Murder of history in Pakistan

[Ammyy]

My god how many times is this video going to be posted?! Can't you guys come up with new material to troll with?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/94009-india-no-country-women.html

 

[Riaz Mohammed]

My god how many times is this video going to be posted?! Can't you guys come up with new material to troll with?

I dont know.....maybe i think the Indians in the forum feel "honour bound" to hammer the fact into your heads....

Anyway, i'm just and observer really...=/

 

[Dance]

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/94009-india-no-country-women.html

I'm sure that particular article has never been posted before, even though the topic of the article has. This video has been posted numerous times and it's getting annoying now.

 

[Dance]

I dont know.....maybe i think the Indians in the forum feel "honour bound" to hammer the fact into your heads....

Anyway, i'm just and observer really...=/

Lmao trust me Indians are the last people to "hammer facts" into our heads.

Thanks for the laugh though

 

[Riaz Mohammed]

Lmao trust me Indians are the last people to "hammer facts" into our heads.

Thanks for the laugh though

I suppose youre welcome.....although you could've just thanked me...*hint* *hint*. I think its common knowledge that if you bring india and pakistan together...it will rain hellfire and brimstone. ....Its kinda like a law of nature...or..idk...law of gravity...?

 

[Dance]

I suppose youre welcome.....although you could've just thanked me...*hint* *hint*. I think its common knowledge that if you bring india and pakistan together...it will rain hellfire and brimstone. ....Its kinda like a law of nature...or..idk...law of gravity...?

Happy?

 

[Areesh]

PROMISE! pretty please???

Promise. Since it looks really bleak that you would grow up.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

well i have never read in any of my history books that they backstabed us actualy i n never read about any of our wars in our books

i guess it was there in our books. our so called television war analysers/ historians always say china back stabbed us.

 

[PakPrinciples]

Distortion of history is not unusual.

No wonder why some pakistani members come here with there own self proclaimed deluded History....!!

teaching the future generation wrong history wont help in anything but will creat more hatred in there hearts

Sethi like his cronies are no nothing idiots who espouse a history that doesn't exist or was proven a lie and maybe he should start by criticizing Dinanth Batra for doing in India what he's incorrectly implicating Pakistan of.

Most of what these guys are referencing are works from the very early 1900s (the time when British occupiers and their cohorts first discovered Pakistan's ancient sites) which attempted to try and unite the Pakistani and the inferior Indian civilization and explain their vast differences through what amounts to outright fraud.

• "India" never existed before the British occupation of countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, etc... The oldest known name for Pakistan was one used by the Mesopotamia which referred to our nation as "Meluha" and our coastline as "Makran" (pg. 285 of "History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Volume 1") from at least about 2500 BC and did not encompass India (other than Gujrat and small sections of Punjab but at this time the Indian race would not have reached our borders or would have, at best, had a very minimal presence).
  

• There is no such religion as "Hinduism" particularly considering not a single religious text from the region ever referred to it's adherents as "Hindus" (ex. like the Quran refers to the religion as “Islam” in Surah 3:19 and it's adherents as "Muslims" in Surah 2:128) nor is there any language or dialect native to India that the word "Hind" or "Hindu" originates from so this idea our ancestry were "Hindu" is complete fiction. The Rig Veda, a collection of hymns originating from Pakistan's ancestry not that of Indians, is not "Hindu" scripture and actually show that Pakistan's ancestry was monotheistic (ex. Rig Veda B3V8H54 and B1V46H164), did not believe in a caste system nor is there any evidence to suggest there ever was one (Pg. 59 of “Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization”, pg 210 of “The History and Geography of Human Genes” and backed up by the Rig Veda B9H112V3), ate meat including cattle (pg. 123 of "The Ancient Indus Valley" New Perspectives" by Jane McIntosh) and buried their dead with food, pots and pans a very strong suggestion in the belief of an afterlife (pg. 278/279 of “Encylopedia of Prehistory Vol. 8: South and Southwest Asia) much like the ancient Egyptians totally the opposite of the beliefs/practices of Indian Brahmanism and the belief in reincarnation. This is why Pakistan's ancestry, unlike those of Indians, quickly absorbed Islam because the message wasn't alien to us while it was a radically foreign concept for the Indian savage. To give an example of one of the many Indian lies about our ancestry they'll state that proof we were "Hindu" is the "horned god" found in our ancient sites who they depict as Shiva :
  
  
  
  Now to understand how ridiculous this is note that the Rig Veda does not mention a single pagan Brahmin god (particularly Shiva/Siva) and not only are those depictions of pagan figures within the Rig Veda far more similar to those of ancient Greco-Roman traditions and the Middle East (ex.
  Mitra is like the Greco-Roman Mithras, Agni is like the Greco-Roman Ignis, etc...) there is absolutely no evidence to even suggest this was in any way an early depiction of Shiva/Siva (pg. 169 of “Indian Sociology Through Ghurye, a Dictionary” by S. Devadas Pillai). In fact this depiction is almost an identical depiction of the European Cernunnos and other antlered/horned figures from that region:
  

• Contrary to what Sethi thinks Pakistani's are not from "India" (our civilization was born from within Pakistan (includes Kashmir). Our civilization was composed of two neolithic settlements the most significant/important being that of Mehrgarh along with the significantly smaller settlement of Burzahom (located in the portion of Kashmir India now occupies) and spread throughout Pakistan particularly along the Indus and it's tributaries just as the Mesopotamians spread along the Tigris and Euphrates, the Egyptians along the Nile and the Chinese along the Yellow River. India's civilization on the other hand began in two locations the first was the Belan Valley from where they spread into the Gangetic valley and eventually along the Ganges the other being settlements located in Tamil Nadu.
  

Comparing Pakistan's civilization to that of India's is like comparing the ancient Egyptian civilization to that of the Ethiopians.

 

[Aka123]

^^ This is what you call Bull crap with Diagram and map!!

Oops that too in a 3 years old thread…. digging really deep!! Lolzz…..

 

[third eye]

Sethi like his cronies are no nothing idiots who espouse a history that doesn't exist or was proven a lie and maybe he should start by criticizing Dinanth Batra for doing in India what he's incorrectly implicating Pakistan of.

Most of what these guys are referencing are works from the very early 1900s (the time when British occupiers and their cohorts first discovered Pakistan's ancient sites) which attempted to try and unite the Pakistani and the inferior Indian civilization and explain their vast differences through what amounts to outright fraud.

Comparing Pakistan's civilization to that of India's is like comparing the ancient Egyptian civilization to that of the Ethiopians.

The part in red is where I stopped reading this silly post.

I stopped reading not out of patriotism or loyalty but on realizing how immature the thoughts posts would be since the author considers civilizations to be inferior or superior.

Evolution and development can not be classified as mentioned above.

If India did not exist before whenever, how can the sites found in what now is Pakistan be called Pakistani ? The Indian civilization is referred to as Indo - Gangetic . Similarly that in Pakistan is Indus valley civilization.

 

[Aka123]

The part in red is where I stopped reading this silly post.

I stopped reading not out of patriotism or loyalty but on realizing how immature the thoughts posts would be since the author considers civilizations to be inferior or superior.

Evolution and development can not be classified as mentioned above.

If India did not exist before whenever, how can the sites found in what now is Pakistan be called Pakistani ? The Indian civilization is referred to as Indo - Gangetic . Similarly that in Pakistan is Indus valley civilization.

Was there anything called Pakistani Civilization before 1947 ?

As far as I know -

The name was coined by Cambridge student and Muslim nationalist Choudhary Rahmat Ali and was published on January 28, 1933 in the pamphlet Now or Never. He saw it as an acronym formed from the names of the "homelands" of Muslims in northwest India — P for Punjab, A for the Afghan areas of the region, K for Kashmir, S for Sindh and tan for Balochistan, thus forming "Pakstan". An i was later added to the English rendition of the name to ease pronunciation, producing "Pakistan". In Urdu and Persian the name encapsulates the concept of "pak" ("pure") and "stan" ("land") and hence a "Pure Land".

 

[INDIC]

"India" never existed before the British occupation of countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, etc... The oldest known name for Pakistan was one used by the Mesopotamia which referred to our nation as "Meluha" and our coastline as "Makran" (pg. 285 of "History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Volume 1") from at least about 2500 BC and did not encompass India (other than Gujrat and small sections of Punjab but at this time the Indian race would not have reached our borders or would have, at best, had a very minimal presence).

You mean the Indo-Aryan made an airlift from Kabul to Delhi without disturbing the settlements of ancient Pakistanis of Meluhha. coming to the point, ancient India was referred as Bharat varsha with North India having a name Uttarapatha and South India as Dakshinapatha, Gandhara was the Northernmost territory of Uttarapatha of Bharat. If there was widespread practice of Hinduism then people of Indus river believed in idea of Bharata varsha if they converted to become Muslim, they still believed in idea of Hindustan.

• There is no such religion as "Hinduism" particularly considering not a single religious text from the region ever referred to it's adherents as "Hindus" (ex. like the Quran refers to the religion as “Islam” in Surah 3:19 and it's adherents as "Muslims" in Surah 2:128) nor is there any language or dialect native to India that the word "Hind" or "Hindu" originates from so this idea our ancestry were "Hindu" is complete fiction. The Rig Veda, a collection of hymns originating from Pakistan's ancestry not that of Indians, is not "Hindu" scripture and actually show that Pakistan's ancestry was monotheistic (ex. Rig Veda B3V8H54 and B1V46H164),

Hinduism was referred as Sanatan Dharma in Hindu scriptures. Now the above crappy paragraph contradicts the earlier claim that Indians have ancestry of Indo-Aryans and ancient Pakistanis of Meluhha didn't.

they depict as Shiva :

Now to understand how ridiculous this is note that the Rig Veda does not mention a single pagan Brahmin god (particularly Shiva/Siva) and not only are those depictions of pagan figures within the Rig Veda far more similar to those of ancient Greco-Roman traditions and the Middle East.

People who never read Vedas making dumb claims. Shiva also known as Rudra is mentioned as a deity in Rigveda and Vedas was polytheist having references to numerous Gods.

 

[third eye]

Was there anything called Pakistani Civilization before 1947 ?

As far as I know -

The name was coined by Cambridge student and Muslim nationalist Choudhary Rahmat Ali and was published on January 28, 1933 in the pamphlet Now or Never. He saw it as an acronym formed from the names of the "homelands" of Muslims in northwest India — P for Punjab, A for the Afghan areas of the region, K for Kashmir, S for Sindh and tan for Balochistan, thus forming "Pakstan". An i was later added to the English rendition of the name to ease pronunciation, producing "Pakistan". In Urdu and Persian the name encapsulates the concept of "pak" ("pure") and "stan" ("land") and hence a "Pure Land".

It really does not matter who coined it, when & with what motive.

I have read posts here where ppl grudge the name Indian Ocean !

Its the mindset that shows. Civilisations developed along rivers - Nile, Tigris/ Euphrates/ Indus/ Ganges and so on and were known as such.

 

[Aka123]

It really does not matter who coined it, when & with what motive.

I have read posts here where ppl grudge the name Indian Ocean !

Its the mindset that shows. Civilisations developed along rivers - Nile, Tigris/ Euphrates/ Indus/ Ganges and so on and were known as such.

Even I have seen that. Sore losers!!