Myanmar Is Starving Rohingya Muslims Out of Their Villages: Reports

[Tehon]

If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did?

They are trying to justify what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

 

[Coyote]

If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did?

They are trying to justify what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

There is no comparison between what Myanmar is doing and what is Israel is doing...just saying.

 

[Vastator]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system. Because this is what diversity brings. Do you think the Rohingya believe that diversity is a strength? The Myanmar government wisely realizes that it's not. And understandably prefers being on the swinging end of the stick...

 

[Coyote]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system. Because this is what diversity brings. Do you think the Rohingya believe that diversity is a strength? The Myanmar government wisely realizes that it's not. And understandably prefers being on the swinging end of the stick...

So...you dont like diversity...then do you think it was ok for ISIS to attempt to "limit" diversity by removing the Yazidi and other minorities?

 

[Vastator]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system. Because this is what diversity brings. Do you think the Rohingya believe that diversity is a strength? The Myanmar government wisely realizes that it's not. And understandably prefers being on the swinging end of the stick...

So...you dont like diversity...then do you think it was ok for ISIS to attempt to "limit" diversity by removing the Azidi and other minorities?

It doesn’t matter if I think it was okay. However any clear thinking individual can understand that a homogenous society is stronger, more cohesive, peaceful internally, and easier to govern. And by that measure I understand why nations and cultures have done this from the dawn of time.

 

[Tehon]

If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did?

They are trying to justify what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

There is no comparison between what Myanmar is doing and what is Israel is doing...just saying.

Yeah, you're probably right.

 

[Coyote]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system. Because this is what diversity brings. Do you think the Rohingya believe that diversity is a strength? The Myanmar government wisely realizes that it's not. And understandably prefers being on the swinging end of the stick...

So...you dont like diversity...then do you think it was ok for ISIS to attempt to "limit" diversity by removing the Yazidi and other minorities?

It doesn’t matter if I think it was okay. However any clear thinking individual can understand that a homogenous society is stronger, more cohesive, peaceful internally, and easier to govern. And by that measure I understand why nations and cultures have done this from the dawn of time.

Homogenous cultures also tend to stagnate.

 

[Vastator]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system. Because this is what diversity brings. Do you think the Rohingya believe that diversity is a strength? The Myanmar government wisely realizes that it's not. And understandably prefers being on the swinging end of the stick...

So...you dont like diversity...then do you think it was ok for ISIS to attempt to "limit" diversity by removing the Azidi and other minorities?

It doesn’t matter if I think it was okay. However any clear thinking individual can understand that a homogenous society is stronger, more cohesive, peaceful internally, and easier to govern. And by that measure I understand why nations and cultures have done this from the dawn of time.

Homogenous cultures also tend to stagnate.

Tend to? Link? None the less... Even if true... And it's not a foregone conclusion... Stagnation=internal peace, and order. Diversity= turbulence and violence. You can't have it all. Decisions must be made.

 

[Vastator]

Does Diversity Create Distrust?

 

[Syriusly]

Shame on you for supporting genocide.
Shame on you for supporting the rape and murder of children.

Just another asshole religious bigot who thinks its okay for countries to kill their unwanted peoples- Jews, Armenians, Christians, Muslims.

That is a lie you keep pushing to avoid the subject. That subject is that Myanmar wants them out. They have a chance to leave peacefully. If they stay they are responsible for whatever happens. I know that makes you cry, but reality can do that to the emasculated idiots.

That is what Hitler said about the Jews.

Germany did not let Jews leave.

They did in the beginning. But no country would take them.

And like the Jews...Myanmar has been keeping many of the Rohinga in concentration camps.

So many similarities...including you.

wrong again-----Neither Germany nor SHARIAH SHIT holes allowed jews to leave.

Germany decided to kill the Jews.
Myanmar decided to rape and murder the Rohinga to drive them out of Myanmar.

Do you agree with the other poster that countries like Germany and Myanmar should be able to do whatever they want with their people?

Do you agree with Myanmar murdering and raping women and children?

 

[Syriusly]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system..

Hmmm what belief system do you have that would agree with the systemic rape of women and children?

See, in my belief system- the rape of women and children- regardless of what religion they are- is wrong.

 

[Syriusly]

*Coyote is changing the subject and making Islam a wicked victim of the new Nazis who now are also Buddhists.

Actually. YOU are making the genocide of an ethnic minority about Islam. It isn't about Islam. It's about a long persecuted ethnic minority.

Timeline: A Short History of Myanmar’s Rohingya Minority

I guess you did not read my post, they are not an ethnic group the name is a political creation for propaganda purposes.

They are a kind of ethnic group------they tend to be Bengali muslims (ie-----belong in Bangladesh)
they have the language of the BENGALIS

They are a kind of ethnic group.

So why does that make the rape of women and children okie dokie to you?

 

[Syriusly]

Myanmar: Since 1947, Rohingya Muslims have been killing Buddhists
19 Sep
Source: Vedic Upasana Peeth - Translated by EuropeNews



Often there is a misconception about the clashes between the Muslim Rohingyas and the Buddhist Burmese in the Rakhina, about the many dead and injured on both sides. Therefore, it should be attempted at this point to present a fair coverage of the historical and current events, so that even those can get an idea that is not so familiar.

The Rohingyas are a Muslim minority who emigrated from Bangladesh and live in Myanmar [also called Burma or Burma]. The Muslim Rohingya multiplied in a relatively short time in large numbers, but without any family planning [1] or economic considerations because of their limited resources. As a result, the indigenous [Buddhist] population in this area became a minority, their land was taken from them, and instead it was given to the growing population of the Rohingya.

[1] In other words, the Bangladeshi Muslims robbed the Burmese of the land. What happened next is called in Germany a birth jihad, with further land grabbing. Why did the Burmese allow this? In Germany, exactly the same thing will happen in a few years. The Germans are so stupid and let millions of Muslims immigrate to Germany. One day they will also rob the Germans of the land and drive them away.

Bengal was an independent state from the 6th century. After the independence of India from British colonial rule in 1947, the Indian states West Bengal and Tripura were formed in the west of Bengal, in the eastern part was created in 1971, the state of Bangladesh.

The Rohingya call themselves indigenous to the state of Rakhine (see above), while the Burmese historians say that they immigrated from Bengal to Burma, mainly during the period of British rule in Burma and, to a lesser degree, after Burma's independence in the year 1948 and the liberation war in Bangladesh in 1971.

Under the rule of Burmese General Ne Win , the Burmese passed a national law that denied Rohingya citizenship, in line with the wishes of the vast majority of Burmese (96%). The decision was also made because the Rohingyas had rebelled against the government for several decades, with support from outside Islamist forces, mainly separatist movements and extremist groups, including al-Qaeda. The Islamic separatists wanted to transform Rakhine into an independent Islamic state.

The rebellions of the Rohingya in western Myanmar were riots in the northern part of Rakhine State (also known as Arakan), carried out by insurgents belonging to the Rohingya ethnic minority. Most of the clashes took place in Maungaw district, which borders Bangladesh.

Local Mujahideen groups rebelled against Burmese government forces from 1947 to 1961 to try to split off the majority of the Rohingya-inhabited Mayu Peninsula in the northern part of Rakhine State, Myanmar, and then connect it to East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). In the late 1950s, they lost a lot of supporters and surrendered to the Burmese government forces.

Rohingya's modern uprisings in northern Rakhine began in 2001, although Roweya majority MEP Shwe Maung dismissed allegations that new Islamist rebel groups had begun to operate on the border with Bangladesh. The last incident reported was in October 2016, when clashes broke out on the Myanmar border with Bangladesh, with Rohingya rebels suspected of having links with foreign Islamists.

Although the Rohingya are located in Burma for several generations, they make up about 4% of the population of Myanmar. On the other hand, Muslim men were constantly abusing, brutally raping and killing Buddhists in Rakhine, followed by murders of Muslim Rohingyas (in retaliation), sparking uprisings between the Buddhists in Rakhine and the Rohingya Muslims. It was not a one-sided massacre, but a local uprising with victims on both sides.

The matter became more serious as the Rohingya also killed monks. Mostly they were beheaded. At least 19 such murders of monks were reported within a few months as the monks sided with the indigenous people fighting the Rohingyas. [If you have Muslims in the country, you do not need hangmen anymore.]

The question we all have to ask ourselves is, why are Muslims killing Christians? Why do Muslims kill other Muslims pretty much all over the world? None of the Buddhists we know wanted or want to kill Muslims, at least not for religious reasons.

Muslims have little tolerance for proselytism [1], which means there are no problems with other religions as long as one stays with his religion and does not try to convert others. Christians have had to learn this long ago, although they continue to do so, but without being aggressive, the Hindus never had such ambitions and the Buddhists do not, but the Muslims ... well

[1] Sura 4:89 calls Muslims to kill Muslims when they leave Islam.

On the other hand, the Rohingyas communities are very conservative regarding inter-religious marriages [marriages between Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists]. Sometimes Muslims punish and kill women when they marry Hindus or Buddhists. But the Muslim men like to marry Buddhist women and convert them to Islam. This does not appeal to some conservative groups of the Buddhist majority, for obvious reasons.

The Christians and the Hindus, the second and fourth largest community within the population of Burma integrates nicely, although many Christian ethnic groups oppose the Buddhist Banar (Kachin, Chin, Karen, etc. (Burmese ethnic groups)), so are the disputes rather historical, or territorial, or resources, but never religious. Even insulting a religion, ANY religion for whatever reason, is illegal in Myanmar and you would end up in jail within a few hours. And that will be actively implemented, probably for a good reason.

The Rohingya Muslims were welcomed in the beginning as historians say. There were few or no problems at the beginning. Problems like rebellions happened later, but an agreement was reached and they were disarmed in the 1960s. Although there were minor conflicts between the two communities, nothing serious happened until five years ago when Muslims gathered in large numbers, went out on the streets and killed the minority natives in their area [Germany's future]. Then, for their part, the Burmese Buddhists began counterattacking the Muslims who killed their brothers and sisters in the Rohingya area.

Therefore, it is important to understand that the Buddhists do not kill the Muslims, but the native Buddhists in Rakhine fought against the Muslim rebels [Islamic jihadists] who are literally out to ethnic cleansing in the state of Rakhine . If it were the guilt of the Buddhists, then they would certainly have attacked the Christians. At least they would have discriminated against Christians somehow, because Christians are after all the second largest religious community in Burma. But that never happened.

So you have to say that the riots can not be described as religious wars. It is a political war in which indigenous Buddhists seek to protect their lives from Muslim invaders belonging to an immigrant community. Not only is it trying to grow in disturbing numbers, but it is also trying to convert the natives by force to their faith through direct and indirect means.

Worse, they call on the Rohingyas' Muslim men to marry Buddhists, but they forbid the Muslim Rohingya women from marrying Buddhists. It is a rebellion that the Muslim Rohingyas started by attacking Buddhists. The opposite is simply not true, although it is believed worldwide. It is the Muslim Rohingyas who kill people and call Allahu Akhbar [as everywhere in the world]. Not a single Buddhist would normally come up with the idea of killing Muslims. But her survival is now a priority and that's what makes her fight back. [2]

[2] Not otherwise in the Philippines. No sooner did the Muslims on the southern Philippine island of Mindanao make up 20 percent of the population than Islamic terror began. Meanwhile, President Rodrigo Duterte has imposed martial law. Now he militarily fights the Muslims. tagesschau.de: 20 million Filipinos under martial law

In Indonesia, too, that for a long time was considered a liberal Islamic model state, now terror and violence prevail: Indonesia: The end of an Islamic model state And in a few years, the same thing is guaranteed to happen in Germany. Why are the Germans so stupid and do not learn from history? It seems to me that they prefer to be slaughtered.

For more than 50 years, Buddhists in Burma have been experiencing how the Muslim Rohingya apparently fight against them for no reason except that they want to create a separate Islamic region in Burma with financial support from extremist organizations and the Middle East and with additional help the neighboring Islamic states of Pakistan and Bangladesh. It's the last option they have, despite the obvious problems that come with it. For the Buddhists it is simply a question of whether they are willing to die at the hands of the Muslim separatists, or if they want to try to continue living by fighting for it. [3]

About 50 percent of six-year-olds in most German cities have a migrant background, in the majority of a Muslim. In Frankfurt / Main even 75.61% of six-year-olds have a migration background . Thanks to Angela Merkel and her CDU voters and family reunification, another 2 to 3 million Muslims will join in 2018. And that's guaranteed to continue in the next few years. In 12 years, today's six-year-olds are grown and go to vote, maybe even two years earlier, at the age of 16.

Germans do not have to be surprised if ethnic cleansing also takes place in Germany. But the suicidal Germans do not want to know about it. By contrast, all the naive, unrealistic, uneducated and idiotic leftists and do-gooders dream of a peaceful multicultural state. What is the name of this mental illness? Socialism, Islamism or communism?

The comments in square brackets are from the admin.

Good propaganda piece by white supremacists.

There are some tidbits of truth there- some Rohinga have killed Buddhists in Myanmar- but the article completely ignores that Buddhists have also been killing the Rohinga since WW2.

Tell me more though how any actions by part of a minority group- justifies the rape of women and children?

 

[Vastator]

The historical situation is complex...but nothing in any way even remotely justifies what is being done to these people. If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did? What ISIS did in attempting to create their “state”? What is being done to Egypt’s Coptic community? Stalin’s treatment of the Ukrainians and other minorities? Does Spain have the right to exterminate the Bask minority for the violence of some of their separatists? Does Turkey, Iran and Iraq have the right to slaughter their Kurdish minorities because of the violence of some of its separatists?

I am also curious about this constant refrain...but if they had left peacefully...where are 800,000 people, mostly very poor agricultural people going to go? What is peaceful about being shot in the back while fleeing? Can anyone tell me without resorting to some violent action some Muslim somewhere else in the world has engaged in?

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule

Tracing history: Tension between Rohingya Muslims, Buddhists date back to British rule
As part of their divide-and-rule policy, British colonists favoured Muslims at the expense of other groups. They recruited them as soldiers during World War II, pitting them against Buddhists.

When did they first arrive in Myanmar?

By some accounts, they are descendants of Arab, Turkish or Mongol traders and soldiers who in the 15th Century migrated to Rakhine state, previously called the Kingdom of Arakan.

Other historians say they emigrated from Bangladesh in several waves, a widely held view among most Burmese.

For centuries the small Muslim minority lived peacefully alongside Buddhists in the independent kingdom, some were even advisors to Buddhist royals, according to historians.

Upheaval ensued from the late 18th century.

In 1784 the kingdom was conquered by the Burmese and later by the British following the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824-1826.

Under British rule, a large number arrived to work as farmers and later as military recruits.

“In the 1830s there was a massive influx of Muslim peasants from neighbouring Bengal, mostly to work in the agriculture sector,” said Sophie Boisseau du Rocher, Southeast Asia expert at the French Institute for International Relations.

By 1912, more than 30 percent of the population of Arakan state were Muslim, up from five percent in 1869, according to British census data cited by historian Jacques Leider.


If they weren’t Muslim...would you believe them or the authoritarian brutal regime that is doing this?

While you are busy despairing in the events unfolding in Myanmar take a good long, hard look at what is actually happening. Then look at your own belief system..

Hmmm what belief system do you have that would agree with the systemic rape of women and children?

See, in my belief system- the rape of women and children- regardless of what religion they are- is wrong.

I believe in reality. And reality doesn’t require that anyone agree with it...

 

[RodISHI]

Myanmar: Since 1947, Rohingya Muslims have been killing Buddhists
19 Sep
Source: Vedic Upasana Peeth - Translated by EuropeNews



Often there is a misconception about the clashes between the Muslim Rohingyas and the Buddhist Burmese in the Rakhina, about the many dead and injured on both sides. Therefore, it should be attempted at this point to present a fair coverage of the historical and current events, so that even those can get an idea that is not so familiar.

The Rohingyas are a Muslim minority who emigrated from Bangladesh and live in Myanmar [also called Burma or Burma]. The Muslim Rohingya multiplied in a relatively short time in large numbers, but without any family planning [1] or economic considerations because of their limited resources. As a result, the indigenous [Buddhist] population in this area became a minority, their land was taken from them, and instead it was given to the growing population of the Rohingya.

[1] In other words, the Bangladeshi Muslims robbed the Burmese of the land. What happened next is called in Germany a birth jihad, with further land grabbing. Why did the Burmese allow this? In Germany, exactly the same thing will happen in a few years. The Germans are so stupid and let millions of Muslims immigrate to Germany. One day they will also rob the Germans of the land and drive them away.

Bengal was an independent state from the 6th century. After the independence of India from British colonial rule in 1947, the Indian states West Bengal and Tripura were formed in the west of Bengal, in the eastern part was created in 1971, the state of Bangladesh.

The Rohingya call themselves indigenous to the state of Rakhine (see above), while the Burmese historians say that they immigrated from Bengal to Burma, mainly during the period of British rule in Burma and, to a lesser degree, after Burma's independence in the year 1948 and the liberation war in Bangladesh in 1971.

Under the rule of Burmese General Ne Win , the Burmese passed a national law that denied Rohingya citizenship, in line with the wishes of the vast majority of Burmese (96%). The decision was also made because the Rohingyas had rebelled against the government for several decades, with support from outside Islamist forces, mainly separatist movements and extremist groups, including al-Qaeda. The Islamic separatists wanted to transform Rakhine into an independent Islamic state.

The rebellions of the Rohingya in western Myanmar were riots in the northern part of Rakhine State (also known as Arakan), carried out by insurgents belonging to the Rohingya ethnic minority. Most of the clashes took place in Maungaw district, which borders Bangladesh.

Local Mujahideen groups rebelled against Burmese government forces from 1947 to 1961 to try to split off the majority of the Rohingya-inhabited Mayu Peninsula in the northern part of Rakhine State, Myanmar, and then connect it to East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). In the late 1950s, they lost a lot of supporters and surrendered to the Burmese government forces.

Rohingya's modern uprisings in northern Rakhine began in 2001, although Roweya majority MEP Shwe Maung dismissed allegations that new Islamist rebel groups had begun to operate on the border with Bangladesh. The last incident reported was in October 2016, when clashes broke out on the Myanmar border with Bangladesh, with Rohingya rebels suspected of having links with foreign Islamists.

Although the Rohingya are located in Burma for several generations, they make up about 4% of the population of Myanmar. On the other hand, Muslim men were constantly abusing, brutally raping and killing Buddhists in Rakhine, followed by murders of Muslim Rohingyas (in retaliation), sparking uprisings between the Buddhists in Rakhine and the Rohingya Muslims. It was not a one-sided massacre, but a local uprising with victims on both sides.

The matter became more serious as the Rohingya also killed monks. Mostly they were beheaded. At least 19 such murders of monks were reported within a few months as the monks sided with the indigenous people fighting the Rohingyas. [If you have Muslims in the country, you do not need hangmen anymore.]

The question we all have to ask ourselves is, why are Muslims killing Christians? Why do Muslims kill other Muslims pretty much all over the world? None of the Buddhists we know wanted or want to kill Muslims, at least not for religious reasons.

Muslims have little tolerance for proselytism [1], which means there are no problems with other religions as long as one stays with his religion and does not try to convert others. Christians have had to learn this long ago, although they continue to do so, but without being aggressive, the Hindus never had such ambitions and the Buddhists do not, but the Muslims ... well

[1] Sura 4:89 calls Muslims to kill Muslims when they leave Islam.

On the other hand, the Rohingyas communities are very conservative regarding inter-religious marriages [marriages between Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists]. Sometimes Muslims punish and kill women when they marry Hindus or Buddhists. But the Muslim men like to marry Buddhist women and convert them to Islam. This does not appeal to some conservative groups of the Buddhist majority, for obvious reasons.

The Christians and the Hindus, the second and fourth largest community within the population of Burma integrates nicely, although many Christian ethnic groups oppose the Buddhist Banar (Kachin, Chin, Karen, etc. (Burmese ethnic groups)), so are the disputes rather historical, or territorial, or resources, but never religious. Even insulting a religion, ANY religion for whatever reason, is illegal in Myanmar and you would end up in jail within a few hours. And that will be actively implemented, probably for a good reason.

The Rohingya Muslims were welcomed in the beginning as historians say. There were few or no problems at the beginning. Problems like rebellions happened later, but an agreement was reached and they were disarmed in the 1960s. Although there were minor conflicts between the two communities, nothing serious happened until five years ago when Muslims gathered in large numbers, went out on the streets and killed the minority natives in their area [Germany's future]. Then, for their part, the Burmese Buddhists began counterattacking the Muslims who killed their brothers and sisters in the Rohingya area.

Therefore, it is important to understand that the Buddhists do not kill the Muslims, but the native Buddhists in Rakhine fought against the Muslim rebels [Islamic jihadists] who are literally out to ethnic cleansing in the state of Rakhine . If it were the guilt of the Buddhists, then they would certainly have attacked the Christians. At least they would have discriminated against Christians somehow, because Christians are after all the second largest religious community in Burma. But that never happened.

So you have to say that the riots can not be described as religious wars. It is a political war in which indigenous Buddhists seek to protect their lives from Muslim invaders belonging to an immigrant community. Not only is it trying to grow in disturbing numbers, but it is also trying to convert the natives by force to their faith through direct and indirect means.

Worse, they call on the Rohingyas' Muslim men to marry Buddhists, but they forbid the Muslim Rohingya women from marrying Buddhists. It is a rebellion that the Muslim Rohingyas started by attacking Buddhists. The opposite is simply not true, although it is believed worldwide. It is the Muslim Rohingyas who kill people and call Allahu Akhbar [as everywhere in the world]. Not a single Buddhist would normally come up with the idea of killing Muslims. But her survival is now a priority and that's what makes her fight back. [2]

[2] Not otherwise in the Philippines. No sooner did the Muslims on the southern Philippine island of Mindanao make up 20 percent of the population than Islamic terror began. Meanwhile, President Rodrigo Duterte has imposed martial law. Now he militarily fights the Muslims. tagesschau.de: 20 million Filipinos under martial law

In Indonesia, too, that for a long time was considered a liberal Islamic model state, now terror and violence prevail: Indonesia: The end of an Islamic model state And in a few years, the same thing is guaranteed to happen in Germany. Why are the Germans so stupid and do not learn from history? It seems to me that they prefer to be slaughtered.

For more than 50 years, Buddhists in Burma have been experiencing how the Muslim Rohingya apparently fight against them for no reason except that they want to create a separate Islamic region in Burma with financial support from extremist organizations and the Middle East and with additional help the neighboring Islamic states of Pakistan and Bangladesh. It's the last option they have, despite the obvious problems that come with it. For the Buddhists it is simply a question of whether they are willing to die at the hands of the Muslim separatists, or if they want to try to continue living by fighting for it. [3]

About 50 percent of six-year-olds in most German cities have a migrant background, in the majority of a Muslim. In Frankfurt / Main even 75.61% of six-year-olds have a migration background . Thanks to Angela Merkel and her CDU voters and family reunification, another 2 to 3 million Muslims will join in 2018. And that's guaranteed to continue in the next few years. In 12 years, today's six-year-olds are grown and go to vote, maybe even two years earlier, at the age of 16.

Germans do not have to be surprised if ethnic cleansing also takes place in Germany. But the suicidal Germans do not want to know about it. By contrast, all the naive, unrealistic, uneducated and idiotic leftists and do-gooders dream of a peaceful multicultural state. What is the name of this mental illness? Socialism, Islamism or communism?

The comments in square brackets are from the admin.

Good propaganda piece by white supremacists.

There are some tidbits of truth there- some Rohinga have killed Buddhists in Myanmar- but the article completely ignores that Buddhists have also been killing the Rohinga since WW2.

Tell me more though how any actions by part of a minority group- justifies the rape of women and children?

Tell me what kind of idiot thinks that their wives and children won't become targets when they hide among them? Why do you try to justify the actions of your beloved terrorist?

 

[Lastamender]

If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did?

They are trying to justify what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

There is no comparison between what Myanmar is doing and what is Israel is doing...just saying.

There sure is a comparison. Both country's are defending themselves, and each country is faced with Islamic terror.

 

[Lastamender]

*Coyote is changing the subject and making Islam a wicked victim of the new Nazis who now are also Buddhists.

Actually. YOU are making the genocide of an ethnic minority about Islam. It isn't about Islam. It's about a long persecuted ethnic minority.

Timeline: A Short History of Myanmar’s Rohingya Minority

I guess you did not read my post, they are not an ethnic group the name is a political creation for propaganda purposes.

They are a kind of ethnic group------they tend to be Bengali muslims (ie-----belong in Bangladesh)
they have the language of the BENGALIS

They are a kind of ethnic group.

So why does that make the rape of women and children okie dokie to you?

You keep forgetting it is alright with Muhammad to rape the women and enslave or convert the children. And what is a kind of ethnic group? The kind you can prop up with lies like the Palestinians?

 

[Tilly]

The ‘rohingya’ have not only been training for terrorism in growing numbers in Bangladesh and Pakistan with several terrorist groups including the Pakistani Taliban, but they have been attacking and slaughtering the police, raping women, murdering Buddhist monks, and raping and hacking up local Hindu’s.
Mass graves of massacred Hindu’s have been found, but the press seem to have decided some time ago to ignore the atrocities the ‘rohingya’ indulge in - in favour of being completely one sided.
The ‘rohingya’ terrorists are also joined by young men and boys from the villages in their attacks.
What with the training and the fact that the terrorists are growing in numbers, and that young men not formally recruited also join in when required, it is a problem that cannot be ignored unless Myanmar is expected to be stupid enough give up land from which further organising, more terrorism and land grabs will be launched.

 

[irosie91]

so? the muslims in Myanmar are---unwelcomed impoverished muslims from east Pakistan----now called
BANGLDESH------what else is new. CULTURALLY-----Bengalis are NOT arabs, mongols or turks. CULTURALLY they are not even WEST PAKISTANIS (generally Urdu speakers) THEY ARE
BENGALIS and the Burmese never got along with them. Sadly ---east Pakistan is and sorta always
has been a mess-------even the west Pakistanis went out of their way to MURDER THEM (remember--
circa 1971---BLOODY WAR!!!) (Bengali is an ethnicity)

 

[irosie91]

If you start to accept that the state has these rights to do what it may to its people then does that justify what the Nazis did?

They are trying to justify what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank.

what is Israel doing in Gaza and Samaria?