The Rohingya

[Wadaad]

Myanmar have 135 offical minorites , the rohingya are not oppressed for being a minority , it is oppresed for being a large minority that seeks to change the laws and customs of the land , often by violent means , they are supported by Taliban and Al Qaeda . It is true many innocents are oppressed but the buramese governement can't give citizenship to a foregin people who don't seek to integrate . There are other muslims in the same state who have full citizenship and are treated fairly , they are the Kamein and they are integrated in the buramese society and they don't want to impose Islamic law in the native population .

Are you not reading the OP's posts, or do you just advocate against Muslims by default? The OP has issues with Rohingya because of everything except Islam oh descendant of Ahlul-Bayt

[StonyArabia]

Are you not reading the OP's posts, or do you just advocate against Muslims by default? The OP has issues with Rohingya because of everything except Islam oh descendant of Ahlul-Bayt

Most people who claim to be Ahlul-Bayt, are often not, and it's a mythical legend. It's more race issue than a religious one.

[DaiViet]

I value my race first. However, unlike most other minorities in Myanmar, the Karen seem alright. Most likely due to also being a Tibeto-Burman group.

The non-Tibeto-Burman ethnicites in Myanmar (the two main ones being the Shan and the Mon) are the ones I distrust. I especially distrust the Indians since they're not even Mongoloid and therefore are complete racial aliens.

Bro, Burmese genetic admixture has some Bangladeshi as well as some AustroAsiatic. We are all a mix of something.

[StonyArabia]

Bro, Burmese genetic admixture has some Bangladeshi as well as some AustroAsiatic. We are all a mix of something.

Southeast Asian often do have Indian admixture.

[Bobby Martnen]

There's no such country as "Myanmar". It's called Burma.

[arkas]

What about the over 100,000 Christians that were forced to flee Burma? They get over looked by the Western media and are equally persecuted in Burma.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.trt...ion-318024/amp

There are definately racial undertones in the current expulsion of certain peoples from Burma. Something similar happened in Bhutan a few years ago, but with Nepali people.

[ButlerKing]

The Western media goes on and on about "muh Rohingya", and how they're supposedly being genocided and ethnically cleansed by the oppressive Burmese, who go around raping and slaughtering babies. The Rohingya also claim that they're native Burmese who have lived in the land for hundreds of years.

What people don't know is that the Rohingya are Islamic foreigners, who come from Bengal or southern India. They were, in fact, brought to Myanmar by the British during the 1800s, used as cheap laborers and workers. They were arrived in the region of Rakhine, and since then, they've been nothing but vermin. They engage in terrorism and violence and rape on the native population.

Even this Burmese beauty pageant woman has something to say about them.




Therefore they are being rightfully removed. The media has the audacity to call us "Buddhist terrorists". Funny.

That's bullshit. Arakan was not even part of Burma in the past. You simply invaded and took it in 1785.

Burmese are fake Buddhist. You have kingdoms that invaded many neighbouring regions and you also have committed crimes against the Chin, Shan people who all told the same of your cruelty

You government is a dictatorship for the longest time in southeast asia and your monks are promote violence. Your history is full of invading other people's territory. Everything you do is against the teaching of Buddhism.

[ButlerKing]

Bro, Burmese genetic admixture has some Bangladeshi as well as some AustroAsiatic. We are all a mix of something.

The sample of those study are from Rakhine Burma and Burmese. The Burmese with less than 20% south asian are the Bamar dominant majority of Burma while the other with 18-35% are Rakhine.

The Mongoloid admixture in Bengali is too high 12-17%. Southern Bengali had been under the rule of the Rakhine dynasty for 300 years and received Mongoloid admixture. However other parts of Bengal are only 5% Mongoloid and in this study it's draws most of the study from Southern Bengali who are are around 13-15% Mongoloid


Here is the study of Burma.

Burmese being 5% South Asian and another 18% on average. The Thais and Cambodians here are surprisingly less than all the other study.

[ButlerKing]

Southeast Asian often do have Indian admixture.

For some reason the Cambodians have low indian admixture in that study. In the other study Cambodians are around 17-24% Indian but yet here is only 10%. I have never seen Malaysians with 0% South Asian admixture but here in this study have it's 0% which is impossible. While for Burmese in the other studies they are only 10-15% South Asian.

[ButlerKing]

Bro, Burmese genetic admixture has some Bangladeshi as well as some AustroAsiatic. We are all a mix of something.

Burma has way too much South Asian admixture and Bengali too much on Mongoloid. Other study only shows they have 5-15%. Malaysian, Cambodian, Thais in every study I've seen shows they are only 76-85% Mongoloid yet on here is basically saying they are 90-100% Mongoloid which is crap. Other southeast Asian like Malay, Cambodians, Thais all look more south Asian influence in features than Burmese.

Bengali is more Mongoloid influenced in this study than in other who has only 5-10%. I think difference in regions produce different DNA.