Myanmar (Burma) is purging itself of Muslims
N_Fiddledog @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:03 pm
fifeboy fifeboy:
Well said!
Unreasoned, high-five of approval-clucking from the Progressive chicken coop.
Seriously is this all you war-mongers who seem to be hoping to one day bomb Myanmar as a virtue signal of approval to the followers of the warlord Mohammed have got?
N_Fiddledog @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:13 pm
It's all such an obvious virtue-signal.
"Oh look at the picture we found of somebody they say is a Rohingya being mistreated. We're going to come out as against that. Aren't we special?"
And good for you, except it's not much of an argument against the call to reason and understanding of the complexities of this conflict.
Your need to virtue signal is the ring they're putting in your nose to eventually lead you to approve the next aggression against the local Burmese.
herbie @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:26 pm
Oh yeah those fucking Progressives that can distinguish a victim from a perpetrator... they're just evil!
PluggyRug @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:30 pm
herbie herbie:
Oh yeah those fucking Progressives that can distinguish a victim from a perpetrator... they're just evil!
Obviously some can't, which are you?
BartSimpson @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:49 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Well, your philosophy lacks internal consistency.
The hell it does.
You say you've been to Afghanistan so you saw the same shit I did and you saw the same decent people I did.
The people who minded their own business were just peachy by me. The folks who were trying to kill me discovered that I was better at it than they were (knock on wood).
My philosophy is pretty fucking consistent: Try to kill me and I will try to kill you. Leave me alone and I will leave you alone. Be my friend and I'll be your friend.
Zipperfish @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:47 pm
martin14 martin14:
And yet, when the Muslims were doing it to the Hindus,
you said nothing.
Ya can't spell Janus, without anus....
you said nothing.
Ya can't spell Janus, without anus....
Well, I wasn't even aware of it, so I said nothing. Had I been aware of it, I would have stated that I am always against the arbitrary use of brutality, rape, torture and murder of civilians.
Zipperfish @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:58 pm
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
No. You and the alt left wingnuts are saying it's okay for the Muslim radicals to slaughter innocent civilians but it's not okay when they fight back. Why are you defending them?
I don't recall saying that support Muslim radicals slaughtering civilians. Pretty sure I said I was against the brutalization of civilians in all cases. Pretty sure I've said that about ten times now.
fifeboy @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:04 pm
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
fifeboy fifeboy:
Well said!
Unreasoned, high-five of approval-clucking from the Progressive chicken coop.
Seriously is this all you war-mongers who seem to be hoping to one day bomb Myanmar as a virtue signal of approval to the followers of the warlord Mohammed have got?
Jesze dude. Get your meds adjusted!
Zipperfish @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:05 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Well, your philosophy lacks internal consistency.
The hell it does.
You say you've been to Afghanistan so you saw the same shit I did and you saw the same decent people I did.
The people who minded their own business were just peachy by me. The folks who were trying to kill me discovered that I was better at it than they were (knock on wood).
My philosophy is pretty fucking consistent: Try to kill me and I will try to kill you. Leave me alone and I will leave you alone. Be my friend and I'll be your friend.
Well, it's worth remembering that when you were there, you were sent there to kill them. They did not try to come to kill you. WE invaded Afghanistan. We actively hunted down and killed the Taliban. I'm not under any illusion the Taliban ever did anything to me as I hung out here in Vancouver.
So don't give me this stuff about how you were just minding your business.
And those civilians--not the radicals, women and children, old people--never did anything to you and yet you are fine with it.
The reality is, in my opinion, is that you support the killing of Muslims in general, not just the radical ones. Either you want them all dead, or maybe you figure that if they are brutalized enough they'll stop launching terrorist attacks in the US, I don't know.
BartSimpson @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:27 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
The reality is, in my opinion, is that you support the killing of Muslims in general, not just the radical ones.
I want them to give up Islam as it is and to give up trying to force it on everyone else.
Not unlike asking people to give up on Naziism and socialism.
And again, I have no problem with the people who mind their own business.
By the way, WTF were you doing in the sandbox? Were you working the Timmie's in Kandahar?
Zipperfish @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:02 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
I want them to give up Islam as it is and to give up trying to force it on everyone else.
Not unlike asking people to give up on Naziism and socialism.
And again, I have no problem with the people who mind their own business.
By the way, WTF were you doing in the sandbox? Were you working the Timmie's in Kandahar?
Not unlike asking people to give up on Naziism and socialism.
And again, I have no problem with the people who mind their own business.
By the way, WTF were you doing in the sandbox? Were you working the Timmie's in Kandahar?
Force their religion on you? One page ago you said you'd take that poor refugee girl and "bring her up Christian."
People don't give up their religion. They never have. The Romans through the Christians to the lions for shits and giggles. Did that get rid of them? No. In fact, in the final analysis, Christianity was the enemy that Rome couldn't beat.
Muslims have their Taliban and ISIS. Christians have their Nazis. Same shit, different pile.
Zipperfish @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:06 pm
Just never saw myself on here, when I joined ten years ago, being outnumbered as the guy maintaining that brutality against civilians is bad. Times they are a-changing.
N_Fiddledog @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:58 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
PluggyRug PluggyRug:
No. You and the alt left wingnuts are saying it's okay for the Muslim radicals to slaughter innocent civilians but it's not okay when they fight back. Why are you defending them?
I don't recall saying that support Muslim radicals slaughtering civilians. Pretty sure I said I was against the brutalization of civilians in all cases. Pretty sure I've said that about ten times now.
Took a long time to make it clear you're agreeing with those of us who looked beyond the headlines then.
But you're right. It isn't just Muslims being mistreated in Rakhine but they can take as much blame for the horror show happening over there as anybody else. Some might even say their piece of the blame pie is the big one.
N_Fiddledog @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 4:07 pm
It's easy to get confused though. There's a lot of media BS muddying the waters:
$1:
In the last month, the world media reports, 250,000 Rohingya have now fled the latest cycle of violence, that began with Rohingya attacks on the military in mid-August, for Bangladesh. In fact, Aung San Suu Kyi has spoken out, but not in the way that many expected. They wanted her to categorically denounce the Burmese military and to depict the Rohingya as entirely innocent victims of Buddhist attacks; this she has refused to do. She believes the story of the Rohingyas in Myanmar is more complicated than the outside world believes. She has noted that “fake news” about atrocities in Myanmar have been relied on by much of the world’s media. More than a few of the stories about the Rohingya have indeed been accompanied by photos purportedly showing the violence against them, but which, in fact, have turned out to be photos of other atrocities experienced by other peoples, having nothing to do with Myanmar. Even the BBC’s south-east Asia correspondent, Jonathan Head, concedes that “much of it [the photos, and the coverage] is wrong.” A closer look reveals that many of the pictures supposedly from Myanmar have come from other crises around the world, with one of those tweeted by Turkey’s Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek even dating back to the Rwandan genocide in 1994.
Jonathan Head discusses at the BBC website four of the most widely-circulated photographs, ostensibly showing Rohingya victims of current Buddhist violence, that are examples of “fake news.” The first photograph, showing a number of bloated corpses, “does appear on several websites dated last year. This suggests the image is not from the recent violence in Rakhine state.’’ “Suggests” is British understatement for “clearly shows.”
The BBC has ascertained that the second photograph, of a woman mourning a dead man tied to a tree, was taken in Aceh, Indonesia, in June 2003, by a photographer working for Reuters.
The third photograph, of two infants crying over the body of their mother, is from Rwanda in July 1994. It was taken by Albert Facelly for Sipa, and was one of series of photos that won a World Press Award.
It has also been difficult to track down the fourth image, of people immersed in a canal, but it can be found on a website appealing for funds to help victims of recent flooding in Nepal.
In other words, not one of the four photographs widely distributed as examples of Rohingya suffering has anything to do with the Rohingyas. This is what the BBC’s south-east Asia correspondent has confirmed. Surely that ought to be made widely known, and just as surely, it won’t.
This “fake news” is, according to Aung San Suu Kyi, “simply the tip of a huge iceberg of misinformation calculated to create a lot of problems between different communities and with the aim of promoting the interest of the terrorists.”
Let’s refresh our memories of what has been going on in Myanmar this last month. All the news reports coming from Myanmar (Burma) tell the same story: tens of thousands of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority, have been fleeing into Bangladesh, to avoid the sudden upsurge in violence from both Burmese military and civilians. The Rohingya are presented as the innocent and long-suffering victims of “racist” Burmese Buddhists (Islam being, for propaganda purposes, a “race”). Only a handful of the reports mention, and only briefly, as if in passing, that the current violence began when, in mid-August, Rohingya fighters attacked 30 different police stations and an army base, as part of their campaign to stake their claim to Rakhine State, in western Myanmar, and showing themselves able “to strike terror in the hearts” of the Infidels to get it. The attacks left more than 70 dead, Muslims and Buddhists.
Jonathan Head discusses at the BBC website four of the most widely-circulated photographs, ostensibly showing Rohingya victims of current Buddhist violence, that are examples of “fake news.” The first photograph, showing a number of bloated corpses, “does appear on several websites dated last year. This suggests the image is not from the recent violence in Rakhine state.’’ “Suggests” is British understatement for “clearly shows.”
The BBC has ascertained that the second photograph, of a woman mourning a dead man tied to a tree, was taken in Aceh, Indonesia, in June 2003, by a photographer working for Reuters.
The third photograph, of two infants crying over the body of their mother, is from Rwanda in July 1994. It was taken by Albert Facelly for Sipa, and was one of series of photos that won a World Press Award.
It has also been difficult to track down the fourth image, of people immersed in a canal, but it can be found on a website appealing for funds to help victims of recent flooding in Nepal.
In other words, not one of the four photographs widely distributed as examples of Rohingya suffering has anything to do with the Rohingyas. This is what the BBC’s south-east Asia correspondent has confirmed. Surely that ought to be made widely known, and just as surely, it won’t.
This “fake news” is, according to Aung San Suu Kyi, “simply the tip of a huge iceberg of misinformation calculated to create a lot of problems between different communities and with the aim of promoting the interest of the terrorists.”
Let’s refresh our memories of what has been going on in Myanmar this last month. All the news reports coming from Myanmar (Burma) tell the same story: tens of thousands of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority, have been fleeing into Bangladesh, to avoid the sudden upsurge in violence from both Burmese military and civilians. The Rohingya are presented as the innocent and long-suffering victims of “racist” Burmese Buddhists (Islam being, for propaganda purposes, a “race”). Only a handful of the reports mention, and only briefly, as if in passing, that the current violence began when, in mid-August, Rohingya fighters attacked 30 different police stations and an army base, as part of their campaign to stake their claim to Rakhine State, in western Myanmar, and showing themselves able “to strike terror in the hearts” of the Infidels to get it. The attacks left more than 70 dead, Muslims and Buddhists.
As long as we in the West stay out of this one I'm content with what will be will be in the Rakhine state of Myanmar.
BartSimpson @ Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:23 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Just never saw myself on here, when I joined ten years ago, being outnumbered as the guy maintaining that brutality against civilians is bad. Times they are a-changing.
You're not alone. The only thing here is that I object to the Muslim brutality against non-Muslim non-combatants, not just the retaliatory brutality against their non-combatants and logistical support structures.
Believe me, I prefer that everyone not be starting shit with anyone.