Burma riots: What the media isn’t telling you

[LaBong]

Cool, so some rohingyas live in a Bangladeshi ghetto in most dangerous place of karachi. Well done ummah brothers.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Cool, so some rohingyas live in a Bangladeshi ghetto in most dangerous place of karachi. Well done ummah brothers.

Instead of trolling, do something to address the issue will ya?

 

[LaBong]

In not trolling, unlike you I have painstakingly read the article you posted which probably Google vomited out to you.

 

[TopCat]

Cool, so some rohingyas live in a Bangladeshi ghetto in most dangerous place of karachi. Well done ummah brothers.

Only 29000 lives in Refugee Camp aka Getto. The rest 470,000 lives in among Bangladeshis in the cities or in the hills.

 

[Icewolf]

Pakistan:
Derek Flood: From South to South: Refugees as Migrants: The Rohingya in Pakistan

That's not good... We are already holding Afghan refugees in the north, Indian Sikh refugees in Lahore, and now Bangladeshi, and Rohingya illegals in the South.

 

[Bhairava]

India's Myanmar refugees get visas after month of protests in Delhi - The National

Offtopic -

But this mentality,

"We left for a better life and we do not want to go back. We want to live here with better rights."

is bad for any refugee. They must be re-patriated at the first opportunity.

It is Bangladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi who hosts most of the Rohinigiya Muslim. Can you name any non muslim country who host more than a 1000 Rohingiyas?

India for instance hosts much much more than 1000 Rohingyas.

But then why should any non-Muslim country care for them ? Isnt there 57 OIC countries for whom its a religious obligation to take care of their Ummah bro's..?

As I said the word Ummah is not even worth half the worth of the paper its written on.

That was when the Burmese Socialist Programme was enacted. Many private business owners lost their property. Though there were racial overtones at the time, it would be disingenuous to imply that it was a racial purge. Furthermore, the chettiars have a particularly notorious reputation as they were specifically imported by the British to be money-lenders where no Burman was allowed to do so. This was inevitably going to be a point of contention.

To say that there is widespread racial discrimination now, however, would be unfair.

That 'reputation' is so un-deserved given that the article states that the Chettiars usually lent money at lower rates than indigenous money lenders.

What happened was a xenophobic reaction towards people who were till them Burmese citizens and who were forced to run due to ethnic oppression.

Anyway I dont want to stretch this argument and divert this article and its specific focus. But the record needs to be set straight.

 

[alaungphaya]

Offtopic -


That 'reputation' is so un-deserved given that the article states that the Chettiars usually lent money at lower rates than indigenous money lenders.

What happened was a xenophobic reaction towards people who were till them Burmese citizens and who were forced to run due to ethnic oppression.

Anyway I dont want to stretch this argument and divert this article and its specific focus. But the record needs to be set straight.

The paper cites 'indigenous money lenders' but what it doesn't go into is that Burmese were not allowed to be money lenders as per the orders of the British. Infact, he is purposely vague about the role of 'indigenous money lenders' in his article. The chettiars were eventually bought out, like many business owners, under the socialists. Was there a racial undertone to the purging of chettiars? Perhaps. But to call it a racist purge is disingenuous.

What the article clearly states is that they were first and foremost agents of the British Empire and were complicit in enforcing British political and economic systems in Myanmar. Ones that made the Burmese third class citizens in our own country. If there was discrimination, that was the reason. Not the colour of their skin or their inherent 'race'.

But I agree, this is off topic. However, I think it is unfair to call the Burmese racists when our modern society is a mix of all 'races'.

 

[TopCat]

The paper cites 'indigenous money lenders' but what it doesn't go into is that Burmese were not allowed to be money lenders as per the orders of the British. Infact, he is purposely vague about the role of 'indigenous money lenders' in his article. The chettiars were eventually bought out, like many business owners, under the socialists. Was there a racial undertone to the purging of chettiars? Perhaps. But to call it a racist purge is disingenuous.

What the article clearly states is that they were first and foremost agents of the British Empire and were complicit in enforcing British political and economic systems in Myanmar. Ones that made the Burmese third class citizens in our own country. If there was discrimination, that was the reason. Not the colour of their skin or their inherent 'race'.

But I agree, this is off topic. However, I think it is unfair to call the Burmese racists when our modern society is a mix of all 'races'.

It is a lame excuse to rationalize racial slaughtering in Burma after british left the scene. If you had problem with Chettias you just ban them, why to attack them. And how many percentage of Indians were Chettias? We had similar problem with Chettias in Bengal too so that the Bengal assembly under british rule made a law called "Rin Shalishi Board" means "Loan Settlement Board" and the loopholes of the previous laws were corrected. It was done under british and I am sure Burmese could do the same.

The reason Burmese attacked Indian is due to grab the business and properties of the Indians once British left. I dont have a problem with that and most of the Indians/Bengalis came back to India or Bangladesh. I know a lot of stories where Bengalis used to involved in Businesses in Rangoon but they left after British. Equating those fortune seeker with the Rohingiyas are just preposterous and no relation whatsoever.

 

[alaungphaya]

It is a lame excuse to rationalize racial slaughtering in Burma after british left the scene. If you had problem with Chettias you just ban them, why to attack them. And how many percentage of Indians were Chettias? We had similar problem with Chettias in Bengal too so that the Bengal assembly under british rule made a law called "Rin Shalishi Board" means "Loan Settlement Board" and the loopholes of the previous laws were corrected. It was done under british and I am sure Burmese could do the same.

The reason Burmese attacked Indian is due to grab the business and properties of the Indians once British left. I dont have a problem with that and most of the Indians/Bengalis came back to India or Bangladesh. I know a lot of stories where Bengalis used to involved in Businesses in Rangoon but they left after British. Equating those fortune seeker with the Rohingiyas are just preposterous and no relation whatsoever.

I'm not equating them with Rohingyas. I'm equating Rohingyas with you people.