(c) 2010 by S.H. Pearson

26 November 2008 is when it started — my awareness of Pakistan. I was on the last leg of my last semester. Seeing the home-stretch and a possible graduation day. My head was down, plowing the last jagged mile.

Then the “news” hit about the Taj Mumbai and how Indians were gunned down in the streets. India and the Jewish news media were quick to point at Pakistan and yell, “terrorist.”

It seemed formulaic to me by then, their point and yell routine. I saw the same one played out on 11 September 2001. Suddenly every Muslim I saw took on a new status. One minute I was having a pleasant chat with an Egyptian Arab and the next, she wore a stigma. We sat next to each other as the news of 9/11 was announced. Immediately I saw her as a potential terrorist and religious fanatic. The power of Jewish television yet again — spreading its manure and doing its dirt. This time they were out to assassinate the character of an entire Faith.

As I was inundated with scenes from India in November 2008, I began to question the news. The killers could have been any South Asian men. It occurred to me that when you cross the border from India into Pakistan, there is no change in how people look. That is because Pakistanis are of the same breed as Indians, the Indo-Aryan race.

The Muslim Faith of Pakistan is the reason there is a Pakistan. In 1947 there was a massacre of Muslims by Hindus. After the bloodbath, it was deemed that a separate region should be allotted to Indian Muslims. Since then there has been nothing but bad blood between India and Pakistan. According to Zaid Hamid, “Pakistan and India were separated on the basis of religion. Pakistan is an ideological Islamic State just as Israel is an ideological Jewish, though illegal State, and India is an ideological Hindu Zionist State. Both India and Israel are natural allies against a State which is not just Islamic but also nuclear armed.”

Given this history, consider the following: India is a 3rd-world country known for its corruption. They test-drove socialism after the partition of Pakistan much to their disappointment. Now they are tucked in bed with Israel like much the rest of the money-loving world, doing the high-step in meeting Zionist agenda.

Part of this agenda, apparently, was to frame Pakistan for acts of terrorism in 2008. As my investigative mind ran its course on the Mumbai killings, I began to publish related questions in my university blog. Part of our grade in Online Journalism was making blog entries about current events.

My initial questions were about forensic evidence. Every dead body has a story to tell, despite the old adage that “dead men tell no tales.” This is borne out by how hard it is to get five minutes of a coroner’s time. From journalists like me they bolt for the hills. I noticed how quickly the killers were killed-off after their killing spree. It was as if they didn’t want those guys talking to anybody. As if what the killers knew was nothing unknown to those who did the clean-up job. Why else kill them off so fast? There are murderers sitting in “protective custody” to this day awaiting some kind of legal procedure. You would think that in a case of international terrorism, the “authorities” would have questions for the killers.

Give me a corpse and I can tell you volumes. Levantine Semites are of a distinct breed. Their eyes, lips, facial bones, lashes and nasal cartilage cannot masquerade as something else, any more than an Eastern European Ashkenazi Khazar can masquerade as a Semitic anything. So too, in a pure-bred race such as South Asia’s, an anatomist can discern the facial signature of an Indo-Aryan. None of this information was reported about the Mumbai killers. Why not?

In the case of our dead Mumbai shooters, medical examiners gleaned enough to seal the case. But we never heard a peep from the media. Why not?

Not long after the Mumbai media circus, I came across a series of English-language videos featuring Pakistan’s Zaid Hamid. In them he presented his thorough investigative report on the acts of terrorism that India attributed to Pakistan. I watched all the videos and read his report. Everything he said and wrote supported my earlier thoughts on the matter. What Hamid substantiated answered many of my questions. A photograph exposed one of the killers as a Hindu male by a thread bracelet he wore that is intrinsic to Hindu tradition. Call that “photographic evidence” if you will.

The most stunning detail of Hamid’s delivery was how it came at a confident gallop. If a man is not telling the truth, there is no such flow to his discourse. He will pause to think, fabricate, hesitate, and sometimes even stammer.

Truth is always in long-term memory while falsehood is not. Truth is never something one has to remember because it resides in random access memory. This is why they cross-examine witnesses in court rooms. Sooner or later, a liar will forget his previous lie. Hence the slips about the 9/11 story from government officials.

I believe that Hamid is correct in his deductions–That India employed (like my government did in 9/11) an act of “home-made terrorism.” I believe that India sacrificed its own people to perpetrate an act of false-flag warfare to frame Pakistan as a terrorist State.

This of course is supported by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) who have vested interests in disarming Pakistan as a nuclear power. This is because Pakistan makes Israel nervous and NATO genuflects to Israel.

I believe what happened in Mumbai on 26 November 2008 was an attempt to create pretext. If India had any evidence to prove their cry of Pakistani terrorism, it would have been put on the table by now.

For example, the student who allegedly killed his university fellows at Virginia Tech and the grainy video-tape of Daniel Pearl’s beheading was submitted to the public mind as truth. However, until we see forensic evidence proving who did what to whom and when, what do we really have? The word of the media? How good is that? These are the same people who wrote that a German guy killed the Lindbergh baby and Osama bin Laden master-minded 9/11.

I was a college student during the Virginia Tech Massacre and noticed right after the killings how my university installed video cameras everywhere. All the classroom doors had automatic locking devices put on them as well. Were those more staged killings to serve as pretext for other agendas? How can you disprove it? Any forensics on that Cho kid? If you are waiting for them to show up in the news, I wager you’ll have a long wait.

What the Mumbai Massacre of 2008 shares with the Nazi Holocaust is how both accusers are screaming bloody murder, yet have no evidence. If they had any evidence to prove their story, it would be flapping in the breeze from every flagpole by now and with all eyes fixated on it.

© 2010 SH Pearson

  1. #1 by Qadir on 11/22/2010 - 9:34

    Thanks for the great info. Zaid Hamid is brave Pakistani and patriotic person full of love and passion for Islam & Pakistan. He will be our leader and we will make Pakistan greater very soon.!!

  2. #2 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    “India is an ideological Hindu Zionist State. Both India and Israel are natural allies against a State which is not just Islamic but also nuclear armed.”



  3. #3 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    “A photograph exposed one of the killers as a Hindu male by a thread bracelet he wore that is intrinsic to Hindu tradition.”

    At the very moment the Mumbai attacks were announced, I ACCUSED MOSSAD AND THE HINDU ZIONIST STATE!

    As soon as the photograph of that Hindu suspect was published, my younger brother RAFIC SOORMALLY wrote that HINDUS DID IT!

    We both linked MOSSAD, CHABAD LUBAVITCH AND THE FASCIST HINDU STATE TO THE ATTACKS! In time, this TRUTH will be fully uncovered.

    The Hindus repeated the same mistakes as the Yankees did on 9/11! The British made the same mistakes on the MOSSAD-MI5-MI6 London attcalks on 7/7/2005!


    Because all three false flag scripts were written by one and the same blooming idiot! The similarities are striking!


  4. #4 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    PLEASE, NOTE THAT “PAKISTAN” IS A RACIST NAME! It means LAND OF THE PURE copied (stolen) from the Sikhs who wanted to call the racist independent state they dreamnt of as KHALISTAN, that is the Land of the Pure Sikhs!

    Arab and Persian speaking people can confirm the meaning in both languages. To me it seems that PAAK is Persian for pure and KHALSA is Arabic for pure!

    If I were to rule “Pakistan”, my first achievement would be to change that racist name! They should have kept the name HINDUSTAN instead and established an Islamic Khilaafah, but NO, they were still ruled by Britain after independence!!


  5. #5 by Rizwan Shaikh on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    Dear Sir

    1st I clear my point about the name of Pakistan

    Its the combination of two Persian words “Pak” (mean Holy / Clean) and “Istan” mean City.

    in arabic Pak mean “Tayyab” n “Istan” mean “Madina”.

    you can say the Arabic name Madina-e-Tayabah in Persian called Pakistan.

    Hope understand

  6. #6 by fasi on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    zaid hamid is a great patriot……….we stand with with zaid hamid in a “war against zionism”

  7. #7 by fasi on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    @ B.A.Frémaux-Soormally…..word pakistan is amalgamation of two arabic words “pak” which means ‘pure’ and “istan” meaning ‘a place to live’

    and for your information in arabic folks “istan” is the word used for holy city of medina……so meaning of pakistan is “madina tayyaba” or ‘holy medina’

    and the issue of “khalistan” which means ‘pure land’ is different…..

    its confirmed by arab folks who are actual protectors of arabic language and dont need any diction for them….

    so by no way is ‘pakistan’ a racist name …….if u support anti zionism movement u should use your energies and abilities in exposing their evils and spreading them

  8. #8 by Muhammad Aasim on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    Glad to See that some American is Interested to know the Truth which Usually Americans don’t know Just due to False Reports and Character Assasination of Pakistan by Indian and Western Media. . .

    One thing more U must made Research about Some Indian Organizations( RSS,SHIV SINA, BAJRANG DAL,and BJP etc) These are Purely Antipakistan. And There was a Attack on the Samjhota Express ( peace train service Between Pakistan and India) in india and Abt 61 Pakistanis were Killed. . .An Indian Army Lieutenant Colonel, Shrikant Parsad Purohit was Involved in it ( he was part of those Hindu Terrorist Organizations ). And Amazingly Himant Karkare, the Indian Police Officer who was Investigating against that Colonel is Killed on the First day of 26/11. . . .
    All People know that He was about to Reach on Truth that Those Hindu Terrorist Organization have Attacked that train. . . .but Indian killed thier own Officer Just to Hide the Truth. . .

    You Must also Search about the Antimuslim Gujrat Riots 2002, and Babri Mosque Assasination 1992. . .All these done by Hindu Terrorists..

  9. #9 by Pakistani on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    India launched Mukti bahni freedom movement in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) from 1965 to 1971. Pakistan DIDN’T and will never forget that. You must do some research on that as well.
    Zaid Hamid is a true voice of Pakis. I salut him.

  10. #10 by Tayyaba on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    @ B.A.Frémaux-Soormally, Pakistan does not mean “Land of the Pure” but “Pure Land”, and why on earth would keeping the name “Hindustan” which means “land for the hindus”, be a better option for the muslims who gave their lives and honor to have an ideological islamic state and which is the basic reason we call is “Pakistan”. And we will bring khilafat e rashida here inshallah, and we will make “United states of Islam”.

  11. #11 by avenzaor on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    fasi, BAFS, Rizwan, and Tayyaba:

    “Pak” is not an Arabic word and there is no letter “P” in Arabic. Arabs or persons whose adopted tongue is Arabic pronouunce Pakistan as ‘Bakistan’. “istan” does not mean city or medina, but the land, as in Afghanistan (land of Afghans) or Turkmenistan (land of Turkmens), Tajikistan (land of Tajiks), etc. The name of the country Pakistan did not originate from root word “Pak” meaning pure. Please go back to history written by Pakistani eminent scholars before 1965. This “pure” connotation began to be used since India-Pakistan war in 1965 and much more commonly so with the dismemberment of the Eastern wing of Pakistan as part of NWO, which is now known as Bangladesh. Historically, areas of what is now known as Pakistan (or West Pakistan between 1947 and 1971) were never referred to as Pak (pure). My impressions communicating with Pakistani Americans and Pakistanis in the last four decades indicates that Pak – Pure connotation is used to imply self confidence in faith and works as opposed to Hindus (Indians) who worship idols. Incidently, the Muslims of India are also looked upon by some zealous Pakistanis in the US with the same lebel as something less than pure as they or their families live among Hindus and supposedly practice some Hindu cultural practices.

    The name PAKISTAN was first suggested by Chowdhari Rahmat Ali in 1933 when the struggle for liberating India from the British rule had gained considerable momentum. At the time Muslims were 32% of India’s population (according to British census), but the British were promoting / grooming majority Hindus to take over India without any specific provision for Muslims from whom they had taken India in 1857 after at least 650 years of Muslim rule of India. For example, the Sind Province which was under continuous Muslim rule since 711 CE was absorbed into Bombay province by the British. This was done to convert a Muslim majority area into a Muslim minority area to nullify Muslims vote / voice in future decisions.

    Below is an expalnation of the origins of name definition of Pakistan, which is being quoted from the book ‘Muslims in the Indian Subcontinent’ by A. Zahoor, ISBN: ISBN 0-9702389-1-6, a Chronology covering the period 617-1960 CE.

    1933: PAKISTAN: The name Pakistan was suggested by Chawdhari Rahmat Ali and a group of Indian Muslim students at Emmanuel College, Cambridge University. The name was mnemonic formation from the names of northwestern predominantly Muslim states and regions: [P]unjab, [A]fghania (North-West Frontier), [K]ashmir, [S]ind, and Baluch[istan].

    Before suggesting this name, he noted, “I knew that their actions had obliterated the twelve centuries of our [Muslim] history, destroyed the very foundations of our heritage. Like millions of Muslims, I watched this development with poignant anxiety. I warned the Muslim delegates…[ here he is refering to the Round Table Conference held in London in 1930 and 1931 ] I begged them to realise their responsibility to Allah (swt) and his Rasool (saw)… to withdraw their demand for the Indian Federation and ask for a separate Islamic federation of our North Western homelands. But all without result. There was no realisation, no response. On the contrary there was every resolve to victimise anyone who might dare oppose them at their policies.” After the independence of these territories from the British rule, Ch. Rahmat Ali wanted to see this area integrated with the three Muslim ‘Asian’ homelands of Afghanistan, Iran and Tukharistan. Ch. Rahmat Ali wrote, “Unless and until we all in our ‘Indian’ and ‘Asian’ homelands, now separated by the twists and turns of history and exploited by our enemies, reintegrate ourselves into one nation under a new fraternal name, none of us whether living in the ‘Indian’ or in the ‘Asian’ homelands could survive or thrive in the world.”

    Pearson is incorrect in stating: “In 1947 there was a massacre of Muslims by Hindus. After the bloodbath, it was deemed that a separate region should be allotted to Indian Muslims.”

    The bloodbath of 1947 (in which millions were slaughtered) was as a result of the partition of India and creation of Pakistan in which a very large population of Muslims were leaving India and crossing over to West Pakistan via Punjab. This bloodbath was due to only to partition. The correct reason is that the communal (Hindu-Muslim) tension first began in Bombay in 1894. Then, in 1927 nationwide communal (Hindu-Muslim) riots happened, which were perpetrated by Hindu extemeists realizing that Caliphate was aboloshed by Turkish Mustafa Kamal in 1924 and that Muslims do not have any real power to protect them. Muslims of India (and I mean the area that is now in India) were the only proponent of restablishing Caliphate (Khilafah) out of all the world Muslims, and this had infuriated British and NWO crowd. Indian Muslims under the leadership of Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar had started a “khilafat Movement” in 1919 and Mahatma Gandhi gave support to it in 1920. But Gandhi’s support had double meaning because of the similarity of the pronunciation of words Khilaf (meaning opposition to British rule) and Khilafat. Gandhi, Hindu leadership, and Hindus used it to promote opposition of the British only. This same confusion and manuevering is involved in Pak – Pure connotations.

    Pearson identifies Zaid hamid as the lead figure in exposing the Mumbai 2008 carnage, but fails to mention that Hamid used the published report of several independent Indian journalist (alternative media) to come up with his analyses. Indian journalists had already written very clearly about those involved, potential scenerios, and suspected culprits. The difference is that Pakistan media was able to capitalize on it, while the mainstream Indian media was somewhat reluctant in publishing all the details about it immediately. There is a very good investigative book out about Hemant karkare and Mumbai 2008 by an Indian journalist (a non-Muslim), and it was published at least a year ago.

  12. #12 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/23/2010 - 9:34

    Tayyaba says:
    November 23, 2010 at 1:03 pm

    @ B.A.Frémaux-Soormally, Pakistan does not mean “Land of the Pure” but “Pure Land”

    I apologise for this confusion.

    I did not make this up; I read it many times.

    I accept the translation you gave here as I do not really know Arabic or Persian, and assume that YOU know. But, why did you not quote the definitions of the Arabic to English dictionary and of the Persian to English dictionary?

    So, let us recapitulate.

    PAAK (not PAK!) = PURE, HOLY, CLEAN…

    Many Muslim countries (not cities) are named with the ending ISTAN or STAN: Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Tadjikistan, Hindustan, etc. So, I understood it meant country and not city, which in Arabic is

    But, what about KHALISTAAN?

    According to my research KHALSA was a word meaning PURE and the Sikhs were said to have borrowed it from Arab Muslim Traditions called Ahadiith (Sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him). Sikhs wanted a PURE LAND (COUNTRY, not CITY) FOR THE SIKHS ALONE! But, I may be wrong!

    This would mean a land CLEANSED from all non Sikh people! So, I understood that “PAAKISTAAN” meant the same, but it doesn’t.

    But, according to you, what is meant by a PURE LAND FOR THE MUSLIMS?

    PAAKISTAAN (written PAKISTAN) is not the creation of Muslims, but of the British. What is there so “pure” in that land to deserve the name of PAKISTAN?

    Do they not have prostitutes, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, or practice usury in “Pakistan”? Do they not lie, steal, murder or sin in that land?

    Unless, you prove me the contrary, to me the word “PAKISTAN” is improper for any country, and certainly not for a Muslim country!

    Before, Muslims not only lived in HINDUSTAN but ruled the country for about ONE THOUSAND YEARS and which was united in HINDUSTAN by the Mughals, and they were all HINDUSTANIS, HINDUS, HINDIS…which meant inhabitants of the HIND (INDUS) VALLEY, regions but not any religious people. Because Dravidians, Aryans (Vedantists) and others did not have a name for their religion, the British called all those religions by the term HINDUISM, which is not a religion, but a bundle of difficult to classify or identify non Christian, non Buddhist and non Islamic religions.

    My ancestors were from Hindustan before the British created PAKISTAN, a name proposed by some Muslim students (I understand) and accepted by Muslim leaders, including poet and thinker Alama Iqbal. So, my ancestors were Muslim Hindustanis, or Muslim Hindus or Muslim Hindis.

    “fasi” says:

    “madina tayyaba” or ‘holy medina’

    MADINA (Medina) means City.

    The Holy = Al Quds = The Holy City of Jerusalem (Aisha Bewley)

    Tayyiba = “the good” another name for MADINA (according to the “Glossary of Islamic Terms” by Aisha Bewley, Ta-Ha Publishers 1998.

    Tayyaba says:
    …”the muslims who gave their lives and honor to have an ideological islamic state and which is the basic reason we call is “Pakistan”. And we will bring khilafat e rashida here inshallah, and we will make “United states of Islam”.”

    The Muslims did not give their lives and honor! They simply WASTED their lives, and they had no HONOR! They were decadent, had alomost abandoned their religion, and allowed Satan to conquer their lands!

    In “PAKISTAN” They did not create an “ideological Islamic State”, but a CLIENT-STATE for Britain, and were still the slaves of the Britsih after their bogus independence?

    What is the currency of “Pakistan”?

    Do they rule according to Shari’a?

    Why are they SO BACKWARD?

    Why do they flood their country with Bollywood and Hollywood pornographic or erotic anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic films?

    Why did they not establish a Khilaafah right from the very beginning? Because the British had abolished it in the Ottoman Empire and was still dictating their orders to the Muslims everywhere!

    You must be very young and ignorant to believe that Muslims can create a “United states of Islam” in the actual world situation.

    First get rid of your dictators like Bushsharraf or whatever and KICK ALL AMERICAN AND BRITISH BUTCHERS FROM YOUR LAND!

    “PAKISTAN” is in reality not a PURE LAND, but like any other land on earth! I will even call it NAPAAK, meaning IMPURE because of the many sins of its inhabitants!

    If Muslims wish to respond to my comment, please, BE VERY CAREFUL, because I normally do not joke where Islam is concerned!


    Basheer Ahmad

  13. #13 by Malikgenius on 11/24/2010 - 9:34

    B.A.Frémaux-Soormally :::: is anything wrong with you , when we say that translate it from Persion and you will get the meaning of Pakistan … and another thing what is thia PAAK ????? hahahah are ok ??? if you just type any other language name into english you can do how you want for example ::::: Pak or PAAK but the meaning is same ……….. get some life and come to to point … we believe what is right and our Country name means Pak Land so take your shop out from here and sell this nonsense ideology somewhere else .. we love Pakistan …….. Pakistan Aik Ishq Aik Junoon…………. now translate this as well and come back with new freaking meanings lolzzzzzzzzz.

    if you wanna debate means our Leader Syed Zaid Zaman Hamid …………….. he will fully satisfy you and you wont debate anything again with anybody lolz.

  14. #14 by Pakistani on 11/24/2010 - 9:34

    Basheer Ahmed:
    No one is joking here so don’t try to be smart.
    It seems you are STUCK with the gramatical meaning and Alphabets of PAKISTAN.
    Yes indeed it is not as pure as your grammer says and yes there are killings and all other sins are present in Pakistan. ONE thing that people like you “confused muslims” don’t see in Pakistan is that large majority of the Pakistanis condem this unlawful activities and especially the things that are against Islamic Idiology.
    By the way majority don’t like bushsharraf and US presence in Pakistan. Soon inshallah you will find them out of this land.

  15. #15 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/24/2010 - 9:34

    avenzaor says:
    November 23, 2010 at 7:50 pm

    fasi, BAFS, Rizwan, and Tayyaba:

    “Pak” is not an Arabic word and there is no letter “P” in Arabic.

    Thanks, LOVE, but I knew that already. I WAS JUST TESTING THOSE FOOLS!

    I wrote a whole chapter on the History of Hindustan in my unpublished book and I know about the facts you have mentioned and they are all CORRECT! I also quoted A. Zahoor in my book.

    M.K. Gandhi “the half-naked Fakir” was full of good intentions, but a fool, a pervert, an incompetent, a bad father and a bad husband who used to sleep with his nieces and other young women naked in bed, a very bad politician and only a stooge of the British. But, I cannot write this in my “homeland” a British neo-colony, the Hindu fanatics will hang me!

    Did you know that I spent more than half my life looking for what I regard as a proper ARABIC (classical) and URDU dictionaries. I found none. I asked Arab speaking and Urdu-speaking people hundreds of times but to no avail! I have a few of them but they are not very helpful as I do not read Arabic. Ferozson’s Urdu Dictionary is of some help though, but I have not sen any better for decades. However, I did find a Chambers HINDI to ENGLISH dictionary, a proper one! “Hindus” are a lot smarter than Indian Bollywoodised Muslims!

    This is one of the many symptoms proving the decadence of Muslims in what used to be Hindustan.

    I did not have time to elaborate on the comments or correct the mistakes of the above named. This is why I wanted them to use the dictionary’s definitions (as I did not agree with the definitions they gave). I was too busy with other priorities, but I WANTED THEM TO RESPOND, and you spoiled my pleasure!

    Well, you can take over from me as I am really very very busy!

    In Arabic, they say BARIZ instead of Paris, and they do not have the sound G as in GARDEN, so they say JANNAH, JARDIN in French, and so on! But, I am sure you know all that!

    Thanks anyway.


  16. #16 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/24/2010 - 9:34

    Pakistani says:
    November 24, 2010 at 6:37 am

    “Basheer Ahmed:
    No one is joking here so don’t try to be smart.”

    First: my name is Ahmad, not Ahmed!

    Second: I cannot help being smart, and I like it!

    Third: Clowns never made me laugh!

    Fourth: Whoever said that PAK is the Arabic for PURE should apologise.

    avenzaor says:
    November 23, 2010 at 7:50 pm

    fasi, BAFS, Rizwan, and Tayyaba:

    “Pak” is not an Arabic word and there is no letter “P” in Arabic.

    And “avenzaor” is right! Say thank you to him!

    “By the way majority don’t like bushsharraf and US presence in Pakistan. Soon inshallah you will find them out of this land.” Pakistani

    Fifth: Please, stop dreaming!

    Pakistanis are the traitors who help the Yankees mass murder Afghanis, just like the Iraqi traitors who helped the same Yankees to mass murder both Irani and Iraqi people!

    “Soon inshallah you will find them out of this land.” Pakistani

    Sixth: YOU, Pakistani, you do not even have a proper name! ALLAH will not kick the Yankees out of Pakistan. HE GAVE THAT JOB TO YOU!

    Be a good boy (I assume you are a boy!)!


  17. #17 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/24/2010 - 9:34

    Malikgenius says:
    November 24, 2010 at 4:53 am

    “B.A.Frémaux-Soormally :::: is anything wrong with you , when we say that translate it from Persian and you will get the meaning of Pakistan … and another thing what is thia PAAK ?????”

    YES, my dear, there is something wrong WITH YOU!

    What is this PAAK? Well, if you knew URDU well (and not only Punjabi!), you would have known that we must write phonetically PAAK not PAK like in the Hindi words LAPAK JAPAK!

    Please, you should also apologise on behalf of your countrymen who said PAK was Arabic!

    You may love Pakistan, but I do not have any love for Pakistan at all! On the contrary, I even hate that name because it is RACIST according to me! A better name would be NAPAAKISTAN! The impure land!

    Absorbed in your own EGO, you have not even noticed that I gave you an electro-choc treatment just to TEST how good you are!

    We need STRONG and KNOWLEDGEABLE Muslims, not the contrary! If you are still young, then GROW up, educate yourselves and listen to your elders, not the rotten ones!

    We need REAL MEN in the Muslim Army! Welcome to the real world!


  18. #18 by kenken on 11/25/2010 - 9:34

    B.A.F-Soormally Says: ” Well, you can take over from me as I am really very very busy!”
    Busy with what, Mr.Soormally? If you do not know Arabic, as you stated,(I do not really know Arabic or Persian), then how you say that you spent more than half of your life looking for what you regard as a proper ARABIC (classical) dictionary, but you found none!? how do you know classic from non-classic if you do not know Arabic?
    If you ask any person who read the Ugly Truth; ‘Who is the least busy person on this site?’ they will tell you: B.A.F-Soormally! . Please take innocent criticism with open heart, not with insult to others! BTW, stop calling yourself a Muslim, even hypocrites like myself do not like hypocrisy. ‘My point of view is right, my opponent’s is wrong with the possibility of being right’, that is the least a muslim can say instead of negative answer.
    Paak, Pakistan, Pakostony!…What is in a name? What is so important about a name? Is that what really keeps you busy! Get busy to fine way to publish your ‘unplished book’.

  19. #19 by Pakistani -Proud to be Pakistani on 11/25/2010 - 9:34

    Buss yehi pehchan thi meri har pehchan say pehlay bhi
    Pakistan ka shehri tha mien Pakistan say pehlay bhi

    Bashir Ahmad
    you are still STUCK on the name of my country. the day is not very far when a confused muslim like you will see a change in Pakistan and will bring peace and justice in the society according to the islamic idiology. You are worn if you think Americans will not leave Pakistan. Can’t you see in Afganistan Americans and NATO have lost the war.

    During the last phase of war they hire people like you “confused muslim” to create DESPONDENCY.
    Majority in Pakistan has firm believe that thing will improve soon and the change is about to come.

  20. #20 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/26/2010 - 9:34

    kenken says:
    November 25, 2010 at 2:55 am


  21. #21 by Muhammad Aasim on 11/26/2010 - 9:34

    @ BAFS. . .
    Firstly u started the Conversation over the Name. . .

    Let me Clear,
    You mean to say that Pakistan and Khalistan is same in meaning. . .

    Now there is a Country Named Pakistan. . .when I Searched on Globe, i don’t find any Country or Even a village Named “Khalistan”. A thing which is n0t exists. . .u are comparing it with Worlds 7th Nuclear Power. . . . ? ? ?

    May be Sikhs are trying to make Khalistan but Still there is n0t existance of even a small piece of land with that name. . .
    Quaid E Azam said ” Pakistan was Came into Being when 1st Non-Muslim Accepted Islam in the Sub-continent” so u Can Imagine how Old is Pakistan M0vement. . .what abt “Sikhs”. . .

    After Independence of Pakistan. . .the sikhs thinked that Muslims have got a separate country on the Basis of Religion then why we can’t. . .then may be they started m0vement for Khalistan but after 1984, Operation on sikhs by Indian Military, their M0vement Died. . . .

    I Admitt, there shoud b Khilafat system instead of dem0cracy. . .i also admitt we are involved in a lot of bad things. . .but I am Being a Pakistani Proud of it. . .buddy u will n0t find Night Clubs Comm0n in Pakistan ( there may exists but they are Hidden or Underground ) I m proud that I have never seen a single Pakistani Porn Site. . .

    There are lot of bad things, I believe on Eradicating them. . . . I believe to Make those “Impures” to “Pure” rather then changing name of Country. . .

    Well BASF I want some of ur information, if u would like to share with me. . .
    Where were u born ?
    Where u live n0w?
    Ur nationality ?
    Age and Occupation. . ?

    ~Proud to Be a Pakistani~

  22. #22 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 11/26/2010 - 9:34

    Muhammad Aasim says:
    November 26, 2010 at 10:37 am

    @ BAFS. . .
    Firstly u started the Conversation over the Name. . .

    “Let me Clear,
    You mean to say that Pakistan and Khalistan is same in meaning. . .”


    For the readers, I would like to repeat that several hundred years ago the Sikhs (Sikhism is an “offshoot of Islam” according to one issue of the Encyclopaedia Britannica) dreamt of and wanted a country of their own CLEANSED OF ALL ITS NON SIKH ELEMENTS (just like the Jews are trying to do in Occupied Palestine, to cleanse it of all its Arab and Muslim/Christian elements!) and wanted to call it KHALISTAN. Anybody versed in classical Arabic or the Ahadiith must be able to confirm whether KHALSA comes from an Arabic term meaning PURE or not! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!

    Muslims who surrendered to the Jewish British DIVIDE AND RULE Satanic policy were not intelligent enough to give their “new” country a proper name, and decided to MONKEY the Sikhs and call the bit of mountainous land the British allowed them to have from their motherland HINDUSTAN, PAAK (or PAK as I believe it is incorrectly written phonetically) which in Persian, NOT ARABIC, means PURE!

    I already gave my reasons for this position. Anybody concerned is welcomed to PROVE ME WRONG and not ask me like a blooming IDIOT

    “Where were u born ?
    Where u live n0w?
    Ur nationality ?
    Age and Occupation. . ?”

    OR how many women I slept with or raped, or how many people did I swindled…?

    “~Proud to Be a Pakistani~”

    Another idiot who is PROUD to be a Pakistani!

    I said Pakistanis are not very smart and they they still don’t get it that PRIDE IS A SIN, and there is nothing to be proud of being a PAKISTANI which looks more to me as a NAPAAK (NON PURE) people rather than a PAAK (PURE) one!

    The BLACKS love calling Britain BLACK BRITAIN, but they would call us racists if we ever use the term WHITE BRITAIN!

    I give you a chance to look at yourselves in a mirror and ask yourselves in all HONESTY: Can I justify the name PAKISTAN as a PURE COUNTRY or as THE LAND OF THE PURE? If, yes, then you are just bloody RACISTS! Or, just prove me wrong if you can instead of asking silly questions!


  23. #23 by Muhammad Aasim on 11/30/2010 - 9:34

    @ Bafs,
    when One Persons wants to be a Muslim, he Recites “kalima e Tayyabah” with True Heart and became a Muslim. And becomes Tayyab, Pak or U say Paak, In english we don’t have a very exact word for Tayyab/PAK/PAAK.
    But there is a word for Khalis/Khalsa, that is Pure. . .

    Meaning of Tayyab/PAK/PAAK Can Only understand by Muslims. . .there is a word “Clean” n0rmally used for the Meaning of Tayyab/pak/PAAK, But Infact it is also InAccurate. . .

    Once hands could be cleaned, but n0t necessary same hands are Pak/paak/tayyab.

    Befor going to a Mosque, one should n0t be even clean, they should b Cleast as well as Tayyab, Pak/paak.

    Now Made clear that Khalis/khalsa/pure are n0t very Similar in meaning to Tayyab/pak/paak.

    But some Idiots and bullshits don’t understand it.

    Now when Pakistan were suggested as Name, there were some great leaders Quaid e Azam, Allama Iqbal, and liaqat ali khan etc, what u think that they don’t had thinked over the Name. . .what u think they don’t had Know that there Will be some dogs in future who will bark over the Name.

    Absolutely they were aware of it and Chosen a Perfect Name.

    I asked abt ur info, i were just abt to know abt u but u don’t tell me. Ok no Matter,

    Now u tell me According to Ur thought who are Real “Pures”

  24. #24 by B.A.Frémaux-Soormally on 12/01/2010 - 9:34

    Muhammad Aasim says:
    November 30, 2010 at 11:11 am

    “But some Idiots and bullshits don’t understand it.”

    Were you looking at yourself in the mirror while writing this “Paki” stuff?

    “Quaid e Azam”? Was this guy a practising Muslim or a Muslim at all? Wasn’t the Foreign Minister (?) or Minister of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan not a Qadiani Muslim hater and a blasphemer?


  25. #25 by Muhammad Aasim on 12/03/2010 - 9:34

    @ BAFS,

    I already have said that I m a Pakistani and Em Proud of It,

    I don’t know to whome you are indicating as Qadiani.

    Now u have Left the Discussion of Pak and Pure.

    You can ask Question about Quaid e Azam,
    i) If You are a Muslim,
    ii) If you Pray 5 times A day,
    iii) If you Pay ZAKAT Annually. . .

    If Not then You don’t have to Right to ask Question about Quaid e Azam,First Buy a Mirror then Look Into it,

    All Muslim of this Country Praise Quaid e Azam. Not You. . .

    Don’t waste My and Your Time. . . .you want a discussion over the Name and I have Cleared it,

    and Plz Let me know so top Gud country names with thier meaning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: