FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > 1m Refugees
1m Refugees
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
Bangladesh is saying that it has taken 1,000,000 refugees from Burma in the last couple of months, in addition to the 300,000 Burmese refugees they already had. Is the world doing enough, should we leave Bangladesh to stuggle with this number alone? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Not atall the whole world should get stuck in and help these people out in my opinion! They clearly need help if you spread 1 million people across say a hundred countries it's only 10,000 per country which is much more of a manageable number than 1 million into 1 country! Syrian refugees got took to alot of different countries so why not Burmese? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *quirrelMan
over a year ago
East Manchester |
The Rohinga muslims who are going to Bangladesh are the victims of their own mistakes.
Originally they were called Arakanese Indians who moved into Burma in the 30s-40s claiming that they were indigenous people who were displaced centuries ago.
Their numbers grew over time and they numbered 1.5 million.
The troubles started in the 90s when they demanded equality and the right to vote, when the official government spokesman met with the leadership of the Muslim council they were told that they were immigrants, had no legal right to be in the country and to accept that they were allowed to stay because of the Buddhist philosophy on treating strangers with respect and decency.
The result of this declaration wasn't acceptable to the Muslim clerics and they began agitating and whipping up their followers to strike back at the Buddhist population.
This let to 10,000 Buddhists losing their homes and businesses, 3,000 being killed and some 1,500 women being sexually assaulted.
The police were unable to control the mobs running wild throughout the region so it was left to the army to deal with them.
The result was a battle between the army and armed insurgents over many months which resulted in a further 4,000 casualties, many unarmed Buddhists in remote village areas were killed by Muslim extremists, they often sexually assaulted the women in front of their families before killing them.
The army took control of the country and began a systematic closure of all the township's and deportation of the Muslim found there.
The first and closest Muslim country to Burma is Bangladesh, but there a poor country and unable to support the numbers of people seeking refuge.
But, they have been orchestrating a media war against the Burmese government by showing how badly treated the refugees had been treated and trying to get international opinion against the Burmese people and force them to take back the Muslim refugees and give them both citizenship and a voice in government with voting rights for all.
What you see in the news isn't the whole story, it's a carefully edited one to garner support for the people who created the problem themselves.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What are you basing this on? "
At a guess I'd say he's basing it on a combination of Islamophobia and something he's read on Facebook, but to be fair I don't know enough about him OR the situation in question to qualify that assumption. Call it a gut feeling. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The Rohinga muslims who are going to Bangladesh are the victims of their own mistakes.
Originally they were called Arakanese Indians who moved into Burma in the 30s-40s claiming that they were indigenous people who were displaced centuries ago.
Their numbers grew over time and they numbered 1.5 million.
The troubles started in the 90s when they demanded equality and the right to vote, when the official government spokesman met with the leadership of the Muslim council they were told that they were immigrants, had no legal right to be in the country and to accept that they were allowed to stay because of the Buddhist philosophy on treating strangers with respect and decency.
The result of this declaration wasn't acceptable to the Muslim clerics and they began agitating and whipping up their followers to strike back at the Buddhist population.
This let to 10,000 Buddhists losing their homes and businesses, 3,000 being killed and some 1,500 women being sexually assaulted.
The police were unable to control the mobs running wild throughout the region so it was left to the army to deal with them.
The result was a battle between the army and armed insurgents over many months which resulted in a further 4,000 casualties, many unarmed Buddhists in remote village areas were killed by Muslim extremists, they often sexually assaulted the women in front of their families before killing them.
The army took control of the country and began a systematic closure of all the township's and deportation of the Muslim found there.
The first and closest Muslim country to Burma is Bangladesh, but there a poor country and unable to support the numbers of people seeking refuge.
But, they have been orchestrating a media war against the Burmese government by showing how badly treated the refugees had been treated and trying to get international opinion against the Burmese people and force them to take back the Muslim refugees and give them both citizenship and a voice in government with voting rights for all.
What you see in the news isn't the whole story, it's a carefully edited one to garner support for the people who created the problem themselves.
"
Could you please provide your sources?
Does not justify genocide! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What are you basing this on?
At a guess I'd say he's basing it on a combination of Islamophobia and something he's read on Facebook, but to be fair I don't know enough about him OR the situation in question to qualify that assumption. Call it a gut feeling."
Not sure what the terminology for the above is but...making a sweeping ill informed statement about someone or thing can never be justified with "gut feeling" or "to be fair" disclaimer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What are you basing this on?
At a guess I'd say he's basing it on a combination of Islamophobia and something he's read on Facebook, but to be fair I don't know enough about him OR the situation in question to qualify that assumption. Call it a gut feeling.
Not sure what the terminology for the above is but...making a sweeping ill informed statement about someone or thing can never be justified with "gut feeling" or "to be fair" disclaimer."
Probably not, but there you have it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *quirrelMan
over a year ago
East Manchester |
Check the sources of where these stories are coming from.
Each is coming from a western news agency, but from a third party source.
Journalists aren't traveling to where these claimed massacres took place, they're just interviewing people who claim they happened.
You're prepared to take the word of someone whose painting a picture of an out of control military running amok. Yet everything is unverified.
Google it, there's nothing whatsoever in the media giving the government's side of the story, just propaganda.
It begs the question as to why after 50 years the government should turn against them, something happened and if you're really interested in the truth, seek it out yourself, being lazy and accepting everything you read in the papers only means that they are controlling your perception of what's going on in the world.
I don't believe anything that I read in the newspapers unless it's verified by other means.
The reason is, I lost a family member in the Hillsborough tragedy, the shit printed in the papers which took years to prove were lies left a bad taste in the mouths of people who were there. It was made worse because people actually condemned the victims because they thought the papers were truthful, the real story was the police using the media to shape opinion and use the fans as scapegoats. But it had a positive effect in that millions of folk who knew about what really happened started to question the honesty of the media.
N.B. A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is not a threat. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Check the sources of where these stories are coming from.
Each is coming from a western news agency, but from a third party source.
Journalists aren't traveling to where these claimed massacres took place, they're just interviewing people who claim they happened.
You're prepared to take the word of someone whose painting a picture of an out of control military running amok. Yet everything is unverified.
Google it, there's nothing whatsoever in the media giving the government's side of the story, just propaganda.
It begs the question as to why after 50 years the government should turn against them, something happened and if you're really interested in the truth, seek it out yourself, being lazy and accepting everything you read in the papers only means that they are controlling your perception of what's going on in the world.
I don't believe anything that I read in the newspapers unless it's verified by other means.
The reason is, I lost a family member in the Hillsborough tragedy, the shit printed in the papers which took years to prove were lies left a bad taste in the mouths of people who were there. It was made worse because people actually condemned the victims because they thought the papers were truthful, the real story was the police using the media to shape opinion and use the fans as scapegoats. But it had a positive effect in that millions of folk who knew about what really happened started to question the honesty of the media.
N.B. A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is not a threat."
So if you are not getting it from the media, where are you getting this information from? Have you been there yourself? Have you conducted interviews with the victims? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *artytwoCouple
over a year ago
Wolverhampton |
"Check the sources of where these stories are coming from.
Each is coming from a western news agency, but from a third party source.
Journalists aren't traveling to where these claimed massacres took place, they're just interviewing people who claim they happened.
You're prepared to take the word of someone whose painting a picture of an out of control military running amok. Yet everything is unverified.
Google it, there's nothing whatsoever in the media giving the government's side of the story, just propaganda.
It begs the question as to why after 50 years the government should turn against them, something happened and if you're really interested in the truth, seek it out yourself, being lazy and accepting everything you read in the papers only means that they are controlling your perception of what's going on in the world.
I don't believe anything that I read in the newspapers unless it's verified by other means.
The reason is, I lost a family member in the Hillsborough tragedy, the shit printed in the papers which took years to prove were lies left a bad taste in the mouths of people who were there. It was made worse because people actually condemned the victims because they thought the papers were truthful, the real story was the police using the media to shape opinion and use the fans as scapegoats. But it had a positive effect in that millions of folk who knew about what really happened started to question the honesty of the media.
N.B. A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is not a threat."
I really wouldn't bother with this on here, the combination of snowflakes, couch SJW's and the perpetually offended (not to mention white knights desperate to please) precludes any sensible discussion of such matters. Just saying, friendly like. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The UN should definitely be doing more. however I don't think spreading people far and wide would be the best thing for them.
They should be firstly trying to get them housed in countries that are culturally similar to what they are used to and also share similar religious beliefs.
Then other countries can support and take refugees.
I agree that they deserve to be safe,but plonking them in Europe Will just add more fuel to the tinderbox that is Europe's current refugee crisis.
I am not saying that they shouldn't help, what I am saying is there are more than enough Asian and Arab countries a hell of a lot closer than European one's.
It's a humanitarian disaster I am shocked that it's not getting the coverage that it deserves in the press.
Still a premiership manager getting the sack is bigger news right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Check the sources of where these stories are coming from.
Each is coming from a western news agency, but from a third party source.
Journalists aren't traveling to where these claimed massacres took place, they're just interviewing people who claim they happened.
You're prepared to take the word of someone whose painting a picture of an out of control military running amok. Yet everything is unverified.
Google it, there's nothing whatsoever in the media giving the government's side of the story, just propaganda.
It begs the question as to why after 50 years the government should turn against them, something happened and if you're really interested in the truth, seek it out yourself, being lazy and accepting everything you read in the papers only means that they are controlling your perception of what's going on in the world.
I don't believe anything that I read in the newspapers unless it's verified by other means.
The reason is, I lost a family member in the Hillsborough tragedy, the shit printed in the papers which took years to prove were lies left a bad taste in the mouths of people who were there. It was made worse because people actually condemned the victims because they thought the papers were truthful, the real story was the police using the media to shape opinion and use the fans as scapegoats. But it had a positive effect in that millions of folk who knew about what really happened started to question the honesty of the media.
N.B. A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is not a threat."
Sorry but I know to little about the current crisis of refugees besides what I saw in the army (never got beyond Iraq or Afghanistan). I do however know that the worldwide news industry can and often does put it's own skew on things. It's called news to sell. Myself and my father were due to go to Hillsborough but dad was called into work the day before as the only other guy who could do his job had a accident and couldn't cover. My dad kept the tickets as no one else he knew who supported Liverpool could get time off. We would have been in the leppings lane end. I know what the scum news industry did to desecrate the fans who only went to watch a game of football and never came home. My dad didn't go to another football match for over a decade. He still has a bad time with it because we were meant to be there.
I guess all I'm saying is don't be fooled by the way it's reported. Do some digging around to find the truth. Worst case scenario is that you wasted 10 mins looking.
M |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Rohinga muslims who are going to Bangladesh are the victims of their own mistakes.
Originally they were called Arakanese Indians who moved into Burma in the 30s-40s claiming that they were indigenous people who were displaced centuries ago.
Their numbers grew over time and they numbered 1.5 million.
The troubles started in the 90s when they demanded equality and the right to vote, when the official government spokesman met with the leadership of the Muslim council they were told that they were immigrants, had no legal right to be in the country and to accept that they were allowed to stay because of the Buddhist philosophy on treating strangers with respect and decency.
The result of this declaration wasn't acceptable to the Muslim clerics and they began agitating and whipping up their followers to strike back at the Buddhist population.
This let to 10,000 Buddhists losing their homes and businesses, 3,000 being killed and some 1,500 women being sexually assaulted.
The police were unable to control the mobs running wild throughout the region so it was left to the army to deal with them.
The result was a battle between the army and armed insurgents over many months which resulted in a further 4,000 casualties, many unarmed Buddhists in remote village areas were killed by Muslim extremists, they often sexually assaulted the women in front of their families before killing them.
The army took control of the country and began a systematic closure of all the township's and deportation of the Muslim found there.
The first and closest Muslim country to Burma is Bangladesh, but there a poor country and unable to support the numbers of people seeking refuge.
But, they have been orchestrating a media war against the Burmese government by showing how badly treated the refugees had been treated and trying to get international opinion against the Burmese people and force them to take back the Muslim refugees and give them both citizenship and a voice in government with voting rights for all.
What you see in the news isn't the whole story, it's a carefully edited one to garner support for the people who created the problem themselves.
"
This is interesting. I'm not at all familiar with the situation so don't have any opinion in the history or politics of it.
I wonder how many children affected by it are likewise? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" I'm sure Saudi Arabia will help them out. They're good like that. 
Saudi Arabia..??
We had several refugees found at the south border of thailand.
Some died, some in severe malnourished state.
"
Yes, it's a very wealthy Muslim country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The Rohinga muslims who are going to Bangladesh are the victims of their own mistakes.
Originally they were called Arakanese Indians who moved into Burma in the 30s-40s claiming that they were indigenous people who were displaced centuries ago.
Their numbers grew over time and they numbered 1.5 million.
The troubles started in the 90s when they demanded equality and the right to vote, when the official government spokesman met with the leadership of the Muslim council they were told that they were immigrants, had no legal right to be in the country and to accept that they were allowed to stay because of the Buddhist philosophy on treating strangers with respect and decency.
The result of this declaration wasn't acceptable to the Muslim clerics and they began agitating and whipping up their followers to strike back at the Buddhist population.
This let to 10,000 Buddhists losing their homes and businesses, 3,000 being killed and some 1,500 women being sexually assaulted.
The police were unable to control the mobs running wild throughout the region so it was left to the army to deal with them.
The result was a battle between the army and armed insurgents over many months which resulted in a further 4,000 casualties, many unarmed Buddhists in remote village areas were killed by Muslim extremists, they often sexually assaulted the women in front of their families before killing them.
The army took control of the country and began a systematic closure of all the township's and deportation of the Muslim found there.
The first and closest Muslim country to Burma is Bangladesh, but there a poor country and unable to support the numbers of people seeking refuge.
But, they have been orchestrating a media war against the Burmese government by showing how badly treated the refugees had been treated and trying to get international opinion against the Burmese people and force them to take back the Muslim refugees and give them both citizenship and a voice in government with voting rights for all.
What you see in the news isn't the whole story, it's a carefully edited one to garner support for the people who created the problem themselves.
"
moved into the area in the 30's-40's?-
quote: "Muslims have lived in the area now known as Myanmar since as early as the 12th century, according to many historians and Rohingya groups.
The Arakan Rohingya National Organisation has said, "Rohingyas have been living in Arakan from time immemorial," referring to the area now known as Rakhine.
During the more than 100 years of British rule (1824-1948), there was a significant amount of migration of labourers to what is now known as Myanmar from today's India and Bangladesh. Because the British administered Myanmar as a province of India, such migration was considered internal, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW)."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Check the sources of where these stories are coming from.
Each is coming from a western news agency, but from a third party source.
Journalists aren't traveling to where these claimed massacres took place, they're just interviewing people who claim they happened.
You're prepared to take the word of someone whose painting a picture of an out of control military running amok. Yet everything is unverified.
Google it, there's nothing whatsoever in the media giving the government's side of the story, just propaganda.
It begs the question as to why after 50 years the government should turn against them, something happened and if you're really interested in the truth, seek it out yourself, being lazy and accepting everything you read in the papers only means that they are controlling your perception of what's going on in the world.
I don't believe anything that I read in the newspapers unless it's verified by other means.
The reason is, I lost a family member in the Hillsborough tragedy, the shit printed in the papers which took years to prove were lies left a bad taste in the mouths of people who were there. It was made worse because people actually condemned the victims because they thought the papers were truthful, the real story was the police using the media to shape opinion and use the fans as scapegoats. But it had a positive effect in that millions of folk who knew about what really happened started to question the honesty of the media.
