Arnab Goswami completely lost his mind

[Spring Onion]

May be in Pakistani History text books.. the freedom struggle was started by Muslims only...

Its claimed otherwise by Indian Hindus NOT us.

Are you sure your Muslim ancestors were not really bothered just about their shrinking and waning empire in the face of the British colonization instead of something as altruistic as Freedom?

P.S. I must commend mulla ji @Zarvan ji for starting popular threads. 11 pages.

Our ancestry doesn't start from 1940s

its beyond that. When we fought for freedom along with Hindus but still if at the end of the day hindus play banaya role we had to wake up.

simple as that

wonder what does that mean ....

I meant my smile but dint know you are GAY and think about something else

 

[Partharjun]

well brother count Whadera class(feudals) and in that almost all muslims(jameendars,nawabs&there stooges) were loyal to british and british made pakistan for them as Congress(old gaurd) was dead against feudalism & western mediation in south asia after independence ...ever wondered why and how it is/was so easy for western powers to use pakistan against USSR & other anty west forces

In fact the Westerns always favoured Pakistanis because of their easy malleability and "cooperation". They are described as sporty, Pucca chaps - our kind, not always into analysis or deep thinking. The Indians, on the other hand are portrayed as intellectually arrogant, austere and impossible to convince . The Kissinger papers are pretty explicit on the stark behavioral differences between Pakistanis and Indians - for while Pakistanis are "like us", Indians are impossible to negotiate with.

This supposed pat on the back has been very important for the elite Punjabi Psyche which entertains a self view of being "royal" and "open minded" which actually hides his feudal and exploitative profiteering. This has enabled Westerns to easily coopt and to ultimately ruin Pakistan. Indians, on the other hand, are over analytical and intellectually arrogant, and with an underlying dislike for foreigners. But this is how India could follow an independent policy.

 

[doppelganger]

Our ancestry doesn't start from 1940s

its beyond that. When we fought for freedom along with Hindus but still if at the end of the day hindus play banaya role we had to wake up.

simple as that

Neither does our ancestry start in the 1940s.

What do your Independence generation have to say about the naras they used to shout during the struggle?

Pakistan Zindabad?

 

[GURU DUTT]

Its claimed otherwise by Indian Hindus NOT us.



Our ancestry doesn't start from 1940s

its beyond that. When we fought for freedom along with Hindus but still if at the end of the day hindus play banaya role we had to wake up.

simple as that



I meant my smile but dint know you are GAY and think about something else

really i dint knew that
jana ji why not come to india and check it

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Its claimed otherwise by Indian Hindus NOT us.



Our ancestry doesn't start from 1940s

its beyond that. When we fought for freedom along with Hindus but still if at the end of the day hindus play banaya role we had to wake up.

simple as that



I meant my smile but dint know you are GAY and think about something else

And Muslims got what they asked for a Muslim Majority country.. but you guys can't even stay with muslims... you kiled Bangali Muslims..and now you are down to Killing Shias.

Indian leadership wanted PAkistan badly too....

Here is the reason Why:

 

[Partharjun]

Understandable . It should be like that BUT there is a little technical problem and that is that What cast it starts and ends with?



The Cow and Pig fats brought both together in the recent history whereas if you go beyond our Muslim ancestors started it much before you can even think.

Shuddi buddhi all started with help of Muslims

Name a few Pakistani "freedom fighters", especially form the "martial" Punjabi "race".

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

@Spring Onion: some great stuff about Pakistan's historic lies being taught to Pakistani Students:

Smokers’ Corner: By the book - DAWN.COM

Pakistan: How much do Pakistani school history textbooks differ from those in India? - Quora

Pakistani textbooks controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Spring Onion]

In fact the Westerns always favoured Pakistanis because of their easy malleability and "cooperation". They are described as sporty, Pucca chaps - our kind, not always into analysis or deep thinking. The Indians, on the other hand are portrayed as intellectually arrogant, austere and impossible to convince . The Kissinger papers are pretty explicit on the stark behavioral differences between Pakistanis and Indians - for while Pakistanis are "like us", Indians are impossible to negotiate with.

This supposed pat on the back has been very important for the elite Punjabi Psyche which entertains a self view of being "royal" and "open minded" which actually hides his feudal and exploitative profiteering. This has enabled Westerns to easily coopt and to ultimately ruin Pakistan. Indians, on the other hand, are over analytical and intellectually arrogant, and with an underlying dislike for foreigners. But this is how India could follow an independent policy.

The Indians are portrayed as cunning. That's what you are . You are not at all intellectual neither arrogant. The fact is that you are lacking any strategic value hence you are nowhere in picture.

 

[Partharjun]

The Indians are portrayed as cunning. That's what you are . You are not at all intellectual neither arrogant. The fact is that you are lacking any strategic value hence you are nowhere in picture.

What happened to your reference about Indians calling Shahid Bhagat Singh a terrorist? Or are you ready to admit that you are a shameless liar?

 

[GURU DUTT]

In fact the Westerns always favoured Pakistanis because of their easy malleability and "cooperation". They are described as sporty, Pucca chaps - our kind, not always into analysis or deep thinking. The Indians, on the other hand are portrayed as intellectually arrogant, austere and impossible to convince . The Kissinger papers are pretty explicit on the stark behavioral differences between Pakistanis and Indians - for while Pakistanis are "like us", Indians are impossible to negotiate with.

