Prominent Buddhist monk fans anti-Muslim sentiment in Thailand

[fasteddie]

27,762 number of muslim based terrorists attacks since 9/11

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/site/the-list.aspx

And the number of Christian based state terrorist attacks on let's say, Iraq, Libya, Syria for example, would be?

Ahhh...the classic "Crusaders" argument

Responding with force against force doesn't make one the aggressor.

And responding with gibberish against a reasonable question doesn't make one intelligent.

[fasteddie]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

So have I, but then again, if all you watch is western media you're not likely to see much.

Is al-Azhar teaching that attacks against kuffirs is wrong?

What about Khomeini?

Perhaps the Salafis are?

Lol have you ever heard Khomanei exort Iranians / muslims to kill kafirs ?

No didnt think so.

Have you heard any of the current bunch of running for US president call for the bombing of Iran ? Yeah I thought so..... trying to lump Iran in with Islamic terrorism is borne out by rhetoric but not facts.

As he is the closest thing Shi'a have to a leader the question was what he was doing to protest against ISIS or others of their ilk.

It's worth noting your lack of addressing the Sufi or Salafi questions.

But to answer your question; Amir Taheri wrote a book, "Holy Terror: Inside the World of Islamic Terrorism" with the below quote.

Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. . . . But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. . . . Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Quranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.

"As he is the closest thing Shi'a have to a leader the question was what he was doing to protest against ISIS or others of their ilk."

Your asking that question shows your complete and utter ignorance of the subject, they are sworn enemies, Iranian troops are fighting alongside Assad against isis for gods sake.

[Bluespunk]

"Bangkok-based Buddhist monk Maha Aphichat is unafraid of speaking his mind."

Bigots rarely are.

For every buddhist bigot there must be 10000 muslim bigots. Or is the oft-used lefty term "bigot" only supposed to be applied to non-muslim faiths?

Maybe the buddhists are getting just a little bit browned off with all the killing down south, carried out by the religion of peace of course.

A bigot is a bigot because of their bigotry. I apply it to anyone from any faith who displays hatred and intolerance to another based on their faith, nationality, race, gender or lifestyle choices.

Please post a link to back up your 1000 to 1 "statistic"

I called this creature a bigot because of the hatred and intolerance he spreads.

The seperatist conflict in the south, nasty as it may be, is not a faith based one.

[Bluespunk]

In a sense Buddhism IS under threat in Thailand, at least in the 3 southernmost violence afflicted provinces. As is typical when Islam starts to dominate, ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims occurs to the point where eventually 100% of the population becomes Muslim. In the three southernmost provinces, 80% of the population is already Muslim and out of Thailand's 3200 or so mosques, 2100 of them are located in these provinces despite only being home to 18% of Thailand's Muslim population (the vast majority of Thais incorrectly think that 90% or so of all Thai Muslims live there). I heard from a Thai based expat that the Thais are planning on building a mega Wat in one of these three southernmost provinces, perhaps to counter the growing Islamic (and anti-Thai separatist) influence in the region. I could imagine that there will be major religious divisions and possibly violence if this

While I'm not sure it's always been this way (always as in historically over the last couple of hundred years since Islam first arrived in Indonesia/Malaysia/southern Thailand) but around 30% of all southern Thais are Muslim. In fact, even in Phuket there are as many mosques as Buddhist temples 37 vs. 38 (based on figures from a few years ago), while in Krabi you'd be hard pressed to find the Buddhist temples (there are some but not many) whereas mosques are everywhere. Even as far north as Ranong, everywhere from around 50km south of A. Muang is predominanently Muslim. I remember counting 11 mosques driving in from Phang-nga, but only 3 Buddhist temples. A. Muang and northern parts of Ranong are predominanently Buddhist though.

While I don't condone violence against anyone, if Islam becomes even more dominant than it currently is, especially in southern Thailand, the consequences to society could be quite significant. I wouldn't be surprised if Buddhist monks lead the charge against the islamization of Thailand, as has been happening in neighboring Myanmar. However, in Myanmar Buddhism seems to be in a much stronger position than in Thailand from my own observations.

There has been no Islamization in Myanmar, they've been living mostly in their own state minding their own business. The so-called buddhists leading the violence against them are monks in name only.

So the Muslim Bengalis who call themselves Rohinga and have been invading the country are a figment of imagination?

