no one said muslims are pacifist. In this thread we were debunking the myth that all buddhists are dalai lama
No one claims that all Buddhists are saint. But to say Buddhist terrorism, is far fetched. Let us first define terrorism:
Terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians).
So yes, it is by definition terrorism. Now, the argument is: is it
Buddhist terrorism?
If you look at few previous posts, the violence is ethnic, more like between two cultures and not two religions. They dont want any foreign (to them, majority) culture to be there. That is why
they kicked out Chinese. Besides, clash of communities should not be called terrorism.
For example, the riots of 47' or later doesnt makes either community terrorist. Attempts to take lives of innocents do, like LTTE, or Al qaeda.
There anger doesnt seem to be originated by religious differences, but it is more likely stemming out of possible intrusion in there culture. And culture is different from religion. You can say that it is the terrorism of Burmese majority against a minority, defined by cultural differences, who coincidentally also have religious differences.
Thus the terrorists are
'cultural majority', who coincidentally also happen to be Buddhist. Not the opposite.
PS: I apologize for getting carried away, and even if slightest bit, supporting the violence. It is wrong, period.
