Save Pakistan From The Vulgar Indian Culture

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

no bro. not at all.

He meant to say a brotherhood of Muslim man from China to Arab to India.

in a non-state way.

Or maybe he was like one of those who still claim muslim rules and kept all hindus slave for thousand years

 

[FaujHistorian]

Or maybe he was like one of those who still claim muslim rules and kept all hindus slave for thousand years

No he was not.

Why are you ready to go off the rails bhai.

Read more about him. In pure politics Iqbal was an Indian nationalist. His letter to Leopold wise is a clear refutation of partition.

so let's keep the Indian-Pak $hit shoveling aside (that you mentioned by Hidu slave thingy)

Have a cup of chai,

I'll join you as well.

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

No he was not.

Why are you ready to go off the rails bhai.

Read more about him. In pure politics Iqbal was an Indian nationalist. His letter to Leopold wise is a clear refutation of partition.

so let's keep the Indian-Pak $hit shoveling aside (that you mentioned by Hidu slave thingy)

Have a cup of chai,

I'll join you as well.

I think he was nationalist prior to becoming politically involved,was he not the one who gave idea of pakistan,I am not sure though.
Okay join.

 

[FaujHistorian]

I think he was nationalist prior to becoming politically involved,was he not the one who gave idea of pakistan,I am not sure though.
Okay join.

His idea of "Pakistan" was within the Indian Union.

It was Savarkar and Hindu nationalists like Lajpat Rai who gave the idea of TNT LOOOOOOOOOONG before Iqbal.

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

His idea of "Pakistan" was within the Indian Union.

It was Savarkar and Hindu nationalists like Lajpat Rai who gave the idea of TNT LOOOOOOOOOONG before Iqbal.

Yeah right...a union for namesake only.Why should muslim get different laws.Why do you blame savarkar or others.Who implemented it?And what savarkar said till last time was to give equal rights to everyone regardless of religion.What is wrong in that.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Yeah right...a union for namesake only.Why should muslim get different laws.Why do you blame savarkar or others.Who implemented it?And what savarkar said till last time was to give equal rights to everyone regardless of religion.What is wrong in that.

Bhai calm down. there was no difference in laws. Union was going to use "Indian penal code".

Sarvarkar and Lajpat rai were representing Hindutvadi business men and factory owners.

And they could never fathom the idea of living along side Muslim land owners.

And thus they were talking about cutting off and chopping British India even as far back as 1922
The idea was to kick out troubling little provinces with Muslim majority. This would allow Hindutvadis to have total control in the post British era.


Sadly you come hear and repeat Pakistani-Indian sarkari history books.


Try to use your own brains instead of following islamists or Hindutvadi propaganda.


Thank you

 

[majesticpankaj]

inferiority complex

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

Bhai calm down. there was no difference in laws. Union was going to use "Indian penal code".

Sarvarkar and Lajpat rai were representing Hindutvadi business men and factory owners.

And they could never fathom the idea of living along side Muslim land owners.

And thus they were talking about cutting off and chopping British India even as far back as 1922
The idea was to kick out troubling little provinces with Muslim majority. This would allow Hindutvadis to have total control in the post British era.


Sadly you come hear and repeat Pakistani-Indian sarkari history books.


Try to use your own brains instead of following islamists or Hindutvadi propaganda.


Thank you

Was it not muslim who demanded separate electorates first

 

[FaujHistorian]

Was it not muslim who demanded separate electorates first

Everyone was jockeying for political influence. Hindutvadis were not sitting like idle ducks.

you pick and choose ONE minority group just because it has a tag "Muslim", without ever trying to understand the power play of other pressure groups.

Indian politics in 1910s and 20s was divided along all religious groups and all ethnic groups and all economic groups.

Just look around the vote bank politics of Congress TODAY, and Hindutvadi politics of BJP TODAY

and see if you can draw some parallels (that may not be 100% valid, but parallels nonetheless).

So I urge you and beg you as my cousin from across the border, as a fellow citizen of the region,

Please study first the role of every group and then come back with an opinion.


Hope you understand.

 

[Hammad-ROX]

Was it not muslim who demanded separate electorates first

Damn Endian!!

 

[FaujHistorian]

Yes we did!

His question was relative to Minto-Morley act.

Every body asked for seats and not just Muslims. There is no "We", it is "Everybody".

 

[mahesh.]

And again, where did I ever claim what you just imposed on me? On the contrary I very firmly believe that if my culture is weak enough to be overtaken by an inferior and morally corrupt culture then it does not deserve to be followed......what it means is that I am confident of the strength of my culture.

If your culture is overtaken, itself means its weak and the other is stronger but not inferior or morally corrupt. How can you assume the other cultures are inferior or morally corrupt.