The British Turn a Political Somersault: Facts are Facts The untold story of India’s Partition WALI KHAN

Download the book : https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aqzwpm0w5B9whgQ7ZaHU64jCsVoX

The British were seasoned players in political gamesmanship. They were determined to crush the freedom movements and stop at nothing to fulfill their imperialist policies. In his letter dated 4 December 1939 the Viceroy wrote to the Secretary of State for India:

"I am fully alive, as my letter to you about Jinnah's questions will have shown, to the objection to allowing the Muslim minority to turn itself into a majority with the right of veto and that does seem to appear to be a position that we can accept."

This letter is written to explain his stand on the Muslim League Working Committee's proposal that the British Government should give it assurances that "no declaration of constitutional accord for India should be made without the consent and approval of the All India Muslim League."To put it bluntly, the above statement is an open plea to turn the Muslim minority into a majority, and to accord it the power of veto. It is all too clear that the civilized, egalitarian British ruler did not give a damn for basic human rights, democracy or self-determination. He blatantly declared, "This does seem to appear to be a position that we can accept." Having closed his eyes and ears to facts, he promoted his own interests, using the Muslim League as their vehicle. The Viceroy suggested that the Muslim majority states should be separated from the North West.A dangerous situation will arise if the Islamic Nations, once again, turned towards Jamal-ud-Din Afghani's Pan Islamism. What if they joined hands with the Russians and presented a united opposition to the British Empire? All British-India policies, so far, had been directed against the Muslims. India had been seized from them. The Ottoman Empire had been fragmented. Therefore, the Secretary of State's fear of retaliation by the Muslims was justifiable. Central intelligence was asked to prepare a comprehensive report on the above subject. This report was then submitted to the Secretary of State for India:

Having held detailed discussions with different Muslim groups such as the League, Wahabis, Khaksars, and other groups with special interest in Afghanistan and tribal areas, I have concluded that the differences between Hindus and Muslims have reached a point at which there is only one solution: partition. Thus, shortly, a nation of Muslim India must be established.

On the question of the Muslims creating a defensive position with the help of Russia; the report says:

Such aid is out of the question. If once Bolshevik aid is accepted, Islamic principles will be submerged. And if an opportunity is given to Russian influence to be felt South of the axis, all Muslim nations will degenerate to the level of the Soviet Central Asiatic [Muslim] State.

This point is further clarified, "Muslims will not ask favor from the anti-God Bolshevik Russia.” On the subject of Pan-Islamism, the Viceroy stated: "In the Turkish Treaties are seen the barring of Bolshevism from the Islamic world, and a rapid development of the line up of Muslim nations against Soviet expansionist policy." While listing the advantages of his scheme the Viceroy frankly stated that the success of this scheme may result in Muslim forces uniting to form a solid front against the Russians. Pan-Islamism may become a steel grip around the Bolsheviks. The British were smart enough to befriend those Muslims who were likely to help them in implementing all these policies. These "devout Muslims" were prepared to utilize Islam in drumming up support for the British against the Congress. For the British it was smooth sailing, once they had established control over the League, the rest could be done by manipulation. The outstanding question was that of Russia. The intelligence report made it clear that the English proposed to use Islam against Russia. In India the Muslims were ruled by a Kafir race, the Christians. So to make a distinction between Kafir and Munafiq, they started calling the Russians anti-God. This was a clever use of semantics to create a Muslim aversion for Russia.

The Pakistan Scheme: 

Several times the Viceroy explained to Muslim leaders like Sir Sikandar Hayat and Maulvi Fazlul Haq that their demand that the control not be handed over to the Congress and no elections be held, was a very negative altitude. It was becoming increasingly difficult for the Viceroy or the Secretary of Stale for India to persuade the British Parliament that if Congress had won the elections why should it not form the Government? The Viceroy made an appeal that UK Muslim leaders adopt a positive and constructive attitude. He said that a civilized world would not accept the supremacy of the minority over the majority. It would not allow their constitutional, legal and democratic demands to be ignored. Sir Sikander Hayat agreed with this point of view. The Viceroy referred to it in a letter to the Secretary of State for India:

"He [Sikander Hayat] thoroughly understood the necessity and importance of getting onto a constructive line and having a scheme of his own on which to stand, before attempting any propaganda in England.... He would let me know confidentially how matters went in the meeting of the Muslim League Working Committee on 3 February."

After attending the meeting of the Muslim League Working Committee Sikander Hayat and Maulvi Fazlul Haq, together, went to meet the Viceroy. The Viceroy wrote that Sikander informed him:

That I should be interested to learn that the Working Committee of the Muslim League has now instructed a sub-committee to draft a constructive programme. I said I was delighted to hear it and that I should await its terms with the greatest interest.

Following the Working Committee meeting, Jinnah met the Viceroy on 6 February 1940. The Viceroy wrote, "After the usual compliments he [Jinnah] opened the proceedings by asking me what were we to do, assuming that we meant Muslim League."

This was a strange meeting! The Viceroy referred to the elected Governments established in various states. Jinnah suggested that he should dismiss the Congress in the manner similar to that adopted by Lord Willingdon. The Viceroy stated that the present situation was very different from what existed in the time of Willingdon. The Congress had been elected to form the Government in eight States. If they wanted they could completely cut themselves off from the Empire. Jinnah, however, insisted that unless the Congress was crushed he could trust neither the Empire nor its representatives.

One State Government of special interest to the British was the Frontier Province. At a previous meeting the Viceroy had told Jinnah that if he tried hard it would be possible to prevent the formation of a Congress Government in NWFP. Jinnah promised to consult his colleagues on this subject. Having done so, he informed the Viceroy that his colleagues were not confident of forming the Government.

Ironically, the greatest single impediment in the combined policy of the Muslim League and the British Government was the Frontier Province itself. First, it had the largest majority of Muslims, secondly, it had a strategic location relative to Russia. The fact that this province was governed by the Khudai Khidmatgars instead of the League went against the British external and internal policy. The Government of Khudai Khidmatgars could be used neither against the Congress nor for the British. Jinnah's attention was riveted upon this issue. To establish a non-Congress Government in NWFP would create the right impact on the rest of the world. Hence his insistence was that Cunningham should help in establishing the League. In previous elections not even one League candidate filed his nomination papers. As a result, the Assembly did not have a single member from the Muslim League. Jinnah realizing that the British were ready to patronize his party, went on to suggest to the Viceroy to dismiss the Allah Bakhsh Soomro’s Sind Ministry. The English wanted to make Muslims realize that to obtain British patronage, they should throw in their lot with the League. The Viceroy had no hesitation in propagating this attitude. On 21 April 1940 he wrote, assuring the Secretary of State for India, that he need have no fears. If a Congress confrontation occurred then:

All I can say is that if Congress are set on having a fight here, they are going to have a fight not only with us, but also with the Muslims. [I am glad Jinnah has made the statement].

To summarize, the British attitude was that if the Congress was out for a confrontation, 'we are not alone! We are wearing the colours of our beloved!' The Viceroy had strengthened his alliance with the Muslim League.At this time, the League was like a sandbag, which the British were using as a buffer. If the Congress took the offensive, the sandbag would take the brunt of it leaving the British unscathed. What better means of self-preservation could they have discovered? If the Muslim League was prepared to put the chain of slavery around India, what better token of friendship and love for the British regime could it offer?

BRITISH AND THE POLITICS OF COMMUNALISM: FACTS ARE FACTS The untold story of India’s Partition by WALI KHAN

Download the book : https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aqzwpm0w5B9whgQ7ZaHU64jCsVoX

At the start of the 20th century, the British had become a very strong force in the country. Afghanistan had fallen into their hands through the contrivance of Amir Abdur Rahman. All doors to the USSR had been closed. After the war of 1857, the Mughal Empire had been completely routed. No military force in the country was strong enough to combat the British. The Sikhs, too, had been put in their place. Six hundred Princely States were British protectorates; their potentates reported to the Viceroy. The British in India had become a super power.

The British were manipulative people experienced in ways of modern sabotage. They seriously set out to find the best means for establishing control over the numerous small kingdoms and millions of individuals. Although they had fought and won several battles, it was not possible to stand guard over each and every territory. Unity among Indians spelt disaster for the British, which they wanted to avoid at all costs. They knew that if the entire nation of Indians decided to stand up united and urinate, they would carry the British Empire in their flood! The British had successfully stripped the Muslims of all their illusions. They realized that although the Muslims had ruled the country for centuries they were numerically much fewer than the non-Muslims. Their first strategy was to ally themselves with the non-Muslims and take advantage of the rift between the two, but they soon realized the fallacy of this stand. They saw that the Hindus, although in far excess of the Muslims, were almost nonexistent in the neighbouring countries. In the entire neighbourhood, it was the Muslim rule that flourished; from North Africa to the Balkan States, and from Turkey to Afghanistan. And above all, the Kingdom of Osmania, which was the Turkish Empire and the citadel for Pan Islamism.

At the Battle of Plassey, in 1757, the British occupied Bengal, establishing their supremacy over the eastern region. With the defeat of Tipu Sultan, they became the power-brokers in the South. Central India was swallowed up following the war of 1857. Northern India had a little more strength, but that too was destroyed in 1831 when the martyrs of Balakot fell. Another stronghold of the Muslims, Afghanistan, fell in line after the agreement of 1893.

The British were now India's undisputed rulers. All internal and external dangers had been laid to rest. In 1907, an agreement signed with the U.S.S.R., declared a policy of mutual non-interference in Afghan affairs. Now the British were in a position to sit back and survey their conquered territory.

The Muslim leaders had learnt their lesson from 1857. They were anxious to unite with the Hindus and with other communities to present a unified front against British imperialism. For example, one of their most respected leaders, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, who is regarded as the father of communal harmony, said, on 27 January 1884, at a function held in Gurdaspur:

We [i.e. Hindus and Mohammadans] should try to become one heart and soul, and act in union. In old historical books and traditions you will have read and heard, we see it even now, that all the people inhabiting one country are designated by the term One Nation. The different tribes of Afghanistan are termed One Nation and so the miscellaneous hordes peopling Iran, distinguished by the term Persians, though abounding in variety of thoughts and religions, are still known as members of One Nation.... Remember that the words Hindu and Mohammadan are only means for religious distinction—otherwise all persons whether Hindus or Mohammadans, even the Christians who reside in the country, are all in this particular respect belonging to one and the same Nation.

I heartily wished to serve my country and my nation faithfully. In the word Nation I include both Hindus and Mohammadans, because that is the only meaning I can attach to it.... These are the different grounds upon which I call both those races which inhabit India by one word, i.e. Hindu, meaning to say that they are the inhabitants of Hindustan.

Sir Syed said that every inhabitant of India, no matter what his personal belief, can be called a Hindu by virtue of his belonging to Hindustan. The essence of his teaching was that Muslims had to unite with Hindus against the British. The Hindus being the favoured community were being provided employment and education. The Muslims, on the other hand, were being deliberately ignored. Therefore the only way out for them was to join forces with Hindus.

The British were becoming conscious of this merging trend. They realized that their position would be considerably weakened if the two communities got together and presented united opposition. To counter this the British decided to introduce reforms based on communalism. The first of these, the Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909, was related to elections to local and municipal committees. According to these, Muslim votes could be cast only for the Muslims and the Hindu votes for the Hindus. In this manner the British laid communalism as the foundation-stone of democracy. This was the first blow they inflicted upon Sir Syed's ideals. By proposing a communal rather than a national basis for politics, they forced the Hindus and Muslims into a position whereby if they wanted to enter municipal or community politics, their electioneering was limited to wooing their religious brethren, and fighting on religious rather than political issues.

The British were delighted with the success of this policy. In 1912, East and West Bengal were once again united as one province. The British realized that although the Hindus were in majority in India, their total population was concentrated only in this country; there were not too many of them anywhere else in the world. But the Muslims were spread all over from Afghanistan to Turkey, from the Balkan Provinces to Northern Africa. They became concerned about the strength of the Muslims, and the movement of Pan-Islamism. At the start of the First World War the British were bent upon wiping out the Ottoman Empire. How could they turn themselves round, and now side with the Muslims in India? Therefore, once again, they stopped their Muslim patronage.

During this time the second series of reforms were introduced, called the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms. These also used communalism as the basis for elections. During the First World War when the British attacked Turkey, the Indian Muslims united to oppose their move. What unnerved the British was Mahatma Gandhi and the Congress Party joining Maulana Mohamed Ali and Shaukat Ali in this movement. They realized that their two-nation theory was in danger.

The Khilafat Committee placed four proposals before the Muslims: (i) returning all official titles; (ii) resigning from the Government employment; (iii) resigning from the army and the police; and (iv) refusing to pay taxes.

To destroy the Hindu-Muslim unity the British relied upon their Muslim subjects. The Khilafat Movement was primarily a Muslim movement in which the Hindu participation was a matter of principle. The British encouraged the Muslims to break the unity fostered by Khilafat because they knew that this was the best manner of disillusioning the Hindus. The first anti-Khilafat announcement was made by the Nizam of Hyderabad on 22 May 1920. His "firman" stated that since the Khilafat was an anti-Muslim movement it was henceforth declared illegal. During the Khilafat Movement Gandhiji and the Ali Brothers had visited Aligarh Muslim University. To reduce the impact of their visit, the British incited the Muslims of Aligarh against the Hindus, on the pretext of protecting Muslim rights.

On the second of November 1921, Mohammad Shafi, a member of the Viceroy's Executive Council, presented a two-pronged scheme:

(i) To weaken the movement for a united India, it was essential to lure away the Muslims; this could only be done if the British signed the Peace Treaty with Turkey.

(ii) An Anglo-Mohammadan Union in the interest of the British Empire should be organized.

On 21 September 1922, Viceroy Lord Reading wrote to the Secretary of State for India:

I have just sent you a telegram, which will show you, how near we have been to a complete break between Muslims and Hindus. I have been giving the greatest attention to this possibility, and I have had the greatest assistance from Shafi on my council, who is a highly respectable Mohammadan.

The British had to adopt several underhand tactics to reach their goals. But reach they did. On 1 January 1925, the Viceroy announced to the Secretary of State, "The bridge Gandhiji had built to span the gulf between the Hindus and Mohammadans has not only broken down, but, I think, it has completely disappeared." It worried them somewhat to see the Muslims divided into many factions. All factions, however, were prepared to accept the leadership of the British, while none was prepared to accept the leadership of anyone of their own people. In the same letter, the Viceroy wrote that although the Muslims were united in their support of the British Government but, "there is no outstanding man to compose the differences and head them."

Efforts began to swing him towards segregated elections. On 20 May 1929, the Viceroy wrote:

I had a long talk with Jinnah a few days ago, which made it very clear to my mind that he and all the Bombay people, who are not disposed to Congress, are disposed to swing towards our direction if we can give them help later.

After the meeting with Jinnah, the Viceroy was convinced that Jinnah could be won over. Therefore, he turned his attention towards the Muslim League. On 21 March 1929 he predicted:

The two wings of the Muslim League are to meet in Delhi at the end of this month, with a rapprochement between Sir Mohammad Shafi and Jinnah. Jinnah may be expected to gain, before long, his former commanding influence in the Muslim League.

Such clairvoyance! Even before the meeting was held the Viceroy knew that the two parties would make peace and that Sir Mohammad Shafi would clear the way for Jinnah. The next step was to organize the party and to raise funds. On 26 November 1929, the Viceroy wrote:

I hear that suggestions are being put out that government should intervene in some way towards raising funds in order to organise proper Muslim representation, and, of course, we should like them to have the best advocacy they can find.

This was going according to British plan: first to unite the Muslims of India under a proper organisation, and secondly to tell the world that they were unable to relinquish power because of the hostility between the Hindus and the Muslims. During the First Round Table Conference the British took maximum advantage of the communal differences. The next step was to create the conditions which would turn the Muslims against the Congress.

Although Gandhiji was present at the Second Round Table Conference, the British continued their-power play. In this regard Sir Samuel Hoare, Secretary of State, wrote on 2 October 19-31, "The delegates are much further off with each other than they were last year and I don't believe that there is a least chance of a communal settlement in the minorities committees."

On the one hand the British wanted to use the Muslims against the Congress, on the other they wanted to use the Harijans to divide the Hindus further on the issue of caste. This was a sure way of reducing the Hindu strength. They were delighted that in addition to the Princely States, they had virtual control over Ambedkar, the leader of the Harijans. On 28 December 1932, the Viceroy wrote, "Ambedkar had behaved very well at the Round Table Conference, and I am most anxious to strengthen his hands in every reasonable way."

Gandhiji, however, spoiled their game. To protect the Harijan's rights and to accord them a dignified place in society, Gandhiji started a "fast unto death". Ambedkar was faced with a dilemma. If he sided with the British, he would be held responsible for Gandhiji's death. If, however, he made a settlement with Gandhiji, he would have to do without British patronage. At last Gandhiji's fast unto death proved successful. Under the pressure of country wide public opinion Ambedkar was forced to concede the Gandhian way which promised to restore the Harijans to their rightful place in society. The Poona Pact was signed between Gandhiji and the Harijans. This pact bore Ambedkar's signature. Having thus lost the Harijans, the only remaining hope for the British were the Muslims. Here another problem arose. When Lord Willingdon took the place of Lord Irwin as the Viceroy of India, Jinnah-departed for England, leaving India for ever! This sudden departure was due to certain differences between Jinnah and Willingdon when the latter was the Governor of Bombay. 

Meanwhile, the British were smug in the knowledge that, thanks to their efforts, no accord could be reached among the various communities. On 31 October 1932, the Viceroy wrote:

The Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims are to meet on 3 November at Allahabad to endeavour to arrive at an agreement which will do away with the communal accord. I am assured by those who know that no agreement will ever be reached.

From the time of Lord Irwin the British had known that if elections were fought on a communal basis it would blow the emotional lid. Among Muslims the stronger parties would be those which had a religious platform. This would also be incidentally advantageous for the British. First, the Muslim candidates with a religious platform would be pitted against the Congress candidates. Second, Islam would be used to turn the voters against the nationalistic Muslims. In this manner communal representation would take precedence over national representation. All hopes for future Hindu-Muslim unity would be dashed.

To fill this political vacuum, the Viceroy decided to create a Government party. On 24 September 1934, he wrote:

I have written to the Governors asking them to give a hint to the Ministers to help pro-Government candidates and also asked them, if opportunity offers, to see that good candidates are selected...we have to sit up here and say nothing except in private…on publicity we are doing the best we can.

.......Reviewing the outcome of the elections, the British had no alternative other than preparing a strong alternative to the Congress. Glancing in all directions the British found three powerful forces that could be pitted against the Congress Party. The most loyal of the three was the group consisting of rulers of the 600 odd Princely States. These States could neither hold elections nor establish a national and democratic government. The second group that could hurt the Congress was of the scheduled castes. The British raised the slogan that the Congress was an organization of Brahmins and high-class Hindus and that Harijans were a separate race. Churchill estimated their members to be four crores. The third group was of the Muslims who were estimated to be ten crores......

Gandhiji had solved the Harijan problem. His fast unto death left a deep impact. The Hindus told Ambedkar that if he was really interested in Harijans he should throw in his lot with Gandhiji. Ambedkar had no choice but to join hands with Gandhiji. Gandhiji broke his fast the very same day Ambedkar became his co-signatory on the Poona Pact. In this manner British lost their second means of support. Now their only hope was the Muslims.

After the departure of Lord Willingdon, Jinnah returned to India. The new Viceroy gave the following account of his meeting with Jinnah on 9 September 1937, "He took very strongly the view that we did not pay sufficient attention to the Muslims, that there was the real risk of the Muslims being driven into the arms of the Congress."

He further stated that Jinnah was suspicious about his meeting with Gandhiji, "He [Jinnah] suggested that the interview [with Gandhiji] was largely responsible for the lifting of the ban on Abdul Ghaffar Khan's return to the Frontier Provinces and the fall of the Abdul Qayum Ministry."

THE BISHNOIS

Bishnoi (also known as Vishnoi) is a religious group found in the Western Thar Desert and northern states of India. They follow a set of 29 principles given by Guru Jambheshwar. Jambheshwar, who lived in the 15th century, said that trees and wildlife should be protected, prophesying that harming the environment means harming oneself.

Bishnoism was founded by Guru Jambheshwar of Bikaner, who was born in 1499, and is buried in Talwa/Mukam in Bikaner. He announced a set of 29 tenets.The name Bishnoi was derived from "Vishnu". His spiritual name was Jambhaji.These were contained in a document written in the Nagri script called Shabdwani, which consists of 120 shabds. Of his 29 tenets, ten are directed towards personal hygiene and maintaining good basic health, seven for healthy social behaviour, and four tenets to the worship of God. Eight tenets have been prescribed to preserve bio-diversity and encourage good animal husbandry. These include a ban on killing animals and felling green trees, and providing protection to all life forms. The community is also directed to see that the firewood they use is devoid of small insects. Wearing blue clothes is prohibited because the dye for colouring them is obtained by cutting a large quantity of shrubs.

The Bishnoi narrate the story of Amrita Devi, a Bishnoi woman who, along with more than 363 other Bishnois, died saving the Khejarli trees. Nearly two centuries ago, Maharajah Abhay Singh of Jodhpur required wood for the construction of his new palace. So the king sent his soldiers to cut trees in the nearby region of Khejarli, where the village is filled with the large number of trees. But when Amrita Devi and local villagers came to know about it, they opposed the king's men. The feudal party told her that if she wanted the trees to be spared, she would have to give them money as a bribe. She refused to acknowledge this demand and told them that she would consider it as an act of insult to her religious faith and would rather give away her life to save the green trees. This is still remembered as the great Khejarli sacrifice. Some of the 363 Bishnois who were killed protecting the trees were buried in Khejerli village near Jodhpur, where a simple grave with four pillars had been erected. Every year, in September, the Bishnois assemble there to commemorate the extreme sacrifice made by their people to preserve their faith and religion.

The 29 tenets of Bishnoism state: 

Observe 30 days' state of ritual impurity after child's birth and keep mother and child away from household activities.

Observe 5 days' segregation while a woman is in her menses.

Take bath daily in the morning.

Obey the ideal rules of life: Modesty, Patience or satisfactions, cleanliness.

Pray two times everyday (morning and Evening).

Eulogise God, Vishnu, in evening hours (Aarti)

Perform Yajna (Havan) with the feelings of welfare devotion and love.

Use filtered water, milk and cleaned firewood.

Speak pure words in all sincerity.

Practice forgiveness from heart.

Be merciful by heart.

Don't steal or keep any intention to do it.

Do not condemn or criticize.

Don't lie.

Don't indulge in dispute/debate.

Fast on Amavashya.

Worship and recite Lord Vishnu in adoration

Have merciful on all living beings and love them.

Do not cut green trees, save the environment.

Crush lust, anger, greed and attachment.

Cook your food by yourself.

Provide shelters for abandoned animals to avoid them from being slaughtered in abattoirs.

Don't sterilise bull.

Don't conuse or trade opium.

Don't smoke or use tobacco or it's products .

Don't take bhang or hemp.

Don't drink alcohol/liquor.

Don't eat meat, always remain pure vegetarian.

Don't wear blue clothes.

Visualization of Quantum Physics (Quantum Mechanics)

DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF PAKISTAN: FACTS ARE FACTS The untold story of India’s Partition by WALI KHAN

 Download the book : https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aqzwpm0w5B9whgQ7ZaHU64jCsVoX
Chapter 3:
DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF PAKISTAN: 
The Governor of North West Frontier Province, Sir George Cunningham, wrote to the Viceroy that upon his return from the Muslim League Convention, Sardar Aurangzeb reported to him: “The scheme which they [Muslim League] were now contemplating would involve the creation of 6 or 7 Indian dominions—and that this novel scheme now holds the field in preference to the original Pakistan proposal.”... 
......These were different schemes. Chaudhry Rehmat Ali, a student of Cambridge, had an esoteric scheme for Pakistan. Sir Mohammad Iqbal proposed yet another format. What remained to be seen was what the British had up their sleeves?......
The British Concept of Pakistan:
The above schemes were being hatched by the Muslims. The final decision rested with the British. When the British saw that their objectives could not be met by the schemes presented by Sikander Hayat Khan or the Muslim League Working Committee, they unilaterally rejected all the proposals submitted by the Muslims. Chaudhry Zafarullah, a member of the Viceroy's Executive Council, was asked to submit a map of two dominions. On that subject, on 12 March 1940, Viceroy Lord Linlithgow wrote to the Secretary of Stale for India: "Upon my instruction Zafarullah wrote a memorandum on the subject. Two Dominion States. I have already sent it to your attention. I have also asked him for further clarification, which, he says, is forthcoming. He is anxious, however, that no one should find out that he has prepared this plan. He has, however, given me the right to do with it what I like, including sending a copy to you. Copies have been passed on to Jinnah, and, I think, to Sir Akbar Hydari. While he, Zafarullah, cannot admit its authorship, his document has been prepared for adoption by the Muslim League with a view to giving it the fullest publicity."The Viceroy explains this further. Since Zafarullah was a Qadiani he had to be cautious. The Muslims would become irritated if they found that this scheme was prepared by a Qadiani. The Viceroy said that Jinnah had been given a copy to make the Muslim League adopt it and publicise its contents. Sir Akbar was given a copy because he was responsible for fund raising.
The dates take on a special significance. The Viceroy' s letter to the Secretary of State was written on 12 April 1940.The Pakistan scheme had been dispatched earlier. Twelve days later the Muslim League adopted this very proposal at their Lahore Annual Meeting. It was called Pakistan Agreement.
Muslim League, A British Party:

When the Muslim League accepted the Viceroy's proposal [author, Sir Zafarullah], the British were convinced of their dependability. It was natural, then, for the British to refuse to recognize the existence of any party other than the Muslim League.......

........The British deliberately ignored those Muslims, who, along with the Congress, were struggling for freedom. Their very faith was called "questionable". More than 1000 representatives, who had gathered together under the leadership of an elected Chief Minister, were totally disregarded. The Viceroy did not mince his words when he wrote to the Secretary of State that "Jinnah is our man and we accept him as a representative of all Muslims."......

Jinnah and State Governments:
When the Congress resigned from eight provinces, pursuant to Section 93, the Governor's rule was established. Jinnah requested the Viceroy to appoint political, unofficial advisers in each one of these eight provinces. This meant that the Muslim League would assume an advisory role in each one of the provinces vacated by the Congress Government. According to Jinnah's proposal, "Hindu provinces" should also have been handed over to the Muslim League. Not only did the League have no official status in any of these provinces, it had never won a single election! Therefore, by making this demand, Jinnah finally incurred the displeasure of the British.
.......The British knew that behind the facade presented by Jinnah, the Muslim League was a shambles. On 28 August 1940, he wrote, "I hope that Sikander and Fazlul Haq will be able to bring pressure on Jinnah to make him toe the line; if he does not, I shall go without him."........The British were well aware that the Muslim Leaguer lacked any foundation; he leaned heavily upon English crutches. If those were pulled from under him, he would fall on his face. The British had no doubt that there would always be a sufficient number of sycophants among Muslims who they could count upon. When the word got around that the British were annoyed with Jinnah, every Muslim leader started offering his services. ..........The British were deliberately giving so much importance to Jinnah and the Muslim League because they were convinced that if ever there was any talk of a settlement between the Congress and the Muslim League, Jinnah having reached a point of no return, would never agree. He knew that the Muslim League drew its entire strength from British support. On their part, the British had agreed that either Jinnah would implement their policies or they would implement them on their own, without Jinnah.


During this time Jinnah made the following demand:
"The Muslim League should be taken into full and equal partnership with His Majesty's Government in the ruling of this country, and authority shared with them. "[Viceroy's letter, dated 5 September 1940]..........The British were indifferent to the condition of the Muslims, and skeptical about the viability of Pakistan. They were using the League as an anti-Congress missile, hoping, that in case of an open challenge, they would be able to fire it at the enemy.
...... The British wanted to parade Jinnah and the Muslim League before an international audience. An opportunity arose when on the invitation of the British, the Chinese President Chiang Kai-shek visited India. He expressed interest in meeting Gandhiji and Jawaharlal Nehru. The Viceroy wrote back saying that since he was not on speaking terms with these leaders it would be difficult to arrange a meeting. On 26 January 1942 he wrote to the Secretary of State for India, "I know you would at once take the point of his seeing Jinnah as well as the other two. I shall have to coax him to receive the Head of the Muslim League whether he feels inclined or not."....The only reason for strengthening the Muslim League was to make it a worthy opponent to the Congress. Ambedkar, too, supported the political split while the power remained in British hands.....“He [Ambedkar] was perfectly content himself, he said, with that state of things, and in favour of the Pakistan idea, because it meant that the British will have to stay in India.”The Secretary of State for India in his letter dated 24 March 1942, makes his position clear, "Jinnah, I shall have thought, will be content to realise that he has now got his Pakistan in essence, whether something substantive, or a bargaining point."
Having been thus assured that he would get his Pakistan, why would Jinnah bother reconciling with the Congress? The British had laid a couple of strict conditions. First, the Muslim League and the Congress had to affect a reconciliation agreement, and secondly, they had to protect the rights of the minorities. Since these conditions could never be fulfilled who was the loser? Jinnah would never get Pakistan and the Congress would lose their eight over provinces. The British had won hands down!...
.......It was an absurd situation. The British had accepted the principles of partition, but the Congress was violently opposed. And how could the Congress be overlooked? It were the Congress’ efforts which had shown up all the way, Congress movement, Congress protest, Congress sacrifice, Congress.....imprisonment, Congress abdication. The Congress did all the work and the Muslim League got all the plaudits! The Muslim League remained a party minus a movement, minus sacrifices, minus seats in the Elected Assemblies and minus any political power.....Blinded by their self-interest, the British lost all sense of principle or fair play. Despite the fact that the Muslim League was a political non-entity, the British regarded it the sole representative of all Muslims. Another fact worth noting is that out of a population of 40 crores, the Muslims constituted only 25 per cent......On what principle did the British agree to uphold the position of the minority over the majority? How could the British try to impose Jinnah upon the non-Muslim provinces? Would Jinnah have allowed the Congress the same right in the provinces which had a Muslim majority? The British had lost all sense of right or wrong. The truth was that the British cared neither for Muslims nor Hindus. They only cared for the Empire. An impasse between the Congress and the Muslim League was a great advantage to the British. Therefore, they prevented the Muslim League from affecting a conciliation with the Congress. Unfortunately for them, the Muslim League got entangled in its own mesh. The power remained securely lodged with the British. The net gain from the League's dog-in-the-manger attitude was that India fell 'smack' in the British lap......

PREFACE : FACTS ARE FACTS The untold story of India’s Partition by WALI KHAN

This book was written under peculiar circumstances. Imprisoned twice during the terms of Field Marshall Ayub Khan and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, I had the time but lacked the access to reference materials which were necessary for this purpose. Due to my solitary confinement under the Bhutto regime, I could not even lay my hands on pen and paper to jot down my thoughts. With the help of a few books that came my way, however, I tried to put the record straight by presenting the other side of the picture which had, until this time, always been turned to the wall. It is a pity when the Government of the day presents only one point of view before the people and deliberately suppresses every other. The Government of Pakistan was determined to tamper with historical records and give the public a one-dimensional view, so that it could find religious justification for its political decisions. The purpose was to keep the public in a constant state of ignorance. Suffice to say that history was being fabricated rather than recorded. I felt some times that this was a court of law where only the public prosecutor was allowed to present evidence against the accused, while the latter was prohibited from speaking a single word in his defense. I felt as if his hands and feet were manacled and shackled, his lips sealed and his pen confiscated. Could this be called a House of Justice?
These circumstances compelled me to record historical facts, documenting each detail, so that, if not this generation, at least future generations would not be denied access to the truth. I was trying to reveal the true spirit of our political ideology. In my capacity as a member of his political caravan, I felt the inner compulsion to present to my people the truth behind Badshah Khan's Khudai Khidmatgar movement and its struggle for freedom. I used several books and memoirs as documentary evidence for my statements and contentions. And by force of intellect plus the strength of my political upbringing I hope I have proved the truth behind the Pashtu proverb that whatsoever is yellow, round, and sour, is unmistakably a grapefruit!
After having served one prison term under Bhutto, I arrived in London. First there were medical problems which required attention. I then found time to browse through some of the London libraries…. I soon discovered that certain top-secret and highly confidential documents had been placed in the India Office Library, London. According to British law, after the lapse of a 30-year period, every document becomes public property. Therefore, there is no restriction upon reading or making Xerox copies of these highly confidential papers. For some time I had been in search of concrete evidence to support the main contention of this book. It pleased me no end to find what I was looking for; and I have no doubt that based on that evidence, those who read this book will agree that Badshah Khan's politics, and the Khudai Khidmatgar Movement was a thorn in the British flesh. The British wanted to preserve their Empire, no matter what the cost. For this it was essential that the internal freedom movements be nipped in the bud.
It was evident to the British that the Indian National Congress was spearheading the internal freedom movements. The Congress represented all the religious groups in the country; Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians or Parsis, anyone could obtain its membership. The British policy was to support other movements in the country with a view to loosening the Congress grip. On the other hand, there was the matter of India's strategic natural location. Surrounded on three sides by vast oceans, its north was protected by the ramparts of the Himalayan range; a few natural passes were the only means of entering the country by land. The fact that those passes linked the country with the USSR posed the only real danger and threat. It was evident that the Khudai Khidmatgars were being clobbered because they refused to succumb to any of the British strategies. First, it was important to understand the genesis of the Anglo-Russian relationship. Therefore, I began my research by examining the archival manuscripts of the Department of External Affairs.
During the Russian revolution of 1917 when the world witnessed its first ideological state, the British Government devised various strategies to curb its growth. As a matter of routine, the British Viceroy in India used to send his weekly report to the Secretary of State for India in Britain. In return, the Secretary dispatched the government policy, pertaining to India, through a weekly courier service. I had a hunch that my problem might be resolved if I could lay my hands on the correspondence that was exchanged between India and Britain, during the months following the death of Lenin. I felt that these dispatches would contain the key to the change in British policy vis-à-vis the Soviet Union. What I discovered in those documents was far beyond my expectations! For, along with their foreign policy documents, I found detailed analyses of the internal affairs of India. I had never really believed the allegations of my elders, who often accused the British of using the most underhand tactics to promote their policies. Having witnessed the lifelong suffering of Badshah Khan which was always attributed to the treatment he and his loyal followers received, I began to suspect that Badshah Khan's hatred for the British was a biased emotion. To blame them for their excesses against him and his men, was understandable, but to hold them responsible for everything that ever went wrong was absurd.... The Congress blamed Britain for creating communal hatred in the country in order to perpetuate their imperialist policies and strengthen their vice-like hold. I often heard them referred to as the bastards who bit the very hand that had fed them for well over one hundred years. The spark they created became a forest fire of communalism. No one, not even the authors-of the crime, could find a means of quenching the flame. Having listened to these diatribes of my elders, I always attributed them to a common human fallacy whereby one's own shortcomings are laid at the doorstep of whoever is perceived as the "common enemy".
I did, however, believe that there was an underlying element of truth in the views of the Congress and Badshah Khan. But never could I imagine that their allegations were only a pale reflection of the truth; the truth was uglier. Their mischief exceeded our wildest imagination. Badshah Khan's and Congress’ allegations were far short of the truth. If there was the slightest doubt earlier, it was now totally removed because the documents preserved in the archives bore the official British seal. Housed in the world's most prestigious library, they were signed by no one less than the Viceroy and the Secretary of State for India. What more proof could one ask for?
While reading certain portions of these documents, I found myself staggering with disbelief. I could not believe the facts that were staring me in the face. Often I was compelled to close the files and go out for a cup of coffee, before taking courage to look at that bitter truth. To give the devil its due, one cannot help admiring British loyalty which stopped at nothing to ensure maximum benefit for their country. Although it was difficult to accept the unscrupulousness with which these rational and educated people protected the Empire, yet one could not help admire them for their straightforward rendering of the truth. There was neither bias towards their own kind nor malice towards others. One by one they stripped every one, friends, companions, and fellow-conspirators, to reveal the truth. They did not mince words in describing all the underhand tasks they assigned to their native lackeys. They appeared unconcerned about what would happen if these documents became known to the Indian people and the masks of their so called leaders were ripped off. The Indian public would be aghast if they realized that these pious leaders and patriots were trafficking in the integrity of their own country, and were the country's enemy number one, besides being traitors and agents of the British Government. The British sense of fair-play did not take any of these factors into consideration.
My study of twenty years of correspondence [from 1922-1942] between the Viceroy and the Secretary of State for India revealed that the earlier study I had made of books and diaries pertaining to the subject was futile. Every detail of the policy was clearly stated in these secret documents which I was now reading. The anti-USSR policy of the British was staring me in the face; all doubts and misgivings were thus removed. What caused me tremendous embarrassment was the account of incidents which revealed the character of the leaders of the country. The worst offenders by far were Muslim Leaguers. The allegations leveled against them by the Congress and or Badshah Khan were a fraction of what I found on record in these British documents.
After considerable reflection I made my final decision. The purpose of my book is to give an honest account of the struggle of Badshah Khan and his true followers, the Khudai Khidmatgars. For this purpose these documents were invaluable. Their contents could rip the veil from his enemies’ faces, especially those who used Islam as a means for strengthening the British imperialism and their colonial regime. This would exonerate Badshah Khan and send his opponents to hell. My purpose, however, was not to malign anyone in particular, but to reveal the true spirit of patriotism underlying our struggle. I want to stop the dirty, filthy rumour-politics which was corrupting the psyche of innocent and devout Muslims. In our country, Muslims have always been denied access to truth and historical evidence. Luckily, however, history has a way of revealing itself sooner or later, no matter how much effort is made to camouflage it with pretty untruths. Just as a diamond glimmers even when buried in kimberlite, so also does truth ultimately emerge! Time has proved the inevitability of this process.
As I have said before, the purpose of writing all this is not to insult anyone but simply to narrate the truth. Concealing truth based on historical evidence is a sin. Having felt so shaken at the facts I uncovered, I wondered how those "true believers in God and the Prophet" would have felt who claimed that they had staked everything for religion! I would have overlooked many shortcomings of the Muslim League, had they been honest about their loyalties. If they liked the British regime, they should have openly supported it. But I cannot condone their heinous act of supporting the imperialist, arrogant, and, above all, the infidel British rule, while hiding behind the veneer of Islam.Historical facts should be revealed with complete candour so that tomorrow Muslims know better than to trust these Judases. Before enlisting with any leader, Muslims should ensure that they are, once again, not being led down the garden path. The truth is sometimes bitter, but the events recorded in this book will enlighten many misinformed, misguided persons. As the British love to say, 'This is just to put the record straight." I do not consider it necessary to inform my readers of my political point of view; it is perfectly obvious. But I want to assure them that the documents, upon which the facts narrated here arc based, are lodged in the India Office Library, London. Whosoever wishes to verify is welcome to read the originals. Meanwhile, I will attempt to prove all my statements.
I wrote originally in Pashto. This was translated into Urdu by my wife, Nasim, which in turn is now being presented in English. I must thank Dr Syeda Saiyidain Hameed for the pains she took over this task. She has preserved the essence of my own writing most admirably.
WALI KHAN
12th July, 1987
Walibagh, Charsadda,
District Peshawar.

"Churchill is no better than Hitler" - Dr Shashi Tharoor

Killings and Rape of Minorities in Pakistan: Christians,Hindu women

Massive killings of Christians in Pakistan: Part -5, ARMY of Pakistan, ISI is giving silent support to these incidents, Because in all incidents a commission is formed but culprit are released in courts in lack of proof nearly every time. One minister of Pakistan has been killed by his own security guard and Lawyers in Pakistan are not fighting the case because that minister was killed rightly in their point of view.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSvZYxlFzhQ (The struggle of Pakistan's Christians)
(Christian couple 'burned to death by Pakistani mob had legs broken to stop them fleeing and wife was wrapped in cotton so she'd burn faster')
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2828845/Relatives-Christian-couple-beaten-Pakistani-mob-burned-death-say-d-legs-broken-stop-fleeing-wife-wrapped-cotton-d-burn-faster.html (Christian couple 'burned to death by Pakistani mob had legs broken to stop them fleeing and wife was wrapped in cotton so she'd burn faster')
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1J-LRX_1So (The Situation of Christians in Pakistan)
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pakistani-christians-burned-alive-were-attacked-1-200-people-kin-n243386 (Pakistani Christians Burned Alive Were Attacked by 1,200 People: Kin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NElyfTYYXTI (Christian Persecution in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSpcmk_7J5o  (Situation of Christians in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqzgkCvuizs (Christians in Pakistan are suffering relentless persecution)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lweonzAVKR4 (Price of being Christian in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKFdiZdRxwg (Christians massacre 'Unspeakable evil' in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-I86QVpbgQ (Christians in Pakistan: Persecuted yet steadfast in the faith)

RAPEs of Hindu women in Pakistan: Part -6:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDypoXF6HEU (Plight of Hindus in Pakistan: Why is the world silent over this discrimination?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwQtfXRb5j0 (Before blaming Indian Extremist you forgot Hindus has been burnt alive in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNauL87IbSc  (Pakistani Hindu : Exclusively on India News)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmdoisJvqow (The Life of Hindus in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6jHqWhUIds (Pakistani Hindus: Tales from across the border)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UuOfh2pnno (Plight of Hindus in pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hldT18ybzlU (This is what happens to Hindu Girls in Pakistan !!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ossa5N573K8 (How Hindus in Pakistan Reduced From 20% to 2%?)
http://www.dawn.com/news/1189939 (Where should a Pakistani Hindu go?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeBhrEa7p00 (hindu community in pakistan,life of hindus in islam dominated pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9wh9AR_0Gs  (Hindu Girls ABDUCTED RAPED AND CONVERTED IN PAKISTAN (Rinkal and Lata)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxUoEAE6lxY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxUoEAE6lxY  (Attack on Pakistani Hindus on Blasphemy Charges)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8-l3o6GJOc (Rape and forcible conversion of Sikh and Hindu Women 1947)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYRW3cv7XoQ (Little Hindus girls being raped in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcAI4qqlJYE (Our Pakistani Hindus (The best documentry reports) life of hindus in pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lKq23F6BQg (Islamic religious cleansing and rape of Hindu women in Pakistan)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBiRTZIbBoc (Forced Conversion of Hindu Girls in Pakistan: ISLAM spread on Sword)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_fqVI7-TLQ  (rinkle kumari pakistan true story of hindu girl)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8A259ia9ow (Hindu girl gang raped in Madarsa and forced to convert to Islam)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTFUokcMOKw (Pakistani Hindus & Sikhs worng to india piz see evey pakistani)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJRfs2kd2Ls (hindu community ln pakistan leaving bcz of forced conversions)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hldT18ybzlU (This is what happens to Hindu Girls in Pakistan !!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4OQXIj4hBs  (Untold Plight of Pakistani Hindus)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqNN6doFacc  (pakistani hindus want to parmanent citizenship of india)
http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/hatred-for-hindus/ (Hatred for Hindus)

Descendants of Alexander the Great's Army in Pakistan Pressured to Convert to Islam

Descendants of Alexander the Great's Army in Pakistan Pressured to Convert to Islam [PHOTOS]:http://www.ibtimes.com/descendants-alexander-greats-army-pakistan-pressured-convert-islam-photos-708831
THE DESCENDANTS OF THE GREEK ARMY OF ALEXANDER IN PAKISTAN – THE KALASH:http://www.bodahub.com/descendants-alexander-pakistan-khalash/
Conversions threaten Pakistan's "Macedonian" tribe: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-60007720111020
Security for Kalash tribe after Taliban threat: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/02/14/national/security-for-kalash-tribe-after-taliban-threat/
Taliban threat closes in on isolated Kalash tribe: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/17/taliban-kalash-pakistan-afghanistan?CMP=share_btn_fb
'Earthquake was Allah's wrath for Kalash community's immoral ways': http://tribune.com.pk/story/988585/earthquake-was-allahs-wrath-for-kalash-communitys-immoral-ways/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV7pOB_YQYU&feature=share: Who Are Pakistan's Descendants Of Alexander The Great?

Teaching Hatred: A Glimpse into Pakistan’s Education System

During 1970s, as Pakistanis were pondering over their country’s future direction, Brigadier SK Malik, an influential figure in Pakistan Army, wrote a tome titled “The Koranic Concept of War” which was published in 1978. Its foreword was written by none other than Pakistan’s future and perhaps most influential dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq. A keen student of war, Malik argued that in order to keep Pakistan intact and take revenge against India, Pakistan must immerse itself in the philosophy of jihad against infidel Hindus and Jews. Jihadi terror, in his opinion was not a means to an end, but an end in itself. In Malik’s estimation, jihad would soften and paralyze the Indian giant, leading to its dismemberment by a thousand cuts. To rally Pakistani people in an eternal jihad against infidels thus became the primary doctrine for Pakistani establishment. This momentous turn of events turned the Pakistani government back to a medieval psychology, increasingly diverging from Attaturk’s secular Turkish model. (http://tech.mit.edu/V129/N30/indiapakistan.html)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oYJO1wK_Ys (Stupidest law in the world - AJE investigates Pakistan's blasphemy law)
https://www.thequint.com/world/2015/04/09/how-history-books-differ-in-india-and-pakistan
How History Books Differ in India and Pakistan

Hate Literature taught in Pakistani schools by Pakistani government recommended by Pakistani mullahs:
The Murder of History : A Critique of History Textbooks used in Pakistan By K K Aziz
http://thoughtcrackers.blogspot.in/2015/09/murder-of-history-by-k-aziz.html
This book is very important as it exposes Pakistan’s government Historical lies and point out how books in Pakistan are used to spread hate against Hindus and other religious minorities in a government recommend text. Above links will give only two chapters of books. We should use these Pakistani book to show rest of world how government of Pakistan corrupts mind of children even at age of 5-6.

Some Example from Book: The Murder of History: A Critique of History Textbooks used in Pakistan By K K Aziz

THERE ARE NO MUSLIMS IN INDIA
Bharat is the country of Non-Muslims (private, Lahore, English, class 3).
I don’t have exact figures available to me as I write this, But I am sure the no. of muslims in India is larger than the total population of Pakistan; which makes India bigger “Muslim Country” than Pakistan. I don’t understand logic or necessity of making this statement, except to convince class 3 students that India is an enemy state.

Our Ancestors arrived from Arabian Peninsula:
This claim has been made by the Ghairat Brigade since long. They have tried to downplay the linkages that we have with our subcontinental ancestors and tried via popular media and textbooks to somehow prove that our ancestors were not people living in the Subcontinent for thousands of years rather they came from the Arabian Peninsula.
A look at the genealogies of two of our founding fathers i.e Jinnah and Iqbal tells us that Mr. Jinnah belonged to a Sindhi family that had migrated to Gujarat.(Akbar S Ahmad, Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity; Routledge, 1997; Chapter 1,page 1 ) while Iqbal belonged to a Kashmiri Sheikh family. Also, there was a considerable population consisting of Jatts and Gujjars before Islam came to our part of the world. Most of us are descendents of those early converts. The people most likely to have come down from Arabia are the Syeds who claim to be direct descendents from the Prophet (PBUH). Interestingly, in a research conduted by University College London, Y chromosomes of self-identified Syeds from the Indian subcontinent show evidence of elevated Arab ancestry but not of a recent common patrilineal origin For more on the castes of our country.
ARAB, Turk Invaders bring ISLAM in India.
Truth:
Islam first came to the western coast of India with Arab traders (not by Turk, Arab invaders as pakistani schools teach) as early as the 7th century AD to coastal Malabar and the Konkan-Gujarat. Cheraman Juma Masjid in Kerala is thought to be the first mosque in India, built in 629 AD by Malik lbn Dinar (land is given by a Hindu King). Malik Deenar  (died 648 CE) is the first follower of the Islamic prophet, Muhammed, to come to India in order to propagate Islam in the Indian Subcontinent.
Cheraman Perumal  is the royal title used by the rulers of the Chera dynasty in southern India. The title has sometimes mistakenly been taken to refer exclusively to some kings of the dynasty, particularly Rama Varma. Kulashekhara and Rajashekhara Varman, but Hermann Gundert has observed that the title "Cheraman" is simply the name of the dynasty of Chera. According to legends, Cherman Perumal, travelled to Madina to meet the Prophet Muhammad (died in 632 AD) and embraced Islam. But he died on his way back and is now buried in Salalah, Oman.
TEACHING INTOLERANCE IN PAKISTAN:
https://1drv.ms/b/s!Aqzwpm0w5B9whgWGMFt3NozB0D4d
A report by Pakistan’s National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP)
https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/2016/08/4601110/(Report: Pakistan school textbooks riddled with religious 'hate material') https://www.worldwatchmonitor.org/3626084/4601826
The Pakistan’s National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP) study cited several passages from textbooks that teach falsehoods about other religions, or criticise or encourage animosity towards them:

• The Punjab Textbook Board’s Class III (ages 7-8) book on Urdu teaches that Islam is “superior” to all other religions.

• The Sindh Textbook Board’s Class VII (ages 11-12) book on Islamic Studies teaches: “Most of the [other] religions of the world claim equality, but they never act on it.”

• The Punjab Board’s Islamic Studies textbook for Class VIII (ages 12-13) reads: “Honesty for non-Muslims is merely a business strategy, while for Muslims it is a matter of faith.”

• For Class VI (ages 10-11), the Punjab Board’s Islamic Studies book says: “For the person who is not in financial need, is not governed by a tyrant and still does not perform [the pilgrimage to Mecca], it does not make a difference whether he dies as a Christian or a Jew.”

• The Punjab Board’s Class VI book on Islamic Studies says: “Though being a student, you cannot practically participate in jihad, but you may provide financial support for jihad.”

• The Punjab Board Class V (ages 9-10) Social Studies book says: “Religion plays a very important role in promoting national harmony. If the entire population believes in one religion, then it encourages nationalism and promotes national harmony.”

• “The better a Muslim we become, the better a citizen we prove to be,” says the Punjab Board’s Class IV (ages 8-9) book on Urdu.

Every textbook continues to use the Urdu word “Isai” (derived from “Isa”, the Arabic word for “Jesus” used in the Qur’an) for “Christian”. As World Watch Monitor has reported, the word now carries strong overtones – from colonial times – with the “unclean” demeaning occupations done by the lowest castes.
History

History is a subject of particular contention in the report. Pakistani textbooks refer to centuries of “Islamic rule” and “jihad” in the Indian subcontinent. However, Pakistani historian and author Dr. Mubarrak Ali told World Watch Monitor: “It is wrong to say ‘Islamic rule’ or ‘Hindu rule’. The Indian wars were political conflicts and not religious conflicts. The political conflict in the Indian subcontinent is seen as a religious conflict, which is why history is described in a binary opposition. We want to see history in black and white, while multiple facts decide one incident.”

Here are some of the other contentious or inflammatory passages cited in the report:

• The Pakistan Studies book from the Punjab Board for Class IX (ages 13-14) students says: “The free status of Islam and Muslims was hurt with the establishment of British rule. Muslims under non-Muslims remained enslaved and coerced.”

• The Sindh Class VIII book on Social Studies says: “The influence of Christian priests increased greatly [during British rule]. Christian priests were able, with the help of their government, to openly preach their religion.”

• The Class VII Baluchistan Textbook Board book on Urdu says: “The British … feared the Muslims, being the true inheritors of the rule of India, could become a danger for them anytime.”

• “Another book shows that the accusations against [Mughal Emperor of India] Aurangzeb of bias towards Hindus are purely a fabrication of the narrow-minded Hindus and treacherous British,” says the Punjab Board’s Urdu textbook for “matriculates” (ages 15-16).

• The Class V book on Islamic Studies by the Punjab Board states: “The Muslims ruled the Indian subcontinent for about thousand years with magnificence, but they did not forcibly convert a single Hindu. If they had willed, then today there wouldn’t even be a trace of them in the subcontinent. But Muslims showed great tolerance and even raised Hindu to high positions.”

• The Punjab Board’s Class VI History book reads: “Most of the population of Delhi consisted of Hindus who considered Muslims strangers. They … were always busy in thinking about getting free from the rule of Muslims. Hindu landlords used various excuses to not pay land revenue and even sometimes descended into revolt. The Hindus were so much encouraged by [Emperor] Akbar’s pro-Hindu policies that they started demolishing mosques and shrines and started building their temples in their place. Wherever Hindus were in majority, they brutalised Muslims.”

• The History textbook for Class VIII students, published by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Textbook Board, reads: “Sikhs used to do many brutalities to Muslims and did not allow them religious freedom … The British did not trust Muslims and the policy of injustice and brutality hurt economic and educational conditions of Muslims. And the discriminatory attitude of Hindu landlords further made their condition worse. Under the influence of Hindus, they adopted several heresies.”

• The Punjab Board’s History textbook for Class VII states: “In those days, Sikhs ruled the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Sikhs had made the life of Muslims terribly difficult. Syed Ahmed Shaheed decided to wage jihad against Sikhs.”

• The Punjab Board Social Studies book for Class VII says that Bangladesh became its own independent nation in 1971 – no longer East Pakistan – due to a conspiracy of “enemy countries of Islam”.

Teaching Hatred: A Glimpse into Pakistan’s Education System, 2012-2013:
http://www.hafsite.org/media/pr/teaching-hatred-glimpse-pakistan-education-system-2012-2013
Grade IV (Social Studies, Khyber Pakhtunkwa): “Muslims treated Hindus in [a] very good manner despite that Hindus used to main[tain] deep animosity against Muslims.”
Grade V (Social Studies, Punjab): “The religious beliefs of the Muslims and Hindus are absolutely different. The Hindus worship many Idols. They have many Gods and Goddesses. The Muslims believe in one Allah who is Almighty and who is Creator of the universe. The Muslims worship Allah. In the Hindu religion the men are divided into different classes by their system of caste and creed, whereas in Islam all the Muslims are equal and are brotherly with one another. In Hindu religion the women are given a low status. Whereas Islam teaches to give due respect to the women.”
Grade V (Islamic Studies, Sindh): “Hindus have tried all their means to harm Muslims of Indian Sub­continent and killed millions of Muslims. They were deprived of their assets and properties.
Grade VI (Social Studies, Punjab): “Before the Arab conquest the people were fed up with the teachings of Buddhists and Hindus...The foundation of [the] Hindu set up was based on injustice and cruelty. The system of Islam, which was based on justice, equality and brotherhood as described earlier,impressed a lot to the Hindu culture and set up.”
Grade VI (Social Studies, Sindh): “The social equality and justice to all freed the cast ridden Hindu society and paved the way for spread of Islam, we know that the low caste Hindus suffered due to the low caste system, The Hindus belonging to lower casts were tortured, insulted and disgraced.[sic]”
Grade IX ­- X (Pakistan Studies, Khyber Pakhtunkwa): “Hindu leadership has not only shown their religious hatred but also expressed their political hatred by opposing to celebrate their independence day on the same day. They proposed 15th August 1947, as their independence day because they never wanted to celebrate with Pakistan on the same day and this shows their psyche of narrow­mindedness.”
Grade IX ­- X (Pakistan Studies, Khyber Pakhtunkwa): “Hindus were against the creation of Pakistan. Despite their utmost opposition, when Pakistan was created, they used all means to weaken and harm Pakistan. Hindus in the ‘East Pakistan’ started mobilizing their fellow citizens against the ‘West Pakistan.’ ”
https://aacounterterror.wordpress.com/here-is-what-70-of-student-population-in-pakistan-study/
(Here is what 70% of student population in Pakistan study)
https://www.hinduismtoday.com/blogs-news/hindu-press-international/religious-hate-material-fills-pakistani-kids--textbooks/15338.html
(Religious Hate Material Fills Pakistani Kids' Textbooks)
Study: Public School Textbooks in Pakistan Teach Intolerance of Non-Muslims
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/study-public-school-textbooks-pakistan-teach-intolerance-non-muslims
A passage in an eighth grade Islamic Studies book published in 2015 as part of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Curriculum describes jihad in a positive light.

“Prophet (PBUH) said that ‘Jihad will continue till the end of times’. Jihad is going on in different parts of the world. Many Mujahidins of Islam are participating in Jihad for sake of Allah, for protection of their religion, to help their oppressed brothers, and to get freedom from tyranny,” it read. “As a student if you cannot practically participate in Jihad you can at least financially help in preparation of Jihad.”

A passage from a tenth grade Punjab textbook, also published in 2015, states, “Because the Muslim religion, culture and social system are different from non-Muslims, it is impossible to cooperate with Hindus.”

Another Punjab curriculum textbook for sixth grade Islamic studies reads, “Christians learned tolerance and kind heartedness from Muslims. The fair treatment and good governance of Muslims improved the living standard of the region. They started to live prosperous and peaceful lives under the patronage of Muslims.”
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/awaiting-changes-to-a-syllabus-of-hate/article253218.ece
Awaiting changes to a syllabus of hate
https://hinduexistence.org/2016/05/17/pakistan-where-some-school-syllabus-seems-dangerous-than-anything/
Pakistan where some school syllabus seems much dangerous than anything.
“Hindu has always been an enemy of Islam”
(Urdu Class V, Punjab Textbook Board, Lahore, March 2002, p 108)

“The religion of the evil Hindus did not teach them good things — Hindus did not respect women”
(Muasherati Ulum for Class IV, Punjab Textbook Board, Lahore, 2005, p 81)

“Hindus worship in temples which are very narrow, dark and dirty places, where they worship fake gods in idols. Only one person can enter the temple at a time. In our mosques, on the other hand, all Muslims can say their prayers together”
(Muasherati Ulum for Class V, Punjab Textbook Board, Lahore, 1996, p 109 )

http://www.sacw.net/article2866.html, Pakistan: Seeds of hate, 17 September 2012
“Hindus can never be true friends of Muslims” is one of the many such lines from Pakistan Studies of grade seven.

http://tarekfatah.com/pakistani-government-school-textbooks-teaching-hate-against-christians-and-hindus-jihad-and-martyrdom-to-children/
Pakistani Government School Textbooks teaching Hate against Christians and Hindus; Jihad and Martyrdom to Children

For Justice and Peace, textbooks are full of intolerance and hatred towards non-Muslims
Kamran Chaudhry
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/For-Justice-and-Peace,-textbooks-are-full-of-intolerance-and-hatred-towards-non-Muslims-38179.html
on page 85 of a history book used in Peshawar, a centre of Taliban extremism, one can read that “The English took power from Muslims, so they considered Muslims as their true enemies. They closed all doors of development to Muslims. So Muslims had no choice but to fight the English . . . Christian pastors were forcefully converting locals to Christianity”.
http://www.earlychristians.org/index.php/persecuted-church/item/1773-the-christians-minorities-in-pakistan-the-problem-of-the-education-system/1773-the-christians-minorities-in-pakistan-the-problem-of-the-education-system
The christians minorities in Pakistan: the problem in the education system