Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Jiraffe

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jiraffe

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Private
  1. I also have known people who have been to myanmar and worked there, that'd how i know about ethnic groups there and history, and i know some burmese too.
  2. I posted my views here because alot of people like salafists are lying in order to initiate jihad against non muslims. When umar ibn al khattab attacked the byzantines, he didn't give bull[Edited Out] justifications like "the levant is arab muslim land and we owned it first", he made it a war of conquest and didn't lie about it. According to salafis, first sunnis are supposed to give dawah to non muslims and invite them to islam. Then if they reject, declared jihad until their land is conquered or they pay jizya, this way, the entire world is to become muslim by force. They aren't supposed to lie about "this land was muslim first", or claim that muslims are being victimized by kuffar as justification. They are supposed to tell the truth, that they came to impose islam by force and are the aggresors. They didn't say "lie and whine". However most salafis are not doing that, almost all of salafi propaganda is dedicated to projecting an image of being a "victim", saying that the kuffar attacked first, and stole muslim land and what they are doing is defending muslims. You can see that going on in syria where fake videos of alawites are made forcing people to say la ilaha ila bashar and are distributed by salafists. If they were honest and say "we are doing this jihad to force the alawites into submission and we started it", i don't have any moral objection to it. I do object to living under salafi rule however for obvious reasons, and don't want them to take over the world. I don't support them because i am not a muslim and not a salafi and i hope they get crushed. But if they weren't lying so much then i wouldn't have a moral objection because they are not hiding their intent.
  3. There are many non muslims in this forum, its the forum's policy to allow it and until it changes i don't need to explain why i am posting here. Most of the media is pro rohingya, and why would you debate people you agree with? That defeats the point of it.
  4. Most kurds are ahlul-sunnah and that didn't stop Saddam from killing them. Iran and Syria do not agree 100% on everything. iran supported shia mujahideen against the soviet union in afghanistan, while Syria was always a soviet ally and supported the kabul communist government. Iran also called the soviet union "little satan", while syria always were allies to the soviets.
  5. Um, you already accuses me of being a bamar so why are you asking about my religion now? I'm not burmese, muslim, or buddhist. The anti chinese pogroms were done because of political tensions with china with the burmese government. They attacked mostly non muslim chinese because chinese muslims are not politically tied to any government. They may not like the junta, since burma was restricted and they could not do alot of trade, but they are not being mass murdered or having their mosques torched. Right now burma wants to open up ties to the west, and if they are seen as committing mass murders or persecution it will be seen as a liability by india or america to open up more ties with them. Obama is going on a tour of southeast asia and burma is one of his stops, america is afraid of being shown in a bad light in the muslim world, burma is not israel and doesn't have a lobby in america.
  6. A. If there is a systematic crackdown on all muslims, how come you are still posting from your computer? B. Everytime i go to the saudi or UAE funded gulf news or khaleejtimes, i find the same lies posted about mrauk u (not mentioned by that name but its obvious what they are referring to ) being a rohingya kingdom, and used as justification to claim that arakan is supposed to be an independent rohingya state. i even saw them boasting about how in 1948 some rohingya set up mujahideen outfits to create an islamic state in arakan when burma became independent, and they kept claiming that arakan is the rohingya homeland and they are native there. There is absolutely no mention of any of the history of the rakhines grievances such as some of the rakhine militant outfits who wanted an independent arakan from burma, the rakhine are just lumped together with the bamar as burmese.
  7. Why should minority ethnic groups be running private armies?
  8. This is what i said Rohingya are claiming the kings of mrauk u were rohingya muslims, and that they were in arakan sincethe beginning of time. These are both lies. They try to deny that they were descendants of bengalis who moved into mrauk u 500 years ago and claim they were always native to the area. The rakhine king of mrauk u brought back bengalis after his stay in bangladesh. They ran the mint and thats why the shahada appeara on one side of their coins. There are white spaniards living in mexico, where their ancestors moved hundreds of years ago, no one said they should leave. But if they start telling lies about being in mexico since the beginning of time, and that the aztecs and olmecs were spanish they should GTFO and go back to spain.
  9. Except rakhine aren't illegally crossing borders into other countries and claiming that it was their land from the beginning of time and that they are natives of the area. There are rakhine in chittagong in bangladesh because that area used to be part of mrauk u, not because of illegal immigration. The rohingya got a high birthrate because they keep siphoning aid from NGOs so they can raise large families without working. Thats why the area of arakan near bangladesh is rohingya majority. Less than 100 people have been killed because its mostly villagers attacking each other, most of the "victims" are the thousands of displaced people, both rohingya and rakhine. By the way a earthquake just hit the mandalay region (most chinese muslims in burma are concentrated there), can't wait for the salafist [Edited Out]s to proclaim that Allah is punishing burma for the rohingya, when the chinese muslims and bamar in mandalay have nothing to do with arakan.
  10. This is the video link with an excerpt from nasrallah's interview with assange http://www.mefeedia.com/watch/51021964 He said the usual bla blah about the need for one democratic state in palestine for muslims, christians, and jews, then said indirect channels of communication to israel were established in 1993 to avoid civilian casulaties.
  11. LOL, now you are claiming the having the shahadah on your coins make you a muslim. This was the coin of king offa of mercia, and anglo saxon king in medieval britain. It clearly says "la ilaha ila Allah" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Offa_king_of_Mercia_757_793_gold_dinar_copy_of_dinar_of_the_Abassid_Caliphate_774.jpg Now let the bull[Edited Out] flow about anglo saxon britain being a muslim state LOL. http://books.google.com/books?id=xP1pK8kA-ekC&pg=PA57&dq=mrauk+u+buddhists&hl=en&sa=X&ei=USOfUI3SNIeB0AG-t4CYBw&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q&f=false Mrauk u was a buddhist arakanese kingdom- http://books.google.com/books?id=M4t8S7BfgeIC&pg=PA1132&dq=mrauk+u+buddhists&hl=en&sa=X&ei=USOfUI3SNIeB0AG-t4CYBw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=mrauk%20u%20buddhists&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=QKgraWbb7yoC&pg=PA171&dq=mrauk+u+buddhists&hl=en&sa=X&ei=uyKfUKrCBfK30AG8lYCoDQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=mrauk%20u%20buddhists&f=false The reason arakanese live in bangladesh in chittagong is because chittagong was part of mrauk u until conquered by the mughals http://books.google.com/books?id=tcZoUGGw3ssC&pg=PA138&dq=mrauk+u+buddhists&hl=en&sa=X&ei=USOfUI3SNIeB0AG-t4CYBw&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=mrauk%20u%20buddhists&f=false If the rohingya were well established in arakan, they would not need to be begging NGOs for aid. It is characteristic of people arriving in a new land in large migrations to be heavily reliant on aid. By the way the laws the burmese passed at independence limited citizenship to peoples whose ancestors lived in burma before 1823, with the practical exception of chinese muslims and other chinese who were granted citizenship by the burmese kingdom. King mindon allowed chinese muslims to settle and burma and have residence rights and alot of burmese like thant myint-u write sympatheticly of the chinese muslim settlement in burma, because they are not seen as being part of a foreign invasion force, the rohingya were identified by the rakhine as supporters of british rule and imperialism. The rohingya were favored by the british and sided with britain against everyone ele.
  12. There are two separate things nasrallah said. He apologized for hitting an arab israeli house which killed two arab israeli children in the 2006 war. During his interview with julian assange, he said that hezbollah and israel had secret agreements not to target each others civilians dating from the 1990s. He never said anything about a jews house.
  13. Its one thing to ask for international help and for citizenship in the country you were born in. Its another thing to start a serial lying campaign in order to attract sympathisers to your cause. Many rohingya are lying and claiming that the rakhine buddhist mrauk-u state in arakan was a rohingya muslim state ruled by a rohingya. They are also claiming arakan was "indian land" for 1,000 years. This bull[Edited Out] was repeated by saudi and pakistani islamists, about mrauk-u being rohingya. The rohingya ARE descendants of bengalis who moved into mrauk-u when it was independent and during british rule, when britian took over both bangladesh and burma. If people want to tell lies and claim rohingya are indigineous to arakan, where did the rakhine come from? The rakhine are not bamar. The rakhine feel victimized by both the bamar rulers of burma, and rohingya, they claim that the rohingya are trying to take over arakan through a massive birthrate. It was their state that was invaded and conquered by burma in 1785. People are just listening to the rohingyas side of the story, and ignoring anything the rakhine say. Everything the rohingya are saying, like about mrauk u is unquestionable being accepted by the media. The bamar are against the rohingya because they see them a mass of brown skinned people with a different culture and background. There are bengalis in britain. If the british were to start stripping citizenship from british born bengalis, it is a human rights violation. But if these bengalis started claiming they were in britain for 1,000 years, that the british empire was ruled by bengali muslim kings, and that britain is part of the indian subcontinent, and english people are invaders, i would start losing my sympathy for them really fast. Saudi arabia does not grant citizenship to non muslims, and has not granted citizenship to south asian migrant workers. For saudis to criticize burma is massive hypocrisy. Burma and thailand both received massive amounts of both chinese muslims and non muslim chinese over the past 200 years, and both have mostly granted them citizenship. Chinese muslims are not seen as a racial threat, they don't have dark skin and are succesful merchants, which means they don't live in refugee camps or rely on NGOs which the rohingya do. Sincw the rohingya get help from ngos many rakhine fear they will be overrun by their birthrate
  14. Heterotrophs (like cows) which feed on edible autotrophs (like corn or grain) are nothing but competitors to humans trying to produce more food, because ten pounds of corn going into feeding one cow only produces one pound of beef in that cow. Only when the heterotroph (cow) feeds on a non edible autotroph (grass, not edible to humans) is it serving a useful purpose, and only then if the grass is growing in an environment where we can't grow edible crops like wheat. Unfortunately, due to the rising demand for meat, farmers especially in western countries have taken to feeding perfectly edible corn and wheat to cows purely for the demand of beef. People will have to sacrifice their taste for meat and eat more grains, fruits, and vegetables if we are to loosen population controls. Since we humans are heterotrophs, we absolutely depend on autotrophs to survive. If all plants are to be wiped out, all heterotrophs will die. We need to maintain a big percentage of autotrphs like plants as part of the total biomass, because autotrophs like plants, bacteria, and protists convert abiotic elements (carbon, nitrogen, iron and copper), into biotic form (in themselves), and then we heterotrophs eat those plants to absorb those elements into ourselves, or eat other heterotrophs which have eaten the autotrophs. Autotrophs are what turn abiotic mass into biotic mass, and must be safeguarded from environmental pollution, urban sprawl and humans should stop the wasteful practices of feeding edible autotrophs to non human heterotrophs.
  15. There are holocaust denial laws in the european union, there is none in the usa because of the first amendment.
×
×
  • Create New...