The 'silent crisis' of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

If you wish to raise new topics on News, Current Events & Politics, please do so at Dhamma Wheel Engaged.
User avatar
Posts: 5961
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: The 'silent crisis' of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

Post by DooDoot » Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:32 pm

binocular wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:54 pm
You're not reading what I'm saying.
I have read basically all that you posted to me & have responded carefully & systematically. My opinion is basically nothing much you have posted is related to either Buddhism or rebirth. Rebirth in Buddhism is about the results (vipaka) caused by intentional actions (kamma) of individuals. L.N. correctly wrote:
L.N. wrote:
Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:34 pm
I agree it [kamma-vipaka] is not intended to explain the actions of others toward oneself, but rather the volitional actions which one performs when faced with circumstances.
The suttas say:
Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech & intellect.

AN 6.63
In the case of a victim of crime, it is the doer of rape or murder engaged in the act of bodily kamma. It is the volition of the rapist or murderer performing the rape or murder.
binocular wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:54 pm
But you are the one doing such attribution, by summarily declaring _all_ the victims in a crime innocent...
I did not ever declare all the victims in a crime are wholly innocent. I wrote that retaliation & retribution can occur.

In summary, my participation in the discussion commenced when I quoted many suttas that were contrary to the idea or view of: "How can there be "innocent victims" when there is kamma??" The Pali suttas say there can be innocent victims therefore this idea of the impossibility of innocence was demonstrated to be heretical or pernicious. :geek:
binocular wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:55 pm
How can there be "innocent victims" when there is kamma??
The kamma of many Rohingya is they have chosen to be Muslim. But this choice is not the cause of their demise. The cause of their demise is the kamma of those who volitionally act to rape & murder them.

I think these articles can remove any prejudice that may be obstructing hiri-ottappa:

Why the Arabs Don’t Want Us in Syria
They don’t hate ‘our freedoms.’ They hate that we’ve betrayed our ideals in their own countries—for oil.
By ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR. February 22, 2016

In part because my father was murdered by an Arab, I've made an effort to understand the impact of U.S. policy in the Mideast and particularly the factors that sometimes motivate bloodthirsty responses from the Islamic world against our country. As we focus on the rise of the Islamic State and search for the source of the savagery that took so many innocent lives in Paris and San Bernardino, we might want to look beyond the convenient explanations of religion and ideology. Instead we should examine the more complex rationales of history and oil—and how they often point the finger of blame back at our own shores.

For Americans to really understand what’s going on, it’s important to review some details about this sordid but little-remembered history. During the 1950s, President Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers—CIA Director Allen Dulles and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles—rebuffed Soviet treaty proposals to leave the Middle East a neutral zone in the Cold War and let Arabs rule Arabia. Instead, they mounted a clandestine war against Arab nationalism—which Allen Dulles equated with communism—particularly when Arab self-rule threatened oil concessions. They pumped secret American military aid to tyrants in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon favoring puppets with conservative Jihadist ideologies that they regarded as a reliable antidote to Soviet Marxism. At a White House meeting between the CIA’s director of plans, Frank Wisner, and John Foster Dulles, in September 1957, Eisenhower advised the agency, “We should do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect,” according to a memo recorded by his staff secretary, Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster.

The CIA began its active meddling in Syria in 1949—barely a year after the agency’s creation. Syrian patriots had declared war on the Nazis, expelled their Vichy French colonial rulers and crafted a fragile secularist democracy based on the American model. But in March 1949, Syria’s democratically elected president, Shukri-al-Quwatli, hesitated to approve the Trans-Arabian Pipeline, an American project intended to connect the oil fields of Saudi Arabia to the ports of Lebanon via Syria. In his book, Legacy of Ashes, CIA historian Tim Weiner recounts that in retaliation for Al-Quwatli’s lack of enthusiasm for the U.S. pipeline, the CIA engineered a coup replacing al-Quwatli with the CIA’s handpicked dictator, a convicted swindler named Husni al-Za’im. Al-Za’im barely had time to dissolve parliament and approve the American pipeline before his countrymen deposed him, four and a half months into his regime. ... ica-213601

The Truth About Radical Islam
November 5, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO)

The source of terrorism is not the Qu'ran - a book that few critics of Islam have even picked up let alone genuinely read - but rather a very easily traced money trail that leads to Washington and London.

It is indeed the Western World that has created, branded, and marketed "radical Islam," which is for all intents and purposes a strictly political tool designed to provoke direct Western military interventions where possible, and fight conflicts by proxy whenever direct military intervention is not possible.

In Syria and Iraq, the US has used its terrorist proxies to do both - first to fight the government of Damascus and its allies by proxy, and when that failed, to set a pretext for direct US military intervention.

Wahhabism - The Key to Arab Conquest

Part of "radical ignorance" includes a deep and profound ignorance of history. Understanding the actual inception of "radical Islam," more accurately known as Wahhabism, dispels many of the most virulent lies spread about Islam - that is has always been a barbaric, warlike ideology. Militant Islam is a relatively new phenomenon, invented by the House of Saud, then cultivated and exploited to its full potential by the British Empire and its American heirs.

