous, you have to look at the bush people who are eating ants.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Musalman

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> too bad even british dont agree with retards like yourself.
> 
> For example... Richard Burton who travelled the entire region and more... researched and wrote a book:
> https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.22744
> 
> He mentions how one can see the difference even in physical and facial features when one enters Sindh which has always remained a STATE... And is rightfully called the mother of south asia..
> 
> Sindh is probably the oldest state/kingdom/country in south asia with its own unique culture.. and has aborbed other races from as far as central asia...
> 
> This is a book about Races living in Sindh/Indus... go through it..
> 
> 
> That is nonsense.
> 
> The word 'desi' is never used for 'people' by Pakistani... but always in sense of food... for example desi ghee,desi murghi etc... you will almost never find Pak calling themselves desis or farmi lol.
> 
> As for Panjabis... sire... its always the indian sikhs who call themselves Panjabis... and almost never indian.
> 
> For reasons they are proud of their panjabiness and have some sort of superiority complex vis other indians.


So you think Im a retard just because I do not agree with you?
It is sad that parents these days do not teach their kids how to make a decent conversation.
Fact is that no matter what we do, we can not change the fact that we are not middle eastern.


----------



## BringHarmony

MultaniGuy said:


> Sorry buddy, we Pakistanis have nothing in common with you Indians.
> 
> Even genetics studies could convincingly show this.
> 
> As more North Indians and South Indians and East Indians intermarry, the difference between Pakistan and India will only grow.


I am a Canadian of Scottish descent and sure enough you folks have nothing in common with me. 

But then you folks live with Indians, you folks speak like Indians, you folks dress like Indians, you folks even have common dance and songs, you folks flock to common movies, you folks even intermarry as well and heck about 70-80 years back you folks used to live together with Indians. Sure as hell they would have romped a lot of you and vice versa. Heck your own leader was born somewhere in India, I guess?

If you guys talk like a duck, walk like a duck, look like a duck, sorry buddy you are a duck. Cya.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lastofthepatriots

BringHarmony said:


> I am a Canadian of Scottish descent and sure enough you folks have nothing in common with me.
> 
> But then you folks live with Indians, you folks speak like Indians, you folks dress like Indians, you folks even have common dance and songs, you folks flock to common movies, you folks even intermarry as well and heck about 70-80 years back you folks used to live together with Indians. Sure as hell they would have romped a lot of you and vice versa. Heck your own leader was born somewhere in India, I guess?
> 
> If you guys talk like a duck, walk like a duck, look like a duck, sorry buddy you are a duck. Cya.



Oh great. We got another poutine eating retard on this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BringHarmony

lastofthepatriots said:


> Oh great. We got another poutine eating retard on this forum.


And yet you flock to our countries. Begging for visas. Anyways, you are welcome! We are nice folks. Just keep leave your shitty thinking and behaviour at the border. Thanks!


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

lastofthepatriots said:


> Oh great. We got another poutine eating retard on this forum.



He’s obviously an Indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BringHarmony

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> He’s obviously an Indian.


In all these threads there is one single common theme among Pakistan folks. If someone is critical or even so as to be slightly differing in opinion with you folks, they must be Indian. A weird world view you have. You folks often say 'don't hyphenate us with Indians'. Guess what? You do it to yourself by labelling anyone having a contrary view to yourself.
In your universe of discourse there are only two sets. India and Pakistan. And then you say why people put you two together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lastofthepatriots

BringHarmony said:


> And yet you flock to our countries. Begging for visas. Anyways, you are welcome! We are nice folks. Just keep leave your shitty thinking and behaviour at the border. Thanks!



I'd never go to Canada. So I have no clue what you mean by 'our countries'. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> He’s obviously an Indian.



I know but you have to play along with these mentally ill people.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

lastofthepatriots said:


> I'd never go to Canada. So I have no clue what you mean by 'our countries'.


Judging by the new arrivals in Surrey, I guess safe to say there is a hell lot of your lot coming to Canadian shores than the other way round.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

lastofthepatriots said:


> I'd never go to Canada. So I have no clue what you mean by 'our countries'.
> 
> 
> 
> I know but you have to play along with these mentally ill people.



Lol. These are the only ones who lie about their ethnicity to abuse others.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> I am a Canadian of Scottish descent and sure enough you folks have nothing in common with me.
> 
> But then you folks live with Indians, you folks speak like Indians, you folks dress like Indians, you folks even have common dance and songs, you folks flock to common movies, you folks even intermarry as well and heck about 70-80 years back you folks used to live together with Indians. Sure as hell they would have romped a lot of you and vice versa. Heck your own leader was born somewhere in India, I guess?
> 
> If you guys talk like a duck, walk like a duck, look like a duck, sorry buddy you are a duck. Cya.






LIES.......LOL.................Imran Khan was born in 1952 in Lahore, Pakistan:

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

..........you've blown your cover and given away that you're an indian.... ........so much so for being a "Scottish Canadian"...........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> LIES.......LOL.................Imran Khan was born in 1952 in Lahore, Pakistan:
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imran_Khan
> 
> ..........you've given blown your cover and given away that you're an indian.... ........so much so for being a "Scottish Canadian"...........


Weren't you guys fighting about some building in Mumbai few days back? About some of your really important leader being born there or lived there?

And please layoff so many smileys. For a person claiming to have lived for 30 years or more, you appear as 5 years old.

And how come do you deduce that I am not a Canadian? Because I don't know your current leader's birthplace? That's weird thinking.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Weren't you guys fighting about some building in Mumbai few days back? About some of your really important leader being born there or lived there?
> 
> And please layoff so many smileys. For a person claiming to have lived for 30 years or more, you appear as 5 years old.
> 
> And how come do you deduce that I am not a Canadian? Because I don't know your current leader's birthplace? That's weird thinking.





Nice attempt at backtracking........

Think you were talking about the Jinnah house. But he passed away in 1948. You're not insinuating that Imran Khan was born in mumbai are you?.........

So what part of Scotland do you originate from? Please note that Scotland is not in india....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So what part of Scotland do you originate from? Please note that Scotland is not in india....


I didn't. My forefathers came from there. Quite a while back. I didn't guess *"Scottish descent" *would be so confusing for someone claiming to have spent 30 years in London. You sure it was London and not Lahore? You know it could be hard to tell sometimes for certain folks.

Here is a helpful link.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/descent

BTW, I am yet to hear why are you so reluctant on proving your prowess at telling Indians and Pakistani faces apart, if it is so easy as you claim.


----------



## M. Sarmad

Musalman said:


> Fact is that no matter what we do, we can not change the fact that we are not middle eastern.



The problem, however, is that the Facts do not matter 
Hyper-nationalists from India and Pakistan deny/twist facts
they want to rewrite history


----------



## BringHarmony

M. Sarmad said:


> The problem, however, is that the Facts do not matter
> Hyper-nationalists from India and Pakistan deny/twist facts
> they want to rewrite history


I have a much simpler question. Why do you guys even care for this question? Let those who have that curiosity worry about it. There are more than one ways to skin a cat and in due time you won't even need to justify your history --if that is a worry. It will set itself by itself.


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> I didn't. My forefathers came from there. Quite a while back. I didn't guess *"Scottish descent" *would be so confusing for someone claiming to have spent 30 years in London. You sure it was London and not Lahore? You know it could be hard to tell sometimes for certain folks.
> 
> Here is a helpful link.
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/descent
> 
> BTW, I am yet to hear why are you so reluctant on proving your prowess at telling Indians and Pakistani faces apart, if it is so easy as you claim.






Becuase most White Scottish-descended people are concerned with proving that indians and Pakistanis look the same.... ........keep going!......

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## BringHarmony

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Becuase most White Scottish-descended people are concerned with proving that indians and Pakistanis look the same.... ........keep going!......


Good point. I am more curious why you guys are so hell-bent on assuming"We are totally different" while all the facts point to the contrary. I brought my Scottish descent to drive home the point that ethnicity and nationality are not one and the same thing.

You know it is looking more and more like Dragon in my Garage argument (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage). The more you are trying hard to push it back, the harder it comes back to you. Because it is a simple fact. Now look at yourself, you have to act like a 5-year old with all these smileys to look sarcastic and "in control", run-away from a fair and final arbiter about this similarity question and now you have to resort to shooting the messenger because you can't handle the message. 

It has all the hallmarks of losing the argument and not being graceful about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

BringHarmony said:


> Good point. I am more curious why you guys are so hell-bent on assuming"We are totally different" while all the facts point to the contrary. I brought my Scottish descent to drive home the point that ethnicity and nationality are not one and the same thing.
> 
> You know it is looking more and more like Dragon in my Garage argument (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage). The more you are trying hard to push it back, the harder it comes back to you. Because it is a simple fact. Now look at yourself, you have to act like a 5-year old with all these smileys to look sarcastic and "in control", run-away from a fair and final arbiter about this similarity question and now you have to resort to shooting the messenger because you can't handle the message.
> 
> It has all the hallmarks of losing the argument and not being graceful about it.






WHAT facts point to the contrary? Please share them here. No conjectures or anecdotal ramblings. GENUINE, RELIABLE, HONEST AND IRREFUTABLE Facts ONLY.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## atya

Indus Pakistan said:


> Absolutely true. On PDF they might claim differant but rarely will you get them calling themselves 'Pakistani'. So form of alternative will be used. This is to do with the abject failure in the state failing to form a identity and consolidated brand.
> 
> Except for the Mohajirs rest [94%] don't. And I assume you are a Mohajir who feels the need to foist that descriptor on rest of us. Now if you said most Pakistan's have South Asian heritage - yes I would agree with you.


What a load of baloney, I don't know about Canadians but British Pakistanis are proud....we don't hide our identity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Becuase most White Scottish-descended people are concerned with proving that indians and Pakistanis look the same.... ........keep going!......



Lol. They have no other job than this... or so they want us to believe.

I have visited Canada many times and know many Canadians, they aren’t obsessive like Indians who only think about Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Lol. They have no other job than this... or so they want us to believe.
> 
> I have visited Canada many times and know many Canadians, they aren’t obsessive like Indians who only think about Pakistan.





And they most certainly don't care what Pakistanis, indians or any other non-whites look like or their origins. You get a lot of indians coming on PDF pretending to be White-Western Christain Europeans but their grammar and the way they construct their sentences always gives away their indianess.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yaseen1

difference is only due to religion which is basis of our culture and way of living

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Musalman

M. Sarmad said:


> The problem, however, is that the Facts do not matter
> Hyper-nationalists from India and Pakistan deny/twist facts
> they want to rewrite history


But can you?


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Yaseen1 said:


> difference is only due to religion which is basis of our culture and way of living





Difference is MUCH MORE than that. Religion does not account for why the Pathans, Baloch, Kalash etc are racially COMPLETELY different to indian Tamils, South indians etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yaseen1

religion counts alot and most of people living in Pakistan migrated from india after partition which indicates that their race is that of indian and not Pakistan as their ancestors were living in india before partition so how their race can differ from those indians who are living there today pathans and balochs are much closer to afghanistan and iran in their race than punjabis and sindhis and indians


PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Difference is MUCH MORE than that. Religion does not account for why the Pathans, Baloch, Kalash etc are racially COMPLETELY different to indian Tamils, South indians etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Yaseen1 said:


> religion counts alot and most of people living in Pakistan migrated from india after partition which indicates that their race is that of indian and not Pakistan as their ancestors were living in india before partition so how their race can differ from those indians who are living there today pathans and balochs are much closer to afganistan and iran in their race than punjabis and sindhis




So even by your own admission, there is a significant proportion of Pakistanis who are racially, completely non-indian. As they are racially Afghan and Iranian does that make us Pakistanis Iranian, Persian or Middle Eastern?. It doesn't just as it doesn't make us "racially" indian. If you believe otherwise, can you please post the link that proves Pakistanis are "racially" indian. Here's one that proves otherwise:

https://www.economist.com/asia/2018...ches-a-treasured-theory-about-indians-origins

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yaseen1

The matter is that no one migrated to Pakistan from afghanistan and iran after partition like massive migration that took place from india to Pakistan so those who migrated to Pakistan main reason is religion otherwise they were living there with more land and other wealth 


PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> So even by your own admission, there is a significant proportion of Pakistanis who are racially, completely non-indian. As they are racially Afghan and Iranian does that make us Pakistanis Iranian, Persian or Middle Eastern?. It doesn't just as it doesn't make us "racially" indian. If you believe otherwise, can you please post the link that proves Pakistanis are "racially" indian. Here's one that proves otherwise:
> 
> https://www.economist.com/asia/2018...ches-a-treasured-theory-about-indians-origins

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Yaseen1 said:


> The matter is that no one migrated to Pakistan from afghanistan and iran after partition like massive migration that took place from india to Pakistan so those who migrated to Pakistan main reason is religion otherwise they were living there with more land and other wealth






But is it not feasible to say that those Pakistanis that migrated to Pakistan from india only have a racial connection to less than 3% of modern day indians? So at least 97% of modern day indians have 0 racial connection to Pakistan whatsoever. Hence the difference is more than religion, it's also RACE.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are of the same race/ethnicity.



If that's the case, then why is it that:

1. Seraikis, Pothwaris and Hindkowans are practically non-existent among Indian Punjabis?
2. Why are there almost no Indian Punjabis of Kashmiri, Pashtun or Baloch heritage? 
3. Why are Pakistani Punjabi tribes like Awans, Arains, Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, Barras, Mughals, etc not common among Indian Punjabis? 

Even beyond that, there are numerous differences between Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis. For example, Pakistani Punjabis write in Shahmukhi, which Indian Punjabis can't even read, let alone use.

Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are not the same, and if you think so, go live in Indian Punjab and see for yourself just how different they are. 



M. Sarmad said:


> In fact, Pakistanis from _the South of Indus_ are closer to North Indians (racially, ethnically and linguistically) compared to Pakhtuns and Balochs.













BringHarmony said:


> am a Canadian of Scottish descent



Then why are you so obsessed with Pakistanis and Indians? Seems pretty odd, the Western members here tend to focus on their own matters primarily. Are you starting to see why we don't believe you> 



BringHarmony said:


> But then you folks live with Indians



No we don't, we're in two different countries.



BringHarmony said:


> you folks speak like Indians



Because we ruled over them for so long that they decided to rip off our beautiful Mughlai language (Urdu) and create a defective version of it (Hindi). 



BringHarmony said:


> you folks dress like Indians



LMAO no we don't, I'm yet to see an Indian who isn't Muslim that wears a headscarf, a skull cap, the same type of shalwar kameez as us, and I'm yet to see a Pakistani who wears bindi or a sari (except for the Muhajirs, I know they dress more like Indians but they're a minority, just like Muslim Indians). 



BringHarmony said:


> you folks even have common dance and songs



No, it's just that a lot of Pakistanis tend to consume Indian media, and a lot of Indians tend to consume Pakistani media. The actual dances and songs that we both view as part of our culture is very minimal, the only exception is Punjabi music and dances. 



BringHarmony said:


> you folks flock to common movies



That literally means nothing. 



BringHarmony said:


> you folks even intermarry as well





The overwhelming majority of Muslims would NEVER marry a Hindu lol. To give you some perspective on how low on the list they are, many of us would rather marry an Israeli over them. 



BringHarmony said:


> and heck about 70-80 years back you folks used to live together with Indians



Only Punjabis, Kashmiris and Muhajirs. Punjabis+Kashmiris make up less than 5% of India, and Muhajirs make up about 7% of Pakistan. 



BringHarmony said:


> Heck your own leader was born somewhere in India, I guess?



You guess wrong, Imran Khan's family are of Pashtun heritage, so they have more in common with Afghanistan than India.



Musalman said:


> Fact is that no matter what we do, we can not change the fact that we are not middle eastern.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Progressive1

Yaseen1 said:


> religion counts alot and *most of people living in Pakistan migrated from india* after partition which indicates that their race is that of indian and not Pakistan as their ancestors were living in india before partition so how their race can differ from those indians who are living there today pathans and balochs are much closer to afghanistan and iran in their race than punjabis and sindhis and indians


no you are absolutely wrong , Most Pakistanis are native to land and even than most migration was from Indian Punjab of many of them were Arains who themselves had origin in lands of Pakistan and than migrated to Indian Punjab some centuries back. Also many people who migrated from UP were Mulsim elite and they differed from average UP person. I am sure you are some karachi muhajir trying to make all Pakistanis Indians.Saying that this doesnt mean that we share nothing with Indians , we do share a lot with some Indians but its highly exaggerated by Karachi Muhajirs and Central Punjabis(Lahoris) and sadly these regions produce a lot diaspora resulting in popularity of stupid terms like desi among diaspora Pakistanis.

read this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India
"The 1951 Census of Pakistan recorded that the largest number of Muslim refugees came from the East Punjab and nearby Rajputana states (Alwar and Bharatpur). They were a number of 5,783,100 and *constituted 80.1% of Pakistan's total refugee population*.[128] This was the effect of the retributive ethnic cleansing on both sides of the Punjab where the Muslim population of East Punjab was forcibly expelled like the Hindu/Sikh population in West Punjab.

Migration from other regions of India were as follows: Bihar, West Bengal and Orissa, 700,300 or 9.8%; UP and Delhi 464,200 or 2.4%; Gujarat and Bombay, 160,400 or 2.2%; Bhopal and Hyderabad 95,200 or 1.2%; and Madras and Mysore 18,000 or 0.2%.[128]

So far as their settlement in Pakistan is concerned, 97.4% of the refugees from East Punjab and its contiguous areas went to West Punjab; 95.9% from Bihar, West Bengal and Orissa to the erstwhile East Pakistan; 95.5% from UP and Delhi to West Pakistan, mainly in karachi division of Sindh; 97.2% from Bhopal and Hyderabad to West Pakistan, mainly Karachi; and 98.9% from Bombay and Gujarat to West Pakistan, largely to Karachi; and 98.9% from Madras and Mysore went to West Pakistan, mainly Karachi.[128]

West Punjab received the largest number of refugees (73.1%), mainly from East Punjab and its contiguous areas. Sindh received the second largest number of refugees 16.1% of the total migrants while Karachi division of sindh received 8.5% of the total migrant population. East Bengal received the third largest number of refugees, 699,100, who constituted 9.7% of the total Muslim refugee population in Pakistan. 66.69% of the refugees in East Bengal originated from West Bengal, 14.50% from Bihar and 11.84% from Assam.[129]

NWFP and Baluchistan received the lowest number of migrants. NWFP received 51,100 migrants (0.7% of the migrant population) while Baluchistan received 28,000 (0.4% of the migrant population).

The Government undertook a census of refugees in West Punjab in 1948, which displayed their place of origin in India."

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> If that's the case, then why is it that:
> 
> 1. Seraikis, Pothwaris and Hindkowans are practically non-existent among Indian Punjabis?
> 2. Why are there almost no Indian Punjabis of Kashmiri, Pashtun or Baloch heritage?
> 3. Why are Pakistani Punjabi tribes like Awans, Arains, Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, Barras, Mughals, etc not common among Indian Punjabis?
> 
> Even beyond that, there are numerous differences between Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis. For example, Pakistani Punjabis write in Shahmukhi, which Indian Punjabis can't even read, let alone use.
> 
> Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are not the same, and if you think so, go live in Indian Punjab and see for yourself just how different they are.



I do not need to learn about the history of my ancestral land and my people from a _Punjab hating_ Afghani refugee

None of the points you raised is worthy of a serious reply.

Try harder, Afghani

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> None of the points you raised is worthy of a serious reply.



No, you're just unable to respond to them because you've been caught with your pants down. If you think Indians are similar to us go live with them. Pakistan wasn't made for you.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> No, you're just unable to respond to them because you've been caught with your pants down. If you think Indians are similar to us go live with them. Pakistan wasn't made for you.



and now a mofo Afghani refugee is telling Pakistanis to leave Pakistan


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> and now a mofo Afghani refugee is telling Pakistanis to leave Pakistan



No, a Pakistani is telling a stranded Indian to join his kin on the other side.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> No, a Pakistani is telling a stranded Indian to join his kin on the other side.



You are just a worthless _namak haram_ Afghani..
Now **** off


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Musalman said:


> So you think Im a retard just because I do not agree with you?
> It is sad that parents these days do not teach their kids how to make a decent conversation.
> Fact is that no matter what we do, we can not change the fact that we are not middle eastern.


Or perhaps your parents consider them bharti & taught you bastardised history taken from bharti textbooks instead of the real stuff? Not talkin bout Pak studies.



BringHarmony said:


> Good point. I am more curious why you guys are so hell-bent on assuming"We are totally different" while all the facts point to the contrary. I brought my Scottish descent to drive home the point that ethnicity and nationality are not one and the same thing.
> 
> You know it is looking more and more like Dragon in my Garage argument (https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage). The more you are trying hard to push it back, the harder it comes back to you. Because it is a simple fact. Now look at yourself, you have to act like a 5-year old with all these smileys to look sarcastic and "in control", run-away from a fair and final arbiter about this similarity question and now you have to resort to shooting the messenger because you can't handle the message.
> 
> It has all the hallmarks of losing the argument and not being graceful about it.


Than a “scotish descent” indian should perhaps take a good fking look at books by the likes of David Omissi, Richard Burton and so on?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> You are just a worthless _namak haram_ Afghani..



And you're just an Indian whose family was too scared to make the migration. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Now **** off



Why don't you try and make me Mr Singh?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Yaseen1 said:


> difference is only due to religion which is basis of our culture and way of living


Unless you think a sindhi looks like a marathi , wears the same clothes, speaks the same language, eats the same food, follows same culture, has similir physical features?

If this guy





can write a book and claim how people of Sindh are different than “hindustanis” be it their culture or physical & facial features.. than perhaps you pan bharti wannabes should smell the coffee too.



This is my message for all who claim Pakistanis are same as biharis,madrasis,gujratis and whatnot;

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> And you're just an Indian whose family was too scared to make the migration.



Well, my ancestral village in Shakragarh Tehsil of Narowal District in Punjab province was founded by my tenth great-grandfather around three hundred years ago. He came from a nearby village that was founded by his ancestors several hundred years ago... We, unlike you, are the true sons of the soil, Afghani... I love my identity and I am proud of my ethnicity, culture, heritage, race, religion, and nationality.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Why don't you try and make me Mr Singh?



I am not a Singh...
And make an account/handle with your real name first, then maybe I will try

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Well, my ancestral village in Shakragarh Tehsil of Narowal District in Punjab province



Which is bang-on the border, a fact that only makes me more firm in my assumption of you being a stranded Indian. 



M. Sarmad said:


> We, unlike you, are the true sons of the soil



No you're not, you're a stranded Indian. That's why you think you're the same as them, why you want to celebrate Basant, why you honour Ranjit Singh, etc. Your very village is right on the border. 



M. Sarmad said:


> I love my identity



You don't even know what your identity is. 



M. Sarmad said:


> I am proud of my ethnicity, culture, heritage, race, religion, and nationality.



Lmao fat chance!



M. Sarmad said:


> I am not a Singh...



You said you're the same as them, so what's wrong if I give you the same name?


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Which is bang-on *the border*,



*A man-made nation-state (Narowal-Gurdaspur) border, not a natural one
and the working boundary(Narowal-Kathua/Jammu); a disputed border



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> ---crap-----
> 
> You don't even know what your identity is.



Again, I do not need to learn about my 'identity' from a clueless Namak Haram Afghani refugee hiding in Pakistan who mocks Jinnah and then pretends to be a patriotic Pakistani


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> *A man-made nation-state (Narowal-Gurdaspur) border, not a natural one



So you consider Pakistan's borders unnatural? So much for being a patriot lol. 



M. Sarmad said:


> I do not need to learn about my 'identity'



Clearly you do, because you're confused about what it is. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Namak Haram Afghani refugee



By Allah, ar-rahman ar-raheem, I am not an Afghan nor am I a refugee. If you don't believe me at this point, that's your problem, not mine. Nobody else is taking you seriously. 



M. Sarmad said:


> who mocks Jinnah



I'd like to see proof of me doing that.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> So you consider Pakistan's borders unnatural? So much for being a patriot lol.



Yes, it's unnatural and unfair; Entire Punjab belonged to us. 
We didn't even get the Muslim majority parts. 

Shakargarh Tehsil was a part of Muslim majority Gurdaspur District which was unfairly transferred to India. The tehsils of Ferozepur and Zira in Ferozepur districts, Nakodar and Jalandhar in Jalandhar district, Ajnala in Amritsar district and Gurdaspur and Batala in Gurdaspur district had a Muslim majority and were almost contiguous to West Punjab, yet they were given to East Punjab or the Indian Punjab.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Clearly you do, because you're confused about what it is.



Clearly, you are absolutely clueless on what you are going on about. 




PakSarzameen5823 said:


> By Allah, ar-rahman ar-raheem, I am not an Afghan nor am I a refugee. If you don't believe me at this point, that's your problem, not mine.



You know very well that I call you Afghani because you use Afghani flags on other forums.
Do you deny it? By Allah?




PakSarzameen5823 said:


> I'd like to see proof of me doing that.



Again, do you deny that you once went as far as using a _disfigured_ image of Jinnah as your dp?
Have you never tried to insult/mock Jinnah? By Allah ar-rahman ar-raheem?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Yes, it's unnatural and unfair; Entire Punjab belonged to us.



There's a clear divide between Pakistani and Indian Punjab, the separation is only natural. 



M. Sarmad said:


> You know very well that I call you Afghani because you use Afghani flags on other forums.



I've never claimed to be Afghan. You keep mistaking me for someone else. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Do you deny it? By Allah?



I already did, and I'll do it again. By Allah, I'm not Afghan. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Again, do you deny that you once went as far as using a _disfigured_ image of Jinnah as your dp?



By Allah, I've never done that. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Have you never tried to insult/mock Jinnah?



Maybe when I was younger, but that's about it.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> There's a clear divide between Pakistani and Indian Punjab, the separation is only natural.
> 
> .



No, the separation is not natural



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> I've never claimed to be Afghan. You keep mistaking me for someone else.
> 
> 
> 
> I already did, and I'll do it again. By Allah, I'm not Afghan.
> 
> 
> 
> By Allah, I've never done that.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe when I was younger, but that's about it.



So, you didn't say "_by Allah I have never used Afghan flags" _... !! I see

Good that you were honest enough to admit that you used to insult/mock Jinnah earlier on but now you don't do that...Nothing against you now

Good day


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> So, you didn't say "_by Allah I have never used Afghan flags" _... !! I see



You dumb monkey, read my post. I said I'm not Afghan. 

But if it keeps your trap shut: By Allah, I've never used Afghan flags nor am I an Afghan. 

Now stop lying.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> You dumb monkey, read my post. I said I'm not Afghan.
> 
> But if it keeps your trap shut: By Allah, I've never used Afghan flags nor am I an Afghan.
> 
> Now stop lying.



**** off MonkeyDluffy 

You are a certified liar


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Afghani



Good to know that an oath by Allah means nothing to you, but what can I expect when you think of yourself as closer to a Punjabi Sikh than to your fellow Muslim and fellow Pakistani non-Punjabis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Good to know that an oath by Allah means nothing to you, but what can I expect when you think of yourself as closer to a Punjabi Sikh than to your fellow Muslim and fellow Pakistani non-Punjabis.



Give it a rest MonkeyDluffy... 
I am not interested in your religious humbug


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Give it a rest MonkeyDluffy...
> I am not interested in your religious humbug



I'll ask you again, what proof do you have that I'm MonkeyDluffy?


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> I'll ask you again, what proof do you have that I'm MonkeyDluffy?



I do not need to prove it to anyone, I know it, and you know it too.
What's your real name? where are you from? Coward Afghani!

Anyway, keep your anti-Punjab bigoted views to yourself. And stop posting stupid threads


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Yaseen1 said:


> religion counts alot and most of people living in Pakistan migrated from india after partition which indicates that their race is that of indian


lol...

Do you really think that most people living in Pakistan migrated from India?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> I do not need to prove it to anyone



Yes you do, otherwise you're completely disregarding an oath to Allah for no reason other than your own personal prejudice. You're also embarrassing yourself in front of everyone.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Yes you do, otherwise you're completely disregarding an oath to Allah for no reason other than your own personal prejudice. You're also embarrassing yourself in front of everyone.



No, I don't

And no one takes a Namak Haram liar Afghani like yourself seriously, other than the select few like-minded worthless Ch****s of course...

Now stop quoting me


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> other than the select few like-minded worthless Ch****s of course...



That would be most of the forum (so far). 



M. Sarmad said:


> Now stop quoting me



Make me Mr Singh.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Good to know that an oath by Allah means nothing to you, but what can I expect when you think of yourself as closer to a Punjabi Sikh than to your fellow Muslim and fellow Pakistani non-Punjabis.


Brother, just ignore him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Musalman

Kawa Chala Hans ki chal....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MultaniGuy

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> If that's the case, then why is it that:
> 
> 1. Seraikis, Pothwaris and Hindkowans are practically non-existent among Indian Punjabis?
> 2. Why are there almost no Indian Punjabis of Kashmiri, Pashtun or Baloch heritage?
> 3. Why are Pakistani Punjabi tribes like Awans, Arains, Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, Barras, Mughals, etc not common among Indian Punjabis?
> 
> Even beyond that, there are numerous differences between Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis. For example, Pakistani Punjabis write in Shahmukhi, which Indian Punjabis can't even read, let alone use.
> 
> Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are not the same, and if you think so, go live in Indian Punjab and see for yourself just how different they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why are you so obsessed with Pakistanis and Indians? Seems pretty odd, the Western members here tend to focus on their own matters primarily. Are you starting to see why we don't believe you>
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't, we're in two different countries.
> 
> 
> 
> Because we ruled over them for so long that they decided to rip off our beautiful Mughlai language (Urdu) and create a defective version of it (Hindi).
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO no we don't, I'm yet to see an Indian who isn't Muslim that wears a headscarf, a skull cap, the same type of shalwar kameez as us, and I'm yet to see a Pakistani who wears bindi or a sari (except for the Muhajirs, I know they dress more like Indians but they're a minority, just like Muslim Indians).
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's just that a lot of Pakistanis tend to consume Indian media, and a lot of Indians tend to consume Pakistani media. The actual dances and songs that we both view as part of our culture is very minimal, the only exception is Punjabi music and dances.
> 
> 
> 
> That literally means nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The overwhelming majority of Muslims would NEVER marry a Hindu lol. To give you some perspective on how low on the list they are, many of us would rather marry an Israeli over them.
> 
> 
> 
> Only Punjabis, Kashmiris and Muhajirs. Punjabis+Kashmiris make up less than 5% of India, and Muhajirs make up about 7% of Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> You guess wrong, Imran Khan's family are of Pashtun heritage, so they have more in common with Afghanistan than India.


I agree with you, most westerners do not care about Pakistanis or Indians. lol.

People from the west care about their own matters.



M. Sarmad said:


> Yes, it's unnatural and unfair; Entire Punjab belonged to us.
> We didn't even get the Muslim majority parts.
> 
> Shakargarh Tehsil was a part of Muslim majority Gurdaspur District which was unfairly transferred to India. The tehsils of Ferozepur and Zira in Ferozepur districts, Nakodar and Jalandhar in Jalandhar district, Ajnala in Amritsar district and Gurdaspur and Batala in Gurdaspur district had a Muslim majority and were almost contiguous to West Punjab, yet they were given to East Punjab or the Indian Punjab.
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly, you are absolutely clueless on what you are going on about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know very well that I call you Afghani because you use Afghani flags on other forums.
> Do you deny it? By Allah?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, do you deny that you once went as far as using a _disfigured_ image of Jinnah as your dp?
> Have you never tried to insult/mock Jinnah? By Allah ar-rahman ar-raheem?


Pakistan should have gotten whole of Punjab and Assam too.
We should have gotten Kashmir too while Hyderabad state went to India.
Letting the princely states decide what to do was utterly stupid.
Muslims were badly cheated in Partition.

*You know I once heard that Vallabhai Patel said that Kashmir state should go to Pakistan while Hyderabad state goes to India in exchange. Pakistan should have accepted that arrangement.
But our blithering idiotic leaders were too shortsighted to see that.

You guys can google this claim.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jobless Jack

HalfMoon said:


> Pakistanis are Arabs. Here are some indisputable facts
> 
> 1) Pakistanis take pride in being descendants of Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim who invaded Indian subcontinent and made Indians as the slaves of the Arabs
> 
> 2) Pakistanis follow tribe system like their Arab forefathers rather than the caste system followed in Indian subcontinent the natives. For example, even *Muslims from *India* and Bangladesh follow caste system for marriages *but there is no caste system in Pakistan
> 
> 3) Pakistan love Arab culture and hate anything to do with Indian subcontinent culture. This is an important fact. People in Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Iran are all Muslims but they still take great pride in their local culture and history but in case of Pakistanis they hate any and all local culture and history prior to the conquest of the land by Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim. Pakistan's history starts with this event.



Are you seriously stupid ?

Muslims no where east west north or south *Follow* a caste system ! Even in Bangladesh no one follows a caste system !

Most Bangladeshi parents prefer their sons and daughters to marry a Bangladeshi, but this is not due to some caste system bullshit ! only because of the fact that people from the same country tend to get along much easier as they have more in common. This does not mean if a Bangladeshi marries say a Pakistani , His/her Bangladeshi parents will throw him/her out of the house ! It is perfectly acceptable as long as the Bangladeshi has married a muslim ! 
Many Bangladeshis who lives abroad has married Indian/Pakistani muslim. This practice is not common but many do it and it is perfectly fine !

To your second point , Bangladeshis do take pride in their language/culture but the 1952 Language movement against West Pakistan had nothing to do with silly pride. If Urdu became the national language then most people in east Pakistan would have fallen behind in terms of education/job opportunity as most official state texts would have been distributed in Urdu and in that point in time hardly anyone could speak let alone read/write Urdu in East Pakistan. 

It was discrimination that separated East and West Pakistan . This discrimination was especially highlighted due to the geographical distance and bad integration of both parts. Discrimination which by the way minorities in both India and Pakistan face to this day. However Pakistan has learned its lesson from '71 and is integrating its minorities better , while India is just going backwards. 

So anyway, while we Bangladeshis take pride in our culture most would chose a Islam over culture. A Bangladeshi Muslim has nothing in common with a Hindu from West Bengal though both are bengalis ! Actually we dislike those idiots from west Bengal ! Of course in terms of culture He/she will find even more commonality a Muslim from say west Bengal and Assam and yes your average Pakistani has a different culture to us. However he/she ( Pakistani ) will find more commonality with us compared to a Hindu from west Bengal! The way we celebrate Bengali new year compared to the west Bengali are completely different. We for only treat the day as a day off to get together with family and friends and relax. For the west Bengals , its almost like a religious day.

We respect our Muslim brothers whether they are from India, Pakistan or wherever. However '71 is an emotional topic, and as most Bangladeshis are very emotional , so for this reason you Indians falsely think that we like you and Pakistan's think that we hate you. Its war and everyone suffers. Yes we do celebrate Bengali New year , however in Bangladesh it is mostly a Holiday where people just take a break and put their feet up. Its not some bullshit Bengali nationalism that Indian Hindus spew to find commonality with Bangladeshis. Our Culture is not Bengali nationalism. We separated from Pakistan not for Bengali nationalism but due to discrimination. I am glad that Pakistan has learned its lessons from 1971 and is integrating its minorities better . If they had learned their lesson before 1971 perhaps both countries would today be together. 



So please keep Bangladeshis out of your Bullshit like caste System, Bengali nationalism and drinking cow Urine. These gem of bullshits are only found in Bharat mata


----------



## M. Sarmad

MultaniGuy said:


> *You know I once heard that Vallabhai Patel said that Kashmir state should go to Pakistan while Hyderabad state goes to India in exchange. Pakistan should have accepted that arrangement.
> But our blithering idiotic leaders were too shortsighted to see that.
> 
> You guys can google this claim.*



agreed

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/what-if-the-subcontinent-was-one-country.587506/page-7#post-10953888



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> That would be most of the forum (so far).



Nah, only you and your coterie of ch****s, and a few of those who do not know who you really are; a Namak Haram traitorous Afghani leech hiding in Pakistan



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Do you really think that most people living in Pakistan migrated from India?



Not most of them,

But as per 1951 census, settlers from East Punjab constituted *25.6 %* of the total population of Pakistani Punjab. i.e. every fourth person in Punjab was a "settler from East Punjab"_. _Punjabi immigrants from East Punjab got easily assimilated in the host society as there were no cultural or lingual differences between East and West Punjab, contrary to what the Punjab hater Afghani refugee is propounding here.



PakSarzameen5823 said:


> .. Ranjit Singh



Well, Ranjit Singh despite being a Sikh was much more tolerant and 'inclusive' in his approach when dealing with those who were not his co-religionists, as compared to the despotic Afghans (and even Mughals) who claimed to be Muslims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakSarzameen5823

M. Sarmad said:


> Well, Ranjit Singh despite being a Sikh was much more tolerant and 'inclusive' in his approach when dealing with those who were not his correligionists, as compared to the despotic Afghans (and even Mughals) who claimed to be Muslims.





Mr Singh is clearly confused about his identity, if he claims to be a proud Muslim and Pakistani but throws Pakistanis who fought alongside the Durranis and Mughals under the bus and feels closer to anti-Muslim Masjid to stable transformer Ranjit Singh.


----------



## M. Sarmad

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> Mr Singh is clearly confused about his identity, if he claims to be a proud Muslim and Pakistani but throws Pakistanis who fought alongside the Durranis and Mughals under the bus and feels closer to anti-Muslim Masjid to stable transformer Ranjit Singh.




Thanks for proving that you are just an ignorant Afghani who knows nothing about the history of Punjab.

Do you know many Punjabi Muslims fought alongside Sikhs against the invading Afghani plunderers? (or how many Dakhini Muslims fought alongside Marathas against the Afghan invaders?) Do Afghanis like yourself see them as lesser Muslims? Those invasions by Afghans were purely _plundering campaigns_ with absolutely no religious overtones or undertones as they were often directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners. 

Do you know the man in charge of the treasury, as well as the arsenal of the Sikh empire during Ranjit Singh's era, was a Muslim?

Do you know Ranjit Singh's Foreign Minister was also a Muslim?

Do you know how many of his emissaries were Punjabi Muslims?

Of course, you don't.

As for transforming Mughal Masjids into stables, A deplorable act indeed.

But have you forgotten what Ahmad Shah Abdali did to Gurdawaras, esp. the holiest of them for Sikhs, the Golden Temple; blew up the building and filled the pond with ****. Have you forgotten what Mughal Kings did to Sikh Gurus and their children?

Ranjit Singh, later on, handed Muslims most of their mosques back. He even gifted all _Nowadrat _(Islamic Relics) to the respectable Fakir Family (of Lahore) instead of destroying or desecrating them. Today, Fakir Khana is the largest privately owned museum in South Asia.

And what did the Afghans do? other than indiscriminate loot and plunder

A folk saying _‘khada peeta lahe da, baqi Ahmed shahe da_
(what you can consume may be of some benefit to you, the rest is taken away by Ahmed Shah)

The great bard of Punjab, Waris Shah, too explicitly hinted at the threat the Afghan marauder posed:

_‘Chadia gazab da katak Kandhar vichon_ (a terrible army started its march from Kandhar)
_ Ahmed Shah az gab thin aan pausi_ (Ahmed Shah will descend from nowhere and strike)’


I can go on and on,

But I don't need to discuss the history of my land and my people with a clueless foreign Afghani racist who holds deep hatred and contempt for Punjabis.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> But have you forgotten what Ahmad Shah Abdali did to Gurdawaras, esp. the holiest of them for Sikhs, the Golden Temple; blew up the building and filled the pond with ****. Have you forgotten what Mughal Kings did to Sikh Gurus and their children?


