What's new

A Statue for A Pakistani Punjabi Hero.....Porus

Status
Not open for further replies.
My whole point was there was no united country known as "india" untill 1947. You were twisting about my words, trying to confuse people.

The Indian people, Indian culture, and Indian civilization has existed for thousands of years. Sometimes we had political unity, sometimes we didn't. But we were always considered one comprehensive civilization. That is the basic fact, supported by piles and piles of historical evidence.

indika, indica,india, indoi, ect, were all names used by inavders to describe the geographic location of south Asia. Just as how "middle east" is used to describe the geographic location of western Asia. And all these names are deprived from Indus River in Pakistan (not south india, where you come from).

Yes, these names came from the Indus River, which was historically a part of India. But these names don't refer to just the Indus Valley, they refer to the entire subcontinent.

Numerous foreigners have written books on Indian people, culture, and geography. In all of these books, the individual nations of India were mentioned (like Magahda, Kambojas, Andhras, etc.), but they were always considered part of the larger civilization, called 'India'.

South Asia has historically been home to just one civilization, while the Middle East has been home to many civilizations (like Egyptians, Persians, Arabs, Turks, Jews, etc.)

This is why the Middle East has always been described by foreigners seperately, while India has been described as a whole.
 
.
The Indian people, Indian culture, and Indian civilization has existed for thousands of years. Sometimes we had political unity, sometimes we didn't. But we were always considered one comprehensive civilization. That is the basic fact, supported by piles and piles of historical evidence.

The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.
 
.
The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.

Hundred and ten percent right :) Our Culture and Civilization is a mix of different influences that makes it unique - even in ordinary Pakistani people's faces - you see the wide range of influences. I have traveled in india, the fact is - we are completely different people, culturally speaking.
 
.
The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.

Can you name some "ancient Pakistani" kingdoms for me? Some "ancient Pakistani" kings? Can you describe "ancient Pakistani" culture, and their customs? Their religions?


I have traveled in india, the fact is - we are completely different people, culturally speaking.

The language you speak is (Urdu, Punjabi) is the same that Indians speak.

The food you eat is 95% the same as Indian food.

Same with dress, music, etc.

Don't try to pretend like you are some aliens from Mars.
 
.
Can you name some "ancient Pakistani" kingdoms for me? Some "ancient Pakistani" kings? Can you describe "ancient Pakistani" culture, and their customs? Their religions?

Here I will help you..

pashupati_protoshiva.jpg


Elephanta3-headed-shiva.jpg


Sanatan_Shiva.jpg


Sindoor.jpg


Sindoor.gif


Namaste.jpg


ModernNamaste.jpg
 
.
Linga.jpg


lingam.jpg


ModernLingam.jpg


Mohdaro-dancing.jpg


stock-photo-portrait-of-a-young-indian-girl-wearing-traditional-indian-dress-sari-not-exactly-plain-34611988.jpg


PriestKing1.jpg


india-2006.1146718380.img_4240.jpg


Brahman. They probably thought it was a Brahman, and called him "Priest-King" with out knowing who he was.
 
. .
i have read many times on this forum that pakistanis look different then indians,the are fairer then indians,some say that the hindu brahmins are aryans and the much darker dalits are dravidians which were the original in habitants of this region so if you think logically you dont satisfy the criteria to say that you are the descendents of IVC since the dalits are the descendents and the are dark skinned not fair
dont know if the above is termed as racist but thats the most directly i could explain,sorry
you people can claim the geographical history ie- the cities,monuments like we claim taj mahal,etc but you cannot exclusively claim the cultural history
 
.
i have read many times on this forum that pakistanis look different then indians,the are fairer then indians,some say that the hindu brahmins are aryans and the much darker dalits are dravidians which were the original in habitants of this region so if you think logically you dont satisfy the criteria to say that you are the descendents of IVC since the dalits are the descendents and the are dark skinned not fair
dont know if the above is termed as racist but thats the most directly i could explain,sorry
you people can claim the geographical history ie- the cities,monuments like we claim taj mahal,etc but you cannot exclusively claim the cultural history

The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less).

And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...

Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.

Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.
 
.
The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less).

And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...

Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.

Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.

m8 i am using the pakistani logic to explain the situation as i have seen pakistani write what i have written on this forum and many other sites its nothing against any skin types,just want to know if pakistanis accept that are not
and the have shown pictures of pakistanis who are fair to show what they mean
 
.
You know what india is the fake country, this is what old Winston thinks about that mythical state

India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator.
Winston Churchill

I love it when you guys quote that colonial imperialist Winston Churchill. But again, if you guys like this quote, you sure are going to like the rest of his quotes.

Here are his views on Islam (these are not my views and, I feel Winston was a racist but some of you guys think other wise)


"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia
in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must
delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa,raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

-Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages
248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).
1 November 2005 - Australia

Do you agree with good ol' Winston now ?
 
.
It's not like you can change the reality.

You keep trying to twist facts like a typical insecure indian. Just be a man, and be straight foward.

Face it. india as a united country didn't exist untill 1947.

"india" itself is a name coined together by the British. British deprived the name "india" from the Indus river in Pakistan, and they applied it to describe the geographic location of south Asia.

Pakistanis in the future can always keep a dominance over you bhartis about this fact. The fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river. :pakistan:

Pecae bro. :)


man ... what bullshit you are talking about......did this was what taught to you in your school :lol:

if you school hasnt taught you history , go through this

HISTORY OF INDIA

History of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indus Valley CIvillization

Indus Valley Civilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And

pakistan was created on 14th aug 1947 , and india got independence from british on 15th aug 1947 .... so according to your logic India was carved out of Pakistan :woot:

learn some history .....

our history is same .... since pakistan was once part of Indian subcontinent ...... talking about King puru , who was hindu by religion ......was an Indian king with his capital in modern day lahore.........

so you see we have a same history , an both have equal share on him.............


next time have some history lessons learnt from your teacher .....or dont start your bullshit again that pakistan as a nation existed from thousands of years ago while india was formed in 1947.
 
.
Our land has been largely independent of bharat for millennia - are culture, language, architecture - our ethnicity are largely independent of india - we do not share anything - in fact - the only reason - British india led to two independent states was because of the major differences between us.

We do not look alike, 90% of the time - I can tell if one is Pakistani or indian by simply looking at them, that is not racist - I am not implying superiority - by that standard, but it is the simple truth.

The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan: Amazon.co.uk: Aitzaz Ahsan: Books

Drawing on primary sources, especially literature, this work endeavours to establish the separateness of Indus from India. Discarding accepted myths of Indian history, it presents a history of the political culture of the Indus region (now Pakistan) from ancient times to the modern age. It is aimed at historians and scholars as well as general readers interested in the history of the subcontinent.

This is essential reading for all Pakistani's and indian's.
 
.
Our land has been largely independent of bharat for millennia - are culture, language, architecture - our ethnicity are largely independent of india - we do not share anything - in fact - the only reason - British india led to two independent states was because of the major differences between us.

We do not look alike, 90% of the time - I can tell if one is Pakistani or indian by simply looking at them, that is not racist - I am not implying superiority - by that standard, but it is the simple truth.

The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan: Amazon.co.uk: Aitzaz Ahsan: Books

Drawing on primary sources, especially literature, this work endeavours to establish the separateness of Indus from India. Discarding accepted myths of Indian history, it presents a history of the political culture of the Indus region (now Pakistan) from ancient times to the modern age. It is aimed at historians and scholars as well as general readers interested in the history of the subcontinent.

This is essential reading for all Pakistani's and indian's.

you didnt recognise kasav :eek:
and please tell me what kingdoms was there after IVC and their geographical area,i have also read that there are IVC sites in gujarat,rajasthan,haryana and punjab so why didnt the british give you that and did you forget east pakistan( now bangladesh) was also pakistan but no IVC so why was it given,please educate me a lowley hindu with your superior intellect
 
.
The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less).

And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...

Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.

Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.

You clearly do care about skin color because your talking about it here. saying "skin color doesnt matter, most Pakistanis and indians have more or less the same skintone". If you didnt care, then you wouldnt speak about it? Especially not in such a hypocritcal style.

Stop playing victim, and dont expect Pakistanis to be sympathetic towards you about this. Your being a complete hypocrite.

Yeah, alot of Pakistanis are racist about skin color. We have never denied this.

indians are even more racist than us. Look at the fairness creams buisness in india compared to Pakistan.

Look at north indians racism towards you south indians. Many north indians dont even consider themselves to be the same race as south indians. Many of them totally look down on south indians. And even with in south india, there is racism towards tamils because they have the darkest skintone.

Stop wasting Pakistani's time on here. A Punjabi (or pashtun, or balcohis, or sindhi) will rarely accept a south indian like you, is the same as us. Your making your own south indian people feel embarrassed, and defaming them along with yourself.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom