How much can the names hide?

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Aug 17, 2022 at 11:04

Dear Dr Pipes,

I will request people to read the following paragraph. Unless you have full knowledge of the terms, the paragraph may not make complete sense:

Yesterday in Kashmir terrorists shot and killed a Kashmiri Pandit apple grower and severely injured his brother. This incidence is not very different from the recent killings of Israelis by Palestinian terrorists in various Israeli cities. While terrorists kill innocent people, even the right leaning conservative Indian government is providing free housing to the Rohingyas refugees in Delhi. Rohingyas failed to assimilate with the Myanmarian society after living in Myanmar for more than a century.

The sentences in the above paragraph are based on true news stories of the last two months but they seem disconnected. Now let me do a little bit of tranlation:

Yesterday in Kashmir *Muslim* terrorists shot and killed a *Hindu* Kashmiri Pandit apple grower and severely injured his brother. This incidence is not very different from the recent killings of *Jewish* Israelis by *Muslim* Palestinian terrorists in various Israeli cities. While *Muslim* terrorists kill innocent people, even the right leaning conservative Indian government is providing free housing to the *Muslim* Rohingyas refugees in Delhi. Muslims failed to assimilate with the *Buddhist* Myanmar society even after living in Myanmar for more than a century.

When I provide the context hidden context, the paragraph starts making a bit more sense and some legitimate questions arise. Is Islam a common factor between what happens in Kashmir and Palestine? Do Muslims have a tendency to kill non-Muslims? Do Muslims have more difficulty in mixing with other populations? Are good societies forced to accommodate Muslims even when they are not the best of partners?

When I researched the word Rohingya even Wikipedia described them as 'Indo-Aryans people who follow Islam'. Excuse me. I am a 100% Indian person but I feel no connection with the Rohingyas. Millions of Indians went to Myanmar during the British rule. They were Hindus, Christians, Anglo Indians, and Muslims. Some assimilated in the Burmese societies, many came back to live happy lives in India. Only Muslims became a pain in the neck 150 years later. I contend that by calling Rohingyas 'indo-aryan', some brilliant academic is trying to minimize the Islamic connection of the Rohingyas. Explained simply, Rohingyas are Indian Muslims who went to Myanmar during the colonial times. They became stateless because none of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, or any of the Islamic nation wants to call them their own. One of the many blessings of Islam!

Hiding Islam under different names is a bad India. The all important adjective 'Muslim' should never be dropped from Palestinians, Kashmiris, Rohingyas,
Al-Quaedas, Taliban, Boko harams, PLO, Hamas, etc.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".