The invasion you claim exists is hate propaganda spread by bigots misrepresenting the truth in order to further their agenda of discrimination and religious intolerance.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Bluespunk

[stillbornagain]

In a sense Buddhism IS under threat in Thailand, at least in the 3 southernmost violence afflicted provinces. As is typical when Islam starts to dominate, ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims occurs to the point where eventually 100% of the population becomes Muslim. In the three southernmost provinces, 80% of the population is already Muslim and out of Thailand's 3200 or so mosques, 2100 of them are located in these provinces despite only being home to 18% of Thailand's Muslim population (the vast majority of Thais incorrectly think that 90% or so of all Thai Muslims live there). I heard from a Thai based expat that the Thais are planning on building a mega Wat in one of these three southernmost provinces, perhaps to counter the growing Islamic (and anti-Thai separatist) influence in the region. I could imagine that there will be major religious divisions and possibly violence if this temple is built.

While I'm not sure it's always been this way (always as in historically over the last couple of hundred years since Islam first arrived in Indonesia/Malaysia/southern Thailand) but around 30% of all southern Thais are Muslim. In fact, even in Phuket there are as many mosques as Buddhist temples 37 vs. 38 (based on figures from a few years ago), while in Krabi you'd be hard pressed to find the Buddhist temples (there are some but not many) whereas mosques are everywhere. Even as far north as Ranong, everywhere from around 50km south of A. Muang is predominanently Muslim. I remember counting 11 mosques driving in from Phang-nga, but only 3 Buddhist temples. A. Muang and northern parts of Ranong are predominanently Buddhist though.

While I don't condone violence against anyone, if Islam becomes even more dominant than it currently is, especially in southern Thailand, the consequences to society could be quite significant. I wouldn't be surprised if Buddhist monks lead the charge against the islamization of Thailand, as has been happening in neighboring Myanmar. However, in Myanmar Buddhism seems to be in a much stronger position than in Thailand from my own observations.

You know, you could have bothered to devote 5 minutes to checking on your facts . Had you done that, you would have discovered that the 3 southernmost provinces were part of the Pattani sultanate or kingdom until about 100 years ago when it was annexed by Siam.. It was often a tributary region under Thai influence but kept at least a semi-independence for most of the tie. For centuries the composition of the population population has been mostly ethnic Malay Moslems. If anything, the population of non Moslems in those regions has increased since the formal annexation by Siam in 1909. If ignorance is bliss, you must be a very happy person

Are you saying that they are justifed in murdering non-Muslim non-Malay people?

Where if the uppity Buddhist Thais would know their place there would be peace and free ponies for everyone?

I corrected the assertions of an ignoramus. What I don't understand is, given the resources teh internet allows access to, why people persist in making up history..

[stillbornagain]

In a sense Buddhism IS under threat in Thailand, at least in the 3 southernmost violence afflicted provinces. As is typical when Islam starts to dominate, ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims occurs to the point where eventually 100% of the population becomes Muslim. In the three southernmost provinces, 80% of the population is already Muslim and out of Thailand's 3200 or so mosques, 2100 of them are located in these provinces despite only being home to 18% of Thailand's Muslim population (the vast majority of Thais incorrectly think that 90% or so of all Thai Muslims live there). I heard from a Thai based expat that the Thais are planning on building a mega Wat in one of these three southernmost provinces, perhaps to counter the growing Islamic (and anti-Thai separatist) influence in the region. I could imagine that there will be major religious divisions and possibly violence if this

While I'm not sure it's always been this way (always as in historically over the last couple of hundred years since Islam first arrived in Indonesia/Malaysia/southern Thailand) but around 30% of all southern Thais are Muslim. In fact, even in Phuket there are as many mosques as Buddhist temples 37 vs. 38 (based on figures from a few years ago), while in Krabi you'd be hard pressed to find the Buddhist temples (there are some but not many) whereas mosques are everywhere. Even as far north as Ranong, everywhere from around 50km south of A. Muang is predominanently Muslim. I remember counting 11 mosques driving in from Phang-nga, but only 3 Buddhist temples. A. Muang and northern parts of Ranong are predominanently Buddhist though.

While I don't condone violence against anyone, if Islam becomes even more dominant than it currently is, especially in southern Thailand, the consequences to society could be quite significant. I wouldn't be surprised if Buddhist monks lead the charge against the islamization of Thailand, as has been happening in neighboring Myanmar. However, in Myanmar Buddhism seems to be in a much stronger position than in Thailand from my own observations.

There has been no Islamization in Myanmar, they've been living mostly in their own state minding their own business. The so-called buddhists leading the violence against them are monks in name only.

So the Muslim Bengalis who call themselves Rohinga and have been invading the country are a figment of imagination?

Another case of aggressive ignorance. The Royinga have been in Myanmar for a very long time. They were actually deprived of their citizenship by the the tyrant General Ne Win. You know, the same guy who kiled aung san suu kyi's father and led Burma back into the Dark Ages. Here's a link if you care to educate yourself which I somehow doubt. The page it links to comes complete with footnotes. You know, citations that can lead to supporting evidence. What have you got to offer besides rage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_people

[Balance]

This right wing nationalistic response to anyone that does not meet their definition of "Thai" had its birth with the bad trade with England in 1907 Anglo-Siam treaty that left three provinces in Thailand when 90% of the people were of Malay heritage and were Moslem. The beginning of the current situation was created by Khun Phibum in 1948 when he responded to demonstrations in the South with tanks and bombs. The demonstrations were about Phibun's national campaign to make all people conform to what he considered Thai behavior. That meant speaking only Thai and being a Thai Buddhist. It was the final nail in the coffin for the enlightened period of Rama V that celebrated diversity and tolerance including the right of people to practice the religion of their choice.

[LannaGuy]

not all muslims are terrorists (in fact a small minority) but most terrorists are muslim

and THAT is the problem

[Tomtomtom69]

"Bangkok-based Buddhist monk Maha Aphichat is unafraid of speaking his mind."

Bigots rarely are.

Bigots or people entitled to express their opinion? Or are you one of those people that calls somebody a bigot or racist or homophobic or islamaphobic if their views differ from yours.

Please feel free to elaborate on why you feel the monk in question is a bigot.

Brigante7

Why is he a bigot, hmm let me see:

From the OP- A: “I want to tell Muslims to stop killing us. We can no longer tolerate this. If more Buddhists and monks are killed then we will retaliate. Our retaliation will not just be in the south, but against Muslims across the country."

A separatist conflict, albeit a foul and nasty one, that has nothing to do with faith is used by this bigot to justify murdering Muslims, any Muslims, regardless of their involvement in the conflict. That is promoting hate.

From the OP-B: "He has used local conflicts to further foment religious tensions, such as the Muslim community’s rejection to the building of a Buddhist Park in Pattani in January and more recently, Buddhist monks' opposition to the setting up of a halal food industry in Chiang Mai."

This bigot refuses to accept any other faiths right to follow their faith or decide what happens in a democratic manner in their community. I don't know why the Muslim community refused to allow a park in their community if the Buddhists there wanted one. All faiths should be allowed their place of worship. Is there a link to this story?

However to use it to promote hate is wrong.

From the OP-C: Ha has cited Myanmar's firebrand monk Ashin Wirathu - and his anti-Muslim teachings - as a model for safeguarding Buddhism in Thailand. “The doves (monks) cannot help us deal with this threat, like in the south, but the hawks can,” said Aphichat. “That's what’s happening in Myanmar: I'm applying Wirathu’s way in Thailand.'

Wirathu's methods are violence, intolerance and persecution, That is promoting hate.

The man is a scumbag, intolerant bigot.

"I don't know why the Muslim community refused to allow a park in their community if the Buddhists there wanted one."

I'll tell you why, and for anyone with their head stuck in the sand. Muslims are completely INTOLERANT towards any non-Islamic ideology, religion or idea that conflicts with Islam. That's why they didn't allow it.

Since Pattani is a majority Islamic province, what the Muslim majority there want goes without objection. What any other minority (ethnic or religious) wants, whether Buddhist, Christian, Thai, Chinese, western? To hell with them! (According to Muslims).

On the other hand, wherever Muslims are in the minority, phoney victimhood is induced to produce a sense of artificial guilt in the non-Muslim population, because if we don't give the Muslims what they want they respond with terms like "discrimination", "racism" and of course even violence.

Recently I went through a majority Muslim slum area of Bangkok for the first time. Apart from being very poor, I noticed a few interesting things, which were very non-Thai to me; I felt like I was in Indonesia, Bangladesh or perhaps even Pakistan:

1) At least one person who joined me claimed he saw the religious police in there. Really? So now they are governing themselves? Whatever happened to following the rules of the land? Sharia Law, here we come.

2) Mosques blasting the evening call to prayer in Arabic at full blast. Of course there were no objections to this, as all surrounding residents are Muslim.

3) Not a single Wat, or visible evidence of the Thai monarchy, Buddhism or culture.

4) Not a single dog. Yep, that's right, in a slum area not a single dog. Of course this is not surprising, since Islam hates dogs.

5) A large number of Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani, Rohingya?, Malay, Arab/mixed race Thai individuals. Nothing wrong with that of course, ethnic diversity is always nice. But in an otherwise Thai area I wasn't expecting to see that. What I didn't see where westerners though, apart from those that joined me. Again, hardly surprising that not a single westerner would want to live in such an area.

6) No alcohol.

7) Even young girls were veiled. Yes, girls as young as 5 or 6.

8) Some men were dressed in the full Islamic attire, from head to toe. Including the head gear, the goatee or full beard. Some women were even wearing the full Niqab or burka style outfit. Not many though, but I have started seeing increasing numbers.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Tomtomtom69

[Tomtomtom69]

In a sense Buddhism IS under threat in Thailand, at least in the 3 southernmost violence afflicted provinces. As is typical when Islam starts to dominate, ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims occurs to the point where eventually 100% of the population becomes Muslim. In the three southernmost provinces, 80% of the population is already Muslim and out of Thailand's 3200 or so mosques, 2100 of them are located in these provinces despite only being home to 18% of Thailand's Muslim population (the vast majority of Thais incorrectly think that 90% or so of all Thai Muslims live there). I heard from a Thai based expat that the Thais are planning on building a mega Wat in one of these three southernmost provinces, perhaps to counter the growing Islamic (and anti-Thai separatist) influence in the region. I could imagine that there will be major religious divisions and possibly violence if this temple is built.

While I'm not sure it's always been this way (always as in historically over the last couple of hundred years since Islam first arrived in Indonesia/Malaysia/southern Thailand) but around 30% of all southern Thais are Muslim. In fact, even in Phuket there are as many mosques as Buddhist temples 37 vs. 38 (based on figures from a few years ago), while in Krabi you'd be hard pressed to find the Buddhist temples (there are some but not many) whereas mosques are everywhere. Even as far north as Ranong, everywhere from around 50km south of A. Muang is predominanently Muslim. I remember counting 11 mosques driving in from Phang-nga, but only 3 Buddhist temples. A. Muang and northern parts of Ranong are predominanently Buddhist though.

While I don't condone violence against anyone, if Islam becomes even more dominant than it currently is, especially in southern Thailand, the consequences to society could be quite significant. I wouldn't be surprised if Buddhist monks lead the charge against the islamization of Thailand, as has been happening in neighboring Myanmar. However, in Myanmar Buddhism seems to be in a much stronger position than in Thailand from my own observations.

You know, you could have bothered to devote 5 minutes to checking on your facts . Had you done that, you would have discovered that the 3 southernmost provinces were part of the Pattani sultanate or kingdom until about 100 years ago when it was annexed by Siam.. It was often a tributary region under Thai influence but kept at least a semi-independence for most of the tie. For centuries the composition of the population population has been mostly ethnic Malay Moslems. If anything, the population of non Moslems in those regions has increased since the formal annexation by Siam in 1909. If ignorance is bliss, you must be a very happy person

Are you saying that they are justifed in murdering non-Muslim non-Malay people?

Where if the uppity Buddhist Thais would know their place there would be peace and free ponies for everyone?

I corrected the assertions of an ignoramus. What I don't understand is, given the resources teh internet allows access to, why people persist in making up history..

Ignoramus? The only ignoramus is you. Whether or not the three southernmost provinces have historically been Muslim (if you had read my post you would have clearly been able to infer that I implied that yes, historically the region has been majority Muslim) HOWEVER, only 18% of the Thai Muslim population lives there. Now, I'm not going to read a history book to have an argument with some keyboard warrior on Thai visa, I know my Thai and ASEAN history quite well and probably better than many locals.

My point was simply that Islam is creeping into other parts of Thailand, starting from the Malay border region and that may, no, WILL have significant implications in the future if it isn't addressed soon. That is assuming that Islam continues to make further inroads into Thailand's heartland.

As for the three southernmost provinces, that is a problem for Thailand's leaders to sort out. What is abundantly clear though is that there is no negotiating with Muslims. Either they get their way, or Thailand forcibly imposes it's way. However, a heterogeneous identity whereby Muslims are recognized equally like Buddhists is not going to solve the problem. The Muslims in that region want their own separate state, or at least autonomy. They want Sharia Law. They want mosques only, no Wats. They don't want Thai Buddhist culture. That is a FACT. Of course I realize that at the heart of this issue is the Thai annexation of a once semi-independent Muslim sultanate that Thailand desperately wants to keep holding onto, no matter the cost.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Tomtomtom69

[Tomtomtom69]

In a sense Buddhism IS under threat in Thailand, at least in the 3 southernmost violence afflicted provinces. As is typical when Islam starts to dominate, ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims occurs to the point where eventually 100% of the population becomes Muslim. In the three southernmost provinces, 80% of the population is already Muslim and out of Thailand's 3200 or so mosques, 2100 of them are located in these provinces despite only being home to 18% of Thailand's Muslim population (the vast majority of Thais incorrectly think that 90% or so of all Thai Muslims live there). I heard from a Thai based expat that the Thais are planning on building a mega Wat in one of these three southernmost provinces, perhaps to counter the growing Islamic (and anti-Thai separatist) influence in the region. I could imagine that there will be major religious divisions and possibly violence if this

While I'm not sure it's always been this way (always as in historically over the last couple of hundred years since Islam first arrived in Indonesia/Malaysia/southern Thailand) but around 30% of all southern Thais are Muslim. In fact, even in Phuket there are as many mosques as Buddhist temples 37 vs. 38 (based on figures from a few years ago), while in Krabi you'd be hard pressed to find the Buddhist temples (there are some but not many) whereas mosques are everywhere. Even as far north as Ranong, everywhere from around 50km south of A. Muang is predominanently Muslim. I remember counting 11 mosques driving in from Phang-nga, but only 3 Buddhist temples. A. Muang and northern parts of Ranong are predominanently Buddhist though.

While I don't condone violence against anyone, if Islam becomes even more dominant than it currently is, especially in southern Thailand, the consequences to society could be quite significant. I wouldn't be surprised if Buddhist monks lead the charge against the islamization of Thailand, as has been happening in neighboring Myanmar. However, in Myanmar Buddhism seems to be in a much stronger position than in Thailand from my own observations.

There has been no Islamization in Myanmar, they've been living mostly in their own state minding their own business. The so-called buddhists leading the violence against them are monks in name only.

So the Muslim Bengalis who call themselves Rohinga and have been invading the country are a figment of imagination?

Another case of aggressive ignorance. The Royinga have been in Myanmar for a very long time. They were actually deprived of their citizenship by the the tyrant General Ne Win. You know, the same guy who kiled aung san suu kyi's father and led Burma back into the Dark Ages. Here's a link if you care to educate yourself which I somehow doubt. The page it links to comes complete with footnotes. You know, citations that can lead to supporting evidence. What have you got to offer besides rage? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_people

Ah Wikipedia, the source of all your knowledge.

I think the only ignorant person is you. How do you know about the "Rohingya" or Bengali Muslim population of Myanmar and as to whether they have been there for a long time? Myanmar's borders were only drawn up in 1948 after independence from England, before then it was a province of British India. Bangladesh as we know it today also didn't exist. Many Indians/Bengalis etc. freely crossed into what is today known as Myanmar and in addition to the many Indians who were brought in as labourers and bureaucrats into today's Myanmar by the British, they are what make Myanmar an ethnically and religiously diverse country.

Since foreigners haven't been allowed into the western border regions of Myanmar's Rakhine state since Burmese independence, there is absolutely no way of verifying the accuracy of any reporting that suggests something other than what the Burmese themselves report. No way of knowing what the real story is.

Either way, most Burmese don't want them. Maybe it would also be good to educate yourself as to the reasons why they feel they are a threat.

[piewarmer]

The biggest wave sweeping the world is Athiesm so relax.

[Bluespunk]

"Bangkok-based Buddhist monk Maha Aphichat is unafraid of speaking his mind."

Bigots rarely are.

Bigots or people entitled to express their opinion? Or are you one of those people that calls somebody a bigot or racist or homophobic or islamaphobic if their views differ from yours.

Please feel free to elaborate on why you feel the monk in question is a bigot.

Brigante7

Why is he a bigot, hmm let me see:

From the OP- A: “I want to tell Muslims to stop killing us. We can no longer tolerate this. If more Buddhists and monks are killed then we will retaliate. Our retaliation will not just be in the south, but against Muslims across the country."

A separatist conflict, albeit a foul and nasty one, that has nothing to do with faith is used by this bigot to justify murdering Muslims, any Muslims, regardless of their involvement in the conflict. That is promoting hate.

From the OP-B: "He has used local conflicts to further foment religious tensions, such as the Muslim community’s rejection to the building of a Buddhist Park in Pattani in January and more recently, Buddhist monks' opposition to the setting up of a halal food industry in Chiang Mai."

This bigot refuses to accept any other faiths right to follow their faith or decide what happens in a democratic manner in their community. I don't know why the Muslim community refused to allow a park in their community if the Buddhists there wanted one. All faiths should be allowed their place of worship. Is there a link to this story?

However to use it to promote hate is wrong.

From the OP-C: Ha has cited Myanmar's firebrand monk Ashin Wirathu - and his anti-Muslim teachings - as a model for safeguarding Buddhism in Thailand. “The doves (monks) cannot help us deal with this threat, like in the south, but the hawks can,” said Aphichat. “That's what’s happening in Myanmar: I'm applying Wirathu’s way in Thailand.'

Wirathu's methods are violence, intolerance and persecution, That is promoting hate.

The man is a scumbag, intolerant bigot.

"I don't know why the Muslim community refused to allow a park in their community if the Buddhists there wanted one."

I'll tell you why, and for anyone with their head stuck in the sand. Muslims are completely INTOLERANT towards any non-Islamic ideology, religion or idea that conflicts with Islam. That's why they didn't allow it.

Since Pattani is a majority Islamic province, what the Muslim majority there want goes without objection. What any other minority (ethnic or religious) wants, whether Buddhist, Christian, Thai, Chinese, western? To hell with them! (According to Muslims).

On the other hand, wherever Muslims are in the minority, phoney victimhood is induced to produce a sense of artificial guilt in the non-Muslim population, because if we don't give the Muslims what they want they respond with terms like "discrimination", "racism" and of course even violence.

Recently I went through a majority Muslim slum area of Bangkok for the first time. Apart from being very poor, I noticed a few interesting things, which were very non-Thai to me; I felt like I was in Indonesia, Bangladesh or perhaps even Pakistan:

1) At least one person who joined me claimed he saw the religious police in there. Really? So now they are governing themselves? Whatever happened to following the rules of the land? Sharia Law, here we come.

2) Mosques blasting the evening call to prayer in Arabic at full blast. Of course there were no objections to this, as all surrounding residents are Muslim.

3) Not a single Wat, or visible evidence of the Thai monarchy, Buddhism or culture.

4) Not a single dog. Yep, that's right, in a slum area not a single dog. Of course this is not surprising, since Islam hates dogs.

5) A large number of Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani, Rohingya?, Malay, Arab/mixed race Thai individuals. Nothing wrong with that of course, ethnic diversity is always nice. But in an otherwise Thai area I wasn't expecting to see that. What I didn't see where westerners though, apart from those that joined me. Again, hardly surprising that not a single westerner would want to live in such an area.

6) No alcohol.

7) Even young girls were veiled. Yes, girls as young as 5 or 6.

8) Some men were dressed in the full Islamic attire, from head to toe. Including the head gear, the goatee or full beard. Some women were even wearing the full Niqab or burka style outfit. Not many though, but I have started seeing increasing numbers.

Nothing you say [whether I agree or not and I don't on most of your more intolerant rants] justifies the hatred and intolerance of this bigot calling himself a monk.

[gandalf12]

Obviously the ISIS, Al Queda, etc muslims are a bad thing. But I agree with the above post with regards to extremists. We see it in all sides. While not all religions have Jihaads, the interpretations have led to most of the wars in mankind's existence. They led to the destruction of thousands of historical artifacts and pieces of knowledge at the hands of crusaders, conquistadors, and others. Certainly someone encouraging burning down mosques is part of the problem, and not the solution.

Just about all conflict in the world is due to religion

And yet the 20th century had the most deaths from states that were proudly atheist (Stalin Russia and Maoist China).

And your point is what exactly? Muslim vs Muslim is not the major source of present conflict? War of the Roses all about religion. Sunni and Sh'ia seem to hate each other yet they think everyone else will love them? Are you really serious?

[hawker9000]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

Well I haven't. And much more to the point, I don't see huge crowds of muslims turning out to support them when they do. I DO see muslim crowds turn out in protest when someone exercises their free speech rights...

[soalbundy]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

Well I haven't. And much more to the point, I don't see huge crowds of muslims turning out to support them when they do. I DO see muslim crowds turn out in protest when someone exercises their free speech rights...

There is no free speech, the PC battalion has seen to that,you have to bend over backwards until your spine breaks which is OK by them as they don't have one

[tbthailand]

not all muslims are terrorists (in fact a small minority) but most terrorists are muslim

and THAT is the problem

I don't know, we had terrorists out in Oregon recently & they didn't look muslim...

[Lee4Life]

27,762 number of muslim based terrorists attacks since 9/11

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/site/the-list.aspx

And the number of Christian based state terrorist attacks on let's say, Iraq, Libya, Syria for example, would be?

the attacks against people of arab origin or appearance has gone through the roof in the USA.

In case you didn't catch it the question was how many Christian based attacks, do you have some references or proof that these attacks were carried out by Christians? And what is "through the roof? Facts please

Edited February 9, 2016 by Lee4Life

[fasteddie]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

Well I haven't. And much more to the point, I don't see huge crowds of muslims turning out to support them when they do. I DO see muslim crowds turn out in protest when someone exercises their free speech rights...

Well you're not looking. Take Charlie Hebdo for example, Muslims all over the world came out in support of France, you just wont see it on Fox.

[Inyourendo]

Recently i spoke with a very well dressed upper class elderly Thai gentleman with his elegantly dressed wife, they looked as if they had just come from the opera although we were in a market town. We met by chance and engaged in conversation ranging from politics to religion, He was scathing about Thai monks and Thai politics as well as LM. It appeared that he had studied politics and had been to London many times and had good knowledge about European politics, he knew all about spitting image and found it highly amusing, but here he said, making a throat cutting gesture, one would be finished. Strangely open minded for a Thai i thought but then again he seemed to be highly intelligent.

Not possible...sorry.....

[NoshowJones]

Obviously the ISIS, Al Queda, etc muslims are a bad thing. But I agree with the above post with regards to extremists. We see it in all sides. While not all religions have Jihaads, the interpretations have led to most of the wars in mankind's existence. They led to the destruction of thousands of historical artifacts and pieces of knowledge at the hands of crusaders, conquistadors, and others. Certainly someone encouraging burning down mosques is part of the problem, and not the solution.

Just about all conflict in the world is due to religion

Yes, especially one in particular.

[vadimbz]

He's right, Afghanistan used to be Buddhist too, and look at it now.

Edited February 9, 2016 by vadimbz

[dave_boo]

Obviously the ISIS, Al Queda, etc muslims are a bad thing. But I agree with the above post with regards to extremists. We see it in all sides. While not all religions have Jihaads, the interpretations have led to most of the wars in mankind's existence. They led to the destruction of thousands of historical artifacts and pieces of knowledge at the hands of crusaders, conquistadors, and others. Certainly someone encouraging burning down mosques is part of the problem, and not the solution.

Just about all conflict in the world is due to religion

And yet the 20th century had the most deaths from states that were proudly atheist (Stalin Russia and Maoist China).

And your point is what exactly? Muslim vs Muslim is not the major source of present conflict? War of the Roses all about religion. Sunni and Sh'ia seem to hate each other yet they think everyone else will love them? Are you really serious?

The point is that in the lifetimes of boardmembers, what has caused the most deaths has been secular states.

They haven't been responsible for the most low level constant bull...but for killing the most people.

[stander]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

Well I haven't. And much more to the point, I don't see huge crowds of muslims turning out to support them when they do. I DO see muslim crowds turn out in protest when someone exercises their free speech rights...

There is no free speech, the PC battalion has seen to that,you have to bend over backwards until your spine breaks which is OK by them as they don't have one

Let's face facts: freedom of speech is dead to all but the suicidal courageous so far as causing offence to Islam is concerned.

[dave_boo]

not all muslims are terrorists (in fact a small minority) but most terrorists are muslim

and THAT is the problem

I don't know, we had terrorists out in Oregon recently & they didn't look muslim...

Who were they terrorising?

And what does a Muslim look like? Asian or Pakistani or Arab or African or European?

Being able to quickly identify them would sure help the bigots...

[dave_boo]

What is happening in Southern Thailand is happening around the globe...Southern Philippines have been dealing with Muslim terrorists/separatists unsuccessfully for decades...Mid East, Africa, Americas, Europe....they are relentless, have little regard for human life...including their own...and want to take the entire world back to the male dominated stone age where women and infidel are to be used and abused as slaves...

Kudos to the folks who stand their ground against these inhumane animals...(OK, to all you bleeding hearts...there are good law abiding Muslims...I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have just not seen many stand up and denounce their radical brothers)

I have.

So have I, but then again, if all you watch is western media you're not likely to see much.

Is al-Azhar teaching that attacks against kuffirs is wrong?

What about Khomeini?

Perhaps the Salafis are?

Lol have you ever heard Khomanei exort Iranians / muslims to kill kafirs ?

No didnt think so.

Have you heard any of the current bunch of running for US president call for the bombing of Iran ? Yeah I thought so..... trying to lump Iran in with Islamic terrorism is borne out by rhetoric but not facts.

As he is the closest thing Shi'a have to a leader the question was what he was doing to protest against ISIS or others of their ilk.

It's worth noting your lack of addressing the Sufi or Salafi questions.

But to answer your question; Amir Taheri wrote a book, "Holy Terror: Inside the World of Islamic Terrorism" with the below quote.

Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. . . . But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. . . . Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Quranic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.

"As he is the closest thing Shi'a have to a leader the question was what he was doing to protest against ISIS or others of their ilk."

Your asking that question shows your complete and utter ignorance of the subject, they are sworn enemies, Iranian troops are fighting alongside Assad against isis for gods sake.

Selective quotation yet again.

Or others if their ilk....such as Hezbollah.

And I'm not asking for any proof that the Shi'a leader complains about the Sunni killing Shi'a but coming out and saying that Muslims killing non-Muslims is wrong.

I provided a quote that you can not or will not discuss and instead you go off on a tangent about other people Shi'a kill and are killed by.

[stander]

not all muslims are terrorists (in fact a small minority) but most terrorists are muslim

and THAT is the problem

One thing to remember is that all terrorists and jihadists were at some point "moderate Muslims" Its just a matter of pressing the right buttons.

[Lannig]

I think that this is clearly a reaction to the fact that making Buddhism a state religion was rejected in the draft of the new constitution.

These two topics can shed some extra light too:

Spurred by Myanmar radicals, Thai Buddhists push for state religion status

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/868100-spurred-by-myanmar-radicals-thai-buddhists-push-for-state-religion-status/

Buddhist extremism in Thailand fits neatly into NCPO's plans

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/875051-buddhist-extremism-in-thailand-fits-neatly-into-ncpos-plans/

Edited February 9, 2016 by Lannig

[John1012]

Just to raise a small point. Why does Thailand not donate the provinces ceded to Thailand in 1909 back to Malaysia? Presumably the Buddhist population has been there for a long time, and has co-existed quite satisfactorily until recently. If not they could relocate to 'mainland' Thailand using the funds released from policing and supporting the Islamic provinces. Then the tossers who want independence are happy, Thailand ceases to lose its soldiers to terrorist activity. The borders can be closed , even build a wall/fence and the Islamic populace can then ponce off the Malaysian government for education, healthcare and follow the Islamic laws of Malaysia. Every body has what they want, Thailand has peace within it's borders and a big reduction on loss of life and finances, the Islamists have their own country to starve in. Too simple?

[simple1]

Just to raise a small point. Why does Thailand not donate the provinces ceded to Thailand in 1909 back to Malaysia? Presumably the Buddhist population has been there for a long time, and has co-existed quite satisfactorily until recently. If not they could relocate to 'mainland' Thailand using the funds released from policing and supporting the Islamic provinces. Then the tossers who want independence are happy, Thailand ceases to lose its soldiers to terrorist activity. The borders can be closed , even build a wall/fence and the Islamic populace can then ponce off the Malaysian government for education, healthcare and follow the Islamic laws of Malaysia. Every body has what they want, Thailand has peace within it's borders and a big reduction on loss of life and finances, the Islamists have their own country to starve in. Too simple?

The colours of the Thai flag represent Nation, Religion, King, accordingly at this stage the military will not even agree to some form of autonomy. In fact the current PM has declared holding elections for locals as provincial governors, rather than being ruled by Bangkok appointees, will not be permitted.

It's disputed that the majority of Thai Muslims in the deep South actually desire merging with Malaysia; to my knowledge Malaysia has not expressed a wish to do so.

Edited February 11, 2016 by simple1