You do realize that Punjabi Muslims also did similar acts, right?

You cannot compare Sikhs and their persecution of Muslims to the Afghans.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> You do realize that Punjabi Muslims also did similar acts, right?
> 
> You cannot compare Sikhs and their persecution of Muslims to the Afghans.



What similar acts were done by Punjabi Muslims? Elaborate, please

Are you a Pakhtun?


----------



## MultaniGuy

M. Sarmad said:


> What similar acts were done by Punjabi Muslims? Elaborate, please
> 
> Are you a Pakhtun?


I am Pathan by ancestry, but Punjabized now.

By the way, the Sikhs were quite barbaric to the Muslims. There is no doubt about this.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

HalfMoon said:


> 2) Pakistanis follow tribe system like their Arab forefathers rather than the caste system followed in Indian subcontinent the natives. For example, even Muslims from India and Bangladesh follow caste system for marriages but there is no caste system in Pakistan


Pakistan's tribal/birdari system was practiced since thousands of years before Arabs even set foot in Sindh. Our ancestors never practiced the caste system; that is a Gangadeshi practice that was imposed on you South Indians.

Here is what Ganga texts say of our people.

_‘Where these five rivers, viz. Satadru, Vipasa, the third Iraavatl, Candrabhaga and Vitasta flow
and where there are pllu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called
Aratta...’ - 21

‘That (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta (country) is
called Balhika where the Arya should not stay even for two days.’ - 22_

Here is a passage from a book written by a renowned Indian historian regarding the "Bahlikas" (ancestors of coterminous Pakistan)


> The passage gives the impression that amongst the Balhikas, the Aryan social structure which
> became a rule in the later days was not enforced and observed strictly. Thus it was not considered
> obligatory by the people to hold on to a single occupation. A Brahmin who visited this region found it
> to his dismay that “having become brahmin ones, a balhika becomes ksatriya, then (he became)
> vaisya, sudra and even a barber. Having become barber, he again became a brahmin and having
> become a twice-born, he became a dasa. In the same family one becomes brahmin and the rest
> followed other professions”, and he concluded that ‘Gandharas, Madrakas and Balhikas are utterly
> thoughtless’. These probably are the impressions of a man who in his society was used to strict
> observance of caste system in which the caste of the person was decided by his birth and it was
> obligatory on him to follow the profession of the family in which he was born. This was the rigid
> form the caste system took. But evidently caste system was not strictly observed in the country of
> Aratta where the individual was free to choose liis profession and change it, if necessary, irrespective
> of the professions of the other members of family as well as those practised by liis forefathers, which
> gave great amount of occupational mobility to individuals. It is tempting not to see in this what was
> probably a custom of long-standing and perhaps a part of the ancient way of life inherited from the
> Asuras.
> 
> The religion of the people of Aratta is described as nastadharma, destroyed religion, which was
> forbidden to the Aryans, ayajvanam, not sacrificing, a term which is used in Rgveda to describe the
> religion of the Dasyus, the Dasas and the Panis. In the Mahabharata-passage it is the religion of the
> Vratya, dasanuya (?) and the people of Videha. Balhikas are classed under those from whom the gods,
> the ancestors and the brahmin do not accept anything. In general the Balhikas seem to be treated as
> outcastes who probably deliberately remained outside the pale of Aryan social structure and also did
> not accept the religious beliefs on which the sacrificial system was based, which explains their being
> called unsacrificing etc.



As you can see, we did not follow your caste system neither did we follow your religion.




HalfMoon said:


> You can google and there are tons of material confirming that Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim invaded India and made my forefathers as slaves. I do not think any Pakistani even disputes this fact. In fact this is an event of great pride for the Pakistanis. Umayyad general Muḥammad ibn Qāsim was their great forefather who conquered India. Pakistanis created and dedicate Pakistan in his name.


Most Pakistani's (mostly Sindhis) don't support Muhammad ibn Qasim for his religion, but we support him for what we did; which was liberating Sindh from a hated tyrant.

Raja Dahir's father, Chach, was a Brahmin Hindu adviser to the legitimate King who was a Buddhist (as it had been for centuries). Chach took over through murder and conspiracies and installed his tyranny over the land which his son succeeded after Chach's death. The *Buddhist Majority* was persecuted, most notably the Jatts; who were forced to wear a special mark to distinguish them. That's why when Muhammad ibn Qasim came, most of the people supported and joined him in his quest to topple this illegitimate and tyrannical Hindu dynasty.



M. Sarmad said:


> In fact, Pakistanis from _the South of Indus_ are closer to North Indians (racially, ethnically and linguistically) compared to Pakhtuns and Balochs.


Think again







As I said before, almost every genetic study shows that Pakistani ethnic groups cluster together and share a very similar genetic makeup.



M. Sarmad said:


> Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis are of the same race/ethnicity.


Punjabis are not a race or ethnicity; they are divided into different sub-ethnic groups (Seraikis) and tribes, many of which have different origins. "Punjabi" is more of a geographical term, anyone living in Punjab - regardless of their ethnic group, can be considered a Punjabi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Punjabis are not a race or ethnicity...



So, _Punjabi_ is not an ethnicity now!!!
You didn't tell if you too were a Pakhtun?


----------



## BringHarmony

MultaniGuy said:


> Totally wrong. I live in Canada and I always tell people I am


Well, you are not the only Pakistani immigrant here in Canada.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> What similar acts were done by Punjabi Muslims? Elaborate, please
> 
> Are you a Pakhtun?


I'm not Pakhtun, but why do you hate Pashtuns and why are you calling fellow Pashtun members here as "Afghan refugees" - let go of this ethno-nationalism and have some shame. 

Mir Mannu is one such example who was responsible for killing Sikhs, many of them dying in the most painful manner. Do you know your history?



M. Sarmad said:


> So, _Punjabi_ is not an ethnicity now!!!
> You didn't tell if you too were a Pakhtun?


Punjabis are not an ethnicity or race, everyone knows this...

Compare the genetics of a Lahori Chura and a Lahori Bhatt; both of them may be considered "Punjabis" (as a geographic term) but they aren't anywhere close in blood or race. 

The tribes of Punjab have different origins and some even have vastly different cultures/languages.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BringHarmony

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Punjabis are not an ethnicity or race, everyone knows this...


Race is a loaded concept.
Ethinicity is very real. Punjabis have a distinct language --Punjabi, Duh. A distinct set of physical features. A distinct cuisine and culture. They have 3 distinct religions commonly followed: Hinduism, Sikhism and Islam. Out of which 2 are native to the region: Hinduism and Sikhism. And you still insist that Punjabis are not an ethnicity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> I'm not Pakhtun, but why do you hate Pashtuns and why are you calling fellow Pashtun members here as "Afghan refugees" - let go of this ethno-nationalism and have some shame.
> 
> Mir Mannu is one such example who was responsible for killing Sikhs, many of them dying in the most painful manner. Do you know your history?



I don't hate anyone, let alone fellow Pakistanis.
In fact, Punjabis, in general, are one of the least racist ethnic groups in Sub-continent.

I don't even hate Afghans and have repeatedly stated here and elsewhere that Afghan refugees in Pakistan should not be forcibly repatriated. A lot of Pakistani members here have seriously opposed my position, some even labeling me a traitor and whatnot

But I have a low tolerance for racist bigots...


As for the _Turk_, Mir Mannu was the Moghul governor of Lahore who later joined Ahmed Shah Abdali. He killed Sikhs and carried out all kinds of atrocities against them on behalf of his Mughal and Afghan masters. And that exactly is what I am saying. What's your point?

Yes, I know my history but do you?

And what's your ethnicity?



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Punjabis are not an ethnicity or race, everyone knows this...



Stop embarrassing yourself

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MultaniGuy

BringHarmony said:


> Race is a loaded concept.
> Ethinicity is very real. Punjabis have a distinct language --Punjabi, Duh. A distinct set of physical features. A distinct cuisine and culture. They have 3 distinct religions commonly followed: Hinduism, Sikhism and Islam. Out of which 2 are native to the region: Hinduism and Sikhism. And you still insist that Punjabis are not an ethnicity.


Now I know you are an Indian pretending to be a Canadian.

Most Punjabis in Pakistan have nothing common with Indian Punjabis. Indian Punjabis only make up 3% of Indian population. Punjabis in Pakistan make up about 44% and have intermarried with Kashmiris, Pathans, Sindhis, and Balochis.



M. Sarmad said:


> I don't hate anyone, let alone fellow Pakistanis.
> In fact, Punjabis, in general, are one of the least racist ethnic groups in Sub-continent.
> 
> I don't even hate Afghans and have repeatedly stated here and elsewhere that Afghan refugees in Pakistan should not be forcibly repatriated. A lot of Pakistani members here have seriously opposed my position, some even labeling me a traitor and whatnot
> 
> But I have a low tolerance for racist bigots...
> 
> 
> As for Mir Mannu, He was the Moghul governor of Lahore who later joined Ahmed Shah Abdali. He killed Sikhs and carried out all kinds of atrocities against them on behalf of his Mughal and Afghan masters. And that exactly is what I am saying. What's your point?
> 
> Yes, I know my history but do you?
> 
> And what's your ethnicity?
> 
> 
> 
> Stop embarrassing yourself


Even if we accept Punjabis as an ethnicity, Pakistani Muslim Punjabis have nothing in common with Indian Punjabis anymore.

Pakistani Punjabis have intermarried with Kashmiris, Pathans, Balochis, and Sindhis now.

Pakistani Muslim Punjabis have nothing in common with Indian Punjabis.

Even Imran Khan who is the Prime Minister of Pakistan, is a Pathan who is Punjabized.

You do realize Pathans who adopt Punjabi culture are Punjabis too right?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

MultaniGuy said:


> Even if we accept Punjabis as an ethnicity, Pakistani Muslim Punjabis have nothing in common with Indian Punjabis anymore.



Punjabi is an ethnicity and you (or anyone else for that matter) accepting it or not won't change this FACT

And no matter how much you want to deny it the fact remains that Pakistani Punjabis share common ancestry, ethnicity, language, culture etc with Indian Punjabis



MultaniGuy said:


> Pakistani Punjabis have intermarried with Kashmiris, Pathans, Balochis, and Sindhis now.



A Punjabi marrying Non-Punjabi in Pakistan is _an exception_ (that too limited to large urban centers only), and not a norm



MultaniGuy said:


> You do realize Pathans who adopt Punjabi culture are Punjabis too right?



Ethnically, No
Culturally, Yes


----------



## BringHarmony

MultaniGuy said:


> Now I know you are an Indian pretending to be a Canadian.


Ofcourse you will say so because there are only two sets in your universe of discourse. Pakistan-China and India. If one does not agree with you, they must be Indians. Whats really funny is that in this way you define yourself with respect to India. You should call yourself Pakistan Is Not India as the name of your country. PINI.



MultaniGuy said:


> Most Punjabis in Pakistan have nothing common with Indian Punjabis. Indian Punjabis only make up 3% of Indian population. Punjabis in Pakistan make up about 44% and have intermarried with Kashmiris, Pathans, Sindhis, and Balochis.


And? How does it matter if there are only 3% of Indians are actually Punjabi? No one is calling you an Indian. Except yourself. Either due to your own practical reasons OR due to the way you define yourself: "We are NOT Indians and everyone who disagrees with us is Indian.".


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> Punjabi is an ethnicity and you (or anyone else for that matter) accepting it or not won't change this FACT



Punjabi is a linguistic identity, which includes many sub-groups like Hazara (mixed Punjabi-Pukhtoons,) Seraiki (South Punjab,) Pahari (North Punjab.)

Even in Central Punjab, one of the most prevalent groups, Niazis, are Pukhtoon origin Punjabis (Imran Khan is one of them.)

Around Lahore and the surrounding areas, the two main ethnic groups are Arain (Mian, Malik,etc.) and Rajputs (along with Jats, Gujjars, Bhattis, Bajwas) have completely different origins.



M. Sarmad said:


> And no matter how much you want to deny it the fact remains that Pakistani Punjabis share common ancestry, ethnicity, language, culture etc with Indian Punjabis



We have diverged a long time ago and Sikhs have different tribes, ethnic groups which Punjabi Musulman do not have. Racially, Pakistani Punjabis have mixed with Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, Sindhis, Baloch, and other groups for almost one thousand years, while Indian Sikh Punjabis have not, as most of them have Hindu origins.



M. Sarmad said:


> A Punjabi marrying Non-Punjabi in Pakistan is _an exception_ (that too limited to large urban centers only), and not a norm



It is very common now a days. Pakistanis are Pakistanis, regardless of linguistic or regional origins. As Pakistani nationalism becomes the norm, you will see more and more marriages like these.

In my family, we have married into almost all provinces in Pakistan. Half of my family are married to Pukhtoons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BringHarmony

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We have diverged a long time ago and Sikhs have different tribes, ethnic groups which Punjabi Musulman do not have. Racially, Pakistani Punjabis have mixed with Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, Sindhis, Baloch, and other groups for almost one thousand years, while Indian Sikh Punjabis have not, as most of them have Hindu origins.


Don't you folks have same Pagan origin? I highly doubt you are 'Native' Muslims. Unless you claim to be from Turkey or from Middle East.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Punjabi is a linguistic identity,



Punjabi is much more than that .. much much more



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Even in Central Punjab, one of the most prevalent groups, Niazis, are Pukhtoon origin Punjabis (Imran Khan is one of them.)



There are no _Niazis_ in central Punjab
Only in Mianwali


----------



## BringHarmony

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Punjabi is a linguistic identity, which includes many sub-groups like Hazara (mixed Punjabi-Pukhtoons,) Seraiki (South Punjab,) Pahari (North Punjab.)


Yes, right! Just as Irish is a linguistic identity. You know, its the name of a language! Isn't it?

There are sub-communities in Ireland as well, FYI. And Oh, Ethnic Irish folks also live in UK and Canada as Canadians or British Subjects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> There are no _Niazis_ in central Punjab
> Only in Mianwali



Lahore and Faisalabad (and surrounding villages) have plenty of Niazis, and I should know as my Niazi relatives are from there.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Around Lahore and the surrounding areas, the two main ethnic groups are Arain (Mian, Malik,etc.) and Rajputs (along with Jats, Gujjars, Bhattis, Bajwas) have completely different origins.



I am a Gujjar, bro
And there are many Hindu and Sikh Gujjars too
I don't want to get into those details bhai



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Lahore and Faisalabad (and surrounding villages) have plenty of Niazis, and I should know as my Niazi relatives are from there.



Rest assured, no Indigenous _Niazis_ in those areas, bro

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> Punjabi is much more than that .. much much more



Yes, but primarily a linguistic and cultural group, not necessarily an ethnic group.

There are plenty of people originating from neighboring provinces since hundreds and thousands of years who are now Punjabis.

Punjabis are the most diverse ethnically than any other province.

We have Butt (Kashmiris,) Niazi (Pukhtoon,) Dasti/Dashti (Baloch,) Agha/Gul (Turk,) Kurd (Kurdish,) Mir/Mashoodi/Ispahani/etc (Iranian,) Punjabized Muhajirs like Sultan Rahi, Syed/Qureshi/Farooqi/Siddiqui/Usmani/Rizvi/Alvi (Qureshi Arabs,) Arain (Taif/Syrian/Iraqi Arabs,) etc.



M. Sarmad said:


> I am a Gujjar, bro
> _Tareekh e Gujran_ was compiled by my maternal great-grandfather



Ma sha Allah. I’m a Rajput, whose family is very active in Rajput Associations in Lahore and Faisalabad.

Gujjars are our brothers. Nice to hear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

@Pan-Islamic-Pakistan 

I am a Pakistani first and foremost
All other identities are secondary

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

M. Sarmad said:


> @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan
> 
> I am a Pakistani first and foremost
> All other identities are secondary



Nice to hear brother.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MultaniGuy

M. Sarmad said:


> Punjabi is an ethnicity and you (or anyone else for that matter) accepting it or not won't change this FACT
> 
> And no matter how much you want to deny it the fact remains that Pakistani Punjabis share common ancestry, ethnicity, language, culture etc with Indian Punjabis
> 
> 
> 
> A Punjabi marrying Non-Punjabi in Pakistan is _an exception_ (that too limited to large urban centers only), and not a norm
> 
> 
> 
> Ethnically, No
> Culturally, Yes


I agree with you that Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis may have had a common ancestor at one point. But we are different to them now.

When Pathans intermarry Pakistani Punjabis, will Pakistani Punjabis have anything in common with Indian Punjabis?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Ma sha Allah. I’m a Rajput, whose family is very active in Rajput Associations in Lahore and Faisalabad.
> 
> Gujjars are our brothers. Nice to hear.



That's great,
Hopefully, we will meet someday



MultaniGuy said:


> I agree with you that Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis may have had a common ancestor at one point. But we are different to them now.
> 
> When Pathans intermarry Pakistani Punjabis, will Pakistani Punjabis have anything in common with Indian Punjabis?



*Bhai, *we don't have to deny facts to be a Pakistani
_Pakistani nationalism is unique_
We are proud Pakistanis

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

MultaniGuy said:


> I agree with you that Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Punjabis may have had a common ancestor at one point. But we are different to them now.
> 
> When Pathans intermarry Pakistani Punjabis, will Pakistani Punjabis have anything in common with Indian Punjabis?


Nope, and there has be alot of intermarriage happening between all the ethnicities.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## MultaniGuy

Pakhtoon yum said:


> Nope, and there has be alot of intermarriage happening between all the ethnicities.


This is what I noticed as well. Sindhis marrying with Punjabis, Pathans marrying with Balochis.
And ofcourse Kashmiris marrying with Punjabis and Pathans.​Soon we will have nothing in common with India.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

MultaniGuy said:


> This is what I noticed as well. Sindhis marrying with Punjabis, Pathans marrying with Balochis.
> And ofcourse Kashmiris marrying with Punjabis and Pathans.​Soon we will have nothing in common with India.


We are seeing the birth of a new people, with a new and unique culture. Look at the rabab a pakhtoon instrument that's used all over pakistan and in mostly all pakistani music. Look at Peshawari chapal, even Pakistani women are starting to wear it, also the pakhtoon hats and men sadar (men chadar) these are some of the changes, influenced by the pakhtoon culture their are other that are influenced by the punjabis, sindhi and balochi.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakhtoon yum said:


> We are seeing the birth of a new people, with a new and unique culture. Look at the rabab a pakhtoon instrument that's used all over pakistan and in mostly all pakistani music. Look at Peshawari chapal, even Pakistani women are starting to wear it, also the pakhtoon hats and men sadar (men chadar) these are some of the changes, influenced by the pakhtoon culture their are other that are influenced by the punjabis, sindhi and balochi.



Just recently, we began to see greater interest in Pukhto and new words borrowed from Pukhto entering Pakistani Urdu vocabulary. I think PTI success is a rejuvenation and spread of Pukhtoon culture to the rest of Pakistan.

In another generation, we will be completely unintelligible to Indians and begin to look completely North and West to our Irani, Turk cousins and our Chinese friends.

PTI should expediate the process by banning Indian movies, songs, and vulgar content from entering Pakistan, particularly in Karachi where we unfortunately have a class which idolizes this culture.

We need to focus on creating new media content which pushes forward positive values and strong nationalism, similar to what Turkey has done.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## @@@

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Just recently, we began to see greater interest in Pukhto and new words borrowed from Pukhto entering Pakistani Urdu vocabulary. I think PTI success is a rejuvenation and spread of Pukhtoon culture to the rest of Pakistan.
> 
> In another generation, we will be completely unintelligible to Indians and begin to look completely North and West to our Irani, Turk cousins and our Chinese friends.
> 
> PTI should expediate the process by banning Indian movies, songs, and vulgar content from entering Pakistan, particularly in Karachi where we unfortunately have a class which idolizes this culture.
> 
> We need to focus on creating new media content which pushes forward positive values and strong nationalism, similar to what Turkey has done.



People from Karachi are messed up in so many ways. Imagine if Karachi had people who genuinely cared for Pakistan. MQM, PPP wouldn't have been elected. If Karachi in the last 30 years was ruled by a competent government. It would've been on the way to become the leading economic city in the world!! See the growth figures of Karachi!

Karachi added *10 million* people in last 40 years! In less than one generation!







It was a thriving city within the '80s as well as the whole country as a whole!! Then after that, everything started turning dark!!

You know why that was? The _Shehadat_ of _Mard e Momin Habib _Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq!

It is the _Zalimun_ who are trying to destroy _Islami Jumhurriyat e Pakistan
_
See this chart.






A _Barakati Watan _can only be achieved if the _M'ashiyaat _is based upon the _Riyyasat e Medina _as adopted by _Rasul e Pak Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam.

Wazir e Azam_ Imran Khan Niazi will adopt this model in _Islami Jamhurriyat e Pakistan_. _Inshallah _

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Just recently, we began to see greater interest in Pukhto and new words borrowed from Pukhto entering Pakistani Urdu vocabulary. I think PTI success is a rejuvenation and spread of Pukhtoon culture to the rest of Pakistan.
> 
> In another generation, we will be completely unintelligible to Indians and begin to look completely North and West to our Irani, Turk cousins and our Chinese friends.
> 
> PTI should expediate the process by banning Indian movies, songs, and vulgar content from entering Pakistan, particularly in Karachi where we unfortunately have a class which idolizes this culture.
> 
> We need to focus on creating new media content which pushes forward positive values and strong nationalism, similar to what Turkey has done.


I've seen people use pakhto words too, I believe it's because of the shows and movies that came out in the past 3 years. You are absolutely right, Indian content needs to be blocked, like how they block our content.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TMA

Pakhtoon yum said:


> I've seen people use pakhto words too, I believe it's because of the shows and movies that came out in the past 3 years. You are absolutely right, Indian content needs to be blocked, like how they block our content.


I think that the State ought to also introduce words from smaller languages like Balochi, Kashmiri, Chitrali etc etc into Old Hindi (Urdu).



M. Sarmad said:


> Thanks for proving that you are just an ignorant Afghani who knows nothing about the history of Punjab.
> 
> Do you know many Punjabi Muslims fought alongside Sikhs against the invading Afghani plunderers? (or how many Dakhini Muslims fought alongside Marathas against the Afghan invaders?) Do Afghanis like yourself see them as lesser Muslims? Those invasions by Afghans were purely _plundering campaigns_ with absolutely no religious overtones or undertones as they were often directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners.
> 
> Do you know the man in charge of the treasury, as well as the arsenal of the Sikh empire during Ranjit Singh's era, was a Muslim?
> 
> Do you know Ranjit Singh's Foreign Minister was also a Muslim?
> 
> Do you know how many of his emissaries were Punjabi Muslims?
> 
> Of course, you don't.
> 
> As for transforming Mughal Masjids into stables, A deplorable act indeed.
> 
> But have you forgotten what Ahmad Shah Abdali did to Gurdawaras, esp. the holiest of them for Sikhs, the Golden Temple; blew up the building and filled the pond with ****. Have you forgotten what Mughal Kings did to Sikh Gurus and their children?
> 
> Ranjit Singh, later on, handed Muslims most of their mosques back. He even gifted all _Nowadrat _(Islamic Relics) to the respectable Fakir Family (of Lahore) instead of destroying or desecrating them. Today, Fakir Khana is the largest privately owned museum in South Asia.
> 
> And what did the Afghans do? other than indiscriminate loot and plunder
> 
> A folk saying _‘khada peeta lahe da, baqi Ahmed shahe da_
> (what you can consume may be of some benefit to you, the rest is taken away by Ahmed Shah)
> 
> The great bard of Punjab, Waris Shah, too explicitly hinted at the threat the Afghan marauder posed:
> 
> _‘Chadia gazab da katak Kandhar vichon_ (a terrible army started its march from Kandhar)
> _ Ahmed Shah az gab thin aan pausi_ (Ahmed Shah will descend from nowhere and strike)’
> 
> 
> I can go on and on,
> 
> But I don't need to discuss the history of my land and my people with a clueless foreign Afghani racist who holds deep hatred and contempt for Punjabis.


Why do you say he is an Afghan Afghan (Afghan Pukhtoon)?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

TMA said:


> I think that the State ought to also introduce words from smaller languages like Balochi, Kashmiri, Chitrali etc etc into Old Hindi (Urdu).


Pure urdu needs to be taught and used again, simple as that. Urdu Is heavily pakhto influenced.



M. Sarmad said:


> What similar acts were done by Punjabi Muslims? Elaborate, please
> 
> Are you a Pakhtun?


You do realize it wasn't all the Afghans right?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TMA

M. Sarmad said:


> No, the separation is not natural
> 
> 
> 
> So, you didn't say "_by Allah I have never used Afghan flags" _... !! I see
> 
> Good that you were honest enough to admit that you used to insult/mock Jinnah earlier on but now you don't do that...Nothing against you now
> 
> Good day


I think that the original map of Pakistan also included an undivided Punjab?


----------



## M. Sarmad

TMA said:


> Why do you say he is an Afghan Afghan (Afghan Pukhtoon)?



Because he uses Afghan flags on other forums and mocks Jinnah and Pakistan



Pakhtoon yum said:


> You do realize it wasn't all the Afghans right?



Your point?


----------



## TMA

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> No, you're just unable to respond to them because you've been caught with your pants down. If you think Indians are similar to us go live with them. Pakistan wasn't made for you.


We share similarities with a minority of Bharatis, that is all. And that part of Bharat should have come to Pakistan. But what is done is done.
I am more comfortable with a Pak Afghan than a Bharati Punjabi.
Also Durrani history and Sikh history are both part of Pakistani history and both did bad. We ought to learn from this, let this not divide. The only empire that I personally consider illegitimate was British India, the others came for loot and plunder only, she came to systematically destroy and enslave, specifically Muslims and their ways. The Sikh Empire turned mosques into stables because Muslim Afghans et al did bad to them, but what did British India do?
1.Destroyed whatever remaining Muslim political power.
2.Destroyed whatever Islamic economic system was there.
3.Destroyed whatever Islamic jurisprudence system was there.
4.Destroyed the Status of the Persian and Arabic tongues.
5.Did all the above and then poured acid on the soil so to speak. 
(It was a miracle that number one was somewhat restored with Pakistan).

Even the Sikh Empire did not do the above.



M. Sarmad said:


> Because he uses Afghan flags on other forums and mocks Jinnah and Pakistan
> 
> 
> 
> Your point?


What forums? Any links please?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

TMA said:


> What forums? Any links please?



He himself posted those links here a few days ago. You can go through his posts if you want.



TMA said:


> We share similarities with a minority of Bharatis, that is all. And that part of Bharat should have come to Pakistan. But what is done is done.
> I am more comfortable with a Pak Afghan than a Bharati Punjabi.
> Also Durrani history and Sikh history are both part of Pakistani history and both did bad. We ought to learn from this, let this not divide. The only empire that I personally consider illegitimate was British India, the others came for loot and plunder only, she came to systematically destroy and enslave, specifically Muslims and their ways. The Sikh Empire turned mosques into stables because Muslim Afghans et al did bad to them, but what did British India do?
> 1.Destroyed whatever remaining Muslim political power.
> 2.Destroyed whatever Islamic economic system was there.
> 3.Destroyed whatever Islamic jurisprudence system was there.
> 4.Destroyed the Status of the Persian and Arabic tongues.
> 5.Did all the above and then poured acid on the soil so to speak.
> (It was a miracle that number one was somewhat restored with Pakistan).
> 
> Even the Sikh Empire did not do the above.





Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founding father of Afghanistan, is a hero for Afghans only.

The devastation of Punjab at his hands has been ingrained in the historical consciousness of its people as a great calamity. Afghan plundering campaigns and raids were very punishing for the general population.

Pakistan is a successor state to the Sikh Empire. Afghans have never forgiven Sikhs for pushing them back to what is now Afghanistan. The Sikhs rolled back the Afghan 'gains' (from Mughals) to the current border that was later formalized as Durand Line by the British. This is the earliest basis of the dispute about the boundary line between modern-day Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the Afghan claim on _areas west of the Indus_

They hate Ranjit Singh, not because of his alleged anti-Muslim policies (Ranjit was a secular ruler, and Afghans were much crueler and despotic rulers anyway) but because of the humiliation and defeat inflicted on Afghans by the Sikhs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AsianLion

True most of Pakistan was part of turk, Persian and its own ppl devoid of any linkages with Indian Subcontinent, even there are no what so ever traces of Hindu rulers in Pakistan, Punjab, KPK, Balochistan etc.


----------



## TMA

M. Sarmad said:


> He himself posted those links here a few days ago. You can go through his posts if you want.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founding father of Afghanistan, is a hero for Afghans only.
> 
> The devastation of Punjab at his hands has been ingrained in the historical consciousness of its people as a great calamity. Afghan plundering campaigns and raids were very punishing for the general population.
> 
> Pakistan is a successor state to the Sikh Empire. Afghans have never forgiven Sikhs for pushing them back to what is now Afghanistan. The Sikhs rolled back the Afghan 'gains' (from Mughals) to the current border that was later formalized as Durand Line by the British. This is the earliest basis of the dispute about the boundary line between modern-day Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the Afghan claim on _areas west of the Indus_
> 
> They hate Ranjit Singh, not because of his alleged anti-Muslim policies (Ranjit was a secular ruler, and Afghans were much crueler and despotic rulers anyway) but because of the humiliation and defeat inflicted on Afghans by the Sikhs.


I know that is why Afghanistan hates Punjabis (even the Muslim Punjabis) because of their defeat at the hands of the Sikh Empire. Although they ought to realise that most Sikhs live in Bharat and not Pakistan.
However Pakistan is not the successor state to the Sikh Empire. I disagree with this and I suspect most Pakistanis will disagree with you on this (Unless you mean from a geographic point of view) If anything it would be British India. Although maybe Afghanistan sees Pakistan as the successor state to Pakistan....?????
True it is part of our history but so is the Durrani Empire (at least that part of Pakistan that was included in it). Indeed Afghan history to a certain extent is part of Pakistani history just like Sikh History and Bharati History is a part of Pakistani History to an certain extent.
I am sure you know that most Afghans (Pukhtoons) are Pak and not Afghan Afghan, whereas mos Sikhs are Bharati and not Pak.

Now as to to who was more brutal...I will not get into that...I will say that we ought to learn from this and unite our histories and make it Pakistani. Pakistan is not different from other nations in this regard.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dexter

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Just recently, we began to see greater interest in Pukhto and new words borrowed from Pukhto entering Pakistani Urdu vocabulary. I think PTI success is a rejuvenation and spread of Pukhtoon culture to the rest of Pakistan.
> 
> In another generation, we will be completely unintelligible to Indians and begin to look completely North and West to our Irani, Turk cousins and our Chinese friends.
> 
> PTI should expediate the process by banning Indian movies, songs, and vulgar content from entering Pakistan, particularly in Karachi where we unfortunately have a class which idolizes this culture.
> 
> We need to focus on creating new media content which pushes forward positive values and strong nationalism, similar to what Turkey has done.



Will you guys stop this nonsense about Karachites?? Go search every source you can indian content is being spread over all Pakistan not just karachi.Whether its Punjab or anyother region people still watch indian movies and dramas.


----------



## Gangetic

MultaniGuy said:


> This is what I noticed as well. Sindhis marrying with Punjabis, Pathans marrying with Balochis.
> And ofcourse Kashmiris marrying with Punjabis and Pathans.​Soon we will have nothing in common with India.


Yep this is a good thing.
Slowly a Pakistani ethnic group is being made.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

M. Sarmad said:


> Because he uses Afghan flags on other forums and mocks Jinnah and Pakistan
> 
> 
> 
> Your point?


We be innocent. On a serious note, there is always 2 sides to a story.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dexter said:


> Will you guys stop this nonsense about Karachites?? Go search every source you can indian content is being spread over all Pakistan not just karachi.Whether its Punjab or anyother region people still watch indian movies and dramas.



We can’t deny that some portions of Karachi’s population admire Indian culture more than the rest of Pakistan.

Our government should work to correct those social ills which promote evils among our youth and misguided population.

Don’t be so thin-skinned brother. We have to deal with these issues resolutely.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dexter

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> We can’t deny that some portions of Karachi’s population admire Indian culture more than the rest of Pakistan.
> 
> Our government should work to correct those social ills which promote evils among our youth and misguided population.
> 
> Don’t be so thin-skinned brother. We have to deal with these issues resolutely.



Brother you have some very misunderstanding about us its not about admiring but about a relation to that area or region, the first generation of muhajirs (1947) and second generation (1971) regardless of which state they belong e.g East Punjab,Jammu Kashmir,UP,CP,Bihar,Hyderabad,gujarat etc) or east pakistan has a bond with their birthplace that can never break i dont need to explain this there are some memories that remained with these people till their death but now their off-springs born in Pakistan mainly in urban Sindh (Karachi,hyderabad,sukkur and mirpurkhas) has no connection with those areas, we are loyal to this land , its natural.

Even in my house or my whole khandan we dont even watch a single indian content. Most of the Pakistani media i.e. dramas,news and film industry is based on Karachi. I dont even care about those states of india from where my ancestors belong because i am born here.

Its ok to emrace your identity and heritage but remember these kind of attitude has lost us half of our counrty and Our beloved *Prophet S.A.W* has warned us about racism in his last sermon so we need to be proud of our Pakistani identity but at the same time we should not forget that the concept of Pakistan is not complete without Islam if it was then whats the point of those countless losses of lives and migrations for a separate muslim land not for a pagan Indus heritage.

May *ALLAH S.W.T.* protect our Pakistan from all sorts of evils and guide us all to the straight path.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dexter said:


> Brother you have some very misunderstanding about us its not about admiring but about a relation to that area or region, the first generation of muhajirs (1947) and second generation (1971) regardless of which state they belong e.g East Punjab,Jammu Kashmir,UP,CP,Bihar,Hyderabad,gujarat etc) or east pakistan has a bond with their birthplace that can never break i dont need to explain this there are some memories that remained with these people till their death but now their off-springs born in Pakistan mainly in urban Sindh (Karachi,hyderabad,sukkur and mirpurkhas) has no connection with those areas, we are loyal to this land , its natural.
> 
> Even in my house or my whole khandan we dont even watch a single indian content. Most of the Pakistani media i.e. dramas,news and film industry is based on Karachi. I dont even care about those states of india from where my ancestors belong because i am born here.
> 
> Its ok to emrace your identity and heritage but remember these kind of attitude has lost us half of our counrty and Our beloved *Prophet S.A.W* has warned us about racism in his last sermon so we need to be proud of our Pakistani identity but at the same time we should not forget that the concept of Pakistan is not complete without Islam if it was then whats the point of those countless losses of lives and migrations for a separate muslim land not for a pagan Indus heritage.
> 
> May *ALLAH S.W.T.* protect our Pakistan from all sorts of evils and guide us all to the straight path.



It’s not only some Muhajirs in Karachi with this mindset. Karachi Punjabis and others are afflicted also.

This is why I used the word class, and not ethnicity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TMA

dexter said:


> Brother you have some very misunderstanding about us its not about admiring but about a relation to that area or region, the first generation of muhajirs (1947) and second generation (1971) regardless of which state they belong e.g East Punjab,Jammu Kashmir,UP,CP,Bihar,Hyderabad,gujarat etc) or east pakistan has a bond with their birthplace that can never break i dont need to explain this there are some memories that remained with these people till their death but now their off-springs born in Pakistan mainly in urban Sindh (Karachi,hyderabad,sukkur and mirpurkhas) has no connection with those areas, we are loyal to this land , its natural.
> 
> Even in my house or my whole khandan we dont even watch a single indian content. Most of the Pakistani media i.e. dramas,news and film industry is based on Karachi. I dont even care about those states of india from where my ancestors belong because i am born here.
> 
> Its ok to emrace your identity and heritage but remember these kind of attitude has lost us half of our counrty and Our beloved *Prophet S.A.W* has warned us about racism in his last sermon so we need to be proud of our Pakistani identity but at the same time we should not forget that the concept of Pakistan is not complete without Islam if it was then whats the point of those countless losses of lives and migrations for a separate muslim land not for a pagan Indus heritage.
> 
> May *ALLAH S.W.T.* protect our Pakistan from all sorts of evils and guide us all to the straight path.


The reason for the civil war of 1971 was not just a one sided racism issue...I know you did not mean to simplify it, however some one who stumbles upon this thread may come away from this impression and think this....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

Pakistan is identified as a part of *Ancient* *India* in literature/books.

Comprehensive account of *Ancient India* in here: https://www.ancient.eu/india/

Even the word _*India*_ is derived from the "Indus River."

Revisionism in our present-day narrative will not change/erase our past.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

LeGenD said:


> Pakistan is identified as a part of *Ancient* *India* in literature/books.


These are *not *words of bible or the Holy quran. There was no Ancient India until British writers in 19th century *reified* that concept basing it on the then colony that they had constructed. It is for us to reify the concept of 'Ancient Pakistan' which is as viable as Ancient India unless you think books written by Anglo-Saxon victorians are sacred.

i don't ....

_Ps. Just as you know i have read widely on this subject and I would call myself amatuer historian and make these comments in light of that. They are not gushes of patriotism._

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> Pakistan is identified as a part of *Ancient* *India* in literature/books.
> 
> Comprehensive account of *Ancient India* in here: https://www.ancient.eu/india/
> 
> Even the word _*India*_ is derived from the "Indus River."
> 
> Revisionism in our present-day narrative will not change/erase our past.





More pertinently then, what LINK do modern day indians have with Modern day Pakistanis?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Indus Pakistan said:


> There was no Ancient India until British writers in 19th century *reified* that concept basing it on the then colony that they had constructed.


If you look for referances to this 'Ancient India' you will find the* entire corpus* that feeds it was written by British writers during the days of Raj in* 19th century*.

It was a outlook and understanding informed as seen by British rulers of a vanquished South Asia that they had named 'British India' which they had at point of pen and arms demarcated on the ground and maps. Thus giving it borders, space and a history to go with that.

Newsflash ~ the British Raj is no more. It is 2018 not 1947.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LeGenD

Indus Pakistan said:


> These are not words of bible or the Holy quran. There was no Ancient India until British writers in 19th century reified that concept basing it on the then colony that they had constructed. It is for us to reify the concept of 'ancient Pakistan' which is as viable as Ancient India unless you think books written by Anglo-Saxon victorians are sacred.
> 
> i don't ....


You are entitled to your view but *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time; it housed diversity due to numerous set of migrations from other regions from time to time.

Ancient Greeks used the term *Indoi* (people of the Indus) to describe people living here. *Indus River* was the primary source of identity of settlers here for a long time. The word *India* is derived from the same.

@PAKISTANFOREVER

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## @@@

Indus Pakistan said:


> These are *not *words of bible or the Holy quran. There was no Ancient India until British writers in 19th century *reified* that concept basing it on the then colony that they had constructed. It is for us to reify the concept of 'Ancient Pakistan' which is as viable as Ancient India unless you think books written by Anglo-Saxon victorians are sacred.
> 
> i don't ....
> 
> _Ps. Just as you know i have read widely on this subject and I would call myself amatuer historian and make these comments in light of that. They are not gushes of patriotism._


Please look into Ancient Scholar's book. Especially the _Biblioteca Historica_ by ancient Greek geographer Diodorus Siculus. The "Indians" of the Indus and the "Gandaridae" of Ganges are two completely different people. This is historically and scientifically proven by the Greek scholar himself!!

Please click the link below and see countless pieces of information yourself!! Remember! This history is before any British or Islamic Empire! We have always been different!

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/2B*.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Can we please, pretty please with sugar on top begin to look at our country free from the servitude of a colonial mind constructed by our masters? 71 years later we need to look at the Indus Valley free from British colonial imprint.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> You are entitled to your view but *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time; it housed diversity due to numerous set of migrations from other regions from time to time.
> 
> Ancient Greeks used the term *Indoi* (people of the Indus) to describe people living here. *Indus River* was the primary source of identity of settlers here for a long time. The word *India* is derived from the same.
> 
> @PAKISTANFOREVER






The vast majority of modern day indians ARE NOT the descendants of those who lived near the indus river. The ancestors of Modern day ganga-landers were ALWAYS completely different to the people of the indus and our ancestors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## @@@

The "Indians" of the Indus are described by Diodorus himself to be of UN-USUAL STATURE! They were TALL compared the Greeks! And of great athletic strong build and skills!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

LeGenD said:


> Ancient Greeks used the term *Indoi* (people of the Indus) to describe people living here. *Indus River* was the primary source of identity of settlers here for a long time. The word *India* is derived from the same.


I have covered entire threads on that subject. I can't be bothered to go over it all again. Suffice to say your mind is shackled by British Imperialism and post 1947 Indian propaganda. Try to fre yourself please.

The other day as is wonders of internet I ended up reading a article about Kylie Minogue the Austrlian singer who now lives in London. Apparently her mother was from Britain [Wales] and moved to Oz when she was 10 years old. Her father was third gen Irish [again British] and Kylie was one of three kids born from the marriage. She appears as Australian as kangaroos. The identity of Australia is very strong. Yet it got me thinking. Most of Australia is just British migrants who caught a boat to Australia and even the queen still holds sway. Yet these these third/fourth gen British have nurtured a strong mashed up identity as 'Australians'.

We on the other hand who are native to the Indus region still can't fcukin escape from 'India' syndrome shafted up our posteriors by British invaders. Wtf?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LeGenD

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> The vast majority of modern day indians ARE NOT the descendants of those who lived near the indus river. The ancestors of Modern day ganga-landers were ALWAYS completely different to the people of the indus and our ancestors.


As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time.

Genetic makeup of people living in present-day Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh, *reinforce* my perception of diversity in the population of *Ancient India*.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indus Pakistan

What do you call a migrant British??


American
Canadian
Australian
New Zealander
etc


----------



## LeGenD

Indus Pakistan said:


> I have covered entire threads on that subject. I can't be bothered to go over it all again. Suffice to say your mind is shackled by British Imperialism and post 1947 Indian propaganda. Try to fre yourself please.
> 
> The other day as is wonders of internet I ended up reading a article about Kylie Minogue the Austrlian singer who now lives in London. Apparently her mother was from Britain [Wales] and moved to Oz when she was 10 years old. Her father was third gen Irish [again British] and Kylie was one of three kids born from the marriage. She appears as Australian as kangaroos. The identity of Australia is very strong. Yet it got me thinking. Most of Australia is just British migrants who caught a boat to Australia and even the queen still holds sway. Yet these these third/fourth gen British have nurtured a strong mashed up identity as 'Australians'.
> 
> We on the other hand who are native to the Indus region still can't fcukin escape from 'India' syndrome shafted up our posteriors by British invaders. Wtf?


Colonial mindset? LOL

My perception of *Ancient India* is different from yours, and I not allergic to the term in question. Please read my responses carefully. I do not like to repeat same point again and again and again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time.
> 
> Genetic makeup of people living in present-day Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh, *reinforce* my perception of diversity in the population of *Ancient India*.






You keep reiterating the some points. Any evidence for your claims? Please make sure you post the links here.



Indus Pakistan said:


> I have covered entire threads on that subject. I can't be bothered to go over it all again. Suffice to say your mind is shackled by British Imperialism and post 1947 Indian propaganda. Try to fre yourself please.
> 
> The other day as is wonders of internet I ended up reading a article about Kylie Minogue the Austrlian singer who now lives in London. Apparently her mother was from Britain [Wales] and moved to Oz when she was 10 years old. Her father was third gen Irish [again British] and Kylie was one of three kids born from the marriage. She appears as Australian as kangaroos. The identity of Australia is very strong. Yet it got me thinking. Most of Australia is just British migrants who caught a boat to Australia and even the queen still holds sway. Yet these these third/fourth gen British have nurtured a strong mashed up identity as 'Australians'.
> 
> We on the other hand who are native to the Indus region still can't fcukin escape from 'India' syndrome shafted up our posteriors by British invaders. Wtf?






And REAL Australians are genetically English as well wheras we do not even have a genetic connection to medern day indians.......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

LeGenD said:


> As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time.
> 
> Genetic makeup of people living in present-day Pakistan, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh, *reinforce* my perception of diversity in the population of *Ancient India*.



If you go to Wagah today and look across the border, you can tell undoubtably that we are two different races.

Pakistan side







India side

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pakistan has to rid of this s...ity Desi mentality we will never move on from rudderless identity if our diaspora folks continue to harp on "Desi" identity, also for the Pakistani Punjabis drop these stupid castes like Rajputs yeah they had cool history but we are Pakistani now I am glad we have a Niazi PM who is not harping on Desi tag no more

Also drop the "we wuz Arabs and Turks" mentality and "wahhabism" and we should make cultural links with Iran to balance out the Desi culture



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> If you go to Wagah today and look across the border, you can tell undoubtably that we are two different races.
> 
> Pakistan side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> India side




If it wasnt for the petro sheikh dollars and their wahhabi ideology of the 70s we would not be larping or trying to look like Arabs

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## @@@

Pakistanis more often resemble Turkish.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yankee-stani

The Turkish dude>>>Zaid Hamid,Zaid Hamid was good for fighting the Soviets in the 80s but he is a f....cking nutjob now


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

OsmanAli98 said:


> Pakistan has to rid of this s...ity Desi mentality we will never move on from rudderless identity if our diaspora folks continue to harp on "Desi" identity, also for the Pakistani Punjabis drop these stupid castes like Rajputs yeah they had cool history but we are Pakistani now I am glad we have a Niazi PM who is not harping on Desi tag no more



In Pakistan, Des (country) and Desi (countrymen/national product) refer simply to Pakistan.

No Pakistani will refer to an Indian as Desi, as they are foreigners of another country (bhartis.)

Brother, stop promoting wrong ideas about native Punjabi clans/tribes like Rajputs, Jats, Gujjars,etc. We are sons of the soil and the majority in Punjab.

Caste system doesn’t exist among Pakistanis.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LeGenD

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> You keep reiterating the some points. Any evidence for your claims? Please make sure you post the links here.


If you find anything wrong in my view then why not highlight it?

FYI: https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/what-my-dna-says-about-indias-history/

And if you want to check your own, then: https://www.23andme.com/en-int/

@Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

I notice typical Indian look-alike in Pakistan as well. Do you recall the fact that at the time of partition, people settled in either side migrated to the other?

However, I am not crazed about genetic distinctions between present-day Pakistani and Indians because this is bordering racism in terms of judgement. I subscribe to the notion that *Ancient India* was a land of diversity due to migrations to this region from other regions, from time to time.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> In Pakistan, Des (country) and Desi (countrymen/national product) refer simply to Pakistan.
> 
> No Pakistani will refer to an Indian as Desi, as they are foreigners of another country (bhartis.)
> 
> Brother, stop promoting wrong ideas about native Punjabi clans/tribes like Rajputs, Jats, Gujjars,etc. We are sons of the soil and the majority in Punjab.
> 
> Caste system doesn’t exist among Pakistanis.



I consider myself Pakistani not Punjabi/Pathan yes my family is Rajput but I consider myself Pakistani first, again I am not against people being proud of those clans and their history but seriously we are Pakistani first

Most Pakistanis don use the retarded castes but I noticed Punjabis are the most to harp about Desiness than Pathans

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## @@@

This is gene test of someone from Central Punjab, Pakistan.

Most Indians have *99%* South Asian DNA. This is not true for average Pakistanis. This guy only has *45%* South Asian.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yankee-stani

Dewaneh said:


> This is gene test of someone from Central Punjab, Pakistan.
> 
> Most Indians have *99%* South Asian DNA. This is not true for average Pakistanis. This guy only has *45%* South Asian.




British Crime was getting rid of Persian as a language and cultural customs close to them as for us Pakistanis we failed come with a coherent Nationalistic identity that encompasses all its people, I mean countries like Kosovo,Croatia,Serbia heck those former Soviet Republics in Middle Asia which were part of the Russian boot 30 years ago are more nationalistic and more for revial of the cultural customs lost during the Soviet era this is why they are able to counter the Saudi "wahhabi" narrative while Pakistanis chocked that up during the 70s,80s and 90s

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## @@@

OsmanAli98 said:


> British Crime was getting rid of Persian as a language and cultural customs close to them as for us Pakistanis we failed come with a coherent Nationalistic identity that encompasses all its people, I mean countries like Kosovo,Croatia,Serbia heck those former Soviet Republics in Middle Asia which were part of the Russian boot 30 years ago are more nationalistic and more for revial of the cultural customs lost during the Soviet era this is why they are able to counter the Saudi "wahhabi" narrative while Pakistanis chocked that up during the 70s,80s and 90s


Funny thing is that Persian is more native to Pakistan than Urdu is. People of Quetta, Peshawar, Hazara, and whole Eastern block were fluent in Persian. Persian was also very much spoken in Lahore. While the Sikhs spoke Punjsbi and only Punjabi. Muslims of Punjab were more versatile, closer to Islamic culture. For example they read Arabic, memorized Quran, knew some Persian. Every Muslim teacher with a B.A. had excellent knowledge of Persian in '40s. Due to this, there was a huge culture clash between Muslims in Punjab and Sikhs/Hindus (aboriginals). 

Urdu is the language from north India, while Persian was a language actually understood naturally by Pakistanis.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> If you find anything wrong in my view then why not highlight it?
> 
> FYI: https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/what-my-dna-says-about-indias-history/
> 
> And if you want to check your own, then: https://www.23andme.com/en-int/
> 
> @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan
> 
> I notice typical Indian look-alike in Pakistan as well. Do you recall the fact that at the time of partition, people settled in either side migrated to the other?
> 
> However, I am not crazed about genetic distinctions between present-day Pakistani and Indians because this is bordering racism in terms of judgement. I subscribe to the notion that *Ancient India* was a land of diversity due to migrations to this region from other regions, from time to time.







What was the point of posting those links? They in NO WAY prove what you have been saying. They were the ramblings of a random indian regarding the results of his 23andme tests and and an insinuation that I should do one myself.

So WHERE is the evidence that ancient india was a land of diversity?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LeGenD

Following are Indians:-
















Not wise to play this kind of game.



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> What was the point of posting those links? They in NO WAY prove what you have been saying. They were the ramblings of a random indian regarding the results of his 23andme tests and and an insinuation that I should do one myself.
> 
> So WHERE is the evidence that ancient india was a land of diversity?


Sure.

_"The Indian population originated from three separate waves of migration from Africa, Iran and Central Asia over a period of 50,000 years, scientists have found using genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today.

The Indian Subcontinent harbours huge genetic diversity, in addition to its vast patchwork of languages, cultures and religions.

Researchers at the University of Huddersfield in the UK found that some genetic lineages in South Asia are very ancient.

The earliest populations were hunter-gatherers who arrived from Africa, where modern humans arose, more than 50,000 years ago.

However, further waves of settlement came from the direction of Iran, after the last Ice Age ended 10-20,000 years ago, and with the spread of early farming.

These ancient signatures are most clearly seen in the mitochondrial DNA, which tracks the female line of descent.

However, Y-chromosome variation, which tracks the male line, is very different, according to the study published in the journal BMC Evolutionary Biology.

"Here the major signatures are much more recent. Most controversially, there is a strong signal of immigration from Central Asia, less than 5,000 years ago," said Marina Silva, co-author of the study.

"This looks like a sign of the arrival of the first Indo- European speakers, who arose amongst the Bronze Age peoples of the grasslands north of the Caucasus, between the Black and Caspian Seas," Silva said.

They were male-dominated, mobile pastoralists who had domesticated the horse - and spoke what ultimately became Sanskrit, the language of classical Hinduism - which more than 200 years ago linguists showed is ultimately related to classical Greek and Latin, the study found.

Migrations from the same source also shaped the settlement of Europe and its languages, and this has been the subject of most recent research.

The origin of the Indian population is an area of huge controversy among scholars and scientists.

A problem confronting archaeogenetic research into the origins of Indian populations is that there is a dearth of sources, such as preserved skeletal remains that can provide ancient DNA samples.

In the latest study, researchers used genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today."
_
Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...ves-from-africa-iran-asia-117051100378_1.html

What was my point again? 
*
This: *"As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Dewaneh said:


> Funny thing is that Persian is more native to Pakistan than Urdu is. People of Quetta, Peshawar, Hazara, and whole Eastern block were fluent in Persian. Persian was also very much spoken in Lahore. While the Sikhs spoke Punjsbi and only Punjabi. Muslims of Punjab were more versatile, closer to Islamic culture. For example they read Arabic, memorized Quran, knew some Persian. Every Muslim teacher with a B.A. had excellent knowledge of Persian in '40s. Due to this, there was a huge culture clash between Muslims in Punjab and Sikhs/Hindus (aboriginals).
> 
> Urdu is the language from north India, while Persian was a language actually understood naturally by Pakistanis.


Sikh court spoke Farsi as well.

Farsi was more prominent in Pakistan than Urdu before 1947.



LeGenD said:


> Following are Indians:-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not wise to play this kind of game.
> 
> 
> Sigh.
> 
> _"The Indian population originated from three separate waves of migration from Africa, Iran and Central Asia over a period of 50,000 years, scientists have found using genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today.
> 
> The Indian Subcontinent harbours huge genetic diversity, in addition to its vast patchwork of languages, cultures and religions.
> 
> Researchers at the University of Huddersfield in the UK found that some genetic lineages in South Asia are very ancient.
> 
> The earliest populations were hunter-gatherers who arrived from Africa, where modern humans arose, more than 50,000 years ago.
> 
> However, further waves of settlement came from the direction of Iran, after the last Ice Age ended 10-20,000 years ago, and with the spread of early farming.
> 
> These ancient signatures are most clearly seen in the mitochondrial DNA, which tracks the female line of descent.
> 
> However, Y-chromosome variation, which tracks the male line, is very different, according to the study published in the journal BMC Evolutionary Biology.
> 
> "Here the major signatures are much more recent. Most controversially, there is a strong signal of immigration from Central Asia, less than 5,000 years ago," said Marina Silva, co-author of the study.
> 
> "This looks like a sign of the arrival of the first Indo- European speakers, who arose amongst the Bronze Age peoples of the grasslands north of the Caucasus, between the Black and Caspian Seas," Silva said.
> 
> They were male-dominated, mobile pastoralists who had domesticated the horse - and spoke what ultimately became Sanskrit, the language of classical Hinduism - which more than 200 years ago linguists showed is ultimately related to classical Greek and Latin, the study found.
> 
> Migrations from the same source also shaped the settlement of Europe and its languages, and this has been the subject of most recent research.
> 
> The origin of the Indian population is an area of huge controversy among scholars and scientists.
> 
> A problem confronting archaeogenetic research into the origins of Indian populations is that there is a dearth of sources, such as preserved skeletal remains that can provide ancient DNA samples.
> 
> In the latest study, researchers used genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today."
> _
> Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...ves-from-africa-iran-asia-117051100378_1.html
> 
> What was my point again? *This:*
> 
> "As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time."


Your first picture is of Sidharth Malhotra, who is a Punjabi (makes up 2-3% of India and around 40-50% of Pakistan).

Second picture is of Arjun Rampal who is a mix of Punjabi, Dutch and Brahmin.

I don't know where you dug the third picture out from but after I reversed searched it - most results come up as her being Punjabi or Pakistani.

Bottom-line; only 1% of Indians look like these people. Did you know that a majority of famous bollywood actors and models actually come from modern-day Pakistan or Punjab?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Yankee-stani

Bottom-line; only 1% of Indians look like these people. Did you know that a majority of famous bollywood actors and models actually come from modern-day Pakistan or Punjab?[/QUOTE]

Dilip Kumar you mean the guy who is Mohammad Yusuf Khan born in Peshawar

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LeGenD

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Your first picture is of Sidharth Malhotra, who is a Punjabi (makes up 2-3% of India and around 40-50% of Pakistan).
> 
> Second picture is of Arjun Rampal who is a mix of Punjabi, Dutch and Brahmin.
> 
> I don't know where you dug the third picture out from but after I reversed searched it - most results come up as her being Punjabi or Pakistani.
> 
> Bottom-line; only 1% of Indians look like these people. Did you know that a majority of famous bollywood actors and models actually come from modern-day Pakistan or Punjab?


You want me to fill this thread with pictures of beautiful/handsome Indians? My assertion is in regards to diversity in the population of *Ancient India *which is a concrete fact (genetically verifiable), and modern-era Pakistan is commonly referenced as a part of it _until_ partition.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

LeGenD said:


> You want me to fill this thread with pictures of beautiful/handsome Indians? My points are in regards to diversity in the population of *Ancient India *which is a concrete fact, and of which Pakistan was a part.


You can nit-pick pictures all you want, but that won't change the reality.

In regards to diversity; yes there exists diversity in culture and languages but genetically Indians mainly cluster into 4 groups. North Indians, South Indians, North West (Mostly Punjabis), and North East. 

Out of these groups, it's only the North West (which makes up 3-5% of Indian population) that shares any relevant genetic ties to Pakistanis.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> Following are Indians:-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not wise to play this kind of game.
> 
> 
> Sure.
> 
> _"The Indian population originated from three separate waves of migration from Africa, Iran and Central Asia over a period of 50,000 years, scientists have found using genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today.
> 
> The Indian Subcontinent harbours huge genetic diversity, in addition to its vast patchwork of languages, cultures and religions.
> 
> Researchers at the University of Huddersfield in the UK found that some genetic lineages in South Asia are very ancient.
> 
> The earliest populations were hunter-gatherers who arrived from Africa, where modern humans arose, more than 50,000 years ago.
> 
> However, further waves of settlement came from the direction of Iran, after the last Ice Age ended 10-20,000 years ago, and with the spread of early farming.
> 
> These ancient signatures are most clearly seen in the mitochondrial DNA, which tracks the female line of descent.
> 
> However, Y-chromosome variation, which tracks the male line, is very different, according to the study published in the journal BMC Evolutionary Biology.
> 
> "Here the major signatures are much more recent. Most controversially, there is a strong signal of immigration from Central Asia, less than 5,000 years ago," said Marina Silva, co-author of the study.
> 
> "This looks like a sign of the arrival of the first Indo- European speakers, who arose amongst the Bronze Age peoples of the grasslands north of the Caucasus, between the Black and Caspian Seas," Silva said.
> 
> They were male-dominated, mobile pastoralists who had domesticated the horse - and spoke what ultimately became Sanskrit, the language of classical Hinduism - which more than 200 years ago linguists showed is ultimately related to classical Greek and Latin, the study found.
> 
> Migrations from the same source also shaped the settlement of Europe and its languages, and this has been the subject of most recent research.
> 
> The origin of the Indian population is an area of huge controversy among scholars and scientists.
> 
> A problem confronting archaeogenetic research into the origins of Indian populations is that there is a dearth of sources, such as preserved skeletal remains that can provide ancient DNA samples.
> 
> In the latest study, researchers used genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today."
> _
> Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...ves-from-africa-iran-asia-117051100378_1.html
> 
> What was my point again?
> *
> This: *"As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time."







The photos of 3 people out of more than 1,300,000,000 means nothing............

Can you provide a source that isn't a dubious indian one and that actually proves what you are saying............evidence of migrations to india is not proving the dna of modern day indians is the same as that of the people who inhabitated the plains of the indus river in ancient times..........

Puting your trust in an indian source has just blown your cover. Nice try indian false-flagger...........



LeGenD said:


> You want me to fill this thread with pictures of beautiful/handsome Indians? My assertion is in regards to diversity in the population of *Ancient India *which is a concrete fact (genetically verifiable), and modern-era Pakistan is commonly referenced as a part of it _until_ partition.





