Why is our full history not taught to us in Pakistan Studies?

[KaiserX]

Lol, Because US dollars were coming,
Money from Saudi and Arabs also coming..

Musharraf days were best among all.
Computer, Media, Telecommunication and Economy was good.
But same US BUSH gave 4 Billion dollars.

If I could blame 3 leaders who destroyed Pakistan by far the most and caused most losses economically in all sectors these would be

1. Yahya Khan- literqlly split the country. Worked with Bhutto to kill thousands and split East pakistan which was a large economic manufacterer + exporter. Almost overnight we lost more than half our population and 40% of our economy. Geopolitically never recovered

2. ZA Bhutto- Split the country along with Yahya khan. Refused to accept election results due to his own ego. Nationalized all remaining private industries in west pakistan. All the rich/educated remaining started to leave the country. Pakistan private sector never recovered economically with all billionaires/large industries destroyed.

3. Nawaz Sharif- in economic damage he has caused the most loss since the 90s. Even PPP under benazir/zardari managed economic policy better than these imbeciles. The damaged caused by the dollarization of pakistans economy, increasing imports, decreasing exports, billions in loans taken to be spent on failing projects. Corruption imbeded into society. And in the end Islamism used to cover up for failures are halmarks of NS.

So now if you wanna compare Zia to other leaders of pakistan who is failure vs ok vs success when compared to others. The facts are pretty obvious. These 3 leaders in each of their individual capacities hurt pak far more than Zia ever did

 

[El Sidd]

Mirzaye can?
Even killed like Shehbaz Bhati.

In Jannah days our FM was even Mirzaye.
Ministery of Minorty Affairs? Lol
Not even a little influential posts.

What is a Mirzaye?

 

[*Warrior*]

What is a Mirzaye?

Ahmedi/Qadiyani

 

[Abdul Rehman Majeed]

Pervez Hoodbhoy is a naive person when it comes to politics.

He should shut his mouth and may be go back to the US.

 

[El Sidd]

Ahmedi/Qadiyani

Which Qadiyani/Ahmadi/Mirzaye wants to be FM of country who declared them heretics?

 

[*Warrior*]

Which Qadiyani/Ahmadi/Mirzaye wants to be FM of country who declared them heretics?

You just want a non sense long debate, but i not.

I said Jinnah gave them a good position in govt, Jinnah knows zafarullah was mirzaye. but he gave them, same he gave ministry to Hindu dalit. because Jinnah was secular.

but now, a mirzaye can not be in politics until they declared themselves as minorities.

and minorities are only for Minister of Minority Affairs.

In last govt Imran Khan was ready to appoint a mirzaye to ministry of economics (i thinks), but but failed.

I am not mirzaye. no more talks.

I am just saying this is difference of secular leader.
and if there was secularism in Pakistan, there may be no terrorism like TTP and Sectarianism.

 

[El Sidd]

You just want a non sense long debate, but i not.

I said Jinnah gave them a good position in govt, Jinnah knows zafarullah was mirzaye. but he gave them due, same he gave ministory to hindu dalit. because jinnah was secular.

but now, a mirzaye can not be in politics until they declared themselves as minorities.

and minorities are only for Minister of Minority Affairs.

In last govt Imran Khan was ready to appoint a mirzaye to ministry of enconomics (i thinks), but but failed.

I am not mirzaye. no more talks.

I am just saying this is difference of secular leader.
and if there was secularism in Pakistan, there may be no terrorism like TTP and Scterism.

There's no constitutional requirement for the position of FM or the courts. It's only for the President and executive of the country, PM.

 

[Bilal9]

by using bad words?

Bhai last day of Ramzan - Sabr and restraint is needed. I do understand your anger but we should be Muslims first. Be the better person - always.

 

[*Warrior*]

There's no constitutional requirement for the position of FM or the courts. It's only for the President and executive of the country, PM.

OK, Good,

Then, Why was pressure on Imran Khan govt to not to include a mirzaye as economist?
You do not understanding my point.

In Jinnah govt shia, hindu, mirzaye all were part.

It was fruit of secularism, even Pakistan was not secular state, only Jinnah was secular.

You are unable to differentiate secularism and so called Islamic state Pakistan

Pakistan removes economist from key role following Islamist backlash

Pakistan's new government canceled the appointment of a renowned Princeton economist to its Economic Advisory Council, an official said on Friday, after a strong backlash against the choice of a member of the Ahmadi religious minority.

www.reuters.com

In India there can be a muslim president, sikh prime minister. why not in Pakistan,
In UK a Muslim Pakistani can be Mayor of London

I am saying Why was a mirzaye FM in Jinnah days?

You are saying any one can be, but not in PM, President,
can you show me even hindu, christian in govt ministeries except ministory of minority.

 

[El Sidd]

OK, Good,

Then, Why was pressure on Imran Khan govt to not to include a mirzaye as economist?
You do not understanding my point.

In Jinnah govt shia, hindu, mirzaye all were part.

It was fruit of secularism, even Pakistan was not secular state, only Jinnah was secular.

You are unable to differentiate secularism and so called Islamic state Pakistan

Pakistan removes economist from key role following Islamist backlash

Pakistan's new government canceled the appointment of a renowned Princeton economist to its Economic Advisory Council, an official said on Friday, after a strong backlash against the choice of a member of the Ahmadi religious minority.

www.reuters.com

In India there can be a muslim president, sikh prime minister. why not in Pakistan,
In UK a Muslim Pakistani can be Mayor of London

I am saying Why was a mirzaye FM in Jinnah days?

You are saying any one can be, but not in PM, President,
can you show me even hindu, christian in govt ministeries except ministory of minority.

Picking a FM is PMs discretionary right. If the Dominion of Pakistan's Governor exercised his rights, it don't make it constitutionally binding for others to pick a Mirzayi.

What fruit are you talking about? Apparently it is your religious belief that selecting minorities will bring about fruits.

 

[Ssan]

I don’t quite understand this secular liberal obsession with India valley. You do know that Pakistan included Bangladesh when it was formed? How is that part of india valley?

Pakistan was formed for Muslims period not so that one group could make some sort of son of soil nonsense.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

Who's "they"?



A Muslim majority country is not equivalent to an Islamic country. Jinnah and the Muslim League opposed theocracy.

Pakistan had no state religion until 1973.

Pakistan had no Sharia court until 1980.

Pakistan's first Minister For Law and Justice was Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Hindu by faith, who was tasked by Jinnah to write up laws for the newly independent country. No Qari sahab was hired to write any Sharia Law.

Pakistan Movement was to protect minorities (the largest being Muslims) against a Brahmin Raj, not about establishing an "Islamic state".

Pakistan was created for everyone...it is not property of Sunni supremacists and was never meant to be an Islamic state.

Let’s just put this into perspective and assume for one minute that Pakistan was indeed “made in the name of Islam”. Okay, now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why was Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam and Jamaat-e-Islami opposed to Pakistan's independence in 1947?

2) Why did Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam and Jamaat-e-Islami refer to Pakistan as “Najistan” and Muhammad Ali Jinnah as “Kafir-e-Azam”?

Answer these questions if you can.

Read on: Muslim Pakistan vs Islamic Pakistan

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1864528243607151&id=780770378649615

Classic example of hijacking the narrative and running with it...

So, let's step back

Crucial to identity are people's Faith, ethnicity and language among others...
It is an amalgamation of the above that propelled movements for Freedom, Khilafat movement, thoughts of Rehmat Ali and Iqbal... translated into what then became Pakistan. Of course the realm of possibility under a British umbrella short of military conflict was only what was acceptable to parting Brits.

Let's leave it here...
The concept of Islamic state is NEVER a theocracy!
It is not an equivalent to Papal State.
Islam has no ministry nor ordained clergy... No Clerical State!
The Iranian and Afghan responses are identical and representative of their discourse, bouts with secularism shoved down their throats... be it the tyranny of a Monarch or communism. Simultaneously, Pakistan's example and a resultant ethno-linguitic State of B-desh.

Islamic response is instead, Fitrah, or innate nature of creation. They do not have to divide or split their loyalties, to affiliate with overlapping, conflicting or fleeting ideologies. They remain united behind their people, their clan and speak their language. Lives are not endlessly legislated
يسر ولا تعسر
Is the concept of this governance.
Fitrah is kept and only that of The Creator, his law codified!

It therefore takes away the secular paradigm of a spectrum, making everything subjective and trivial. It takes away the reason to divide people on race, creed, color, origin, economic or social backgrounds, in fact tyranny of all kinds.

It will be an endless discussion and I think I have posited enough as a food for thought for the reader.

 

[hatehs]

Did Zia also make it mandatory to teach the kids that Pakistanis are actually Arabs and different from Indians?

The article indirectly explains why the identity crisis is prevalent in Pakistan.

Suckdeep bhai

Is it identity crisis to think the Dasyu chimp from some Madrasi jungle or Gangetic slum is the same as a Punjabi? Pajeets in the same location but with different castes have high genetic variation, so it's weird for some chimp in a loincloth to decide that I am the same as him. It sounds like the identity crisis is on your end.

 

[hussain0216]

We need to retilt Pakistani ideology. This begins with complete ownership of our history. Seperation of state and religion. Going back to a secular republic. Dethroning influential molvis. Disbanding madrassahs. Full attaturk. Ban headscarfs and non Pakistani attire which includes headscarves and niqabs.

And integrate faith into the state, God is with Pakistan the collective, the state and not just Pakistani Muslims.

Then logic, reason and hunger for progress will take over and the Jinnah archetype will become the majority and we will rise, become 1st world developed, leader of men, noble and respected.

Other civilizations will copy our culture, our language, our dress, associate with our history. We shall mog India into absolute oblivion.

I don’t quite understand this secular liberal obsession with India valley. You do know that Pakistan included Bangladesh when it was formed? How is that part of india valley?

Pakistan was formed for Muslims period not so that one group could make some sort of son of soil nonsense.

And this is exactly what they don't understand

What unites all these different people????

The Indus valley civilization for example doesn't really reach up and out to KP or Balochistan, it certainly didn't to Bengal


All these different ethnicities weren't united in the name of ethnocentrism or secularism



What united all these different people was Islam and a common Islamic and Muslim identity


Too much stupidity and emphasis on ethnocentric jahilat is what caused 1971

Secularism does not inspire our people, so regardless of the bullshit of the liberals it's not what's going to make Pakistan strong

 

[hatehs]

ye mulla madharchod to pagla gaya hai.

This black Indian man decided to name himself after the Indian penis God, just so everyone is aware of who is calling other people crazy.