The Ottoman Empire and mastery over the Arab World was coveted and contested by the British Empire. The promise of Arab independence was dangled over the heads of the founders of many of the dynasties now ruling Arabia - dynasties that were carved out through cults of personality and a violent misinterpretation of Islam known as Wahhabism. The British, after betraying the Arabs, would harness this political tool to do what all empires do best - divide and conquer - and specifically so regarding the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

As the British Empire unraveled, the Americans picked up where London left off. The Saudis and their neighboring Persian Gulf kingdoms have been propped up by the West since the end of World War 1. Since World War 2, many of the same dynasties have sat in power, armed, funded, protected, and invited into some of the most lucrative business deals and economic activity in human history.

It was with members of the Muslim Brotherhood that the US attempted to overthrow current Syrian President Bashar Al Assad's father, Hafez al-Assad with. It was the US with the Saudis and factions within Pakistan's military and government who oversaw the very creation of militant groups like Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

And it is to this very day still very much a US-European enterprise perpetuating the Saudi regime in Riyadh, arming it to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and military support, and using Riyadh admittedly as an intermediary through which Washington, London, and Brussels arm and fund the worst, most virulent terrorist organizations on Earth.

Even current US President Donald Trump - who regularly cites "radical Islam" as an enduring threat to America's national security, has signed off on immense weapon deals to the very nations the US uses to cultivate and perpetuate global terrorism. ... islam.html

There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

User avatar
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:53 pm

Re: The 'silent crisis' of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

Post by Dharmasherab » Tue Nov 21, 2017 2:38 pm

The current Rohingya situation in Burma is being discussed a lot these days, and the general narrative seems to be that the Muslim Rohingya are entirely victims, and the Buddhist Burmese are terrible and committing acts of genocide. Speaking against the Rohingya in any way seems to attract accusations of ‘Islamobhobia’. And there have even been calls to strip Aung San Suu Kyi of her Nobel Peace Prize for not speaking up loudly enough in favour of the Rohingya cause. To me, this situation seems to be imbalanced.
I do not condone violence. And I believe it is wrong to judge any people as bad merely on the basis of what religion they follow. However, I am a keen supporter of objectivity and of factual information. I would therefore like to share here two items - a video from BBC news on the issue, in which you will hear two sides of the story from two women whose backgrounds I have detailed below for those interested (it is good to know your sources); and an article on the history and background of this current situation.
I welcome any criticism by anyone who can demonstrate any factual errors in either source. I say that because I do not have a fixed view. I think this issue is worthy of open conversation, and I am against the idea that one should stick to one opinion and close ones ears and eyes to information that might challenge ones views. I believe ‘truth’ and ‘objectivity’ are far more important than ‘my’ views, if I had any.

Here is the video:

Here is also a detailed analysis of the history of this issue: ... ern-burma/
Background on the two speakers in the video:
The first lady to speak on this issue is Sanam Shantyaei. According to her company France 24’s website, she is “a specialist on Iran coverage and the weekly host of Middle East Matters”. I struggled to find more info about her, there’s no wikipedia page on her, but to quote her profile on the website of the company she works for in full:
“She is a British-Iranian journalist with more than a decade's experience as a foreign correspondent and international news television producer. At France 24, she is notably a specialist on Iran coverage and the weekly host of Middle East Matters.”

The second lady to speak is Priscilla Clapp. She is currently a senior advisor to the U.S. Institute of Peace and the Asia Society. Here’s more about her:�During her 30-year career with the U.S. Government, Ms. Clapp served as chief of mission and permanent charge d’affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Burma (1999-2002), deputy chief of mission in the U.S. Embassy in South Africa (1993-96), principal deputy assistant aecretary of state for Refugee Programs (1989-1993), deputy political counselor in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow (1986-88), and chief of political-military affairs in the U.S. Embassy in Japan (1981-85). She also worked on the State Department's Policy Planning Staff, in the East Asian, Political Military and International Organizations bureaus, and with the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.

Prior to government service, Ms. Clapp spent ten years in foreign policy and arms control research, with the MIT Center for International Studies and as a Research Associate at the Brookings Institution. She is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Ms. Clapp’s books include: with Morton Halperin, "Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy" (Brookings, 2006), with I.M. Destler et al., "Managing an Alliance: the Politics of U.S.-Japanese Relations" (Brookings, 1976), with Morton Halperin, "U.S.-Japanese Relations in the 1970's" (Harvard, 1974). She is a frequent media commentator and the author of numerous publications on Burma and U.S. Burma policy with USIP, the Brookings Institution, the East-West Center, Australia National University, the Asia Society, the National Bureau of Asian Research, Singapore’s ISEAS and others.
If anyone can clearly disprove any of Ms. Clapp’s statements in the video, or any of the historical information in the article, I welcome you to comment with your reasoning and references. I am not posting these because I have verified all of the information myself and these are not my own opinions. Rather, I am posting them because I have no reason to believe they contain false data (except for Sanam Shantyaei's data as first speaker in the video). And because it seems the general information in the public discourse appears to be biased, incomplete, and inaccurate.

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: The 'silent crisis' of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Sun Nov 26, 2017 4:01 am

Rohingya crisis: 'It's not genocide,' say Myanmar's hardline monks ... index.html
I participate in this forum using Google Translator.

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: The 'silent crisis' of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:42 pm

Bangladesh-Myanmar agreement on Rohingya refugees revealed ... index.html
I participate in this forum using Google Translator.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests