emiratesgooner

On 24/06/2016 at 0:05 PM, Ulic said:

Why use the term Rohingya when Bangladeshi is much more accurate. Religion,

language, and genetics link them to Bangladesh.

And the Uighurs are more akin to the Turks.

So Uighurs should be called Turkish?

Or that Romanies across Europe were originally from India, should all Romanies be called Indians?

Or the Chakmas in Bangladesh originated from Myanmar, should they be called Myanmarese?

Or ... get the gist?

I think you should do a little bit of reading.

On 23/12/2016 at 4:53 AM, zekhong said:

Well there is a Geopolitics behind that problem. By creating  Rohingya term is to get indigenous Status .Indigenous status has political power . Rohingya refuse naturalized citizenship statushttp://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/muslim-villagers-in-myanmars-rakhine-state-refuse-to-participate-in-census-06072016154906.html we don't know who is behind to refuse that most likely is USA .That migrant problem had been long time and it became popular after china start pipe line and deep sea port. Human trafficking of Rohingya and Bangladeshi had been long times but tried to blame Thailand after Thailand shifted toward China in Foreign policy.

USA want to create instability in that area to block China sea outlet of Indian ocean. So creating 2 large indigenous status people with different religions will ensure instability in that area for long time.

Read this article about Geopolitics. https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/myanmar-reckons-muslim-insurgency

 

The US didn't succeed though.

Bangladesh, with Chinese financial assistance is building a deep sea port in the Bay of Bengal, the only such port in this area. Such a port can't be built in Indian or Myanmarese territory as neither country has deep enough waters.

Seems like the Chinese have succeeded. Good luck to them.

On 25/06/2016 at 4:49 AM, xerostar said:

Politically correct hogwash.

The UK has had enough of it.

Donald Trump has has enough of it.

It's time to call a spade a spade.

Really?

So why are EUROPEANS who have lived for less than, say three generations in a country like for example Australia, are referred to and refer to themselves as Australians?

Or EUROPEANS in South Africa, United States, etc.?

Mind boggling reading some of the comments posted.

Do I get another official warning from the administrators for posting ANOTHER inflammatory post?

Silly me.

I can't understand why such a question would be asked.

Pattaya - ghost town - ten years.

Really???

All that property paperwork must've been all Greek to him.

Is that an attempt at being humorous?

If so, you failed miserably.

On a personal note, I truly hope you get proper stitched up and some two-bob nothing on a public forum comes out with a two-bob comment.

Apparently the nerve gas used on Syrian children also came from Saudi Arabia. Etc.etc.etc. theres a lot of heavy duty crime coming from that place and while I agree with the "blue diamond" post above, I think you will find there are places in SA where you could experience all those crimes that you listed happening in Bangkok, with a cherry ontop.

But obviously, countries with strict religious laws and taboos, be they sex or gambling, you will always see a mass-exodus towards countries where those taboos are rightly laughed at. Because fundamentally people accept many of the social norms out of duty (usually to their ancestors or direct family) but don't agree with them and find them difficult to live by. You can also chart globally nations where people are allowed to express themselves (in whatever way) and map them with nations that are generally happier and healthier and less violent. Is interesting.

Yunla, you've obviously NEVER visited, lived or worked in Saudi Arabia.

May I suggest you get first hand experience of a country/nation before writing tosh!

And yes, I visit Saudi Arabia many times a year for business purposes and what you've written borders on absolute nonsense.

As for your second paragraph, I personally could not understand a single sentence.

FOYS

Have to disagree with you there, best to be avoided at all costs, as for not understanding his second ''Paragraph'', what was the problem, its plain and simple ??

You have the absolute right to disagree with me, your prerogative.

When Yunla states "Apparently the nerve gas used on Syrian children also came from Saudi Arabia", the Western media has disclosed the supply actually came from Europe.

Regarding Yunla's second paragraph, I don't understand a word because he refers to "countries", "nations", and the cause of population movement without citing any reference to his or others empirical research on such a huge subject.

I trust this clears up for you my perspective, "plain and simple". If not, please feel free to reply.

Just a thought, I recognise a tinge of racism in your posts, just like Yunla, or would you like me to explain why I've written this statement as well?

FOYS

The Blue Diamond Affair.

Of course you are reluctant to allow your citizens to visit a country that has proven it's dishonesty by robbing you of prized assets, returning fakes then assuring the crime is covered up and those associated with fencing the goods are murdered, along with their families.

It doesn't help that your diplomats are gunned down in broad daylight in central Bangkok.

It also doesn't help when influential persons are spotted wearing the jewelry at social functions, seemingly with absolute disregard and contempt.

I await with baited breath the "it could happen anywhere" nonsense from the apologists.

"I await with baited breath the "it could happen anywhere" nonsense from the apologists."

I'm waiting with bated breath to find out why you've baited your breath.

European countries looted the treasures of Egypt, Greece, India, China and, for that matter, most of Africa & Asia. Much of the loot went on display in museums or into private collections and, with rare exceptions, has not been returned to the countries of origin despite diplomatic requests. As for gunning down citizens that was a routine exercise in much of the colonialized world. That or hacking off of limbs if not enough loot was produced fast enough.

Of course, that doesn't make it right, but you seem to feel that most countries in the world don't have a lot of dirt shoved under their proverbial carpets.

You also appear to believe that looking at the big bad world with both eyes open means one is an apologist for Thailand. Bad things happen in Thailand. Accepting that it's no different than any other country in that regard is not an apology. Wrong is wrong wherever it happens, but it does happen everywhere. Pretending Thailand is any worse than the countries from which most tourists and long term residents come, is just childish xenophobia.

People who come from the US, Russia, Germany, UK, Japan, China, most countries in the Middle East ... who amongst them is really able to put on some mantle of righteousness. Surely they taught a realistic view of world history wherever you come from?? Or possibly you got the sanitized revisionist history that's crafted to be PC for home consumption??

An excellent post, the answer that is.

Apparently the nerve gas used on Syrian children also came from Saudi Arabia. Etc.etc.etc. theres a lot of heavy duty crime coming from that place and while I agree with the "blue diamond" post above, I think you will find there are places in SA where you could experience all those crimes that you listed happening in Bangkok, with a cherry ontop.

But obviously, countries with strict religious laws and taboos, be they sex or gambling, you will always see a mass-exodus towards countries where those taboos are rightly laughed at. Because fundamentally people accept many of the social norms out of duty (usually to their ancestors or direct family) but don't agree with them and find them difficult to live by. You can also chart globally nations where people are allowed to express themselves (in whatever way) and map them with nations that are generally happier and healthier and less violent. Is interesting.

Yunla, you've obviously NEVER visited, lived or worked in Saudi Arabia.

May I suggest you get first hand experience of a country/nation before writing tosh!

And yes, I visit Saudi Arabia many times a year for business purposes and what you've written borders on absolute nonsense.

As for your second paragraph, I personally could not understand a single sentence.

FOYS