I don’t fail to understand that, I understand that isn’t true that Pol Pot didn’t kill people specifically because they were religious, he certainly did.
“The Khmer Rouge also classified people based on their religious and ethnic backgrounds. Under the leadership of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge had a policy of
state atheism. All religions were banned, and the repression of adherents of
Islam,
Christianity, and
Buddhism was extensive. Nearly 25,000 Buddhist monks were massacred by the regime. The regime dispersed minority groups, forbidding them to either speak their languages or practise their customs. They especially targeted
Muslims,
Christians, Western-educated intellectuals, educated people in general, people who had contact with
Western countries or
Vietnam, disabled people, and ethnic Chinese,
Laotians, and
Vietnamese. Some were imprisoned in the
S-21 camp for interrogation involving torture in cases where a confession was useful to the government. Many others were summarily executed.”
Pol Pot - Wikipedia
What
you seem to not understand that I wrote that it would be just a wrong to use a broad brush against atheists for things Pol Pot did as it would to criticize theists for wrongs done by other religionists or those mistaken as religious but not actually done because if religion at all. Thank you for providing an example which makes my point.