Thailand scuppers migrant rescue ship's operations

[simple1]

I think the Mediterranean situation and the Rohingyas are two much different things. The common denominator is internally displaced people but In the Mediterranean you have people fleeing a sadistic Daesh. I don't have the impressions that many Syrians moved to Europe before the civil war as they had a relatively stable life - now it is either flee or get shot/decapitated/thrown from a building/etc - as well as being bombed by Assads forces. Quite simple really.

For the Rohingya situation things could be dealt with internally in Myanmar by first of all giving them citizenship and join the democratic processes. Thailand and ASEAN fails miserably in supporting this process. Fair enough they clearly don't want to help any refugees outside of Myanmar but then they could help inside Myanmar by pushing the political agenda and provide proper aid in Myanmar. Bear in mind that Thailand herself received and still receives a lot of Western aid - perhaps it is time to give something back to the global community?

One can only hope that Suu Kyi is willing to include all ethnic minorities in building a new Myanmar, but I don't see Thailand as acting like a good neighbor and encouraging inclusivity in this nation building.

all people called "Rohingya" are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

I guess you have overlooked the then Burmese invasion of the territory held by Rohingya, subjected to mass murder and forced relocation of some to central Burma. However, rather than rehashing differing versions of history, perhaps you can explain why Rohingya held Burmese citizenship when Burma gained independence and were a recognised ethnic minority by the then Burmese government.

BTW I notice in your latest reply to me you have used the descriptive language of the far right. I'm curious, do you hold such hostile opinion of other Myanmar ethnic groups e.g. the approx 140k Karen who have resided in refugee camps within Thailand for years.

Edited April 19, 2016 by simple1

[Matt96]

I think the Mediterranean situation and the Rohingyas are two much different things. The common denominator is internally displaced people but In the Mediterranean you have people fleeing a sadistic Daesh. I don't have the impressions that many Syrians moved to Europe before the civil war as they had a relatively stable life - now it is either flee or get shot/decapitated/thrown from a building/etc - as well as being bombed by Assads forces. Quite simple really.

For the Rohingya situation things could be dealt with internally in Myanmar by first of all giving them citizenship and join the democratic processes. Thailand and ASEAN fails miserably in supporting this process. Fair enough they clearly don't want to help any refugees outside of Myanmar but then they could help inside Myanmar by pushing the political agenda and provide proper aid in Myanmar. Bear in mind that Thailand herself received and still receives a lot of Western aid - perhaps it is time to give something back to the global community?

One can only hope that Suu Kyi is willing to include all ethnic minorities in building a new Myanmar, but I don't see Thailand as acting like a good neighbor and encouraging inclusivity in this nation building.

all people called "Rohingya" are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

I guess you have overlooked the then Burmese invasion of the territory held by Rohingya, subjected to mass murder and forced relocation of some to central Burma. However, rather than rehashing differing versions of history, perhaps you can explain why Rohingya held Burmese citizenship when Burma gained independence and were a recognised ethnic minority by the then Burmese government.

BTW I notice in your latest reply to me you have used the descriptive language of the far right. I'm curious, do you hold such hostile opinion of other Myanmar ethnic groups e.g. the approx 140k Karen who have resided in refugee camps within Thailand for years.

the majority of modern Rohingya never were Burmese citizenship -it's just a blatant lie in order to force Myanmar authorities to accept them.

it's was a small Muslim minority in Rakhine state when Burma gained independence. Thy hold citizenship. And still held it.

the majority of modern Rohingya crossed the border much later:

From 1971 to 1973, the Bangladesh Liberation War and its accompanying genocide saw an exodus of ten million Bengali refugees to neighboring countries. A large number of refugees settled in northern Rakhine and to a smaller extent in Chin State. In 1975, Bangladesh Ambassador to Burma, Khwaja Mohammed Kaiser admitted that there were upward of 500,000 trespassers in Arakan who Burma had some rights to eject and implored the Burmese authorities not to press the issue during political turmoils in Bangladesh

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF13/kaiser-obrien.pdf

500.000 Rohingya crossed the border and Bangladesh admitted this!

Burmese were enough stupid to believe the word of Bangladesh ambassador. they let them stay until turmoil ends. But later Bangladeshis started to deny this. because Bangladesh was (and is now) overpopulated and they don't need there Rohingya back.

