"Religion of Non-Violence" vs "Religion of Peace"

Have you been following the developments in Myanmar (formerly Burma) as much as you do the events in Assam? If not, we recommend you do. Muslims from Bangladesh etc. immigrate into India and Muslims from Bangladesh and Thailand immigrate into Myanmar. While Indian Leaders are always bending over backwards to Muslim sensitivities; their Burmese counterparts, notwithstanding their religious allegiance to "Non-violence" are treating the members of "Religion of Peace" the way they need to be treated, as the other and as aggressors.

Myanmar, all our proud Leftist would know, was ruled by military junta and has recently turned into an Electoral Democracy. Our proud Seculars will note that Myanmar's majority population is Buddhist. Suu Kyi is the force behind Democracy and Human Rights in Myanmar. Now what happens when Buddhism, the Religion of Non-Violence and Islam, the Religion of Peace meet? Blood, mayhem and civil strife!

If you search Google News for Myanmar and Rohingya for past month you get this and this. We recommend our readers to peruse casually among the list and understand the situation.

The epitome of democracy in Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi is being accused of indifference. The epitome of "World Peace" OIC (Organization of Islamic Countries) want her to help Rohingya Muslims. Peaceful Citizens from the Holy Land of Islam, Pakistan, yes you guessed it right, the Taliban have threatened Burma. You must understand that this is a "peaceful" threat. International Leftists are shouting at roof tops against the injustice. But the Burmese Leaders insist that Rohingyan are not their citizens.

Why do our "intellectuals" answer when faced with an innocent question like: Why is it that wherever there is large scale violence, usually Muslim populations are involved? They quickly answer: Because All over the World the Muslims are discriminated against for being "Peaceful". When "human rights" of members of "Religion of Peace" are violated, they stage a small protest. Don't they have a right to even protest? These moronish intellectuals completely obfuscate the point that the mere existence anywhere of a non-Muslim is a human-right violation of a Muslim! They ignore the fact that the UN Human Right standards are violated by the dictats of Islam. For starters, Islam advocates death penalty for apostacy while the Human Rights Charter grants "Freedom of Religion", thus the two are inherently incompatible.

The Burmese know that they need to defend themselves, and they do not mind violating the principle of Non-violence taught by the Buddha. However, our "pussy-intellectuals" want us to honor the Mohandasian non-violence even at the risk of Civilizational Suicide! Of course, you must ask where these intellectuals live? Do they live in Muslim dominated localities with having to suffer 5 times braying everyday, or do they live in posh silent localities protected by the lives and blood of Hindu Security Personnel? The answer is obvious. This is exactly what V. S. Naipaul told the pussy-intellectual Dilip Padgaonkar (see here):

Naipaul: ...What is happening in India is a mighty creative process. Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on, especially if these intellectuals happen to be in the United States. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening. 

However, we are aware of one of the more cynical forms of liberalism: it admits that one fundamentalism is all right in the world. This is the fundamentalism they are really frightened of: Islamic fundamentalism. Its source is Arab money. It is not intellectually to be taken seriously etc. I don't see the Hindu reaction purely in terms of one fundamentalism pitted against another. The reaction is a much larger response... Mohamedan fundamentalism is essentially negative, a protection against a world it desperately wishes to join. It is a last ditch fight against the world. ...

Also

Padgaonkar: My colleague, the cartoonist, Mr R K Laxman, and I recently travelled thousands of miles in Maharashtra. In many places we found that noses and breasts had been chopped off from the statues of female deities. Quite evidently this was a sign of conquest. The Hindutva forces point to this too to stir up emotions. The problem is: how do you prevent these stirred-up emotions from spilling over and creating fresh tensions?

Naipaul: I understand. But it is not enough to abuse them or to use that fashionable word from Europe: fascism. There is a big, historical development going on in India. Wise men should understand it and ensure that it does not remain in the hands of fanatics. Rather they should use it for the intellectual transformation of India.

This Hindu reawakening, which is on going, is to be whole-heartedly supported. Subramanian Swamy's idea of disenfranchising those Muslims who refuse to admit Hindu-ancestry and Modi's idea of Development are merely preliminary stepping stones. We must consider them, admire them, and possibly even implement them. However, we must not stop with them, we need to go further, without fear and without guilt, and work towards Sanatana Bharat.