This supposed pat on the back has been very important for the elite Punjabi Psyche which entertains a self view of being "royal" and "open minded" which actually hides his feudal and exploitative profiteering. This has enabled Westerns to easily coopt and to ultimately ruin Pakistan. Indians, on the other hand, are over analytical and intellectually arrogant, and with an underlying dislike for foreigners. But this is how India could follow an independent policy.

well things dint change after independence aswell as nehru made overtones to Russia & China but carried forward policy of NAM but pakistanies as soon as got independence went to west for AID and in return promised/gave acsess to there strategick Air fields and millitarry instalations which even to this day are used by west/USA

no wonder why Muslim elite was/Still is so against Freedom struggle agaisnt British and still consider opponents of british raj & western hegemony as traitors but to keep there publick pre occupied they created the bogey of kashmir(by sending afridies in 48) and Evil Hindu's .....

AMMEER E SHEHER GARIBON KO LOOT LETA HAI KABHI ABANAM E WATAN TO KABHEE BALEEHA E MAZHAB

THE irony is even to this day pakistanies in general are following the same old propoganda while it has destroyed there socio-economick culture and taken away there sovrenity

What A Pity

 

[sovcomflot]

In fact the Westerns always favoured Pakistanis because of their easy malleability and "cooperation". They are described as sporty, Pucca chaps - our kind, not always into analysis or deep thinking. The Indians, on the other hand are portrayed as intellectually arrogant, austere and impossible to convince . The Kissinger papers are pretty explicit on the stark behavioral differences between Pakistanis and Indians - for while Pakistanis are "like us", Indians are impossible to negotiate with.

This supposed pat on the back has been very important for the elite Punjabi Psyche which entertains a self view of being "royal" and "open minded" which actually hides his feudal and exploitative profiteering. This has enabled Westerns to easily coopt and to ultimately ruin Pakistan. Indians, on the other hand, are over analytical and intellectually arrogant, and with an underlying dislike for foreigners. But this is how India could follow an independent policy.

One of the best posts ,you ever made.Bravo.

 

[karan.1970]

The Indians are portrayed as cunning. That's what you are . You are not at all intellectual neither arrogant. The fact is that you are lacking any strategic value hence you are nowhere in picture.

If being in the picture lands you where Pakistan is today then I am glad we were not in the picture

 

[doppelganger]

In fact the Westerns always favoured Pakistanis because of their easy malleability and "cooperation". They are described as sporty, Pucca chaps - our kind, not always into analysis or deep thinking. The Indians, on the other hand are portrayed as intellectually arrogant, austere and impossible to convince . The Kissinger papers are pretty explicit on the stark behavioral differences between Pakistanis and Indians - for while Pakistanis are "like us", Indians are impossible to negotiate with.

This supposed pat on the back has been very important for the elite Punjabi Psyche which entertains a self view of being "royal" and "open minded" which actually hides his feudal and exploitative profiteering. This has enabled Westerns to easily coopt and to ultimately ruin Pakistan. Indians, on the other hand, are over analytical and intellectually arrogant, and with an underlying dislike for foreigners. But this is how India could follow an independent policy.

Great post. During the times of the British, even communities like the Christians, Anglos, and Parsis were looked upon by the British with more favor as the lesser of the evil as opposed to the rest of the "lower" "brown natives", but when the time came, these communities have stood by us as our own people, though they may have enjoyed British favor and even profited from it at the time in terms of education, business, etc.

 

[Partharjun]

well things dint change after independence aswell as nehru made overtones to Russia & China but carried forward policy of NAM but pakistanies as soon as got independence went to west for AID and in return promised/gave acsess to there strategick Air fields and millitarry instalations which even to this day are used by west/USA

no wonder why Muslim elite was/Still is so against Freedom struggle agaisnt British and still consider opponents of british raj & western hegemony as traitors but to keep there publick pre occupied they created the bogey of kashmir(by sending afridies in 48) and Evil Hindu's .....

AMMEER E SHEHER GARIBON KO LOOT LETA HAI KABHI ABANAM E WATAN TO KABHEE BALEEHA E MAZHAB

THE irony is even to this day pakistanies in general are following the same old propoganda while it has destroyed there socio-economick culture and taken away there sovrenity

What A Pity

Pakistani Punjabis were the bulk of the British Army which suppressed The mutiny of 1857 and captured Delhi. The entire North India had revolted and could never be relied upon again. Post 1857, the British gave up recruiting the Hindu higher castes of Ganga plains which earlier formed the bulk of Bengal army. Instead, they went in for "races" with proven loyalty to the British, and this was , in a large part, from the Muslim Punjabis. The Punjabis never took any part in the Freedom movement and were steadfastly loyal to the British.

This "martial" habit of following Western orders has carried on after independence. After all, old loyalties die hard.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Great post. During the times of the British, even communities like the Christians, Anglos, and Parsis were looked upon by the British with more favor as the lesser of the evil as opposed to the rest of the "lower" "brown natives", but when the time came, these communities have stood by us as our own people, though they may have enjoyed British favor and even profited from it at the time in terms of education, business, etc.

well add to that Sikhs aswell