Why not start a thread about how the Hindu kings committed atrocities against their people if you want to? Why do you want to close the thread?
Because
No Good will come out of it , if I started openly talking about Pindari atrocities on South India, all it would achieve is breed hatred among South Indian on Pindaris and the Marathas who sponsored them. What exactly would that achieve?
India is a very old civilization, but it was never a single political entity, so its obvious that during the 1000s of years, some group would have committed some atrocities against another.
AJSINGH said:
but the difference about muslim rule was that they did it under religious intolerance , what hindu kingdoms did was under conquest ,i mean nobody complains about capturing wealth of any nation after it was defeated however what Muslim Kings did was destroy the faith of the native people
That's not entirely true, there were religous atrocities against Buddhist by some North Indian rulers, down south there was religous intolerance towards Vaishnavites from some Shivaite rulers. Hinduism being a polytheistic religion gives more scope for tolerance of other faiths, but still atrocities do happen.
The larger question is, Is this about 'Distorted History' or just plain old bias against another religion?
If this was about 'Distorted History' then people should be as worried about the Pindari raids being left out from our textbooks, as they are about Muslims misrule being left out. But I don't see that happening, its always about Muslim rule never about anything else.