N.B. A phobia is an irrational fear of something that is not a threat.
Sorry but I know to little about the current crisis of refugees besides what I saw in the army (never got beyond Iraq or Afghanistan). I do however know that the worldwide news industry can and often does put it's own skew on things. It's called news to sell. Myself and my father were due to go to Hillsborough but dad was called into work the day before as the only other guy who could do his job had a accident and couldn't cover. My dad kept the tickets as no one else he knew who supported Liverpool could get time off. We would have been in the leppings lane end. I know what the scum news industry did to desecrate the fans who only went to watch a game of football and never came home. My dad didn't go to another football match for over a decade. He still has a bad time with it because we were meant to be there.
I guess all I'm saying is don't be fooled by the way it's reported. Do some digging around to find the truth. Worst case scenario is that you wasted 10 mins looking.
M"
I'm not fooled, I've completed human rights interviews in Burma, worked in the IDP and refugee camps etc. I'm just asking this poster where he is getting his info from. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *angzMan
over a year ago
Manchester, London & sometimes Newcastle |
"The Rohinga muslims who are going to Bangladesh are the victims of their own mistakes.
Originally they were called Arakanese Indians who moved into Burma in the 30s-40s claiming that they were indigenous people who were displaced centuries ago.
Their numbers grew over time and they numbered 1.5 million.
The troubles started in the 90s when they demanded equality and the right to vote, when the official government spokesman met with the leadership of the Muslim council they were told that they were immigrants, had no legal right to be in the country and to accept that they were allowed to stay because of the Buddhist philosophy on treating strangers with respect and decency.
The result of this declaration wasn't acceptable to the Muslim clerics and they began agitating and whipping up their followers to strike back at the Buddhist population.
This let to 10,000 Buddhists losing their homes and businesses, 3,000 being killed and some 1,500 women being sexually assaulted.
The police were unable to control the mobs running wild throughout the region so it was left to the army to deal with them.
The result was a battle between the army and armed insurgents over many months which resulted in a further 4,000 casualties, many unarmed Buddhists in remote village areas were killed by Muslim extremists, they often sexually assaulted the women in front of their families before killing them.
The army took control of the country and began a systematic closure of all the township's and deportation of the Muslim found there.
The first and closest Muslim country to Burma is Bangladesh, but there a poor country and unable to support the numbers of people seeking refuge.
But, they have been orchestrating a media war against the Burmese government by showing how badly treated the refugees had been treated and trying to get international opinion against the Burmese people and force them to take back the Muslim refugees and give them both citizenship and a voice in government with voting rights for all.
What you see in the news isn't the whole story, it's a carefully edited one to garner support for the people who created the problem themselves.
"
Complete nonsense. You've based this nonsense on pure ignorance. The Rohingya are the most persecuted people on earth. They are not even allowed to call themselves Rohingya in burma.
The UNHCR has declared this action of the burmese army and Buddhist vigilantes as a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.
But don't let the fact get in your way of your vile mentality
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *angzMan
over a year ago
Manchester, London & sometimes Newcastle |
Also the Rohingya are mainly Muslim with a significant Hindu population. They've been there for centuries but have suffered persecution after the British rule ended, and more so after the military took power. What the ignorant racists here won't realise is that burm wa once ruled as a state or prepartitioned India. The boundaries never existed and people had been moving around for centuries before the British even turned up.
I can understand the Rohingya language and I've seen interviews by small unaccompanied children who have described seeing their parents/siblings being beheaded, and they have had to run away to save the self. Small baby boys are having their genitals chopped off and babies are being burned in bonfires. Satellite imagery has shown hundreds of villages have been destroyed and burned to ashes. The Red Cross and other agencies have been denied access to these areas by the burmese army so they can hide their crimes.
And then for knob socks here saying it's all fake news and the victims are responsible. Fucking wankers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What ever the reason or the facts its still a very sad and tragic situation ...we need to concentrate on finding solitions rather than pointing the finger.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