BUT can you VERIFY that modern day indians ARE genetically/racially connected to the people who inhabitated ancient Pakistan? If not your entire conjectures are false.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LeGenD

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> You can nit-pick pictures all you want, but that won't change the reality.
> 
> In regards to diversity; yes there exists diversity in culture and languages but genetically Indians mainly cluster into 4 groups. North Indians, South Indians, North West (Mostly Punjabis), and North East.
> 
> Out of these groups, it's only the North West (which makes up 3-5% of Indian population) that shares any relevant genetic ties to Pakistanis.


Pakistan is among the most ethnically diverse regions of the world.

“Our nation is a mix of a lot of races,” said Prof. Dr M Iqbal Choudhary, who heads the project. “Pakistanis are like a “melting pot” ie a mix of Mughals, Turks, Pashtuns, Afghans, Arabs, etcetera.”

FYI: https://tribune.com.pk/story/197783/milestone-scientists-map-genome-of-first-pakistani-man/

Nevertheless, I notice many Pakistani who resemble typical Indians in features (Urdu speaking communities in particular). Below is a minor glimpse:








PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> The photos of 3 people out of more than 1,300,000,000 means nothing............
> 
> Can you provide a source that isn't a dubious indian one and that actually proves what you are saying............evidence of migrations to india is not proving the dna of modern day indians is the same as that of the people who inhabitated the plains of the indus river in ancient times..........
> 
> Puting your trust in an indian source has just blown your cover. Nice try indian false-flagger...........


You asked for links, and I provided some, but you do not bother to read them properly.

And I am a false-flagger now? This is absurd thinking on your part, or you a RACIST individual.



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> BUT can you VERIFY that modern day indians ARE genetically/racially connected to the people who inhabitated ancient Pakistan? If not your entire conjectures are false.


Pakistan is commonly referenced as a part of *Ancient India* in literature around the world _until_ partition. *Ancient India* was ethnically diverse [on the whole] due to "numerous factors." Modern-era partitions of Pakistan, India, Nepal and Bangladesh, did not change the obvious. Also, at the time of aforementioned partitions, millions of people migrated from one to another.

_"After the Partition of India, about 7.2 million Hindus migrated from the new country of Pakistan to the New India, while about 7.3 million Muslims migrated from India to Pakistan." - _Leanna Arjune

The least you can do is your own homework, and don't take my comments out of context. If you do not appreciate my responses, or unable to comprehend them, then I see no point in having this conversation with you. I am not a geneticist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

LeGenD said:


> Pakistan is among the most ethnically diverse regions of the world.
> 
> “Our nation is a mix of a lot of races,” said Prof. Dr M Iqbal Choudhary, who heads the project. “Pakistanis are like a “melting pot” ie a mix of Mughals, Turks, Pashtuns, Afghans, Arabs, etcetera.”
> 
> FYI: https://tribune.com.pk/story/197783/milestone-scientists-map-genome-of-first-pakistani-man/
> 
> Nevertheless, I notice many Pakistani who resemble typical Indians in features (Urdu speaking communities in particular). Below is a minor glimpse:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You asked for links, and I provided some, but you do not bother to read them properly.
> 
> And I am a false-flagger now? This is absurd thinking on your part, or you a RACIST individual.
> 
> 
> Pakistan is commonly referenced as a part of *Ancient India* in literature around the world _until_ partition. *Ancient India* was ethnically diverse [on the whole] due to "numerous factors." Modern-era partitions of Pakistan, India, Nepal and Bangladesh, did not change the obvious. Also, at the time of aforementioned partitions, millions of people migrated from one to another.
> 
> _"After the Partition of India, about 7.2 million Hindus migrated from the new country of Pakistan to the New India, while about 7.3 million Muslims migrated from India to Pakistan." - _Leanna Arjune
> 
> The least you can do is your own homework, and don't take my comments out of context. If you do not appreciate my responses, or unable to comprehend them, then I see no point in having this conversation with you. I am not a geneticist.





We may be a mixture of races, but are those mixtures in the main, racially common to modern day indians? If not then they have 0 connection to the role that the land of Pakistan played in "Ancient india".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

LeGenD said:


> Following are Indians:-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not wise to play this kind of game.
> 
> 
> Sure.
> 
> _"The Indian population originated from three separate waves of migration from Africa, Iran and Central Asia over a period of 50,000 years, scientists have found using genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today.
> 
> The Indian Subcontinent harbours huge genetic diversity, in addition to its vast patchwork of languages, cultures and religions.
> 
> Researchers at the University of Huddersfield in the UK found that some genetic lineages in South Asia are very ancient.
> 
> The earliest populations were hunter-gatherers who arrived from Africa, where modern humans arose, more than 50,000 years ago.
> 
> However, further waves of settlement came from the direction of Iran, after the last Ice Age ended 10-20,000 years ago, and with the spread of early farming.
> 
> These ancient signatures are most clearly seen in the mitochondrial DNA, which tracks the female line of descent.
> 
> However, Y-chromosome variation, which tracks the male line, is very different, according to the study published in the journal BMC Evolutionary Biology.
> 
> "Here the major signatures are much more recent. Most controversially, there is a strong signal of immigration from Central Asia, less than 5,000 years ago," said Marina Silva, co-author of the study.
> 
> "This looks like a sign of the arrival of the first Indo- European speakers, who arose amongst the Bronze Age peoples of the grasslands north of the Caucasus, between the Black and Caspian Seas," Silva said.
> 
> They were male-dominated, mobile pastoralists who had domesticated the horse - and spoke what ultimately became Sanskrit, the language of classical Hinduism - which more than 200 years ago linguists showed is ultimately related to classical Greek and Latin, the study found.
> 
> Migrations from the same source also shaped the settlement of Europe and its languages, and this has been the subject of most recent research.
> 
> The origin of the Indian population is an area of huge controversy among scholars and scientists.
> 
> A problem confronting archaeogenetic research into the origins of Indian populations is that there is a dearth of sources, such as preserved skeletal remains that can provide ancient DNA samples.
> 
> In the latest study, researchers used genetic evidence from people alive in the subcontinent today."
> _
> Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...ves-from-africa-iran-asia-117051100378_1.html
> 
> What was my point again?
> *
> This: *"As I pointed out before, *Ancient India* did not belong to a particular race at any point in time due to numerous set of migrations from other regions to this region from time to time."



The pictures you posted still do not resemble general Pakistanis. Even dark skinned Pakistanis look very different to Indians.

There is no such thing as ancient India. If you mean IVC, Harappa, Mohenjo daro, and Taxilla, all those were in modern-day Pakistan.

There was no fabled mass migration of Coterminous Pakistanis to modern India and no monolithic Hindu rashtra.

These are all fantasies of Hindutva zealots.



LeGenD said:


> Nevertheless, I notice many Pakistani who resemble typical Indians in features (Urdu speaking communities in particular). Below is a minor glimpse:



Muhajirs are ethnically UP, Bihari, Hyderabadi people and this is why they resemble the modern-day Indians from those regions.

They were immigrants from what is now India so they will look like them.



OsmanAli98 said:


> Also drop the "we wuz Arabs and Turks" mentality and "wahhabism" and we should make cultural links with Iran to balance out the Desi culture



A tribe or clan whose patrilineal descent goes back to an Arab, Turk, or Persian has every right to claim his lineage.

There is no shame in acknowledging your heritage. Every other nation on Earth can do this, but here in PDF we have Indians, Bangladeshis, and others abusing Pakistanis for referring to themselves by their tribe or ethnic origin.

Instead of worrying about someone claiming ancestry, worry about how to deal with our current problems.

Those of us who are of Arab, Turk, Persian blood will claim it regardless of what anyone things.



OsmanAli98 said:


> If it wasnt for the petro sheikh dollars and their wahhabi ideology of the 70s we would not be larping or trying to look like Arabs



A very small minority of Pakistanis are Ahl e Hadith, which itself is a native Islamic movement in this region.

We resemble Arabs, Turks, and Persians because we live in this region and are descended from common ancestors.



OsmanAli98 said:


> I consider myself Pakistani not Punjabi/Pathan yes my family is Rajput but I consider myself Pakistani first, again I am not against people being proud of those clans and their history but seriously we are Pakistani first
> 
> Most Pakistanis don use the retarded castes but I noticed Punjabis are the most to harp about Desiness than Pathans



Your idea of caste is inflated with race and tribe. You have to take the Hindu nonsense out of it.

There is nothing wrong with being from local heritage of this region stretching from IVC, Harappa, Mohenjo daro, Taxilla.

The only Desi we recognize is a Pakistani which includes Punjabis, Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, etc.

Rajput is a noble lineage which goes back to as far as the founding of Lahore and the migration of Iranic tribes to this region thousands of years ago.



Dewaneh said:


> Funny thing is that Persian is more native to Pakistan than Urdu is. People of Quetta, Peshawar, Hazara, and whole Eastern block were fluent in Persian. Persian was also very much spoken in Lahore. While the Sikhs spoke Punjsbi and only Punjabi. Muslims of Punjab were more versatile, closer to Islamic culture. For example they read Arabic, memorized Quran, knew some Persian. Every Muslim teacher with a B.A. had excellent knowledge of Persian in '40s. Due to this, there was a huge culture clash between Muslims in Punjab and Sikhs/Hindus (aboriginals).
> 
> Urdu is the language from north India, while Persian was a language actually understood naturally by Pakistanis.



Persian was a more natural language for Pakistan, but now we have made the Urdu tongue our own. No use in looking back.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TMA

LeGenD said:


> You want me to fill this thread with pictures of beautiful/handsome Indians? My assertion is in regards to diversity in the population of *Ancient India *which is a concrete fact (genetically verifiable), and modern-era Pakistan is commonly referenced as a part of it _until_ partition.


Perhaps we should now reference it as Ancient Pakistan?



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> The pictures you posted still do not resemble general Pakistanis. Even dark skinned Pakistanis look very different to Indians.
> 
> There is no such thing as ancient India. If you mean IVC, Harappa, Mohenjo daro, and Taxilla, all those were in modern-day Pakistan.
> 
> There was no fabled mass migration of Coterminous Pakistanis to modern India and no monolithic Hindu rashtra.
> 
> These are all fantasies of Hindutva zealots.
> 
> 
> 
> Muhajirs are ethnically UP, Bihari, Hyderabadi people and this is why they resemble the modern-day Indians from those regions.
> 
> They were immigrants from what is now India so they will look like them.
> 
> 
> 
> A tribe or clan whose patrilineal descent goes back to an Arab, Turk, or Persian has every right to claim his lineage.
> 
> There is no shame in acknowledging your heritage. Every other nation on Earth can do this, but here in PDF we have Indians, Bangladeshis, and others abusing Pakistanis for referring to themselves by their tribe or ethnic origin.
> 
> Instead of worrying about someone claiming ancestry, worry about how to deal with our current problems.
> 
> Those of us who are of Arab, Turk, Persian blood will claim it regardless of what anyone things.
> 
> 
> 
> A very small minority of Pakistanis are Ahl e Hadith, which itself is a native Islamic movement in this region.
> 
> We resemble Arabs, Turks, and Persians because we live in this region and are descended from common ancestors.
> 
> 
> 
> Your idea of caste is inflated with race and tribe. You have to take the Hindu nonsense out of it.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with being from local heritage of this region stretching from IVC, Harappa, Mohenjo daro, Taxilla.
> 
> The only Desi we recognize is a Pakistani which includes Punjabis, Pukhtoons, Kashmiris, etc.
> 
> Rajput is a noble lineage which goes back to as far as the founding of Lahore and the migration of Iranic tribes to this region thousands of years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Persian was a more natural language for Pakistan, but now we have made the Urdu tongue our own. No use in looking back.


Even Old Hindi (Urdu) is dying?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

M. Sarmad said:


> Thanks for proving that you are just an ignorant Afghani who knows nothing about the history of Punjab.
> 
> Do you know many Punjabi Muslims fought alongside Sikhs against the invading Afghani plunderers? (or how many Dakhini Muslims fought alongside Marathas against the Afghan invaders?) Do Afghanis like yourself see them as lesser Muslims? Those invasions by Afghans were purely _plundering campaigns_ with absolutely no religious overtones or undertones as they were often directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners.
> 
> Do you know the man in charge of the treasury, as well as the arsenal of the Sikh empire during Ranjit Singh's era, was a Muslim?
> 
> Do you know Ranjit Singh's Foreign Minister was also a Muslim?
> 
> Do you know how many of his emissaries were Punjabi Muslims?
> 
> Of course, you don't.
> 
> As for transforming Mughal Masjids into stables, A deplorable act indeed.
> 
> But have you forgotten what Ahmad Shah Abdali did to Gurdawaras, esp. the holiest of them for Sikhs, the Golden Temple; blew up the building and filled the pond with ****. Have you forgotten what Mughal Kings did to Sikh Gurus and their children?
> 
> Ranjit Singh, later on, handed Muslims most of their mosques back. He even gifted all _Nowadrat _(Islamic Relics) to the respectable Fakir Family (of Lahore) instead of destroying or desecrating them. Today, Fakir Khana is the largest privately owned museum in South Asia.
> 
> And what did the Afghans do? other than indiscriminate loot and plunder
> 
> A folk saying _‘khada peeta lahe da, baqi Ahmed shahe da_
> (what you can consume may be of some benefit to you, the rest is taken away by Ahmed Shah)
> 
> The great bard of Punjab, Waris Shah, too explicitly hinted at the threat the Afghan marauder posed:
> 
> _‘Chadia gazab da katak Kandhar vichon_ (a terrible army started its march from Kandhar)
> _ Ahmed Shah az gab thin aan pausi_ (Ahmed Shah will descend from nowhere and strike)’
> 
> 
> I can go on and on,
> 
> But I don't need to discuss the history of my land and my people with a clueless foreign Afghani racist who holds deep hatred and contempt for Punjabis.



Most Muslims in the Punjab were vicious enemies of the Sikh Empire, with individuals like Ahmed Khan Karral and Muqarrab Khan fighting against them bitterly. The latter even sided with Ahmed Shah Durrani, as did other Gakhars who joined the ranks of the "Afghans" (such a term is stupid since plenty of non-Pashtuns fought alongside them, such as Balochis).

Remember where your allegiance as a Pakistani lies. These Pashtuns who founded the Durrani Empire are our brothers, not Indian Punjabis. We aren't even the same as Indian Punjabis, as others have pointed out, we have different tribes, we write in a different alphabet, we wear different clothes, and we've got ancestry from areas west of the Punjab. Even I've got family originally from outside of the Punjab.

And we are Muslims first and foremost. I don't care if the Durranis came from freaking Dhaka, they're Muslims so we should feel inclined towards them rather than the Sikh Empire.

Also, anybody who called himself a Muslim and joined the Sikh Empire nullified his Islam by siding with the enemies of Islam over the Muslims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Taimur Khurram said:


> Most Muslims in the Punjab were vicious enemies of the Sikh Empire, with individuals like Ahmed Khan Karral and Muqarrab Khan fighting against them bitterly. The latter even sided with Ahmed Shah Durrani, as did other Gakhars who joined the ranks of the "Afghans" (such a term is stupid since plenty of non-Pashtuns fought alongside them, such as Balochis).
> 
> Remember where your allegiance as a Pakistani lies. These Pashtuns who founded the Durrani Empire are our brothers, not Indian Punjabis. We aren't even the same as Indian Punjabis, as others have pointed out, we have different tribes, we write in a different alphabet, we wear different clothes, and we've got ancestry from areas west of the Punjab. Even I've got family originally from outside of the Punjab.
> 
> And we are Muslims first and foremost. I don't care if the Durranis came from freaking Dhaka, they're Muslims so we should feel inclined towards them rather than the Sikh Empire.
> 
> Also, anybody who called himself a Muslim and joined the Sikh Empire nullified his Islam by siding with the enemies of Islam over the Muslims.



The Durrani empire and all its allies which resisted and eventually defeated the Sikh occupation are rightly regarded as mujahideen.

Mughals themselves fell back to Afghanistan to resist various opportunist usurpers like the Sikh empire, Maratha arsonists, and British colonials.

I don't know where this idolism of Sikh empire comes from. Some of us have seen first hand what they did to Lahore and its surrounding cities. @PAKISTANFOREVER 

Partition showed us the true nature of our relationship.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Taimur Khurram said:


> Most Muslims in the Punjab were vicious enemies of the Sikh Empire, with individuals like Ahmed Khan Karral and Muqarrab Khan fighting against them bitterly. The latter even sided with Ahmed Shah Durrani, as did other Gakhars who joined the ranks of the "Afghans" (such a term is stupid since plenty of non-Pashtuns fought alongside them, such as Balochis).
> 
> Remember where your allegiance as a Pakistani lies. These Pashtuns who founded the Durrani Empire are our brothers, not Indian Punjabis. We aren't even the same as Indian Punjabis, as others have pointed out, we have different tribes, we write in a different alphabet, we wear different clothes, and we've got ancestry from areas west of the Punjab. Even I've got family originally from outside of the Punjab.
> 
> And we are Muslims first and foremost. I don't care if the Durranis came from freaking Dhaka, they're Muslims so we should feel inclined towards them rather than the Sikh Empire.
> 
> Also, anybody who called himself a Muslim and joined the Sikh Empire nullified his Islam by siding with the enemies of Islam over the Muslims.



Ahmed Khan Kharal indeed was a great Punjabi freedom fighter who bravely fought against the British occupiers ... But his enemies were mostly other Muslims (Kharals from Kamalia, Makhdooms of Multan and Arains from Sahiwal), not Sikhs, who sided with the British against him and his allies that ultimately led to his martyrdom.

And no, Pakistani Punjabis do not have different tribes from Indians. Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars have been the major Musalman tribes in Punjab. Even today, there are more Non Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in India than Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in Pakistan.

And you are absolutely wrong. There was nothing 'Islamic' about Abdali's looting campaigns (which many times were directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners anyway) ... Fighting against looters and plunderers and expelling them from your motherland does not Nullify your Islam. Quite the contrary, siding with those who are on indiscriminate plundering campaigns is what is disallowed in Islam.

As for allegiance, yes, Pakistan first... But those Afghani plunderers were not Pakistani. Pakistani Pashtuns are our brothers and they are integral part of 'Pakistan' identity.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

M. Sarmad said:


> Ahmed Khan Kharal indeed was a great Punjabi freedom fighter who bravely fought against the British occupiers ... But his enemies were mostly other Muslims (Kharals from Kamalia, Makhdooms of Multan and Arains from Sahiwal), not Sikhs, who sided with the British against him and his allies that ultimately led to his martyrdom.
> 
> And no, Pakistani Punjabis do not have different tribes from Indians. Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars have been the major Musalman tribes in Punjab. Even today, there are more Non Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in India than Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in Pakistan.
> 
> And you are absolutely wrong. There was nothing 'Islamic' about Abdali's looting campaigns (which many times were directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners anyway) ... Fighting against looters and plunderers and expelling them from your motherland does not Nullify your Islam. Quite the contrary, siding with those who are on indiscriminate plundering campaigns is what is disallowed in Islam.
> 
> As for allegiance, yes, Pakistan first... But those Afghani plunderers were not Pakistani. Pakistani Pashtuns are our brothers and they are integral part of 'Pakistan' identity.



I disagree with your notion based upon the fact that ethnic Rajputs, Jats, and Gujjars sided with the kaafir out of ethnicity, where as the Makhdooms and Arains sided with the British. In one sense at least the british were ahle-kitab. It really depends in which lens you are using to criticize a certain group. Look at us today. Neither the British or these Rajput, Jat, Gujjar hindu brothers are of any use to us.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> I don't know where this idolism of Sikh empire comes from...



If today Pakistan’s borders are where they are with Afghanistan, it is entirely because of one man; Hari Singh Nalwa of Gujranwala ... A true son of the soil who represented the aspiration of the fighting men of Punjab


----------



## lastofthepatriots

M. Sarmad said:


> If today Pakistan’s borders are where they are with Afghanistan, it is entirely because of one man; Hari Singh Nalwa of Gujranwala ... A true son of the soil who represented the aspiration of the fighting men of Punjab



Saday bazurg te us kanay kanjar nu lanata dinde si.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

lastofthepatriots said:


> Saday bazurg te us kanay kanjar nu lanata dinde si.



Yes, I know. Ranjit Singh and Sikh Empire are generally disliked by Pakistanis because the Muslim genocide carried out by Sikhs in East Punjab ( the genocide was mutual though) in 1947 made the two Punjabi religious communities lose trust in eachother. 

Many Punjabi Musilims held high posts in Ranjit Singh's Punjab. He was a secular ruler. One of his Muslim generals, Elaahi Bukhsh of Lahore, the incharge of Khalsa Artillery, was the man behind the defeat of Sayyad Ahmad Shaheed's Yousafzai Army in the famous battle of Balakot. It was not about Muslim Vs Nonmuslim as many people try to make it look like. With a few exceptions, those wars were fought just for power, territory and wealth

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

M. Sarmad said:


> Ahmed Khan Kharal indeed was a great Punjabi freedom fighter who bravely fought against the British occupiers ... But his enemies were mostly other Muslims (Kharals from Kamalia, Makhdooms of Multan and Arains from Sahiwal), not Sikhs, who sided with the British against him and his allies that ultimately led to his martyrdom.



The Sikhs were also his enemy, he fought against them before the British Empire:

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Khan_Kharal



M. Sarmad said:


> And no, Pakistani Punjabis do not have different tribes from Indians.



Yes we do lol. As others said earlier, you will not find Qureshis, Awans, Syeds, Ansaris, Mughals, Arains, Pathan tribes, Baloch tribes, Kashmiri tribes, etc among Indian Punjabis. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars have been the major Musalman tribes in Punjab.



Those tribes are not the majority, and a lot of the clans among them in Pakistani Punjab are not present in Indian Punjab. For example, my father is a Bara. We are all native Muslims descended from a Sufi, you do not get non-Muslim Bara (unless one of us decides to convert, which I doubt has ever happened). 



M. Sarmad said:


> Even today, there are more Non Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in India than Muslim Rajputs, Jats and Gujjars in Pakistan.



No, there are more Muslim than Kafir Gujjars. In Pakistan and Afghanistan, pretty much all the Gujjars are Muslim. In India, most Gujjars are in the Kashmir region and these ones are also pretty much all Muslim. You also get Muslim Gujjars scattered in other parts of India. Kafir Gujjars are the minority. 

You can literally Google Gujjars and almost all the pictures clearly depict Muslims:



































M. Sarmad said:


> And you are absolutely wrong. There was nothing 'Islamic' about Abdali's looting campaigns



They were perfectly halal. 



M. Sarmad said:


> (which many times were directed against Muslim rulers and Muslim commoners anyway)



The only Muslim commoners who died were the ones who welcomed and lived alongside the Sikh Empire. Sorry but they should've joined their brothers in Islam if they didn't want to become a part of collateral damage. You can't expect him to not target a major centre of the Sikh Empire (e.g Lahore) just because some Muslims lived there too. 



M. Sarmad said:


> Fighting against looters and plunderers and expelling them from your motherland does not Nullify your Islam.



Fighting against your fellow Muslims and siding with the enemies of Islam most certainly does nullify your Islam. For goodness sake, the Sikh Empire desecrated Masjids and because of them, Muslims stopped being the dominant power in the Punjab (until 1947) because of him. Why the heck are you siding against your own people? 



M. Sarmad said:


> But those Afghani plunderers were not Pakistani.



Yes they were. They had Pakistani Pashtuns, Pakistani Baloch, and even some Pakistani Punjabis fighting for them. Ahmed Shah Durrani himself is believed by many to have been born in Multan.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

M. Sarmad said:


> Yes, I know. Ranjit Singh and Sikh Empire is generally disliked by Pakistanis because of Muslim genocide carried out by Sikhs in East Punjab ( the genocide was mutual though) in 1947.
> 
> Many Punjabi Musilims held high posts in Ranjit Singh's Punjab. He was a secular ruler. One of his Muslim generals, Elaahi Bukhsh of Lahore, the incharge of Khalsa Artillery, was the man behind the defeat of Sayyad Ahmad Shaheed's Yousafzai Army in the famous battle of Balakot. It was not about Muslim Vs Nonmuslim as many people try to make it look like. With a few exceptions, those wars were fought just for power, territory and wealth



From what I understood they neither liked baba ahmad shah abdali nor the sikhs. The difference was that to ahmad shah they only have to give thekha. Sikh zyda hi chaan chare pirde si. Saade te ek ummi da cousin huni foht hoya jinnay 12-15 sikh vadday si parition de vich talwar naal. Pind di basti te appi kara ho gaya talwar naal, te jeray vi sikh aya mukabla karan uno otay hi vaad sitaya.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Taimur Khurram said:


> The Sikhs were also his enemy, he fought against them before the British Empire:
> 
> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Khan_Kharal
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we do lol. As others said earlier, you will not find Qureshis, Awans, Syeds, Ansaris, Mughals, Arains, Pathan tribes, Baloch tribes, Kashmiri tribes, etc among Indian Punjabis.
> 
> 
> 
> Those tribes are not the majority, and a lot of the clans among them in Pakistani Punjab are not present in Indian Punjab. For example, my father is a Bara. We are all native Muslims descended from a Sufi, you do not get non-Muslim Bara (unless one of us decides to convert, which I doubt has ever happened).
> 
> 
> 
> No, there are more Muslim than Kafir Gujjars. In Pakistan and Afghanistan, pretty much all the Gujjars are Muslim. In India, most Gujjars are in the Kashmir region and these ones are also pretty much all Muslim. You also get Muslim Gujjars scattered in other parts of India. Kafir Gujjars are the minority.
> 
> You can literally Google Gujjars and almost all the pictures clearly depict Muslims:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 531687
> View attachment 531688
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They were perfectly halal.
> 
> 
> 
> The only Muslim commoners who died were the ones who welcomed and lived alongside the Sikh Empire. Sorry but they should've joined their brothers in Islam if they didn't want to become a part of collateral damage. You can't expect him to not target a major centre of the Sikh Empire (e.g Lahore) just because some Muslims lived there too.
> 
> 
> 
> Fighting against your fellow Muslims and siding with the enemies of Islam most certainly does nullify your Islam. For goodness sake, the Sikh Empire desecrated Masjids and because of them, Muslims stopped being the dominant power in the Punjab (until 1947) because of him. Why the heck are you siding against your own people?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were. They had Pakistani Pashtuns, Pakistani Baloch, and even some Pakistani Punjabis fighting for them. Ahmed Shah Durrani himself is believed by many to have been born in Multan.


I am not interested in your childish arguments Bhai
Posting random images and Wikipedia links does not prove anything. 

As for you saying that Muslim Gujjars outnumber Non Muslim Gujjars, .... JFYI, as per 1931 Census, Gujjars were present in significant numbers in 8 British India provinces, Pakistan got only 1 ( and a half) of them. Gujarat and Rajasthan have been the historical abodes of Gujjars. Haryana, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh and even UP has large population of Non Muslim Gujjars.



lastofthepatriots said:


> From what I understood they neither liked baba ahmad shah abdali nor the sikhs. The difference was that to ahmad shah they only have to give thekha. Sikh zyda hi chaan chare pirde si. Saade te ek ummi da cousin huni foht hoya jinnay 12-15 sikh vadday si parition de vich talwar naal. Pind di basti te appi kara ho gaya talwar naal, te jeray vi sikh aya mukabla karan uno otay hi vaad sitaya.



Yes, besides routinely looting them directly, the taxes imposed by Abdali on Punjabi Muslims were so high that it was impossible for them to pay such large amounts. Will post details later.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

M. Sarmad said:


> I am not interested in your childish arguments Bhai



Don't call me bhai.



M. Sarmad said:


> Posting random images and Wikipedia links does not prove anything.



They do if the pictures are the majority, and the Wikipedia link gives proper citations for my claim. 



M. Sarmad said:


> FYI, as per 1931 Census, Gujjars were present in significant numbers in 8 British India provinces, Pakistan got only 1 ( and a half) of them.



The population of Muslim Gujjars are larger than that of Hindu Gujjars. Pakistani and Afghan Gujjars are almost all Muslim, and Indian Gujjars are mostly Muslim too since most of them are concentrated in the Kashmir region (and most Kashmiri Gujjars are Muslim). Plenty of the Gujjars in other places like UP and HP are also Muslim. Stop trying to Hindu-fy our people, it's silly.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

M. Sarmad said:


> I am not interested in your childish arguments Bhai
> Posting random images and Wikipedia links does not prove anything.
> 
> As for you saying that Muslim Gujjars outnumber Non Muslim Gujjars, .... JFYI, as per 1931 Census, Gujjars were present in significant numbers in 8 British India provinces, Pakistan got only 1 ( and a half) of them. Gujarat and Rajasthan have been the historical abodes of Gujjars. Haryana, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh and even UP has large population of Non Muslim Gujjars.



I'll tell you in interesting story.

Partition de waqt jadon sikha de jahtay aunde si saday pind vaal, lokian ne karray paray hunde si kersone naal. Sadi zannania kotay toh utton sit di hundiya si karray Sikha te, te bandaya ne teeli la de ni. Nani saadi das di si oh boh sab to perri si, jeri sarri laasha ton aundi si. Balkay bardasht ne hundi si. Gali'aa vich una diyan haddiyan kuttay chub de si.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Taimur Khurram said:


> Don't call me bhai.
> 
> 
> 
> They do if the pictures are the majority, and the Wikipedia link gives proper citations for my claim.
> 
> 
> 
> The population of Muslim Gujjars are larger than that of Hindu Gujjars. Pakistani and Afghan Gujjars are almost all Muslim, and Indian Gujjars are mostly Muslim too since most of them are concentrated in the Kashmir region (and most Kashmiri Gujjars are Muslim). Plenty of the Gujjars in other places like UP and HP are also Muslim. Stop trying to Hindu-fy our people, it's silly.



Stop quoting me Mr. Taimur 
Didn't I tell you I was not interested in your childish arguments?


----------



## Pakistani E

M. Sarmad said:


> Yes, I know. Ranjit Singh and Sikh Empire are generally disliked by Pakistanis because the Muslim genocide carried out by Sikhs in East Punjab ( the genocide was mutual though) in 1947 made the two Punjabi religious communities lose trust in eachother.



The hatred for Sikh rule isn't only because of 1947 though. It goes way back to the rule of Sikh misls, where they butchered many Muslims. I know of stories from our elders of men being killed in battle and massacres of all boys and enslavement of women and girls by Sikhs, although I'll give credit to Ranjit Singh for having the sense to be more inclusive towards his Muslim subjects.

I am all for having an open mind when it comes to history, but I will never ever accept the rule of Sikhs in Punjab as something to be proud of.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Sher Shah Awan said:


> I'll give credit to Ranjit Singh for having the sense to be more inclusive towards his Muslim subjects.



He wasn't. He turned Masjids into stables.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## M. Sarmad

Sher Shah Awan said:


> The hatred for Sikh rule isn't only because of 1947 though. It goes way back to the rule of Sikh misls, where they butchered many Muslims. I know of stories from our elders of men being killed in battle and massacres of all boys and enslavement of women and girls by Sikhs, although I'll give credit to Ranjit Singh for having the sense to be more inclusive towards his Muslim subjects.
> 
> I am all for having an open mind when it comes to history, but I will never ever accept the rule of Sikhs in Punjab as something to be proud of.



Nice to see you post after long time, bro. Hope everything is fine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistani E

M. Sarmad said:


> Nice to see you post after long time, bro. Hope everything is fine.



Alhamdolillah. How are things at your end? I was just taking a break from this forum.



Taimur Khurram said:


> He wasn't. He turned Masjids into stables.



At least as a statesman, he understood the importance of co-opting local Muslim chieftains. I know many Muslims fought for him and served at his court.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Sher Shah Awan said:


> I know many Muslims fought for him and served at his court.



All Munafiqoon who Ahmed Shah Durrani (rahimuhullah) defeated.


----------



## Pakistani E

Taimur Khurram said:


> All Munafiqoon who Ahmed Shah Durrani (rahimuhullah) defeated.



I don't know the intentions buried deep in people's hearts. Let Allah be the judge.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Sher Shah Awan said:


> I don't know the intentions buried deep in people's hearts. Let Allah be the judge.



Their intentions are apparent. They joined the enemies of their people for selfish reasons (some such as Adina Beg might have been trying to weaken all players though, in a Timur-like fashion).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cobra Arbok

My God, the stupidity of members from both countries here is painful. First of all @BringHarmony, if you are actually Anglo Canadian, my advice is to avoid getting into controversial South Asian issues, because as you can tell by now, some Pakistanis here are overly sensitive and get easily offended. And tbh, it really does not affect you what Pakistanis call themselves.

@HalfMoon, India and Pakistan are now two different countries with different histories. If the past 70 years had been any different, perhaps we would be at a point where we consider it acceptable to consider Pakistan's history(and Bangladesh's) as part of the history of a "greater" ancient India. However, no such situation exists today, so we cannot disrespect Pakistanis by denying them the right to their heritage. 

Most of all, I cannot stand how any discussion about Race, ethnicity, culture, and history in South Asia inevitably turns into a contest to see who looks fairer. It is always a handful of posters responsible. So let us finally settle this "debate" once and for all

Peshawar, Pakistan




Mumbai. India




Lahore, Pakistan




Lucknow, India




And if a picture is a thousand words, a video is a thousand pictures.
Lahore Pakistan





Meerut, India





Hyderabad, Sindh




Dehradun, Uttarakhand.





Sialkot Pakistan





Mumbai India





Gujarati herder




rural Punjabi farmers




So obviously, there are differences, but people of both countries are not as different from each other in terms of looks as some here want to believe. Obviously, there are exceptions, such South and East Indians and some Pakistani Pukhtoons and Balochis, but overall, not too different. Of course, skin color is the most superficial of differences and is just one feature of race and ethnicity. And not to mention culture and religion, which are the major differences between people. Indians and Pakistanis are no exception in this regard. Although Indians and Pakistanis could not be more different culturally and religiously, they do not look as different from each other as some want to believe.


----------



## Dalai Lama

I mean, surely Pakistan is part of Western Europe.


----------



## Cobra Arbok

Dalai Lama said:


> I mean, surely Pakistan is part of Western Europe.


No, it's part of Scandanevia. Iceland used to be a part of Pakistan.


----------



## Dalai Lama

Cobra Arbok said:


> No, it's part of Scandanevia. Iceland used to be a part of Pakistan.


Let's just put it on the North pole and call it a day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Cobra Arbok said:


> So let us finally settle this "debate" once and for all



Picking random pictures/videos means nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cobra Arbok

Taimur Khurram said:


> Picking random pictures/videos means nothing.


yes I know. I tried to pick photos from a variety of different locations to make it more fair. As I said, skin color really doesn't mean much in terms of similarities/differences. There are plenty of peoples who look similar but cannot be more different, and South Asia is a good example of this. It just annoys me that some posters turn interesting topics of discussion into discussions on physical appearance, usually to prove superiority. So I was just trying to bring those few posters back to reality. 

Good to see you back BTW.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Cobra Arbok said:


> yes I know. I tried to pick photos from a variety of different locations to make it more fair. As I said, skin color really doesn't mean much in terms of similarities/differences. There are plenty of peoples who look similar but cannot be more different, and South Asia is a good example of this. It just annoys me that some posters turn interesting topics of discussion into discussions on physical appearance, usually to prove superiority. So I was just trying to bring those few posters back to reality.
> 
> Good to see you back BTW.



Yeah I agree. Saying Indians and Pakistanis are different from each other is one thing, but saying Pakistanis are totally different to Indians is silly. We're neighbours (without a major land barrier between us), so there will inevitably be some similarity.

And we're both still brown, so many of us looking similar is to be expected.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sindhi(Indus)

PakSarzameen5823 said:


> This is a curious little fact I managed to stumble across. It turns out that geographically, most of Pakistan isn't a part of the Indian sub-continent. How? Let me explain:
> 
> Most of us know that the Indus river has been the traditional western boundary of the Indian sub-continent, and that this therefore means KPK, Balochistan and Gilgit Baltistan are not a part of the Indian sub-continent. However, what a lot of people don't actually know is that the total area of all these provinces is larger than the total area of all of Pakistan's provinces that are a part of the Indian sub-continent (Punjab+Sindh+AK+Islamabad capital territory).
> 
> *Total area of Pakistan: 796096 square km
> 
> Area of Balochistan: 347190 square km
> 
> Area of KPK: 74521 square km
> 
> Area of FATA (now a part of KPK): 27220 square km *
> 
> *Area of GB: 72971 square km
> 
> Total area of above provinces: 521902 square km
> *
> Sources:
> 
> https://web.archive.org/web/2010122...k/depts/pco/statistics/area_pop/area_pop.html
> 
> https://unpo.org/article/15483?id=15483
> 
> @django @Pakhtoon yum @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan @ghazi52 @khanmubashir @RealNapster @Indus Pakistan @Talwar e Pakistan @Chakar The Great
> 
> 
> *
> *
> 
> 
> *
> *


No horrible information 

Sindh is the only land that routinely was separated from India 




Musalman said:


> Mohajirs???
> We punjabis are Indian ancestry, Bajwa chattha jatt etc etc. So are the Sindhi. Only pushton and Baluch are Iranic.



Sindhis were never Indian ancestry 

Sindhis were always R1a and U5 in their gene make up 

Iranic is a language not a genetic race 

African Americans speak English does that make them Anglo Saxon?



PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> Punjabis make up less than 3% of india's population but around 60% of Pakistan's population. So at least 97% of india's population HAVE NOTHING in common with 100% of Pakistan's population in terms of race, physical appearence and genetics. But this is a moot point. 30% of Pakistan's population is Pathan and Baloch. They have dna from ancient Persian/Central Asian nomadic tribes. That doesn't make us Pakistanis; Persian or Middle Eastern just as it doesn't make us racially indian.


Sindhis were never Indian people 

The only race in the region that historically had their own land mass was Sindhis

Words like Punjab and Balochistan just arrived into existence 


















Taimur Khurram said:


> Yeah I agree. Saying Indians and Pakistanis are different from each other is one thing, but saying Pakistanis are totally different to Indians is silly. We're neighbours (without a major land barrier between us), so there will inevitably be some similarity.
> 
> And we're both still brown, so many of us looking similar is to be expected.



No your upper caste Hindus are brown the majority of India is not

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Happy

M. Sarmad said:


> Punjabi is an ethnicity and you (or anyone else for that matter) accepting it or not won't change this FACT
> 
> And no matter how much you want to deny it the fact remains that Pakistani Punjabis share common ancestry, ethnicity, language, culture etc with Indian Punjabis
> 
> 
> 
> A Punjabi marrying Non-Punjabi in Pakistan is _an exception_ (that too limited to large urban centers only), and not a norm
> 
> 
> 
> Ethnically, No
> Culturally, Yes



Ethnicity can be determined by race, religion, language, culture, or nationality. 
So, a person can be ethno-linguistically Punjabi/Panjabi by speaking the Punjabi/Panjabi language. 

One can be ethno-geographically Punjabi/Panjabi by being a resident of the Punjab province. 

One can also be ethno-culturally Punjabi/Panjabi by following or adhering to Punjabi/Panjabi culture. 

One can not be ethno-racially Punjabi/Panjabi as Punjab does not signify a race.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Taimur Khurram said:


> Yeah I agree. Saying Indians and Pakistanis are different from each other is one thing, but saying Pakistanis are totally different to Indians is silly. We're neighbours (without a major land barrier between us), so there will inevitably be some similarity.
> 
> And we're both still brown, so many of us looking similar is to be expected.







But Pakistan also borders Iran and Afghanistan. They too are our neighbours. So do we also share similarities with them too?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But Pakistan also borders Iran and Afghanistan. They too are our neighbours. So do we also share similarities with them too?



Of course.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mr Happy

PAKISTANFOREVER said:


> But Pakistan also borders Iran and Afghanistan. They too are our neighbours. So do we also share similarities with them too?



You are correct. Pakistani people have similarities with Afghanistan, Iran, India, etc.



Pakhtun345 said:


> Ethnicity can be determined by race, religion, language, culture, or nationality.
> So, a person can be ethno-linguistically Punjabi/Panjabi by speaking the Punjabi/Panjabi language.
> 
> One can be ethno-geographically Punjabi/Panjabi by being a resident of the Punjab province.
> 
> One can also be ethno-culturally Punjabi/Panjabi by following or adhering to Punjabi/Panjabi culture.
> 
> One can not be ethno-racially Punjabi/Panjabi as Punjab does not signify a race.



I will give you a suggestion. One can usually find out one's racial origin by family names, language, culture, physical features, and there is also DNA testing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PAKISTANFOREVER

Pakhtun345 said:


> You are correct. Pakistani people have similarities with Afghanistan, Iran, India, etc.





As far as indians are concerned, we ONLY have any sort of similarity with indian Punjabis who make up around 3% of india's population.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakhtun345 said:


> You are correct. Pakistani people have similarities with Afghanistan, Iran, India, etc.



With India, we have been diverging from them for more than 70 years, and probably longer than that.

Commonalities maybe with Sikhs and Some Indian Muslims.

We are closest to Afghanistan and our ties to Iran are from the time of IVC and Iranic migration.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

Pakhtun345 said:


> Ethnicity can be determined by race, religion, language, culture, or nationality.
> So, a person can be ethno-linguistically Punjabi/Panjabi by speaking the Punjabi/Panjabi language.
> 
> One can be ethno-geographically Punjabi/Panjabi by being a resident of the Punjab province.
> 
> One can also be ethno-culturally Punjabi/Panjabi by following or adhering to Punjabi/Panjabi culture.
> 
> One can not be ethno-racially Punjabi/Panjabi as Punjab does not signify a race.




The concept of ethnicity contrasts with that of race. 
Punjabis, just like Pashtuns, are a complex ethno-linguistic group with a unique culture of their own.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imad.Khan

Geographically speaking everything East of Indus River is part of South Asia, while the land West of Indus River is Central Asia. The term Middle East is a relatively new term. Countries like Iran, Northern Iraq, Northern Syria and Eastern Turkey were considered as part of Central Asia. Basically all areas of people of Turko/Iranic backgorund were considered part of Central Asia, including Turkestan (Now called Xinjiang, part of China)


----------



## Crusher

Imad.Khan said:


> Geographically speaking everything East of Indus River is part of South Asia, while the land West of Indus River is Central Asia. _*The term Middle East is a relatively new term. Countries like Iran, Northern Iraq, Northern Syria and Eastern Turkey were considered as part of Central Asia. Basically all areas of people of Turko/Iranic backgorund were considered part of Central Asia*_, including Turkestan (Now called Xinjiang, part of China)



Absolutely baseless, middle east is the oldest civilized area of this world, the civilization as we know it today (living different than animals, means living in agricultural settlements as compared to animal like nomadic life). Western Iran, Syria, Iraq, Turkey have always been cradel of civilization of middle east. This BS of central asia is anglo-american created hype, it was mostly inhabited in the past by animal like nomadic poor people who were mostly dacoits and bandits.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Imad.Khan

Simurgh said:


> Absolutely baseless, middle east is the oldest civilized area of this world, the civilization as we know it today (living different than animals, means living in agricultural settlements as compared to animal like nomadic life). Western Iran, Syria, Iraq, Turkey have always been cradel of civilization of middle east. This BS of central asia is anglo-american created hype, it was mostly inhabited in the past by animal like nomadic poor people who were mostly dacoits and bandits.



Can you highlight which point is baseless and also what does Middle-eastern civilization have anything to do with what i wrote. Also your knowledge about nomads of Central Asia and Arabia is lacking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Crusher

Imad.Khan said:


> Can you highlight which point is baseless and also what does Middle-eastern civilization have anything to do with what i wrote. Also your knowledge about *nomads of Central Asia and Arabia is lacking*.



Nomad life is inferior primitive life like that of animals, there is nothing to be proud of being nomadic, would you like to become nomadic with some kind of "jhugi" from place to place instead of living comfortable life in your settled apartment/house where you most probably have lived your whole life. I know some people are inspired of that Anglo-American supremacist BS of indo-european "nomadic aryans" of central asia being related to the "white" people of north east europe and hence should be "worshiped" by everyone as a symbol of white race.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-after-ny-bomb-scare-idUSTRE64655Y20100507

*Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare*

Walden Siew
4 MIN READ


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Pakistani merchants and job seekers in the United States, still reeling from economic hardship since the September 11 attacks of 2001, are posing as Indians to avoid discrimination in the wake of the Times Square bomb attempt.


A police car is seen in Times Square, New York May 3, 2010. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

Once again, a man of Pakistani descent is at the center of a security story, leading to backlash against the Pakistani-American community.

Faisal Shahzad, 30, a naturalized American born in Pakistan, was arrested on Monday, two days after authorities say he parked a crude car bomb in New York’s busy Times Square.

Suspected September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and convicted 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef are also of Pakistani decent, and anti-American militants fighting U.S. forces in Afghanistan take refuge in Pakistan.

In Brooklyn, home to one of the largest Pakistani populations in the United States, business is scant at the various grocery, halal meat and sweet cake shops since a Pakistani-American was suspected in the Times Square plot. More than 100 businesses along Coney Island Avenue have closed due to a 30 percent drop in business since 2001, a merchants’ association said.

In Washington, an American man of Pakistani descent told of coming under suspicion this week when he tried to buy garden fertilizer. The Times Square car bomb contained a non-explosive type of fertilizer.

While there have been no reported incidents since the failed car bomb attack last Saturday, some Pakistanis are bracing for reprisals. Police have increased foot patrols.

“A lot of Pakistanis can’t get jobs after 9/11 and now it’s even worse,” said Asghar Choudhri, an accountant and chairman of Brooklyn’s Pakistani American Merchant Association. “They are now pretending they are Indian so they can get a job.”

India and Pakistan have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, creating hostilities that ordinarily would lead a Pakistani to resent being mistaken for an Indian.


According to the latest U.S. census data, some 210,410 people of Pakistani origin reside in the United States. Nearly 15,000 Pakistanis received U.S. immigrant visas last year.

“I want to make clear that we will not tolerate any bias or backlash against Pakistani or Muslim New Yorkers,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said this week, noting there are always “a few bad apples.”

New York is “the city where you can practice your religion and say what you want to say and be in charge of your own destiny and we’re going to keep it that way,” Bloomberg said.

*SUSPICION OF GARDENING*
In Washington, an American of Pakistani heritage who would only be identified as Farhan, said a manager of a suburban home-improvement store prevented him from buying two bags of fertilizer for his family’s lawn on Tuesday.

Farhan, who was born in northern Virginia, said police arrived soon after, investigated and allowed him to buy the fertilizer.

“What kind of a country are we living in when a 22-year-old male can’t buy fertilizer?” Farhan asked. “I’m American. I’m not Pakistani.”

Farhan said the store had subsequently apologized and the case appeared to be one of an overzealous manager rather than store policy.

Merchants in New York, many of whom declined to be named, still remember reprisals after September 11. Soon after the attacks, there was a drive-by shooting in Brooklyn at a Pakistani restaurant, which is now closed.

ADVERTISEMENT

The local merchants association has shrunk to 150 members, from about 250 merchants almost a decade ago.

The FBI also arrested many undocumented workers in the neighborhood, leading to a wave of deportations, and residents would call law enforcement to make claims against their neighbors, including many false claims, Choudhri said.

“After 9/11, we took much pain,” he said. “After that, a small beating is nothing. Now the Pakistanis are not so much scared but we are ashamed. We are embarrassed that the name of Pakistan came up.”

Additional reporting by William Maclean in London and Frances Kerry in Washington; Editing by Daniel Trotta and Bill Trott


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

nick_indian said:


> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-after-ny-bomb-scare-idUSTRE64655Y20100507
> 
> *Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare*
> 
> Walden Siew
> 4 MIN READ
> 
> 
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Pakistani merchants and job seekers in the United States, still reeling from economic hardship since the September 11 attacks of 2001, are posing as Indians to avoid discrimination in the wake of the Times Square bomb attempt.
> 
> 
> A police car is seen in Times Square, New York May 3, 2010. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
> 
> Once again, a man of Pakistani descent is at the center of a security story, leading to backlash against the Pakistani-American community.
> 
> Faisal Shahzad, 30, a naturalized American born in Pakistan, was arrested on Monday, two days after authorities say he parked a crude car bomb in New York’s busy Times Square.
> 
> Suspected September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and convicted 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef are also of Pakistani decent, and anti-American militants fighting U.S. forces in Afghanistan take refuge in Pakistan.
> 
> In Brooklyn, home to one of the largest Pakistani populations in the United States, business is scant at the various grocery, halal meat and sweet cake shops since a Pakistani-American was suspected in the Times Square plot. More than 100 businesses along Coney Island Avenue have closed due to a 30 percent drop in business since 2001, a merchants’ association said.
> 
> In Washington, an American man of Pakistani descent told of coming under suspicion this week when he tried to buy garden fertilizer. The Times Square car bomb contained a non-explosive type of fertilizer.
> 
> While there have been no reported incidents since the failed car bomb attack last Saturday, some Pakistanis are bracing for reprisals. Police have increased foot patrols.
> 
> “A lot of Pakistanis can’t get jobs after 9/11 and now it’s even worse,” said Asghar Choudhri, an accountant and chairman of Brooklyn’s Pakistani American Merchant Association. “They are now pretending they are Indian so they can get a job.”
> 
> India and Pakistan have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, creating hostilities that ordinarily would lead a Pakistani to resent being mistaken for an Indian.
> 
> 
> According to the latest U.S. census data, some 210,410 people of Pakistani origin reside in the United States. Nearly 15,000 Pakistanis received U.S. immigrant visas last year.
> 
> “I want to make clear that we will not tolerate any bias or backlash against Pakistani or Muslim New Yorkers,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said this week, noting there are always “a few bad apples.”
> 
> New York is “the city where you can practice your religion and say what you want to say and be in charge of your own destiny and we’re going to keep it that way,” Bloomberg said.
> 
> *SUSPICION OF GARDENING*
> In Washington, an American of Pakistani heritage who would only be identified as Farhan, said a manager of a suburban home-improvement store prevented him from buying two bags of fertilizer for his family’s lawn on Tuesday.
> 
> Farhan, who was born in northern Virginia, said police arrived soon after, investigated and allowed him to buy the fertilizer.
> 
> “What kind of a country are we living in when a 22-year-old male can’t buy fertilizer?” Farhan asked. “I’m American. I’m not Pakistani.”
> 
> Farhan said the store had subsequently apologized and the case appeared to be one of an overzealous manager rather than store policy.
> 
> Merchants in New York, many of whom declined to be named, still remember reprisals after September 11. Soon after the attacks, there was a drive-by shooting in Brooklyn at a Pakistani restaurant, which is now closed.
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> The local merchants association has shrunk to 150 members, from about 250 merchants almost a decade ago.
> 
> The FBI also arrested many undocumented workers in the neighborhood, leading to a wave of deportations, and residents would call law enforcement to make claims against their neighbors, including many false claims, Choudhri said.
> 
> “After 9/11, we took much pain,” he said. “After that, a small beating is nothing. Now the Pakistanis are not so much scared but we are ashamed. We are embarrassed that the name of Pakistan came up.”
> 
> Additional reporting by William Maclean in London and Frances Kerry in Washington; Editing by Daniel Trotta and Bill Trott



Indians are more likely the victims of hate crimes, as they look more foreign due to dark complexion and thick accent.

Many Pakistanis can pass as others, including Hispanic, European, and White.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Indians are more likely the victims of hate crimes, as they look more foreign due to dark complexion and thick accent.
> 
> Many Pakistanis can pass as others, including Hispanic, European, and White.



OP is mostly correct


----------



## Imad.Khan

Simurgh said:


> Nomad life is inferior primitive life like that of animals, there is nothing to be proud of being nomadic, would you like to become nomadic with some kind of "jhugi" from place to place instead of living comfortable life in your settled apartment/house where you most probably have lived your whole life. I know some people are inspired of that Anglo-American supremacist BS of indo-european "nomadic aryans" of central asia being related to the "white" people of north east europe and hence should be "worshiped" by everyone as a symbol of white race.



What has nomadic life got to do with anything i said? Did you even read my post? first you stated my post is baseless and started talking about middle-eastern civilization which was also unrelated to what i said and now this post about nomadic life.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mugwop

nick_indian said:


> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ans-after-ny-bomb-scare-idUSTRE64655Y20100507
> 
> *Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare*
> 
> Walden Siew
> 4 MIN READ
> 
> 
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Pakistani merchants and job seekers in the United States, still reeling from economic hardship since the September 11 attacks of 2001, are posing as Indians to avoid discrimination in the wake of the Times Square bomb attempt.
> 
> 
> A police car is seen in Times Square, New York May 3, 2010. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton
> 
> Once again, a man of Pakistani descent is at the center of a security story, leading to backlash against the Pakistani-American community.
> 
> Faisal Shahzad, 30, a naturalized American born in Pakistan, was arrested on Monday, two days after authorities say he parked a crude car bomb in New York’s busy Times Square.
> 
> Suspected September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and convicted 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef are also of Pakistani decent, and anti-American militants fighting U.S. forces in Afghanistan take refuge in Pakistan.
> 
> In Brooklyn, home to one of the largest Pakistani populations in the United States, business is scant at the various grocery, halal meat and sweet cake shops since a Pakistani-American was suspected in the Times Square plot. More than 100 businesses along Coney Island Avenue have closed due to a 30 percent drop in business since 2001, a merchants’ association said.
> 
> In Washington, an American man of Pakistani descent told of coming under suspicion this week when he tried to buy garden fertilizer. The Times Square car bomb contained a non-explosive type of fertilizer.
> 
> While there have been no reported incidents since the failed car bomb attack last Saturday, some Pakistanis are bracing for reprisals. Police have increased foot patrols.
> 
> “A lot of Pakistanis can’t get jobs after 9/11 and now it’s even worse,” said Asghar Choudhri, an accountant and chairman of Brooklyn’s Pakistani American Merchant Association. “They are now pretending they are Indian so they can get a job.”
> 
> India and Pakistan have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, creating hostilities that ordinarily would lead a Pakistani to resent being mistaken for an Indian.
> 
> 
> According to the latest U.S. census data, some 210,410 people of Pakistani origin reside in the United States. Nearly 15,000 Pakistanis received U.S. immigrant visas last year.
> 
> “I want to make clear that we will not tolerate any bias or backlash against Pakistani or Muslim New Yorkers,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said this week, noting there are always “a few bad apples.”
> 
> New York is “the city where you can practice your religion and say what you want to say and be in charge of your own destiny and we’re going to keep it that way,” Bloomberg said.
> 
> *SUSPICION OF GARDENING*
> In Washington, an American of Pakistani heritage who would only be identified as Farhan, said a manager of a suburban home-improvement store prevented him from buying two bags of fertilizer for his family’s lawn on Tuesday.
> 
> Farhan, who was born in northern Virginia, said police arrived soon after, investigated and allowed him to buy the fertilizer.
> 
> “What kind of a country are we living in when a 22-year-old male can’t buy fertilizer?” Farhan asked. “I’m American. I’m not Pakistani.”
> 
> Farhan said the store had subsequently apologized and the case appeared to be one of an overzealous manager rather than store policy.
> 
> Merchants in New York, many of whom declined to be named, still remember reprisals after September 11. Soon after the attacks, there was a drive-by shooting in Brooklyn at a Pakistani restaurant, which is now closed.
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> The local merchants association has shrunk to 150 members, from about 250 merchants almost a decade ago.
> 
> The FBI also arrested many undocumented workers in the neighborhood, leading to a wave of deportations, and residents would call law enforcement to make claims against their neighbors, including many false claims, Choudhri said.
> 
> “After 9/11, we took much pain,” he said. “After that, a small beating is nothing. Now the Pakistanis are not so much scared but we are ashamed. We are embarrassed that the name of Pakistan came up.”
> 
> Additional reporting by William Maclean in London and Frances Kerry in Washington; Editing by Daniel Trotta and Bill Trott


Bullshit article! The name asghar chowdhry is even spelled wrong. I lived in new york city for most of my life and it's indians who were more victims of hate crimes compared to others "who fought back".
If insecure or self hating Pakistanis would want to pose as someone else they wouldn't pose as indians for sure because they get picked on the most. Stop bullshitting and pretending to be invincible while all your insecurities and frustrations can be seen online. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Indians are more likely the victims of hate crimes, as they look more foreign due to dark complexion and thick accent.
> 
> Many Pakistanis can pass as others, including Hispanic, European, and White.


NO! It's because they are fragile and weak plus sadists and racists find them as a easy target.
The funniest thing is after indians get their a** kicked by them instead of fighting back they blame muslims for everything.  Darpoke slave mentality. British nay rakh kay 2e mari hai ainki.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Agnihotra

It's so funny for Kashmiri Brahmin like me when Desi Punjabis and even worse Sindhis(literally discount Rajasthanis) larp as non Desi due to Inferiority complex lol.

Simply hilarious


----------



## Mr Happy

Simurgh said:


> Absolutely baseless, middle east is the oldest civilized area of this world, the civilization as we know it today (living different than animals, means living in agricultural settlements as compared to animal like nomadic life). Western Iran, Syria, Iraq, Turkey have always been cradel of civilization of middle east. This BS of central asia is anglo-american created hype, it was mostly inhabited in the past by animal like nomadic poor people who were mostly dacoits and bandits.



The Indo-European people are just as old as the Semitic people. The Indo-European people are descendants of Yapheth, a son of Nuh Alayhi Salaam. The Semitic people are descendants of Saam who was also a son of Nuh Alayhi Salaam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakhtun345 said:


> The Indo-European people are just as old as the Semitic people. The Indo-European people are descendants of Yapheth, a son of Nuh Alayhi Salaam. The Semitic people are descendants of Saam who was also a son of Nuh Alayhi Salaam.



Yes brother, Afghanistan and Pakistan share the same nomadic Irani/Hun origin (Hephthalites, Scythian, Parthians, etc.) which makes us related to other Iranic groups like those who later became Iranians and Kurds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mr Happy

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Yes brother, Afghanistan and Pakistan share the same nomadic Irani/Hun origin (Hephthalites, Scythian, Parthians, etc.) which makes us related to other Iranic grounds like those who later became Iranians and Kurds.



All languages are related. We are all descendants of Adam Alayhi Salam. I will share some of my work. Alhamdulillah. 

Example:
Arabic: "Manasik" of Hajj meaning "the rites, rituals ceremonies". "Mansak" is singular. 

(Man)sak = sacred= sak- Indo-European root. 
"Sacred" in the sense: "of or relating to religious rites or practices."
"Sacred" also has a meaning of "dedicated to or set apart for the worship of a deity."

(Man)sak, sacred, sak-.

Alhamdulillah. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Yes brother, Afghanistan and Pakistan share the same nomadic Irani/Hun origin (Hephthalites, Scythian, Parthians, etc.) which makes us related to other Iranic grounds like those who later became Iranians and Kurds.



Correction

Manasik in Arabic means," rites, rituals, ceremonies."
I missed a comma. 



Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Yes brother, Afghanistan and Pakistan share the same nomadic Irani/Hun origin (Hephthalites, Scythian, Parthians, etc.) which makes us related to other Iranic grounds like those who later became Iranians and Kurds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Proudpakistaniguy

nick_indian said:


> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Pakistani merchants and job seekers in the United States, still reeling from economic hardship since the September 11 attacks of 2001, are posing as Indians to avoid discrimination in the wake of the Times Square bomb attempt.


They are pretending to be Indian to get a job ? Indian must be very special people LOL Employers in westen countries do see your passport and visa when you apply for any jobs so how could someone pretend to be Indian when having Pakistani passports ?


----------

