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
Sign in to follow this  
Jiraffe

Lying About Burma

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this is bull[Edited Out] - trying to defend the massacres of Rohingyas by the Rakhines. All of it bull[Edited Out] - it has no link with logic or reality. Mrauk U kings had Muslim names, used coins with the declaration "La Ilaha Il-Allah". To say that they were Buddhists pretending to be Muslims in a Buddhist majority country is a modern day Rakhine lie. There is no reason to pretend to be a Muslim in a Buddhist majority country.

At the same time the murderous Rakhine racist terrorists pretend to be victims of Bengali migrations - they themselves have migrated and settled in Muslim Bangladesh, where they enjoy full rights as citizens - and where they, among others, have waged a campaign of terror against Bengali villagers in trying to break away from Bangladesh to form their own country. If their Rakhine state homeland was so precious to them, they would not have migrated to the "kalar" homeland.

The truth is that Rakhines are just racist - they do not want to live with "dark skinned Bengalis" at any cost. Wherever they have found Bengalis they have killed them in terrorist campaigns. And when they have found themselves unable to kill them, due to the Bangladesh Army keeping law and order they've screamed oppression, kalars taking over "their" country, etc.

The OP is clearly biased but I encourage others to research the history and decide on the truth by themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this is bull[Edited Out] - trying to defend the massacres of Rohingyas by the Rakhines. All of it bull[Edited Out] - it has no link with logic or reality. Mrauk U kings had Muslim names, used coins with the declaration "La Ilaha Il-Allah". To say that they were Buddhists pretending to be Muslims in a Buddhist majority country is a modern day Rakhine lie. There is no reason to pretend to be a Muslim in a Buddhist majority country.

At the same time the murderous Rakhine racist terrorists pretend to be victims of Bengali migrations - they themselves have migrated and settled in Muslim Bangladesh, where they enjoy full rights as citizens - and where they, among others, have waged a campaign of terror against Bengali villagers in trying to break away from Bangladesh to form their own country. If their Rakhine state homeland was so precious to them, they would not have migrated to the "kalar" homeland.

The truth is that Rakhines are just racist - they do not want to live with "dark skinned Bengalis" at any cost. Wherever they have found Bengalis they have killed them in terrorist campaigns. And when they have found themselves unable to kill them, due to the Bangladesh Army keeping law and order they've screamed oppression, kalars taking over "their" country, etc.

The OP is clearly biased but I encourage others to research the history and decide on the truth by themselves.

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

In the fifteenth century Narameikhla, the Arakan king, regained his throne with help of the Ilyas Shahi sultan. He soon after started a mint at his capital Mrauk-U, with the help of Bengali mint experts. The result was the distinctive Arakanese coin with Buddhist symbols and the Buddhist name of the ruler in Arakanese script on the one side and with Arabic numerals and the Islamicised name of the ruler on the obverse.

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

The buddhist kings at mrauk-u used Muslim titles. Their coinage was inscribed with the kalima, the Islamic declaration of faith.

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jirrafe nothing justifies the mass killing of Rohingiyas. Dont try to justify the massacre.

Its like a very lame excuse to say "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" They have got high birhtrate so they should be exterminated coz of

the fear of rohingyas taking over Arakan., pathetic. If some other people rise and say the Rakhines took over their

country and they were the indigenous people before the Rakhines came and start to make disturbance, will that be

acceptable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jirrafe nothing justifies the mass killing of Rohingiyas. Dont try to justify the massacre.

Its like a very lame excuse to say "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" They have got high birhtrate so they should be exterminated coz of

the fear of rohingyas taking over Arakan., pathetic. If some other people rise and say the Rakhines took over their

country and they were the indigenous people before the Rakhines came and start to make disturbance, will that be

acceptable?

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

What a crock. You should be ashamed of yourself, repeating the blatant propaganda that the Burmese authorities are flooding their news media with.

The Rohingya have likely lived in the western areas of Burma bordering Bangladesh for many centuries. The idea that they just recently crossed into Arakan state is BS. They have lived there FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS, yet there are still only 800,000 of them. The idea they are breeding like rabbits is laughable.

It is true that during WW2 the Rohingya supported the British whilst most Burmese buddhists bent over for the Japanese, but so what?

I am married to a Burmese Shi'i Muslimah, and I have been to Burma several times. What I can say without doubt is that the Burmese in general are racists and Islamophobes. The recent trouble in Arakan state has been used by the Burmese as an excuse to crack down hard on Muslims in general - not just the Rohingya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

You are a racist nutter. Guess what, I'm a lily-white European so using your logic, I must be superior to you because Bamar are pretty dark compared to me. Actually, Than Shwe was a dark bugger, and I've seen plenty of dark Bamar, so using one's skin colour as a yardstick for whether one is worthy of human rights in Burma is a rather dangerous game to be playing.

Additionally, ethnic Chinese have suffered their share of persecution, including thousands being displaced from their homes in the north near the Chinese border only a couple of years ago. I guess you've forgotten about the ethnic, anti-Chinese pogroms that occurred in the 1960s? My friend lived next door to a Chinese family in Yangon who were killed and whose house was looted during those riots.

Here's an article from a Burmese with more sense than you ...

A Jingoist Media Foments Violence in Burma’s Arakan State | The Irrawaddy Magazine

http://www.irrawaddy.../archives/17698

Edited by Abdul Qaim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a crock. You should be ashamed of yourself, repeating the blatant propaganda that the Burmese authorities are flooding their news media with.

The Rohingya have likely lived in the western areas of Burma bordering Bangladesh for many centuries. The idea that they just recently crossed into Arakan state is BS. They have lived there FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS, yet there are still only 800,000 of them. The idea they are breeding like rabbits is laughable.

It is true that during WW2 the Rohingya supported the British whilst most Burmese buddhists bent over for the Japanese, but so what?

I am married to a Burmese Shi'i Muslimah, and I have been to Burma several times. What I can say without doubt is that the Burmese in general are racists and Islamophobes. The recent trouble in Arakan state has been used by the Burmese as an excuse to crack down hard on Muslims in general - not just the Rohingya.

This is what i said

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

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are a racist nutter. Guess what, I'm a lily-white European so using your logic, I must be superior to you because Bamar are pretty dark compared to me. Actually, Than Shwe was a dark bugger, and I've seen plenty of dark Bamar, so using one's skin colour as a yardstick for whether one is worthy of human rights in Burma is a rather dangerous game to be playing.

Additionally, ethnic Chinese have suffered their share of persecution, including thousands being displaced from their homes in the north near the Chinese border only a couple of years ago. I guess you've forgotten about the ethnic, anti-Chinese pogroms that occurred in the 1960s? My friend lived next door to a Chinese family in Yangon who were killed and whose house was looted during those riots.

Here's an article from a Burmese with more sense than you ...

A Jingoist Media Foments Violence in Burma’s Arakan State | The Irrawaddy Magazine

http://www.irrawaddy.../archives/17698

Why should minority ethnic groups be running private armies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

You keep jibbering on about the Rohingya claims to west Arakan state, but that is a smoke-screen. The vast majority of Rohingya don't make any such claims. They just want the same rights and priviliges as other Burmese citizens. Just because there is a tiny, militant minority making ridiculous claims doesn't mean the vast majority should be persecuted.

Oh, but what ... I forgot - they're BROWN .

Why should minority ethnic groups be running private armies?

Just about every minority ethnic group in Myanamar has a private army. You can thank Bamar imperialism and discrimination for that ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am mad at this topic.@jiraffe@ u dont know burma's systematically crackdown about muslims in myanmar.

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, Jiraffe, we get your point. No need for your comments anymore. Some Rohingya said that Mrauk U was a Muslim kingdom, which is totally understandable, because Mrauk U kings had names like Sulaiman Shah, etc, called themselves Sultan and imprinted the Shahada on their coins.

And because some Rohingya said this then its OK to massacre them and kill all of them and rape their women and cut their children out of their mother's wombs, and burn down their houses.

Ok, we got your point. No need to blather on endlessly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Allah, please strengthen all Believers from All Nations to Your cause. Please allow Us to understand the best strategy to handle civil unrest, violence, and chaos. Please strengthen Believers and reduce friction between factions, so that we may see our true enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Who cares what the Khaleejis are saying? They are known liars and obfuscators. Do you propose that the majority of Rohingya are pushing for an Islamic sate in Arakan? If you are, then you are either ignorant or lying because, as I've stated before, most Rohingya don't care about the origins of mrauk u or an independent Rohingya state. They simply want the same rights as everyone else living in Myanmar ! To suggest otherwise is to spread the hateful propaganda that the Burmese government and the Rakhine are using as an excuse for their despicable treatment of the Rohingya.

Btw, are you are a Muslim, let alone a Shi'i ? I ask, because you certainly are not acting like one. If you are a Muslim, do you have relatives in Myanmar? If you do, you wouldn't have made a snide remark to titumir about being able to still use the internet. Do you know the Shi'ah community in Yangon didn't even openly celebrate 'Eid al Adha and that animals were not sacrificed this year?

You know, about 2 months before the most recent trouble in Arakan, a Burmese friend of mine told me that he had been informed by an old Buddhist friend with ties to the Burmese military to expect a crackdown on Muslims in Myanmar. They are an easy target, he was told, and are not liked or trusted by the majority of Buddhists. Using Muslims as scapegoats will help unify the people with a common enemy. My friend started talking about the anti-Chinese pogrom of the 1960s and projecting it forward to the present. At the time, I laughed at him in disbelief. The notion seemed completely ridiculous to me, even taking the Burmese character into account. How wrong I was ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares what the Khaleejis are saying? They are known liars and obfuscators. Do you propose that the majority of Rohingya are pushing for an Islamic sate in Arakan? If you are, then you are either ignorant or lying because, as I've stated before, most Rohingya don't care about the origins of mrauk u or an independent Rohingya state. They simply want the same rights as everyone else living in Myanmar ! To suggest otherwise is to spread the hateful propaganda that the Burmese government and the Rakhine are using as an excuse for their despicable treatment of the Rohingya.

Btw, are you are a Muslim, let alone a Shi'i ? I ask, because you certainly are not acting like one. If you are a Muslim, do you have relatives in Myanmar? If you do, you wouldn't have made a snide remark to titumir about being able to still use the internet. Do you know the Shi'ah community in Yangon didn't even openly celebrate 'Eid al Adha and that animals were not sacrificed this year?

You know, about 2 months before the most recent trouble in Arakan, a Burmese friend of mine told me that he had been informed by an old Buddhist friend with ties to the Burmese military to expect a crackdown on Muslims in Myanmar. They are an easy target, he was told, and are not liked or trusted by the majority of Buddhists. Using Muslims as scapegoats will help unify the people with a common enemy. My friend started talking about the anti-Chinese pogrom of the 1960s and projecting it forward to the present. At the time, I laughed at him in disbelief. The notion seemed completely ridiculous to me, even taking the Burmese character into account. How wrong I was ...

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

So you aren't Burmese and you are not Muslim? Where are you from then? And why are you posting in this forum? Why are you so pro-Rakhine and anti-Rohingya? I notice you say you aren't Bamar, but you didn't say you are not from Myanmar. In fact, only someone from Myanmar would even use the term "Bamar" ?

Who are you and precisely where are you from? Don't suppose that you can come here in complete anonymity and post inflammatory garbage ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you aren't Burmese and you are not Muslim? Where are you from then? And why are you posting in this forum? Why are you so pro-Rakhine and anti-Rohingya? I notice you say you aren't Bamar, but you didn't say you are not from Myanmar. In fact, only someone from Myanmar would even use the term "Bamar" ?

Who are you and precisely where are you from? Don't suppose that you can come here in complete anonymity and post inflammatory garbage ...

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

I notice you only responded to the query as to whether you are a Muslim. You still haven't answered who you are and where you are from, which is important because you claim you are neither Burmese nor Buddhist. I've noticed most of your posts have to do with Burma, and you use expressions like Bamar which only someone from Myanmar would use. You also have knowledge of Burmese names and history that only someone from Myanmar would have.

So answer the question - where are you from and what is your ethnicity? You are completely correct that you can post here as a non-Muslim, but if you are going to make the sort of inflammatory, anti-Rohingya statements that you have been making (straight out of the Burmese media playbook, btw), you should have the honesty to declare your origins.

Edited by Abdul Qaim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice you only responded to the query as to whether you are a Muslim. You still haven't answered who you are and where you are from, which is important because you claim you are neither Burmese nor Buddhist. I've noticed most of your posts have to do with Burma, and you use exp<b></b>ressions like Bamar which only someone from Myanmar would use. You also have knowledge of Burmese names and history that only someone from Myanmar would have.

So answer the question - where are you from and what is your ethnicity? You are completely correct that you can post here as a non-Muslim, but if you are going to make the sort of inflammatory, anti-Rohingya statements that you have been making (straight out of the Burmese media playbook, btw), you should have the honesty to declare your origins.

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.

Edited by Jiraffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

You really must think I'm stupid.

Anyway, you still refuse to disclose where you come from, which shows you are not unbiased in your ridiculous assertions. Nobody asked you to reveal your personal details - just the most basic information. But as befits trolls such as yourself, you attempt to remain completely anonymous.

You also failed to show any proof that anything more than a tiny minority of Rohingya are Salafis or wish to establish an Islamic state in Rakhine. That's because it would be impossible for you to do so as the vast majority of Rohingya don't care about who the kings of Mrauk U were, or anything other than getting basic human rights for themselves and their families. What the despicable actions of the Rakhine and Burmese government has done, however, is give ammunition to the Salafis and other extremists whilst simultaneously empowering racists and radicals on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...