Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That sounds like a receipe for condoning possible genocide. There is no evidence in the articles that the religions under attack are provoking it or initiating violence and simply because you don't like a particular religion seems a poor excuse for condoning attacks and murder of innocent people.
...so because the articles haven't thoroughly investigated things, we have to assume the risk of tolerating intolerant people?
This is actually a classic problem of journalism. It strictly sticks to the facts instead of analyzing the values of the situation at hand because it's afraid of confusing values with opinions. Perhaps the real problem for us is journalistic standards, not the political situation.
How do you know they haven't? You haven't offered up anything else at this point.
Do you apply this standard across the religious board or only with Islam?
...so because the articles haven't thoroughly investigated things, we have to assume the risk of tolerating intolerant people?
This is actually a classic problem of journalism. It strictly sticks to the facts instead of analyzing the values of the situation at hand because it's afraid of confusing values with opinions. Perhaps the real problem for us is journalistic standards, not the political situation.
How do you know they haven't? You haven't offered up anything else at this point.
Do you apply this standard across the religious board or only with Islam?
Where did the articles analyze religious values beyond simply referring to the events which took place?
Are you saying people have to believe in things unless they can provide a superior degree of explanation?
Whatever happened to expecting people to prove their own points instead of expecting others to prove their points for them?
You're assuming they haven't, and one of the articles I posted was not an article as such, but a Wikipedia entry that gave some background. If you are going to insist that there is more to it than the articles state then by all means provide the evidence to support your contention.
Nope. I'm not sure what you are talking about here.
Well...that's kind of what I'm asking you to do. I provided sources to back up my points, now, will you do the same?
well-----I googled------it seems that buddhist/muslim conflict has nothing
to do with DOCTRINE -<<<< good news----those doctrine fights are
really bloody. There has been some mild "bad blood" issues between
muslims and buddhists for CENTURIES Buddhist lands were invaded
by muslims ------and there is a history of DHIMMIA imposition on buddhists. ---
not a good legacy. Lately the fight seems largely ECONOMIC <<<< bad--
but not so bad like DOCTRINE issues. In general-----thruout the places where
muslim/buddhist fights go on-------in SUM----it is a kind of balanced dislike----
accompanied by balanced violence AT LAST-----EQUITY!!!!!!!!!!!
Most of all----the important issue is--------whatever problems muslims have
with Buddhists--------guess who causes it? anyone? -----c'mon
coyote------you know-------the answer shows up on GOOGLE
Getting back to the used to be angelic BUDDHISTS-----they have recently
developed NATIONALISM------fairly new to them. -----but they got it too.
Hindus got it and NOW buddhists got it. EVERYONE GETS IT EVENTUALLY.
There are places where buddhists who are IN THE MAJORITY----want to keep
it that way------very vehemently
anyone got an answer? should "NATIONALISM" become an international
crime?
You're assuming they haven't, and one of the articles I posted was not an article as such, but a Wikipedia entry that gave some background. If you are going to insist that there is more to it than the articles state then by all means provide the evidence to support your contention.
I'm assuming it's unclear. If you claim that your articles have investigated values, then you have to show it.
The very definition of a religion, however, entails values, so it's reasonable to expect values to be involved. Not only that, but actions in general entail values. We don't assign guilt without looking into motive. Sometimes, people do things that appear atrocious because of self-defense against actually atrocious people who are motivated without values.
The segment of your article didn't analyze religion itself though. It only indicated the presence of religious conflict. I didn't say that it was wrong either. I said that it was incomplete.
Likewise, I didn't take an affirmative defense there. I was just describing the regularity of due process in going above and beyond to explain why people aren't presumed to be guilty by default.
How many Buddhists have been killed by Muslims over the centuries?
Payback's a bitch.
I don't think any innocent people deserve to be killed simply because other people in another era killed other people.
How many Buddhists have been killed by Muslims over the centuries?
Payback's a bitch.
I don't think any innocent people deserve to be killed simply because other people in another era killed other people.
Then where is your thread about innocents killed by Muslims or any other religious cult?
Why is it that you choose to focus on this group of Muslims in Myanmar?
So you think this is a good thing even though the Muslims in Myanmar had nothing to do with what occured in the Maldives?
Buddhists are supposed to be tolerant - but not in Myanmar.
Genocide Watch
Over the last two years, the positive news of Myanmar embracing democracy and engaging with the developed world has been consistently offset by reports of sectarian violence between Buddhists and the minority Rohingya Muslim population. Estimates suggest that 300 Muslims have been killed and up to 300,000 displaced since the military junta nominally ceded power in 2011. No longer is this violence restricted to the state of Rakhine where the majority of Burmese Muslims live. Major incidents are reported in states as far south as Thaketa, just a few miles from Yangon, the cultural, historic and business capitol of the country which is now awash with western businessmen drinking expensive cocktails in expensive hotels. This worrying trend of more frequent and more widely spread violence threatens to derail the country’s turnaround.
It has been over a year since the renowned Burmese political activist Aung San Suu Kyi was elected to
the Burmese parliament signalling a groundbreaking change in the country’s government. It has also
been over a year since the first story emerged about the plight of the Rohingya, an ethnic Muslim minority
in Burma, leaving nothing but a slight murmur on the global conscience.
In this time, Burma’s international relations have markedly improved, with visits to the United States as
well as the removal of economic sanctions. Even prominent global corporations have travelled to the
country to set up shop. Behind this veil of prosperity and change lies the persecution of the biggest
population of stateless people in the world.
The Rohingya are a Muslim minority that have been in Burma since 9th century. Despite the clear ethnic
differences, they are for all intents and purposes, Burmese. Unfortunately, they have been victims of
systematic persecution since the Burmese junta government took over in 1962. Prior to this, Rohingyas
were recognized by the state and even served as representatives in Burmese parliament. In 1982, the
Rohingya were declared “non-nationals” and “foreign residents” and were banned from participating in
elections. Since then, they have been subject to large scale ethnic cleansing that in the past year has led
to grave bloodshed on both sides of the divide.
Currently, there is still a significant population of Rohingyas living in their native Rakhine State in Western
Burma, but apartheid-like restrictions have prevented them from accessing things they need for everyday
life, including their jobs. This has led an estimated 35,000 to seek refuge across the border in neighboring
countries, but even then they are hardly welcome.
The most recent development in this story is the fact that Rohingyas fleeing from sectarian violence into
Thailand are being held in immigration facilities that are akin to prisons. According to Human Rights
Watch, the cells in these facilities are “cage like” and there is barely enough place to sit. The women
detainees are subject to sexual assault and exploitation.* Even worse, many Rohingya are ending up at
Turutao Island in Thailand, which whilst being a spectacular national park, is also the site of some of the
most intricate human trafficking rings in the region, leaving many Rohingya as not only victims of
sectarian violence, but victims of human trafficking.**
All in all this does seem like a helpless situation. How can anyone help a population that is stateless and
belongs nowhere–how can we document approximately how many have gone missing–and how many
have disappeared into the clutches of human trafficking? Wouldn’t it just be easier to collectively forget?
Ethnic tensions and wars of identity are very much akin to the modern condition. It may be easy to turn a
blind eye to the Rohingya now, but this will only enable harsher consequences a few years down the line.
Identity divisions that have gone unanswered and unsolved have produced some of the gravest conflicts
today; from Syria to Iraq and even to Egypt. And these are not conflicts that we haven’t seen before. The
post Cold War era of the 1990
It's taught us lessons from the dissolution of Yugoslavia to the genocide in Rwanda, stories like this are all too familiar.
International actors can choose to forget, or they can choose to take steps towards a more stable future.
Today, the Rohingya are a helpless minority, but you never know what tomorrow brings. Their identity as a
Muslim minority resonates with many unstable organizations active today and collective political memory
is a powerful tool–just pick up any history book
Buddhists are supposed to be tolerant - but not in Myanmar.
Genocide Watch
Over the last two years, the positive news of Myanmar embracing democracy and engaging with the developed world has been consistently offset by reports of sectarian violence between Buddhists and the minority Rohingya Muslim population. Estimates suggest that 300 Muslims have been killed and up to 300,000 displaced since the military junta nominally ceded power in 2011. No longer is this violence restricted to the state of Rakhine where the majority of Burmese Muslims live. Major incidents are reported in states as far south as Thaketa, just a few miles from Yangon, the cultural, historic and business capitol of the country which is now awash with western businessmen drinking expensive cocktails in expensive hotels. This worrying trend of more frequent and more widely spread violence threatens to derail the countrys turnaround.
It has been over a year since the renowned Burmese political activist Aung San Suu Kyi was elected to
the Burmese parliament signalling a groundbreaking change in the countrys government. It has also
been over a year since the first story emerged about the plight of the Rohingya, an ethnic Muslim minority
in Burma, leaving nothing but a slight murmur on the global conscience.
In this time, Burmas international relations have markedly improved, with visits to the United States as
well as the removal of economic sanctions. Even prominent global corporations have travelled to the
country to set up shop. Behind this veil of prosperity and change lies the persecution of the biggest
population of stateless people in the world.
The Rohingya are a Muslim minority that have been in Burma since 9th century. Despite the clear ethnic
differences, they are for all intents and purposes, Burmese. Unfortunately, they have been victims of
systematic persecution since the Burmese junta government took over in 1962. Prior to this, Rohingyas
were recognized by the state and even served as representatives in Burmese parliament. In 1982, the
Rohingya were declared non-nationals and foreign residents and were banned from participating in
elections. Since then, they have been subject to large scale ethnic cleansing that in the past year has led
to grave bloodshed on both sides of the divide.
Currently, there is still a significant population of Rohingyas living in their native Rakhine State in Western
Burma, but apartheid-like restrictions have prevented them from accessing things they need for everyday
life, including their jobs. This has led an estimated 35,000 to seek refuge across the border in neighboring
countries, but even then they are hardly welcome.
The most recent development in this story is the fact that Rohingyas fleeing from sectarian violence into
Thailand are being held in immigration facilities that are akin to prisons. According to Human Rights
Watch, the cells in these facilities are cage like and there is barely enough place to sit. The women
detainees are subject to sexual assault and exploitation.* Even worse, many Rohingya are ending up at
Turutao Island in Thailand, which whilst being a spectacular national park, is also the site of some of the
most intricate human trafficking rings in the region, leaving many Rohingya as not only victims of
sectarian violence, but victims of human trafficking.**
All in all this does seem like a helpless situation. How can anyone help a population that is stateless and
belongs nowherehow can we document approximately how many have gone missingand how many
have disappeared into the clutches of human trafficking? Wouldnt it just be easier to collectively forget?
Ethnic tensions and wars of identity are very much akin to the modern condition. It may be easy to turn a
blind eye to the Rohingya now, but this will only enable harsher consequences a few years down the line.
Identity divisions that have gone unanswered and unsolved have produced some of the gravest conflicts
today; from Syria to Iraq and even to Egypt. And these are not conflicts that we havent seen before. The
post Cold War era of the 1990
It's taught us lessons from the dissolution of Yugoslavia to the genocide in Rwanda, stories like this are all too familiar.
International actors can choose to forget, or they can choose to take steps towards a more stable future.
Today, the Rohingya are a helpless minority, but you never know what tomorrow brings. Their identity as a
Muslim minority resonates with many unstable organizations active today and collective political memory
is a powerful tooljust pick up any history book
This is a youtube video about a young man named Stephen who lives in Myanmar and he does mention persecution there more than once - as he tells the workers of VOM - Voice of the Martyrs his testimony. It was some time ago I began to learn about the brutality of Buddhists which before I had not known of. It came as quite a shock when I heard a story from missionary to China, Gwen Shaw - who told the story of a woman who found another woman locked inside a bamboo cage ( by Buddhists ) to die of starvation on a hillside. She was abandoned there to die and the cruelty of such a slow death is quite telling of what the Buddhists there are capable of. This VOM film was taken of Stephen in Myanmar
There is nothing graphic to the video but you can see the idolatry there and a huge gold idol in the center of the city. The poverty is quite apparent there also.
[ame=http://youtu.be/gve7s8FWhJc]Message from Myanmar | Stephen's Story - YouTube[/ame]
So you think this is a good thing even though the Muslims in Myanmar had nothing to do with what occured in the Maldives?
I more than "think" ----I know that nothing happens in a vacuum -----There are
reasons-----even though there are "reasons"------there is no excuse for violence---
but just as there is no excuse for violence------UNBALANCED discussions of the
problem are not at all helpful.------the fact that buddhists have been oppressed
by muslims in the past and the fact that buddhists have and CONTINUE to face
violence from muslims----- IS A LOGICAL PART OF THE DISCUSSION----and leaving
those facts out------is a manifestation of bigotry.
not long ago-----muslims destroyed ancient buddhist shrines----my impression is---
that if buddhists did a job on the black rock in mecca------or---simply smoked
a few korans publically-----SOME PERSONS (that means you) would shrug
and say ----'what did they expect'------if muslims murdered a few hundred
buddhists in "response"
MYANMAR HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MALDIVES? oh goody----
so if someone bombs the mecca rock IN MECCA----with pig feces---
we can tell the muslims of the world "WHAT HAPPENED IN MECCA
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYONE IN THE REST OF THE WORLD"
good point-----like the MAGNIFICENT 19 of 9-11-01 has nothing to do ---
with anyone-------too. and Osama was not even there.
As far as I know -----adolf abu ali never personally murdered anyone
well-----I googled------it seems that buddhist/muslim conflict has nothing
to do with DOCTRINE -<<<< good news----those doctrine fights are
really bloody. There has been some mild "bad blood" issues between
muslims and buddhists for CENTURIES Buddhist lands were invaded
by muslims ------and there is a history of DHIMMIA imposition on buddhists. ---
not a good legacy. Lately the fight seems largely ECONOMIC <<<< bad--
but not so bad like DOCTRINE issues. In general-----thruout the places where
muslim/buddhist fights go on-------in SUM----it is a kind of balanced dislike----
accompanied by balanced violence AT LAST-----EQUITY!!!!!!!!!!!
Most of all----the important issue is--------whatever problems muslims have
with Buddhists--------guess who causes it? anyone? -----c'mon
coyote------you know-------the answer shows up on GOOGLE
Getting back to the used to be angelic BUDDHISTS-----they have recently
developed NATIONALISM------fairly new to them. -----but they got it too.
Hindus got it and NOW buddhists got it. EVERYONE GETS IT EVENTUALLY.
There are places where buddhists who are IN THE MAJORITY----want to keep
it that way------very vehemently
anyone got an answer? should "NATIONALISM" become an international
crime?
Sort of a silly question.
However, when "nationalism" involves lynching/slaughter and/or genocide then it might be a
crime. After all, didn't Hitler start out with a rallying cry of "nationalism"?
lots of times NATIONALISM is a response to an external threat
lots of times NATIONALISM is a response to an external threat
Tell that Hitler and Stalin.
lots of times NATIONALISM is a response to an external threat
This is a youtube video about a young man named Stephen who lives in Myanmar and he does mention persecution there more than once - as he tells the workers of VOM - Voice of the Martyrs his testimony. It was some time ago I began to learn about the brutality of Buddhists which before I had not known of. It came as quite a shock when I heard a story from missionary to China, Gwen Shaw - who told the story of a woman who found another woman locked inside a bamboo cage ( by Buddhists ) to die of starvation on a hillside. She was abandoned there to die and the cruelty of such a slow death is quite telling of what the Buddhists there are capable of. This VOM film was taken of Stephen in Myanmar
There is nothing graphic to the video but you can see the idolatry there and a huge gold idol in the center of the city. The poverty is quite apparent there also.
[ame=http://youtu.be/gve7s8FWhJc]Message from Myanmar | Stephen's Story - YouTube[/ame]
That is brutal. I don't blame the religions - it's human nature, and it seems the less educated people are, the more intolerant they are of others