I hold a "hostile opinion" about all illegal migrants in Burma. those who reside in Burma without citizenship should be send back to where they came from. If there is no such a place - they should gain citizenship of Myanmar.

but this is not the case with Rohingya - there is absolutely no doubt were, when and how did they come to Burma, either they deny it or not.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Matt96

[Bluespunk]

I think the Mediterranean situation and the Rohingyas are two much different things. The common denominator is internally displaced people but In the Mediterranean you have people fleeing a sadistic Daesh. I don't have the impressions that many Syrians moved to Europe before the civil war as they had a relatively stable life - now it is either flee or get shot/decapitated/thrown from a building/etc - as well as being bombed by Assads forces. Quite simple really.

For the Rohingya situation things could be dealt with internally in Myanmar by first of all giving them citizenship and join the democratic processes. Thailand and ASEAN fails miserably in supporting this process. Fair enough they clearly don't want to help any refugees outside of Myanmar but then they could help inside Myanmar by pushing the political agenda and provide proper aid in Myanmar. Bear in mind that Thailand herself received and still receives a lot of Western aid - perhaps it is time to give something back to the global community?

One can only hope that Suu Kyi is willing to include all ethnic minorities in building a new Myanmar, but I don't see Thailand as acting like a good neighbor and encouraging inclusivity in this nation building.

all people called "Rohingya" are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

I guess you have overlooked the then Burmese invasion of the territory held by Rohingya, subjected to mass murder and forced relocation of some to central Burma. However, rather than rehashing differing versions of history, perhaps you can explain why Rohingya held Burmese citizenship when Burma gained independence and were a recognised ethnic minority by the then Burmese government.

BTW I notice in your latest reply to me you have used the descriptive language of the far right. I'm curious, do you hold such hostile opinion of other Myanmar ethnic groups e.g. the approx 140k Karen who have resided in refugee camps within Thailand for years.

the majority of modern Rohingya never were Burmese citizenship -it's just a blatant lie in order to force Myanmar authorities to accept them.

it's was a small Muslim minority in Rakhine state when Burma gained independence. Thy hold citizenship. And still held it.

the majority of modern Rohingya crossed the border much later:

From 1971 to 1973, the Bangladesh Liberation War and its accompanying genocide saw an exodus of ten million Bengali refugees to neighboring countries. A large number of refugees settled in northern Rakhine and to a smaller extent in Chin State. In 1975, Bangladesh Ambassador to Burma, Khwaja Mohammed Kaiser admitted that there were upward of 500,000 trespassers in Arakan who Burma had some rights to eject and implored the Burmese authorities not to press the issue during political turmoils in Bangladesh

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF13/kaiser-obrien.pdf

500.000 Rohingya crossed the border and Bangladesh admitted this!

Burmese were enough stupid to believe the word of Bangladesh ambassador. they let them stay until turmoil ends. But later Bangladeshis started to deny this. because Bangladesh was (and is now) overpopulated and they don't need there Rohingya back.

I hold a "hostile opinion" about all illegal migrants in Burma. those who reside in Burma without citizenship should be send back to where they came from. If there is no such a place - they should gain citizenship of Myanmar.

but this is not the case with Rohingya - there is absolutely no doubt were, when and how did they come to Burma, either they deny it or not.

Pure BS. Your true colours are showing now.

[Bluespunk]

I think the Mediterranean situation and the Rohingyas are two much different things. The common denominator is internally displaced people but In the Mediterranean you have people fleeing a sadistic Daesh. I don't have the impressions that many Syrians moved to Europe before the civil war as they had a relatively stable life - now it is either flee or get shot/decapitated/thrown from a building/etc - as well as being bombed by Assads forces. Quite simple really.

For the Rohingya situation things could be dealt with internally in Myanmar by first of all giving them citizenship and join the democratic processes. Thailand and ASEAN fails miserably in supporting this process. Fair enough they clearly don't want to help any refugees outside of Myanmar but then they could help inside Myanmar by pushing the political agenda and provide proper aid in Myanmar. Bear in mind that Thailand herself received and still receives a lot of Western aid - perhaps it is time to give something back to the global community?

One can only hope that Suu Kyi is willing to include all ethnic minorities in building a new Myanmar, but I don't see Thailand as acting like a good neighbor and encouraging inclusivity in this nation building.

all people called "Rohingya" are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. during and after the war in Bangladesh they took advantage of bad border control on Burmese side and relocated to the land which didn't belong to them.

they don't have any right for Myanmar citizenship. being an illegal immigrant for decades does not make you eligible for a citizenship - according to Myanmar law.

they should be send where they came from - Bangladesh.

You really are the most vile poster I have come across in a long time.

[Matt96]

the majority of modern Rohingya never were Burmese citizenship -it's just a blatant lie in order to force Myanmar authorities to accept them.

it's was a small Muslim minority in Rakhine state when Burma gained independence. Thy hold citizenship. And still held it.

the majority of modern Rohingya crossed the border much later:

From 1971 to 1973, the Bangladesh Liberation War and its accompanying genocide saw an exodus of ten million Bengali refugees to neighboring countries. A large number of refugees settled in northern Rakhine and to a smaller extent in Chin State. In 1975, Bangladesh Ambassador to Burma, Khwaja Mohammed Kaiser admitted that there were upward of 500,000 trespassers in Arakan who Burma had some rights to eject and implored the Burmese authorities not to press the issue during political turmoils in Bangladesh

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF13/kaiser-obrien.pdf

500.000 Rohingya crossed the border and Bangladesh admitted this!

Burmese were enough stupid to believe the word of Bangladesh ambassador. they let them stay until turmoil ends. But later Bangladeshis started to deny this. because Bangladesh was (and is now) overpopulated and they don't need there Rohingya back.

I hold a "hostile opinion" about all illegal migrants in Burma. those who reside in Burma without citizenship should be send back to where they came from. If there is no such a place - they should gain citizenship of Myanmar.

but this is not the case with Rohingya - there is absolutely no doubt were, when and how did they come to Burma, either they deny it or not.

Pure BS. Your true colours are showing now.

I wrote facts about Rohingya. with link to a real document. and all you can answer - "you are wrong because you are bad"?

haha

[Bluespunk]

No. They are wrong because they are incorrect. A product of prejudice. Something you are well versed in.

[jeab1980]

The thing is if all these boat people allowed in it would have the TV users up in arms as immigration queques lengthen. Personaly as Thai I don't want them we can't afford them.

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

You have every right to express your opinion about the topic. You may disagree, but it must be done in a civil manner.

[Matt96]

No. They are wrong because they are incorrect. A product of prejudice. Something you are well versed in.

if I am wrong, please prove that the document I wrote the link for is a fake. As I know even UK never denied that it's an official genuine extract from real UK Ambassador Terrence O'Brien's record.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Matt96

[Matt96]

The thing is if all these boat people allowed in it would have the TV users up in arms as immigration queques lengthen. Personaly as Thai I don't want them we can't afford them.

but the problem is that many TVF members don't really care what you or other Thais want. They really believe they know it better who Thai authorities should let in on Thai territory.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Matt96

[jeab1980]

The thing is if all these boat people allowed in it would have the TV users up in arms as immigration queques lengthen. Personaly as Thai I don't want them we can't afford them.

but the problem is that many TVF members don't really care what you or other Thais want. They really believe they know it better who Thai authorities should let in on Thai territory.

Yes I know this luckily enough they won't have a say except to them self's on here

[Bluespunk]

No. They are wrong because they are incorrect. A product of prejudice. Something you are well versed in.

if I am wrong, please prove that the document I wrote the link for is a fake. As I know even UK never denied that it's an official genuine extract from real UK Ambassador Terrence O'Brien's record.

You are wrong.

