We all get worked up after some terrorist activity and we go on interpreting every religion. Agreed that Bharata raashtra (aka India, aka Hindustan) was occupied by muslim rulers for 1000 years and then by British for another couple of centuries. I am sure neither were invited by the then bharata raashtra rulers just for a "change". Mughal/Muslim rulers after taken over by British rulers would have gone back to their native countries, if it was so bad here. British did leave after independence. Mughal/Muslim rulers had another opportunity after independence to leave the bharata raashtra since they did not like it then and don't like it now. The process is made even easier after independence, they had and still have a choice of moving to either Bangladesh or Pakistan, just in case they don't like original dwellers of the Bharat raashtra. Then Bharat desis don't have to insult Islam and of course peace loving Islam followers don't have to live or deal with native Bharat raashtra dwellers. The question then is, when the original country was divided on religion basis, and since current Bharat raashtra Islam followers find it difficult to digest Sanatana Dharma, and also Islam (I know they are peace loving) followers can not coexist with people following Sanatana Dharma, what is stopping them from moving on? instead of criticizing the very nation that gave them second homes?
