Asean must address Rohingya issue on humanitarian grounds, Surin insists

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Rohingya immigrant issue is an internal affair of Myanmar, which Asean members should address on humanitarian grounds, former Association of Southeast Asian Nations secretary-general Surin Pitsuwan said yesterday.

At the root of the problem is the fact that Myanmar's constitution and internal laws do not recognise the Rohingya as citizens, he said. Other groups in Myanmar don't accept the Rohingya, who are based mainly in Rakhine and number about 800,000 in all, he said, adding: "This has to be dealt with gradually, as Myanmar authorities are worried about intervention from the outside world."

newsjs

"The United Nations has been working on the Rohingya issue, but has to be careful in dealing with it, and Asean needs to address it, especially on humanitarian grounds," he said.

Surin was speaking at a school in Nakhon Si Thammarat run and sponsored by the Pitsuwan family. HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn made a private visit to the Ban Tal pondok school. Surin said the princess had sponsored 14 such schools in the South, including those located in the upper part of the region, where subjects were taught in Thai.

Meanwhile, another 145 Rohingya aboard a Malaysia-bound boat entered Thai waters off the Trang coast yesterday, before they were provided with fresh water and supplies and had their vessel towed out of Thai waters. Two of them are women and there were two children on board.

Marine Police said no arrests were made, because of insufficient shelter that would be needed to house them afterwards. The food supplies provided by the Red Cross included canned fish, omelettes and medical assistance were not provided despite many of them being exhausted and starving, after their fresh water and supplies run out two days ago.

Reporters complained about not being allowed to follow a police boat to cover the provision of supplies. Marine Police claimed that their presence would cause panic among the Rohingya.

-- The Nation 2013-02-04

The reporters were not allowed to cover. The Red Cross food and medical supplies did not reach the Rohingya.

This morning on the radio news, BBC was reporting some untoward action by Thai authorities who apparently robbed a group of Rohingyas and then towed them back out to sea. I believe they landed in Sri Lanka. Did anybody hear the report or have any information?

Not good PR for Thailand.

Yet again despicable action by Thai authorities, probably condemning the Rohingya to their deaths. Another report says that when forcibly sent back over the Burmese border by Thailand they are handed over to human traffickers or abused by Burmese authorities.

The actions by Thailand are now receiving worldwide media coverage, even Fox News. It will be interesting to see if Thailand Tier 2 status on the of the US State Department Watch List is downgraded or not. If downgraded it will have a lot more damage to Thailand than provisioning extra holding facilities for the Rohingya whilst awaiting processing by UNHCR.

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by simple1

"At the root of the problem is the fact that Myanmar's constitution and internal laws do not recognise the Rohingya as citizens........."

When Thailand's real PM talks with the Burmese, does she discuss this or investment opportunities for her family? Has the matter EVER been raised by this government?

This morning on the radio news, BBC was reporting some untoward action by Thai authorities who apparently robbed a group of Rohingyas and then towed them back out to sea. I believe they landed in Sri Lanka. Did anybody hear the report or have any information?

Is this the story you heard about? Quite shocking!

http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-21314186

And more here, as refugees were sold on by Thai officials:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...d-asia-21115728

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by Morakot

Sri Lanka navy rescues 138 in stricken refugee boat

Sri Lanka's Navy says it has rescued 138 Bangladeshi and Burmese nationals from a sinking fishing boat in an operation lasting about 20 hours.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21314186

"At the root of the problem is the fact that Myanmar's constitution and internal laws do not recognise the Rohingya as citizens........."

When Thailand's real PM talks with the Burmese, does she discuss this or investment opportunities for her family? Has the matter EVER been raised by this government?

The Thai Foreign Minister is visiting Myanmar later this month to hold talks with government representatives. One of his staff went last month and made no progress as the Burmese were saying "not certain whether the Rohingya migrants arriving in Thailand recently originated from Rakhine state in Myanmar or from Bangladesh"

There is a recent article (just published) on Phuket Wan on the Rohingya (and unfortunately I cannot link the article or any pictures due to Phuket Wan not allowing TV to use articles). The article is on the "petition" the Rohyingya have written demanding to meet with UNHCR. If you read the article, and the hand written "petition" it essentially says the Rohyingya demand access to UNHCR, that the Rohingya say that there are two groups, one group are registered refugees, the other are unregistered refugees.

It strikes me that these people are not "unsophisticated". They know about UNHCR. They know (at least one group of them) know how to register as refugees. If they are already registered refugees, it seems like queue jumping to go out on boats rather than wait at a refugee camp until their turn comes up to be assisted. I also think if they are sophisticated enough to know about UNHCR and register as refugees, that they're not trying to come to Thailand, Malaysia, or Indonesia. They want to go to a Western country like USA, UK or Australia. Really, they are not simpletons. Looks like they know the process already and that if they go out on boats that it will "speed up" the process of resettlement.

Edit:

Looks like they are really trying to reach Australia, not Thailand. Looks like many are trying to or already made it to Australia.

http://presstv.com/detail/2012/12/31/281104/rohingya-muslims-flee-to-australia/

http://www.brca.org.au/

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by submaniac

Trapped inside Burma's refugee camps, the Rohingya people call for recognition

• The Guardian, Thursday 20 December 2012 14.23 GMT
  

Muslim group languishes in makeshift homes with no work, no schools and no citizenship rights from Burmese government

http://www.guardian....mps?INTCMP=SRCH

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by Morakot

There is a recent article (just published) on Phuket Wan on the Rohingya (and unfortunately I cannot link the article or any pictures due to Phuket Wan not allowing TV to use articles). The article is on the "petition" the Rohyingya have written demanding to meet with UNHCR. If you read the article, and the hand written "petition" it essentially says the Rohyingya demand access to UNHCR, that the Rohingya say that there are two groups, one group are registered refugees, the other are unregistered refugees.

It strikes me that these people are not "unsophisticated". They know about UNHCR. They know (at least one group of them) know how to register as refugees. If they are already registered refugees, it seems like queue jumping to go out on boats rather than wait at a refugee camp until their turn comes up to be assisted. I also think if they are sophisticated enough to know about UNHCR and register as refugees, that they're not trying to come to Thailand, Malaysia, or Indonesia. They want to go to a Western country like USA, UK or Australia. Really, they are not simpletons. Looks like they know the process already and that if they go out on boats that it will "speed up" the process of resettlement.

Edit:

Looks like they are really trying to reach Australia, not Thailand. Looks like many are trying to or already made it to Australia.

http://presstv.com/d...e-to-australia/

http://www.brca.org.au/

Please inform what queue they are jumping. Thai authorities have already firmly stated they will return the current batch of Rohingya to have landed on Thai territory to Burma within six months if not resettled to a third party nation. How will this arbitrary timeline be met as Thailand is not a signatory to UNHCR convention. Even more challenging is a wait list averaging ten years for refugees already cleared and registered by UNHCR assessment processes.

For the meantime Thai authorities are forcible returning some Rohingya to Burma or out to sea in contradiction to international humanitarian protocols

Please inform what queue they are jumping. Thai authorities have already firmly stated they will return the current batch of Rohingya to have landed on Thai territory to Burma within six months if not resettled to a third party nation. How will this arbitrary timeline be met as Thailand is not a signatory to UNHCR convention. Even more challenging is a wait list averaging ten years for refugees already cleared and registered by UNHCR assessment processes.

You see, that IS the queue jumping. It takes about 10 years to be resettled--normally. Thailand is demanding that they be resettled in 6 months or they will be sent back to Burma. With that kind of pressure, the UNHCR probably will try to accomodate. Meanwhile, the Rohingya are still setting out to sea, rather than wait 10 years for resettlement.

Please inform what queue they are jumping. Thai authorities have already firmly stated they will return the current batch of Rohingya to have landed on Thai territory to Burma within six months if not resettled to a third party nation. How will this arbitrary timeline be met as Thailand is not a signatory to UNHCR convention. Even more challenging is a wait list averaging ten years for refugees already cleared and registered by UNHCR assessment processes.

You see, that IS the queue jumping. It takes about 10 years to be resettled--normally. Thailand is demanding that they be resettled in 6 months or they will be sent back to Burma. With that kind of pressure, the UNHCR probably will try to accomodate. Meanwhile, the Rohingya are still setting out to sea, rather than wait 10 years for resettlement.

Good try, the UN has already rejected approaches by Burmese government to assist them with Rohingya resettlement, or to phrase it more correctly ethnic cleansing - their are no Rohingya refugee camps in Burma

now there is an idea for all the european and american illegal immigrants... put them all on a boat on the sea and tow them away when they get too close...

honnestly, who would like to see phuket or other soutern town invaded by 800.000 illegal people ?

even the phuket maffia would not be able to handle so much people

if you think about it, we farangs are Rohingya with money... for the rest: no rights either, except to spend our money and get out when it dries up

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by belg

Please inform what queue they are jumping. Thai authorities have already firmly stated they will return the current batch of Rohingya to have landed on Thai territory to Burma within six months if not resettled to a third party nation. How will this arbitrary timeline be met as Thailand is not a signatory to UNHCR convention. Even more challenging is a wait list averaging ten years for refugees already cleared and registered by UNHCR assessment processes.

You see, that IS the queue jumping. It takes about 10 years to be resettled--normally. Thailand is demanding that they be resettled in 6 months or they will be sent back to Burma. With that kind of pressure, the UNHCR probably will try to accomodate. Meanwhile, the Rohingya are still setting out to sea, rather than wait 10 years for resettlement.

Good try, the UN has already rejected approaches by Burmese government to assist them with Rohingya resettlement, or to phrase it more correctly ethnic cleansing - their are no Rohingya refugee camps in Burma

Yes. Submaniac has done nothing but post derogatory half true & untrue stories about the Rohingya on a number of threads.

Above, he suggests that they 'might' be headed for Australia. All reports I've seen mention Malaysia as their preferred destination. They are desperate people who take to boats at great risk to flee a country that doesn't want them.

Queue jumping? Ludicrous. Surin is totally correct that Asean should address the problem as it mainly involves Myanmar, Thailand & Malaysia. Getting as far as Sri Lanka is a new twist but quite possibly due to poor navigation skills.

^^What country are you from? And why aren't we shipping Rohingya there? Rohingya happy. Submaniac happy. Khunken happy.

^^What country are you from? And why aren't we shipping Rohingya there? Rohingya happy. Submaniac happy. Khunken happy.

That just about sums up your patently subversive agenda. Shipping is a term used for cargo which seems to be your view of what the Rohingya are. Any person with some humanity would tend to ask the Rohingya themselves first.

Seriously if your so interested in their plight then go tell your home government to go take them then. Do what you want with your own country then. But all you do is spout off at how the government has treated these people horribly. Well guess what? The country they're washing ashore in is Thailand and Thailand had every right to control who arrives and stays in their country. It's called a nation's "sovereignty". And these people have no connection with the people or Thailand,aren't connected to the culture and don't speak the language. So I agree with the Thai government not wanting to keep them on Thai land. But people like you come up screaming "oh now how dare the Thai government force them to leave! Well I say get off your computer and go help them then but don't sit there on your high horse passing judgment for not doing enough help when you're not doing anything either.

If you want to be a bleeding heart be one with your own resources. I frankly I have my concerns. These people have been involved in clashes in their own country and have links to terrorism. I've already out up links before and all you do is ignore it. Whatever dude. I know these people are just playing the refugee game and are trying to get to the wealthiest country they can. So let them go to oz or uk as far as I care.

I think we can dispense with the inflammatory remarks addressed to other posters.

Whether you agree with other posters or not, they are entitled to their opinion.

Seriously if your so interested in their plight then go tell your home government to go take them then. Do what you want with your own country then. But all you do is spout off at how the government has treated these people horribly. Well guess what? The country they're washing ashore in is Thailand and Thailand had every right to control who arrives and stays in their country. It's called a nation's "sovereignty". And these people have no connection with the people or Thailand,aren't connected to the culture and don't speak the language. So I agree with the Thai government not wanting to keep them on Thai land. But people like you come up screaming "oh now how dare the Thai government force them to leave! Well I say get off your computer and go help them then but don't sit there on your high horse passing judgment for not doing enough help when you're not doing anything either.

If you want to be a bleeding heart be one with your own resources. I frankly I have my concerns. These people have been involved in clashes in their own country and have links to terrorism. I've already out up links before and all you do is ignore it. Whatever dude. I know these people are just playing the refugee game and are trying to get to the wealthiest country they can. So let them go to oz or uk as far as I care.

I am expressing my opinion just like you & don't take orders from another person sitting at his computer on HIS high horse spouting strong ill-feeling about those who are helpless. I live in Thailand and will comment on the good parts of the society here as well as the bad.

There are refugees all over the world - many fleeing wars, civil conflicts & yes, some are just looking for a better place to live - and countries have an obligation to help those fleeing wars & conflicts. It's called basic humanity, which unfortunately you seen to have lost. Sovereignty doesn't mean 'do nothing' or wash one's hands when confronted with a serious problem. Shoving boats laden with refugees back to sea is something that anyone should be ashamed of. The fact that they don't speak the language or are of a different culture is irrelevant.

The UN has asked Thailand to get involved so that the refugees came at least receive temporary shelter & food. Thailand has prevaricated between saying 'yes - for 6 months' & the military doing the opposite. The few times that anyone has asked some of the Rohingya where they want to go, they have said anywhere but Myanmar & mentioned Malaysia. Interestingly enough any Rohingya that have reached Malaysia have been treated with respect but not granted asylum. That is what Thailand should do.

I have looked up your links and they do not provide any evidence that the refugees are involved in 'terrorism' or any other 'ism'. You are only attempting to demonise these people because of what I can only describe as a form of racism. You say you 'know' that they are playing a refugee game. You know nothing of the sort and are just showing your prejudice.

Finally, there is no evidence that they want to go to Oz, Europe or any distant land. Frankly, if they know anything about the racist policy of some of these countries, it wouldn't be their choice.

You are only attempting to demonise these people because of what I can only describe as a form of racism. You say you 'know' that they are playing a refugee game. You know nothing of the sort and are just showing your prejudice.

Well yeah, for future reference I'll be putting you on the "ignore" list. It seems that you cannot have a rational discussion without it reverting to personal attacks and accusations and you are very intolerant of any opinion that is not shared by you.

My retort is short because I frankly feel like having no more conversations with you on the issue, but the points you have tried to raise should be rebutted:

1. It is a fundamental right of sovereignty for every country to choose who they allow to enter the country;

2. a country has a right to protect and preserve its resources and culture of its people;

3. The conflict with the Rohingya in the Arakan state is a long standing conflict dating to British rule of Burma and there is no way that conflict could have lasted as long as it has without developing militant factions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_conflict_in_Western_Burma

See also:

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/16449 entitled "Rohingyas trained in different Al-Qaeda and Taliban camps in Afghanistan"

http://www.asianewsnet.net/news-34225.html which states "After the recent violence, Pakistani Taleban sought to present itself as a defender of Muslim men and women in Myanmar, saying "we will take revenge of your blood". Hizbollah and Afghan Taleban have also expressed support for the ethnic group."

see also: http://www.ibtimes.com/burma%E2%80%99s-rohingya-new-lightning-rod-islamic-militants-731894

http://tribune.com.pk/story/413231/taliban-threaten-myanmar-over-rohingya/ which is covered in this thaivisa post from July 2012 http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/572996-myanmar-pakistani-taliban-threatens-burma-over-rohingya-violence/

http://www.eurasiareview.com/23072012-western-myanmar-unrest-partisan-portrayals-risk-extremist-implications-analysis/

Yeah, I just made up the terrorists links to Rohingya just for fun and because I am a cruel person lacking in any humanity. And I am so good at it that I can create news articles and back date them prior to the Rohingya boat people arrival. Try googling. It isn't that hard to find that there is a serious problem with having these people in Thailand. Whatever problems they have or are escaping from in Myanmar, I do not want it to follow onto Thai soil.

In regards to comments about them trying to reach Australia, I also made up an organization entitled Burmese Rohingya Community in Australia (BRCA) and this website: http://www.brca.org.au/

http://presstv.com/detail/2012/12/31/281104/rohingya-muslims-flee-to-australia/

see the above video at 2:15 where Rohingya advocacy groups state "many are keen to come to Australia as soon as possible as the country does not persecute on religion" (and, of course escaping persecution is the only reason, because it's not like Australia is an economically developed country or anything). Note that the first Rohingya interviewed originally was on a boat that arrived in Indonesia, where he was given refugee status. That same guy then hopped on a boat towards Australia where he was given refugee status too.

There are refugees all over the world - many fleeing wars, civil conflicts & yes, some are just looking for a better place to live - and countries have an obligation to help those fleeing wars & conflicts. It's called basic humanity, which unfortunately you seen to have lost.

Thank you for your accusations that I have lost basic humanity. And you wonder why I am really not keen to have any further discussions with you.

But in regards to your comment "countries have an obligation to help those fleeing wars & conflicts.

No they don't.

Do you remember a place called Somalia or a movie called "Black Hawk Down", which was based on an incident in Somalia. The country had a famine, U.N. intervened to send food into the country, and food was being hijacked by the warlords? And then the Somalis started killing U.N. Peacekeeprs sent to safeguard the food so it was distributed to the population. It kind of ended with the Somalis attacking U.S. soldiers whose job it was to protect the delivery of food. I still have the image of the body of a dead U.S. soldier being dragged naked through the streets and I remember where I was when I first saw it on the news. It's kind of like that. Old saying, no good deed goes unpunished.

Then there was Afghanistan, where the poor Afghani people were being opressed by those mean nasty Soviets. So the U.S. sent lots of rifles, explosives, and stinger missles. And then after the Soviets were kicked out the Taliban took over and hosted Osama Bin Ladin.

And then there was the Mariel boatlift where all these poor opressed people where trying to escape Fidel Castro's oppressive regime in the 1980's and escaped on boats to Florida. Turns out Fidel Castro just opened up the prisons to dump his problems on the U.S.

Then there was the bombings in Beirut where the United States had stationed U.S. Marines to maintain peace during the Lebanese Civil war.

Then there was this place called Rwanda where the Hutu and Tutsi tribes were trying to kill each other...and they ended up killing the U.N. peacekeepers assigned to protect innocent civilians.

P.S. despite your accusations of me, I am not reporting them and am requesting that the moderators keep them up because it just demonstrates someone willing to engage in baseless accusations and damages your credibility more than mine.

Executive summary available?

1. It is a fundamental right of sovereignty for every country to choose who they allow to enter the country;

It has been suggested that the concept of Nation States (as alluded to by the term: sovereignty) is a 19th century construct of European origins and as such ill-equipped to understand socio-political reality in the 21st century in Asia and elsewhere.

You might like to familiarise yourself with current debates such as Civilization state versus nation-state on the example of China and how an European/ North American perspective --that has been dominated by nation-state thinking-- continues to misunderstand politics in Asia and elsewhere.

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by Morakot

End result? USA, here come the Rohingya. Free housing. Free job training. Cash benefits every month. Food stamps. And Medicaid. Bankrupt, broke, and still trying to tell the rest of the world how to behave. Won't be long now, before the big kissoff comes.

This morning on the radio news, BBC was reporting some untoward action by Thai authorities who apparently robbed a group of Rohingyas and then towed them back out to sea. I believe they landed in Sri Lanka. Did anybody hear the report or have any information?

Not good PR for Thailand.

3rd of Feb:

I saw a report on BBC TV News last night: Yingluck said Thailand would give them six months in Thailand,the film then showed them being denied access ashore,some provisions were given to them on their jam packed boat of which two had died on the voyage,non of them had been able to wash for over a week. Apparently the Military denied them a safe haven,and towed them back out to sea.

The last reports available of the Rohingya people on the BBC 23rd of February.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21161745

Edited February 4, 201313 yr by MAJIC

http://www.asiantrib...m/?q=node/16449

Not a very creditable author is he? Gomes is an ex-Muslim, who converted to Christianity few years back and was working as an employee with CARITAS. Gomes was sacked from CARITAS for stealing. In other parlance he is known as an “agent provocateur”

http://www.asianewsn...news-34225.html Expressions of support from Islamic extremist organisation, you really would not expect anything less. To date not one terrorist attack has been attributed to supporting the Rohingya.

see also: http://www.ibtimes.c...ilitants-731894 same response as above

http://www.eurasiare...tions-analysis/

relevant content from the link. "While this is highly unlikely, there have been attempts by certain Rohingya organisations in the past to link up with regional militant Islamic organisations with links to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and Rohingya militant training camps and Rohingya’s receiving militant training have been documented.

As these activities have been relatively minor and isolated, it is highly unlikely that most of Rohingya society has undergone radicalisation.

I do not support terrorism, at the same time if you are a member of a group that have been actively oppressed and discriminated against for decades, citizenship removed and stateless, with all those issues, it most definitely will create an environment where extremism will find some adherents. That would not be unique to those of a Muslim faith.

http://presstv.com/d...e-to-australia/

The first Rohingya interviewed originally was on a boat that arrived in Indonesia, where he was given refugee status. That same guy then hopped on a boat towards Australia where he was given refugee status too.

Firstly the travel by travel by sea is organised by human traffickers, they do not just "hop on a boat" and many have drowned. Put yourself in their position, if you know your future is to sit in a refugee camp for years on end, would you not seek a better alternative. It’s not correct, but understandable. Below is a link that talks to Burmese Christian refugees experience in Australia.

http://www.smh.com.a...0306-1bjig.html

Edited February 5, 201313 yr by simple1

The bbc video link majic cites if you watch the video the rohingya talks about how he was picked up and held for ransom and had to telephone his wife in Myanmar to sell some of his land and some of his cattle to buy himself out. If he can own land and cattle and his wife is still in Myanmar I just don't see how this isn't an economic refugee rather than oppressed due to ethnicity and religion.

To me there is little difference between the plight of the rohingya and he plight of Mexicans/central Americans in trying to enter the United States . Crossing into the United States illegally is extremely dangerous. He rohingya go on a boat. Mexican immigrants have to cross the desert to avoid us border patrol. People regularly die on the journey. They pay coyotes to smuggle them in and the coyotes basically enslave them. Like women are raped or sold into prostitution. There have been verified incidents where the illegals were left in he back of semi trucks with no air condition. Google the plight illegal immigrants into the United States form Mexico endures. What the rohingya endure is what the Mexicans face too.

And the thing is that the Mexican and Central Americans face oppression in their home country but UN help either. Look at what happens in Honduras where the street gangs have control if the country. Look what happened in guatamala. Look at how the indigenous natives are treated in Mexico.

However hear are all classed as economic refugees. They don't get help from the un. They don't get help from the United States either. If they're caught they get sent back on a bus to Mexico.

What I am saying is hat there is a lot of oppression to go around the world. And I don't see why the rohingya should be treated any different. However when it's the rohingya in boats the world is paying attention but when it happens I the United States no one hears a out it.

And the terrorist articles linking he rohingya is because you asked. You asked I found it and posted it. But as Simon and garfink have said a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. So I bring in the articles you disregard them.

The bbc video link majic cites if you watch the video the rohingya talks about how he was picked up and held for ransom and had to telephone his wife in Myanmar to sell some of his land and some of his cattle to buy himself out. If he can own land and cattle and his wife is still in Myanmar I just don't see how this isn't an economic refugee rather than oppressed due to ethnicity and religion.

To me there is little difference between the plight of the rohingya and he plight of Mexicans/central Americans in trying to enter the United States . Crossing into the United States illegally is extremely dangerous. He rohingya go on a boat. Mexican immigrants have to cross the desert to avoid us border patrol. People regularly die on the journey. They pay coyotes to smuggle them in and the coyotes basically enslave them. Like women are raped or sold into prostitution. There have been verified incidents where the illegals were left in he back of semi trucks with no air condition. Google the plight illegal immigrants into the United States form Mexico endures. What the rohingya endure is what the Mexicans face too.

And the thing is that the Mexican and Central Americans face oppression in their home country but UN help either. Look at what happens in Honduras where the street gangs have control if the country. Look what happened in guatamala. Look at how the indigenous natives are treated in Mexico.

However hear are all classed as economic refugees. They don't get help from the un. They don't get help from the United States either. If they're caught they get sent back on a bus to Mexico.

What I am saying is hat there is a lot of oppression to go around the world. And I don't see why the rohingya should be treated any different. However when it's the rohingya in boats the world is paying attention but when it happens I the United States no one hears a out it.

And the terrorist articles linking he rohingya is because you asked. You asked I found it and posted it. But as Simon and garfink have said a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest. So I bring in the articles you disregard them.

I have not ignored the links to articles concerning alleged Rohingya involvement with extremist organisations - please re-read. You may also wish to review the US State Department involvement with the original reports, that appear to be based on hearsay, not documented facts.

You are well aware there is major difference between illegal immigrants crossing into the USA from Central American countries. They have not had their citizenship cancelled in their country of birth. I assume not abused by their law enforcement agencies/military when returned to their home country. I also assume they are permitted to have more than two children, own land, access to to basic education etc etc Their is no comparison to Central American illegal migrants and you know it.

You are well aware there is major difference between illegal immigrants crossing into the USA from Central American countries. They have not had their citizenship cancelled in their country of birth. I assume not abused by their law enforcement agencies/military when returned to their home country. I also assume they are permitted to have more than two children, own land, access to to basic education etc etc Their is no comparison to Central American illegal migrants and you know it.

Look up Rigoberto menchu and her autobiography "I Rigoberto menchu" to see about the treatment of the indigenous community during the guatamalan civil war. Look up the Chiapas rebels in Mexico and the treatment of Mayan decendants in Mexico.

http://rfkcenter.org/rigoberta-menchu-tum

Edited February 5, 201313 yr by submaniac

You are well aware there is major difference between illegal immigrants crossing into the USA from Central American countries. They have not had their citizenship cancelled in their country of birth. I assume not abused by their law enforcement agencies/military when returned to their home country. I also assume they are permitted to have more than two children, own land, access to to basic education etc etc Their is no comparison to Central American illegal migrants and you know it.

Look up Rigoberto menchu and her autobiography "I Rigoberto menchu" to see about the treatment of the indigenous community during the guatamalan civil war. Look up the Chiapas rebels in Mexico and the treatment of Mayan decendants in Mexico.

http://rfkcenter.org...erta-menchu-tum

'Thanks for that - wasn't aware of the ongoing discrimination against ethic minorities in Central America, why is it not receiving mainstream international media coverage?. Were not most of the dictatorships during the civil wars armed and funded by the USA?

I did take the time to look at the UNHCR figures and it appears there are less than 10 registered stateless people in Central American countries and around 30k refugees, whereas there are 800k stateless Rohingya with 120k refugees in Thailand alone - big difference.