[Matt96]

The thing is if all these boat people allowed in it would have the TV users up in arms as immigration queques lengthen. Personaly as Thai I don't want them we can't afford them.

but the problem is that many TVF members don't really care what you or other Thais want. They really believe they know it better who Thai authorities should let in on Thai territory.

Yes I know this luckily enough they won't have a say except to them self's on here

luckily Thai government was and is enough clever not to give citizenship of Thailand to those Western "advisers". so if they don't like something in Thailand - the best advise would be - "go back to your homeland where everything is according to your wishes and points of view. and let Thais manage their own country how they like".

I don't know why, but Thailand was always lucky with it's leaders. may be it's just a good karma...

[Matt96]

No. They are wrong because they are incorrect. A product of prejudice. Something you are well versed in.

if I am wrong, please prove that the document I wrote the link for is a fake. As I know even UK never denied that it's an official genuine extract from real UK Ambassador Terrence O'Brien's record.

You are wrong.

ahahahahaha

you made my day, man! thanks a lot for that reply.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Matt96

[Bluespunk]

You are still wrong.

[simple1]

Some Rohingya are provided citizenship; this claim is contradicted:

Under the 1982 Citizenship Law, Rohingya were declared “non-national” or “foreign residents.” This law designated three categories of citizens: (1) full citizens, (2) associate citizens, and (3) naturalized citizens. None of the categories applies to the Rohingya as they are not recognized as one of the 135 “national races” by the Myanmar government. More than 700,000 Rohingya in northern Rakhine today are effectively stateless and denied basic human rights.

Also…

http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs14/ARAKAN-%20Question_of_Rohingyas_Nationality-red.pdf

From the link used by Matt96 to support some of his claims are a number of articles with differing versions of Rohingya history. Also links that talk to the ongoing organised oppression of Rohingya in Myanmar and the clear risk for transition to actual genocidal practices; e.g...

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF18/Rohingya_history__Myth_and_Reality.pdf

http://statecrime.org/data/2015/10/ISCI-Rohingya-Report-PUBLISHED-VERSION.pdf

Also of interest is a British Embassy letter from 11/1982 heavily critical of the then recently enacted Burmese Citizenship Law..

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF20/1982-Act.pdf

Getting back to the OP it is unclear to me if the charity organisation had reached agreement with the Thai Government to hand over any Rohingya rescued at sea. Based on previous Thai responses and actions of Thai government officials collaborating with human traffickers, Thai fisheries slave industry and so on, I seriously doubt such inference. In any case it has on numerous occasions been stated Rohingya are trying to reach Malaysia, not Thailand, as the final destination in the deluded idea they will be treated with respect, not exploited.

[Matt96]

Some Rohingya are provided citizenship; this claim is contradicted:

Under the 1982 Citizenship Law, Rohingya were declared “non-national” or “foreign residents.” This law designated three categories of citizens: (1) full citizens, (2) associate citizens, and (3) naturalized citizens. None of the categories applies to the Rohingya as they are not recognized as one of the 135 “national races” by the Myanmar government. More than 700,000 Rohingya in northern Rakhine today are effectively stateless and denied basic human rights.

Also…

http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs14/ARAKAN-%20Question_of_Rohingyas_Nationality-red.pdf

From the link used by Matt96 to support some of his claims are a number of articles with differing versions of Rohingya history. Also links that talk to the ongoing organised oppression of Rohingya in Myanmar and the clear risk for transition to actual genocidal practices; e.g...

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF18/Rohingya_history__Myth_and_Reality.pdf

http://statecrime.org/data/2015/10/ISCI-Rohingya-Report-PUBLISHED-VERSION.pdf

Also of interest is a British Embassy letter from 11/1982 heavily critical of the then recently enacted Burmese Citizenship Law..

http://www.networkmyanmar.org/images/stories/PDF20/1982-Act.pdf

Getting back to the OP it is unclear to me if the charity organisation had reached agreement with the Thai Government to hand over any Rohingya rescued at sea. Based on previous Thai responses and actions of Thai government officials collaborating with human traffickers, Thai fisheries slave industry and so on, I seriously doubt such inference. In any case it has on numerous occasions been stated Rohingya are trying to reach Malaysia, not Thailand, as the final destination in the deluded idea they will be treated with respect, not exploited.

lie again. there is no such a word "Rohingya" in Myanmar law. there is a word "bengali" - those who crossed the border with Bangladesh after Burma gained independence. those "bengali" considered aliens and should be sent back to Bangladesh.

"From the link used by Matt96 to support some of his claims are a number of articles with differing versions of Rohingya history."

my link was not for an "article" but for a document which was written by a UK Ambassador. your "articles" were made up by Rohingya and there left-liberal accomplices in order to justify Rohingya's claims.

do you understand a difference between a document and an article?!

"Also links that talk to the ongoing organised oppression of Rohingya in Myanmar and the clear risk for transition to actual genocidal practices; e.g..."

so why don't they go back to wonderful Bangladesh?!

"In any case it has on numerous occasions been stated Rohingya are trying to reach Malaysia, not Thailand"

blatant lie

report about Rohingyas crossed Thai border illegally:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/rohingya-refugee-struggle-thailand-150614072214066.html

and even in Malaysia nobody need them. locals hate them.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/05/29/refu-m29.html

from this article:

"Another 3,500 Rohingya and Bangladeshi refugees have managed to reach shore in Malaysia and Indonesia after those governments ended the policy of driving the boats out to sea and granted temporary shelter to some for one year. The UN estimates that at least 120,000 asylum seekers have left from Burma and Bangladesh so far this year."

migrants from Bangladesh behave exactly the same as "Rohingya": speak the same language, use same boats, have the same religion. this is another proof that so called "Rohingya" are just Bengalis who managed to cross the border with Myanmar illegally.

they made a hell out of their own country - Bangladesh - now they try to make the same with neighboring countries.

it's not a fault of Burma, Malaysia or Thailand that Bengalis can't make their own country - Bangladesh - a decent place to live. other nations owe nothing to them.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Matt96

[simple1]

Prior to the last election in Myanmar "Rohingya" as a recognised ethnic description was removed in order to disenfranchise them politically i.e. not permitted to vote.

As you seem to view yourself as a subject matter expert on the issue of Rohingya you well know Bangladeshi government has firmly rejected entry for Rohingya for years, indeed detained approx 200k in appalling conditions in Bangladesh for decades.

There may well be Rohingya in Chiang Mai. However, the majority head to Malaysia and elsewhere, not Thailand, Thailand is primarily a transit country. There are numerous reports of Rohingya held in appalling conditions at Thai camps bordering Malaysia for on selling to trafficking gangs by corrupt Thais.

A TV member for less than a week with extraordinarily hostile posts - odd. Don't know what your agenda is. Is the reality, which you deny, that you hold extreme anti Muslim sentiment / far right agenda. Maybe previously banned and using a new identity. Perhaps an ultra nationalist Thai, recently returned to Thailand from living overseas - what's the truth?

[jeab1980]

LOL how you dare be a member for less than a week a while week and win an argument with an old poster what is it they said "not cricket". Must I say I found it very good until simple1 capitulated .

[simple1]

LOL how you dare be a member for less than a week a while week and win an argument with an old poster what is it they said "not cricket". Must I say I found it very good until simple1 capitulated .

I have not 'capitulated', nor has he 'won' the argument with a number of false assertions. Though I do find these exchanges very rarely rise above the circular and just stop replying.

I find the aggressive & excessive vilification by Matt96 and others in this & other topics relating to one of the most oppressed ethnic groups worldwide, Rohingya, reprehensible. One never hears from the usual clique with the same song sheet concerning other non-Muslim ethnic groups' refugees from Myanmar in Thailand, oppressed stateless Thai Hill Tribes and so on. The clique's universal use of terminology exercised by the far right speaks volumes, one can only conclude the extreme vilification & bigotry is solely based upon Rohingya being from the Islamic faith.

[Matt96]

Prior to the last election in Myanmar "Rohingya" as a recognised ethnic description was removed in order to disenfranchise them politically i.e. not permitted to vote.

As you seem to view yourself as a subject matter expert on the issue of Rohingya you well know Bangladeshi government has firmly rejected entry for Rohingya for years, indeed detained approx 200k in appalling conditions in Bangladesh for decades.

There may well be Rohingya in Chiang Mai. However, the majority head to Malaysia and elsewhere, not Thailand, Thailand is primarily a transit country. There are numerous reports of Rohingya held in appalling conditions at Thai camps bordering Malaysia for on selling to trafficking gangs by corrupt Thais.

A TV member for less than a week with extraordinarily hostile posts - odd. Don't know what your agenda is. Is the reality, which you deny, that you hold extreme anti Muslim sentiment / far right agenda. Maybe previously banned and using a new identity. Perhaps an ultra nationalist Thai, recently returned to Thailand from living overseas - what's the truth?

quotes:

"In any case it has on numerous occasions been stated Rohingya are trying to reach Malaysia, not Thailand"

and "However, the majority head to Malaysia and elsewhere, not Thailand"

Oh my Buddha, was it a blatant lie?!

"Prior to the last election in Myanmar "Rohingya" as a recognised ethnic description was removed in order to disenfranchise them politically i.e. not permitted to vote."

another lie. before all elections in the history of Myanmar there were no word "Rohyngya" in any law or state document. all Myanmar laws are recorded abroad. show me any old Myanmar state document with a word ရိုဟင်ဂျာ ( Rohingya) in it.

"As you seem to view yourself as a subject matter expert on the issue of Rohingya you well know Bangladeshi government has firmly rejected entry for Rohingya for years, indeed detained approx 200k in appalling conditions in Bangladesh for decades."

ok, Bangladeshi government is bad. but why it's a problem of Myanmar?

why those left-liberal organizations "All Good People Against All Bad Things" don't push Bangladesh to accept Bengali who call themselves"Rohingya"? I can tell you why - because it's an US ally, same as Saudi Arabia, where more executions are performed that in all other world.

"A TV member for less than a week with extraordinarily hostile posts - odd. Don't know what your agenda is. Is the reality, which you deny, that you hold extreme anti Muslim sentiment / far right agenda. Maybe previously banned and using a new identity. Perhaps an ultra nationalist Thai, recently returned to Thailand from living overseas - what's the truth?"

you can guess whatever you like, dear

[Matt96]

LOL how you dare be a member for less than a week a while week and win an argument with an old poster what is it they said "not cricket". Must I say I found it very good until simple1 capitulated .

I have not 'capitulated', nor has he 'won' the argument with a number of false assertions. Though I do find these exchanges very rarely rise above the circular and just stop replying.

I find the aggressive & excessive vilification by Matt96 and others in this & other topics relating to one of the most oppressed ethnic groups worldwide, Rohingya, reprehensible. One never hears from the usual clique with the same song sheet concerning other non-Muslim ethnic groups' refugees from Myanmar in Thailand, oppressed stateless Thai Hill Tribes and so on. The clique's universal use of terminology exercised by the far right speaks volumes, one can only conclude the extreme vilification & bigotry is solely based upon Rohingya being from the Islamic faith.

another blatant leftist manipulation. you try to make an anti-Muslim oppression out of border protection of an independent state.

Thai Muslim citizens live happily in Thailand. enjoy the same rights as Buddhists or Christians.

but some people from the West or from the East would do whatever it takes to raise hostility between Buddhists and Muslims in Thailand - in order to topple truly nation - oriented independent Thai government and put a marionette on it's place.

[Bluespunk]

LOL how you dare be a member for less than a week a while week and win an argument with an old poster what is it they said "not cricket". Must I say I found it very good until simple1 capitulated .

I have not 'capitulated', nor has he 'won' the argument with a number of false assertions. Though I do find these exchanges very rarely rise above the circular and just stop replying.

I find the aggressive & excessive vilification by Matt96 and others in this & other topics relating to one of the most oppressed ethnic groups worldwide, Rohingya, reprehensible. One never hears from the usual clique with the same song sheet concerning other non-Muslim ethnic groups' refugees from Myanmar in Thailand, oppressed stateless Thai Hill Tribes and so on. The clique's universal use of terminology exercised by the far right speaks volumes, one can only conclude the extreme vilification & bigotry is solely based upon Rohingya being from the Islamic faith.

another blatant leftist manipulation. you try to make an anti-Muslim oppression out of border protection of an independent state.

Thai Muslim citizens live happily in Thailand. enjoy the same rights as Buddhists or Christians.

but some people from the West or from the East would do whatever it takes to raise hostility between Buddhists and Muslims in Thailand - in order to topple truly nation - oriented independent Thai government and put a marionette on it's place.

Clueless, rabid, right wing BS

Edited April 22, 2016 by Bluespunk

[Matt96]

LOL how you dare be a member for less than a week a while week and win an argument with an old poster what is it they said "not cricket". Must I say I found it very good until simple1 capitulated .

lol

people like Simple1 can't take their own defeat. when they feel they are going to loose - they start to cry "fascists", "far rights are coming", "hate speech"!

this is how their version of "free speech" works. nothing new.

I would not care if they are just implementing there destructive values on their own compatriots, but the problem is they are enough impudent to come to a foreign country, smile politely on the border while asking for entrance, and then teach Thais in Thailand how they should live, believe it or not!

Edited April 22, 2016 by Matt96

[simple1]

teach Thais in Thailand how they should live, believe it or not

So far as I'm aware Thai governments have never permitted any foreign refugees residency. However, people such as me are hoping for humane treatment by the Thai government, not hinder NGOs, Thai officials selling Rohingya to traffickers and other abuses including rape and murder etc.

The Thai government is aiming to move beyond it's development status & improve it's image with the international community, not be targeted for sanctions by the EU and other Western countries due to it's treatment of the less fortunate. Permit UNHCR to assess, process and facilitate the resettlement of Rohingya refugees and others to third party countries. e.g. countries such as Australia & the US have previously accepted Rohingya for resettlement.

IMO people with your attitude are the antithesis for what is required for the future of Thailand in the global marketplace.

EDIT: I see you liked Bluespunks' last post - are you a troll?

Edited April 22, 2016 by simple1

[Matt96]

teach Thais in Thailand how they should live, believe it or not

So far as I'm aware Thai governments have never permitted any foreign refugees residency. However, people such as me are hoping for humane treatment by the Thai government, not hinder NGOs, Thai officials selling Rohingya to traffickers and other abuses including rape and murder etc.

The Thai government is aiming to move beyond it's development status & improve it's image with the international community, not be targeted for sanctions by the EU and other Western countries due to it's treatment of the less fortunate. Permit UNHCR to assess, process and facilitate the resettlement of Rohingya refugees and others to third party countries. e.g. countries such as Australia & the US have previously accepted Rohingya for resettlement.

IMO people with your attitude are the antithesis for what is required for the future of Thailand in the global marketplace.

required? who dares to require (!) anything from an independent country?

please remember, you are just a guest here. you have two choice:

1) accept Thailand as it is

2)leave Thailand and find another places which suits you better

"However, people such as me are hoping for humane treatment by the Thai government"

you can hope for whatever you like. but you know even better than me - nobody here cares of what you hope for.

"I'm aware Thai governments have never permitted any foreign refugees residency."

Bravo, beloved Thai government! for this simple fact I can forgive you many things.

"The Thai government is aiming to move beyond it's development status & improve it's image with the international community, not be targeted for sanctions by the EU"

another manipulation. EU sanctions due to human trafficking, but not because Thailand refused to accept illegal migrants.

if any country would like to accept ALL illegal immigrants -Thailand would be happy. Thai people would dance on streets. Thailand asked for help from the World community (including UNHCR) - to accept illegal immigrants - but everybody gave just advises "you should accept them yourself"

Thailand does not need such "help" anymore, thank you very much.

PS I guess there will be no link to any old Myanmar state document with a word "Rohingya" in it?

lol

Edited April 22, 2016 by Matt96

[Bluespunk]

http://csis.org/publication/separating-fact-fiction-about-myanmars-rohingya

[simple1]

PS I guess there will be no link to any old Myanmar state document with a word "Rohingya" in it?

