Nationalist uprising in Myanmar

Watch
Unorganisedaf
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Very interesting article.
'No Muslims allowed': how nationalism is rising in Aung San Suu Kyi's Myanmar | World news | The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.comhttp://www...u-kyis-myanmar

Where extremism isn't happening amongst Muslims. Figured it's a good read and ought to be known of. Discrimination against anyone is horrid and can only provoke and aggravate situations further.
2
reply
garfeeled
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
(Original post by Unorganisedaf)
Very interesting article.
'No Muslims allowed': how nationalism is rising in Aung San Suu Kyi's Myanmar | World news | The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.comhttp://www...u-kyis-myanmar

Where extremism isn't happening amongst Muslims. Figured it's a good read and ought to be known of. Discrimination against anyone is horrid and can only provoke and aggravate situations further.
Your link isn't working properly.
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
working link

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...u-kyis-myanmar

“No Muslims allowed to stay overnight. No Muslims allowed to rent houses. No marriage with Muslims.”

I see similar laws in Muslim countries and within the Muslim faith so can't see an issue with this I suspect the outrage will be some Muslims complaining they are being treated the same as they would treat others.

But this is the problem with Islamic immigration there is no compromise with the host country so tensions always arise (as we see in every country with a new Muslim community)
6
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Unorganisedaf)
Discrimination against anyone is horrid and can only provoke and aggravate situations further.
This sentiment is very common but suffers from being utterly thoughtless, and trite. Do you not know the meaning of the word "discriminate"?

I (justifiably and reasonably) discriminate against people who threaten me, or who are violent, or who rob me, or who are dishonest. I actively seek to avoid them at all times. I also discriminate against people who live in the west but who refuse to be assimilated into our society. Such people should live elsewhere.

If seeking to employ someone, I actively discriminate against anyone I suspect is incapable of performing the job well.
6
reply
garfeeled
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
working link

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...u-kyis-myanmar

“No Muslims allowed to stay overnight. No Muslims allowed to rent houses. No marriage with Muslims.”

I see similar laws in Muslim countries and within the Muslim faith so can't see an issue with this I suspect the outrage will be some Muslims complaining they are being treated the same as they would treat others.

But this is the problem with Islamic immigration there is no compromise with the host country so tensions always arise (as we see in every country with a new Muslim community)
Shouldn't we be better than that. I mean other Muslims have and still do similar things is a pretty weak reason. These are a people undergoing years of oppression of some of the most extreme kind. I have my issues with Islam (and for the most part the prosecution faced by Rohingya people is more extreme than that faced by non Muslims under Islamic rule) but that's largely irrelevant. Religious/ethnic prosecution is wrong the Rohingya deserve better, they are owed better.
4
reply
Unorganisedaf
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#6
(Original post by Good bloke)
This sentiment is very common but suffers from being utterly thoughtless, and trite. Do you not know the meaning of the word "discriminate"?

I (justifiably and reasonably) discriminate against people who threaten me, or who are violent, or who rob me, or who are dishonest. I actively seek to avoid them at all times. I also discriminate against people who live in the west but who refuse to be assimilated into our society. Such people should live elsewhere.

If seeking to employ someone, I actively discriminate against anyone I suspect is incapable of performing the job well.
Okay I spoke a bit too broadly then. I'm not one to really get into politics but I felt like so much is happening you can't keep up. This one article I felt was pretty interesting to see considering the dynamics don't favour Muslims much in this day and age. Extremism usually has the connotations of Islam etc. But I take your point, I just hope no one has a massive go at me for saying something. I accept that I'm not at a level of full maturity to understand everything so you may call my sentiment thoughtless, it's fine. I have no problem with comments like that. I suppose I meant to say prejudice.
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by garfeeled)
Shouldn't we be better than that.
If we try to be 'better' then them they will beat us as they will (and do) use our laws against us.

Intolerance needs to be countered with intolerance not excuses.
3
reply
M14B
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
Burma was such a nice country
0
reply
Tawheed
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
The silence of ang yan sui kyi on the oppression of muslims in her nation is sickening. Absolutely sickening.
0
reply
Unorganisedaf
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by garfeeled)
Your link isn't working properly.
Ah possibly because it's taken from my news app thingy.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by garfeeled)
Shouldn't we be better than that.
It isn't relevant to Burma, which is by no means a liberal democracy, but the liberal democracies have a serious problem in that political Islam (among others) will take full advantage of their easy-going nature to further their own ends.

