Sunday, December 28, 2008

Pak textbooks build hate culture against India...what do Maldivan mullahs teach?

The empowerment of terror in Pakistan has not happened overnight. This is the logical culmination of the politics and policies pursued by Pakistan for years now. Terrorism in Pakistan has its roots in the culture of hate and the ethos of inequality on the ground of religious faith, leading to their being deeply ingrained in the Pakistani psyche and mindset.
One factor that has played a crucial role in creating this culture of hate is the educational policy of the government of Pakistan pursued since 1977. The officially prescribed textbooks, especially for school students, are full of references that promote hate against India in general, and Hindus in particular.

A cursory glance at Pakistani school textbooks - especially the compulsory subjects like Pakistan studies and social studies - gives an idea of how history has been distorted and a garbled version prescribed to build this mindset and attitude.
The objective of Pakistan's education policy has been defined thus in the preface to a Class 6 book: "Social studies have been given special importance in educational policy so that Pakistan's basic ideology assumes the shape of a way of life, its practical enforcement is assured, the concept of social uniformity adopts a practical form and the whole personality of the individual is developed." This statement leaves no doubt that "social uniformity", not national unity, is a part of Pakistan's basic ideology.
The Class 5 book has this original discovery about Hindu help to bring British rule to India: "The British had the objective to take over India and to achieve this, they made Hindus join them and Hindus were very glad to side with the British. After capturing the subcontinent, the British began on the one hand the loot of all things produced in this area, and on the other, in conjunction with Hindus, to greatly suppress the Muslims."
The Std VIII book says, "Their (Muslim saints) teachings dispelled many superstitions of the Hindus and reformed their bad practices. Thereby Hindu religion of the olden times came to an end."
On Indo-Pak wars, the books give detailed descriptions and openly eulogize ‘jihad' and ‘shahadat' and urge students to become ‘mujahids' and martyrs and leave no room for future friendship and cordial relations with India.
According to a Class 5 book, "In 1965, the Pakistani army conquered several areas of India, and when India was on the point of being defeated, she requested the United Nations to arrange a ceasefire. After 1965, India, with the help of Hindus living in East Pakistan, instigated the people living there against the people of West Pakistan, and finally invaded East Pakistan in December 1971. The conspiracy resulted in the separation of East Pakistan from us. All of us should receive military training and be prepared to fight the enemy."
The book prescribed for higher secondary students makes no mention of the uprising in East Pakistan in 1971 or the surrender by more than 90,000 Pakistani soldiers. Instead, it claims, "In the 1971 India-Pakistan war, the Pakistan armed forces created new records of bravery and the Indian forces were defeated everywhere.
" The students of Class 3 are taught that "Muhammad Ali (Jinnah) felt that Hindus wanted to make Muslims their slaves and since he hated slavery, he left the Congress". At another place it says, "The Congress was actually a party of Hindus. Muslims felt that after getting freedom, Hindus would make them their slaves."
And this great historic discovery is taught to Std V students, "Previously, India was part of Pakistan."
Commenting on this literature that spreads hate, leading Pakistani educationist Tariq Rahman wrote, "It is a fact that the textbooks cannot mention Hindus without calling them cunning, scheming, deceptive or something equally insulting. Students are taught and made to believe that Pakistan needs strong and aggressive policies against India or else Pakistan will be annihilated by it."
(The author is a former Union minister of India)


  1. Anonymous12:08 PM

    The teachings of Mullas or the fanatics doesn't have anything to do with the true teachings of Islam just like the peodophile preists and bishops have nothing to do with the true teachings of Christianity.

    If this makes any sense to you. well i know it won't. cos you all are fools.

  2. Dhivehi Christian12:52 PM

    "...peodophile preists and bishops have nothing to do with the true teachings of Christianity."

    Good to know.

    The behaviour of elderly Muslim men who have sex with 9 year old girls has everything to do with Mohamed aged 53 having sex with Aisha aged 9. Aisha was the daughter of the best friend of Pedophile Mohamed (PBUH*).

    Great example!

    (* PBUH = Pedophile Been Up Her)

  3. Anonymous1:57 PM

    Dhivehi Christian: Do remember, I will be laughing at you on the day of judgement. You will be facing your lord, and you will wish that you were re-born and send to this world. But that wish would not be granted. You will be thrown into hell. To burn there forever.

    I curse you. You will never be happy in this world. You will suffer both in this world and in the hereafter. Amen.

  4. Anonymous2:00 PM

    And by the way, I referred to the true teachings of christianity. Not the christianity you beleive in. Which is man made.

  5. Anonymous2:12 PM

    Dhivehi Christian

    First you ought to learn about the christianity that you follow. Then after that you can bark. You are so narrow minded. :)

    When we read the Bible, we learn about some Prophets marrying many wives, even hundreds of wives in some cases. Let us look at some of the verses from the Old Testament:

    In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

    In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

    In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

    In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

    And knowing that the Bible's Old Testament allowed before for men to have sex with girls who were at the age of 3, then it wouldn't surprise me that those Prophets who had 700 wives for instance, had many very young "teenage" girls before as their wives.

    It wouldn't surprise me if they too had wives that were younger than Mary when she got pregnant, and younger than Aisha when she got married.

    Since there are so many wives that those Prophets married (hundreds of wives), then how would anyone know that they didn't marry young women as our beloved Prophet peace be upon him did with his marriage to Aisha peace be upon her?


    Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him was not a child molester as the haters of Islam claim. He was a Noble Messenger of God. Muhammad peace be upon him lived in a society and culture that existed 1400 years ago, and we must not judge what he or others did based on our standards today. It is wrong and foolish to do so.

    If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.- George Orwell

  6. Anonymous2:21 PM

    The pedophilia in the bible was quite different, because girls were raped at 3-years of age by Moses and his men.

    Also, in Exodus 21:7-11 as further elaborated on below, girls were sold off as slave girls by their own fathers to other men. So most certainly, no one is qualified to call the Prophet of Islam a pedophile!

    * X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.

    * Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

    Young girls in the Bible and Jewish Talmud.

    1- 3-year old slave girls were forced into sex under the Mosaic Law in the Bible.

    2- Fathers can sell their daughters as slave girls to other men in the Bible.

    3 year old slave girls were forced into sex under the Mosaic Law in the Bible:

    Pedophilia with 3-year old slave girls in the Bible!

    Forcing 3-year old slave girls into sex during the Mosaic Law in the Bible!

  7. Dhivehi Christian5:14 PM

    Just because the Bible says that people who lived long ago did such and such a thing, it doesn't mean that these things constitute how Christians should live and behave.

    The Bible does not say that Christ had sex with a 9 year old girl and so if an old Christian man has sex with a 9 year old girl then he is violating the law.

    On the other hand Hadith and Seerah which makes up the Sunnah categorically states that Mohamed had sex with a 9 year old girl. Muslims are required to live by the Sunnah and that is why until today, pedophile sex between old men like Mohamed and young girls like Aisha is regarded as a virtue in Islam.

    Muslims pedophiles are following the example of Mohamed. Christian pedophiles are going against the example of Christ.

    Simple as that.

  8. Anonymous10:44 PM

    Maldivian mullah teach hate towards Christians, jews, all unbelievers and the "hulagu ge gaaum"

  9. Dhivehi Christian12:58 PM

    Let me give you another example to illustrate the point.

    Have a look at the volumes of court judgments of criminal cases in civlised (non-Islamic) countries where written records of court judgments are kept. They include graphic details of horrendous crimes committed by convicts. These judgments are then used by members of the legal profession and law students as reference.

    The fact that the court judgements include such graphic detail doesn't mean such crimes are permitted or promoted. On the contrary it serves us as reminders that such behaviour amounts to crimes.

    Large parts of the Bible record how people behaved in Biblical times. King David's sexual indiscretions are recorded in the Bible as a reminder that such behaviour is wrong.

    On the contrary Mohamed's criminal activity found in the Koran and the Sunnah serve Muslims as a code as to how to behave. Muslims commit atrocities because Mohamed committed similar atrocities. Old Muslim men commit pedophile sex on 9 year-old girls because Mohamed did so. Muslims rape women captured in war because the Koran categorically allows that and Mohamed personally committed such rape.

    I challenge Muslims to show a single example in the Bible which says that Jesus Christ committed such crimes. You can sift through the pages of the Bible with a sieve and you will never be able to come up with such an example. Rise up to the challenge you Muslims! If you can't, then just stomach the fact that Mohamed was the low pedophile that he was!

  10. Anonymous11:42 PM

    If Mohammed was truly a prophet, he would have set better examples.
    If Allah was a true god, he would know that Mohammed would be called a pedophile in the future. How could Allah allow his last messenger to be called a pedophile in the future? Was it necessary for Mohammed to have married a 9 year old little girl and result in being called a pedophile later on?