Correct, believe the term 'Rohingya' is relatively recent, prior were usually described as people from Rakhine/Arakan. This is word games on definitions, so far as I know all reporting in English at the time of independence moving, denying citizenship in 1982, insisting Rohingya register themselves as Bengali in the last elections thereby disenfranchising them etc, in the English language, refer to the description 'Rohingya'.

I no longer live in Thailand, but I lived among the Thai Muslim community for four years in Nong Prue & married with a Thai for twenty years. I note you don't answer direct questions, maybe this time you will - are you a Thai citizen?

Edited April 22, 2016 by simple1

[Matt96]

PS I guess there will be no link to any old Myanmar state document with a word "Rohingya" in it?

Correct, believe the term 'Rohingya' is relatively recent, prior were usually described as people from Rakhine/Arakan. This is word games on definitions, so far as I know all reporting in English at the time of independence moving, denying citizenship in 1982, insisting Rohingya register themselves as Bengali in the last elections thereby disenfranchising them etc, in the English language, refer to the description 'Rohingya'.

I no longer live in Thailand, but I lived among the Thai Muslim community for four years in Nong Prue & married with a Thai for twenty years. I note you don't answer direct questions, maybe this time you will - are you a Thai citizen?

quotes from your posts

before:

"Prior to the last election in Myanmar "Rohingya" as a recognised ethnic description was removed in order to disenfranchise them politically i.e. not permitted to vote."

and later:

"Correct, believe the term 'Rohingya' is relatively recent, prior were usually described as people from Rakhine/Arakan."

ahaha another blatant lie!

"so far as I know all reporting in English at the time of independence moving, denying citizenship in 1982, insisting Rohingya register themselves as Bengali in the last elections thereby disenfranchising them etc,"

"so far as I know" means I should not ask for any proof? ahahaha

after the independence there was a full list of Burma citizen. no big group of people were ever excluded from this list. but those, who illegally resettled to Burma after the independence were never included in those lists. they asked for citizenship for many times, yes, but all Myanmar governments had enough commonsense to deny these requests. because Burmese don't need Bengali illegal immigrants in Burma. and will never need.

"I lived among the Thai Muslim community for four years in Nong Prue" you are a Muslim? OK, this explains you bias and your passion.

"I note you don't answer direct questions, maybe this time you will - are you a Thai citizen?" no I will not, why should I? I realize that any piece of my personal information you will use as an "ad hominem" argument in this discussion.

as you may notice, I never asked you for any personal info - because I don't need ad hominem arguments to win this discussion.

[simple1]

Concerned about ad hominem attacks when you repeatedly call me a liar - LOL - moving along...

Some of Aung San Suu Kyi’s officials have used the definition ‘Rohingya’. Prior to her election other Myanmar government officials have also referred to ‘Rohingya’, e.g. “The relocation of the Rohingya camps will definitely take place. So far informal steps have been taken according to the PM's directives," Secretary Amit Kumar Baul, head of the government's Myanmar Refugee Cell, told AFP”. To summarise ‘Rohingya’ has been utilised on a number of occasions though as you say not an officially recognised ethnic group with officials usually call them out as Bengalis for their political agenda and to kowtow to Buddhist nationalist groups, such as Group 969. More to the point documentation has now come to light that the then Burmese government did actually provide ID which identified it’s holder as Rohingya, an example.

Lumyo or race: Rohingya Muslim
Issued by Board of Management of the Rangoon Post
29 July 1968 –

http://www.rohingyablogger.com/2013/05/the-official-evidence-of-rohingya.html#sthash.MCh4DKft.dpuf

From memory, in other topics some TV members who have lived in Myanmar have commented the vilification of the Rohingya & Bengalis by the Bamar ethnic group is primarily based upon racism.

There are a number of narratives with varying historical interpretations. As you are so interested I have provided an example below.

http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Rebuttal-to-Tonkin-long.pdf

Edited April 22, 2016 by simple1