It may be a very slow process, but strong immigration into the west will be a surer route to the next caliphate than the battleground, unless we take steps to ensure secularism is written into our constitutions irrevocably.
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
People are judged by their behaviour. If they had a history of flourishing and being a great economic advantage to their hosts then everyone would be queuing up to take them in.

We just use the information we have to hand to make the best judgments we can. Obviously religions tend to take issue with the use of information.
0
reply
garfeeled
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
If we try to be 'better' then them they will beat us as they will (and do) use our laws against us.

Intolerance needs to be countered with intolerance not excuses.
Intolerance cannot be tolerated from Muslims or against Muslims. It's completely unjust to ban Muslims from having more than two children but it is completely just (arguably morally required) to challenge homophobia within Muslims and the community as a whole. But what is being done to the Rohingya is not justifiable intolerance in the name of preserving tolerance. It's intolerance done from feelings of ethnic supremacy and intolerance of other religions.

What is done to the Rohingya is intolerable and we shouldn't tolerate it.

(Original post by Good bloke)
It isn't relevant to Burma, which is by no means a liberal democracy, but the liberal democracies have a serious problem in that political Islam (among others) will take full advantage of their easy-going nature to further their own ends.

It may be a very slow process, but strong immigration into the west will be a surer route to the next caliphate than the battleground, unless we take steps to ensure secularism is written into our constitutions irrevocably.
I don't disagree. But let's be clear the discrimination faced by the Rohingya is unjustifiable.
0
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Jebedee)
People are judged by their behaviour. If they had a history of flourishing and being a great economic advantage to their hosts then everyone would be queuing up to take them in.

We just use the information we have to hand to make the best judgments we can. Obviously religions tend to take issue with the use of information.
Quite true and given Islams interaction with Buddhism I can see why they are VERY wary of allowing Islam to gain any traction in their country
1
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by garfeeled)
Intolerance cannot be tolerated from Muslims or against Muslims.
Have to disagree we NEED to treat those who are intolerant in the same way they treat others and those who are unable to compromise deserve no acceptance.

As I said in the 'rules' posted I see similar in Muslim countries and within Islam itself.

But as I say you need to understand Islams interaction with Buddhism to see why they are very wary indeed and rightly so (it's akin to the Nazis trying to set up in Israel and then decrying any restrictions that are placed on them)
0
reply
chemting
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
When will the wall come along? Will Thailand pay for it?

I don't think anything justifies mob-rule...

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
garfeeled
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
Have to disagree we NEED to treat those who are intolerant in the same way they treat others and those who are unable to compromise deserve no acceptance.

As I said in the 'rules' posted I see similar in Muslim countries and within Islam itself.

But as I say you need to understand Islams interaction with Buddhism to see why they are very wary indeed and rightly so (it's akin to the Nazis trying to set up in Israel and then decrying any restrictions that are placed on them)
So an eye for an eye then for every abused dished out by Isis or Saudi Arabia, Muslims in Britain and around the world should face the same. For every homophobic preacher in America holding a kill the gay conference mainstream Americans should hold conferences discussing how to kill evangelicals.

I have a question how far back do we go to justify. I mean let's say we start enacting anti Muslim laws does that mean Saudi Arabia is permitted now to enact more extreme laws (or do the already discriminatory rulings become forgiven).
0
reply
Peroxidation
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Unorganisedaf)
Very interesting article.
'No Muslims allowed': how nationalism is rising in Aung San Suu Kyi's Myanmar | World news | The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.comhttp://www...u-kyis-myanmar

Where extremism isn't happening amongst Muslims. Figured it's a good read and ought to be known of. Discrimination against anyone is horrid and can only provoke and aggravate situations further.
Ludicrous! Absolutely ludicrous!

Do you have any idea why that's happening in Burma? Clearly not, or you'd be praising the Burmese for putting national security first. Let me enlighten you all.

The Rohingya were never Burmese, they were unwanted immigrants who flooded to Burma under British rule. The Buddhists tolerated them though. The Rohingya didn't understand that they're guests. They were violent towards the Burmese Sangha for decades, rape cases were significantly high in areas with large moslem populations, in fact it was only the Buddhists who were being raped in almost every case.

What started off the conflict was much worse. Initially, three Buddhist girls were found raped and murdered (the culprits were moslems). One was only seven. Soon after a Buddhist family was attacked and refused service when they went to buy food at a moslem-owned store. Soon after that, a Buddhist monk was murdered in an indescribably savage way by Rohingya. The man was innocent and was a pillar of his community. He had set up a school for the children of his village (children of all faiths no less) and was out buying books for his students as there were about 200 students and only about 140 books. He was a man who lived only for the sake of others. While out buying books, he was attacked by Rohingyas. They slashed the back of his head with a knife, beat him, ripped off his robes (which is to us as offensive as pulling a hijab off is to moslems) and then dragged him into the nearby mosque. There they castrated him, poured acid in his face and burned him alive. He died later in hospital. This attack was unprecendented and unprovoked. The moslems butchered him simply because he was a Buddhist.

For Buddhists, the community (Sangha) is one of the components of the Triple Gem, alongside the Buddha and the Dhamma. The Sangha is like an incredibly close knit family. Other Buddhists are almost like relatives. Monks in particular are highly respected among the Sangha. So you can imagine the anguish that this noble man's death caused. For Buddhists it was like having the above attack done to your cousin. Not only that, but those 200-odd kids that relied on him for an education don't have a future anymore. They've got no education now and as a result they're doomed to remain poor.

It gets worse though. One of the moslem rapists was caught soon after. He confessed that his imam had been handing out bounties for every Buddhist murdered. Women had to be raped as well in order for the bounty to be valid. Upon investigating the other mosques, the Burmese police found that this wasn't a one off incident. All of the mosques had been doing it. At that point it became clear that the moslems had been planning the genocide of the Buddhists. Naturally, that made them all a threat to national security and to the safety of all non-moslems in Burma. The Burmese government has a responsibility to protect it's people and due to how serious the threat was, containment of the moslems in prison camps was the only way to ensure the safety of the Burmese people.

None of us like it, none of us wanted it and all of us wish it could end. But that's all out of our hands. Until the Rohingya are removed from Burma or learn to live peacefully, this won't end. Buddhists have even been trying to help them, despite everything they've done to us. Temples are sheltering the (few) innocent Rohingya (who are actually being attacked by other Rohingya for not attacking Buddhists) and the Burmese government is trying to get them Bengali citizenship, which is where they originally came from. That way they'd have somewhere to go where they'd be among other moslems and can leave peacefully. Unfortunately Bangladesh won't take them in due to their unforgivable violence towards the Burmese.

In typical left-wing fashion, the media has twisted the story to hide all of the atrocities that the Rohingya have committed and the help that Buddhists are trying to give them. They've made it look like ethnic cleansing, which is not at all the case.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/175530387...BUDDHIST-WOMEN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g2D...ature=youtu.be

I suggest we all have a minute of silence for this poor woman's husband and the other's who have been killed in this conflict, both Buddhist and Rohingya.

(Original post by Tawheed)
The silence of ang yan sui kyi on the oppression of muslims in her nation is sickening. Absolutely sickening.
"Oppression of muslims." I'm sorry but that's ridiculous.
6
reply
Lord Samosa
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by BaconandSauce)
Intolerance cannot be tolerated from Muslims or against Muslims

Have to disagree we NEED to treat those who are intolerant in the same way they treat others and those who are unable to compromise deserve no acceptance.

As I said in the 'rules' posted I see similar in Muslim countries and within Islam itself.

But as I say you need to understand Islams interaction with Buddhism to see why they are very wary indeed and rightly so (it's akin to the Nazis trying to set up in Israel and then decrying any restrictions that are placed on them)
But what do the Rohingya people have to do with the countries imposing those laws? They're not the ones imposing them, so how can you justify them being treated like this.
1
reply
BaconandSauce
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by garfeeled)
So an eye for an eye then for every abused dished out by Isis or Saudi Arabia, Muslims in Britain and around the world should face the same. For every homophobic preacher in America holding a kill the gay conference mainstream Americans should hold conferences discussing how to kill evangelicals.

I have a question how far back do we go to justify. I mean let's say we start enacting anti Muslim laws does that mean Saudi Arabia is permitted now to enact more extreme laws (or do the already discriminatory rulings become forgiven).
No not an eye for an eye but I see no issues with treating people how they would treat others.

As I said we need to stop tolerating intolerance

But to ignore history means we are due to repeat the errors and Islam has a long and bloody history from it inception to today.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (639)
33.47%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (806)
42.22%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (378)
19.8%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (86)
4.5%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed