Sorry, you are serious, you think Abhisit paid Newin,I think you need to consider this idea, it is unlikely in the extreme. Far more likely is that Newin believed he could accrue more power and influence by being part of a new government. That is the actions were initiated by Newin, not by Abhisit.
There are many character who played a part in these events, do you really prefer any of them to Abhisit?
As I have stated history will judge him as having failed in many ways, but I suspect it will view him as having tried to fight a democratic parliamentary fight, I am not sure that history will judge others so kindly.
“Abhisit has tried, he has played by the rules, even when they are bad rules, he has tried to move the democrat party forward, he has won significant votes despite intimidation and vote buying and has never instituted a coup. He will be viewed by history as having failed, but without him Thailand would have been a much poorer place today.”
The significant votes he won were not significant enough. In other words, votes by real Thai people which would have made him PM. He never bought votes? Who buttered Newin’s bread that made Abhisit PM?
Indonesia is not Bangladesh’s dumping ground. The Bangladeshi “Rohingya” are not Jakarta’s problem, but Dhaka’s problem. Indonesia has enough problem of its own than to deal with radicalized Bengali Wahhabis. If you want international intervention, then let the wealthy GCC house these Bangladeshis, since the Arabs always preach about the Ummah and “brotherhood”, let them put their enormous Swiss bank accounts where their mouths are, and they can also ask Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei to help out, in between his orgy sessions with underage girls.
Whether it’s true that Arab and Persian seamen and traders reached the Arakan as early as the 8th C or the “Rohingya scholars” perpetuated the myth, it does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that these people are descended from those seamen and traders. Did William the Conqueror leave distinctive indigenous Normans in Kent like “Texicans” whom these people seem inspired by?
Whilst mildly amusing this article again shows a huge gap between reality and the opinions expressed here.
Let me ask, did Khun Abhisit ever appear to you to have issued an illegal variation to Thai law on the Friday before illegally selling his Telecom business on the Monday. A business that had its value only because of it being built first on an effective monopoly, that was developed and maintained despite it being massively against the Thai public interest. Did he illegally avoid paying tax on the profits he made in this type of transaction?
Did Khun Abhisit every organise a mob to attack his opponents, as he was attacked in Pattaya, or was that an example of the sort of democracy that you think Thailand should have, that is mob rule, with attempts to intimidate opponents. Have you forgotten the blood on this gates, have you forgotten so many similar incidents?
Did he give regional targets for drug dealer arrests, which resulted in many deaths, yet reduced actual availability of drugs a negligible amount?
Did he instruct regional governments to report reduced road deaths irrespective of reality, but collating this figures not centrally but regionally?
In other words is he the only rogue who needs to move out of politics, or is he in comparison to self serving politicians, of which there are many examples in all parties, a comparatively well intentioned man struggling against groups on both sides of him who have no intention of allowing democracy to really exist, as they control papers, radio airways, television news and talk shows and advertising. Oh yes, remember the award of the exclusive advertising on the underground the a long established (well several days at least) firm that just happened to be on paper owned by a certain Mr Oak!
Abhisit has tried, he has played by the rules, even when they are bad rules, he has tried to move the democrat party forward, he has won significant votes despite intimidation and vote buying and has never instituted a coup. He will be viewed by history as having failed, but without him Thailand would have been a much poorer place today.
If it’s all about speaking good English in Burma, they shouldn’t have kicked out the Brits. Burma didn’t even join the British Commonwealth after Inependence.
I remember the story about how Ne Win was upset at his daughter’s poor English after he “nationalised” all the “missionary schools” in Burma, including MEHS (Methodist English High School) where the kids of the elite Burmese, like Ne Win’s daughter, used to go. The other well-known “institution” was SPHS (St. Paul’s High School).
By the way, in case younger people don’t remember, Ne Win (he was called number 1) was the original dictator of Burma, who started this military era with a coup d’etat in 1962. All these new guys: Than Shwe, Khin Nyunt, … are his progenies!
Mind you, I am not implying that Burma’s stupid problems will be solved overnight by bringing back English missionary schools, but hey, I did learn English in Burma!
The saddest thing about Thailand today and its past is that few Thais, even those who claim to have moral intentions, really care about fairness and objectivity in solving the nations problems. Nothing has changed. The failure of Thailand continues with this coup. There are no honest, untainted, heroes to lead the nation. The king is hardly alive and he was never outspoken on bringing justice to all. When he goes, the are no moral leaders to rise up for the benefit of all. There is no one who is strong enough to take on the abusers who have always controlled things in Thailand. What hope is there for the average Thai? Sad state.
This post would have gained somewhat in persuasiveness had the author ventured a definition of ‘oligarch’. In the absence of such a definition, the reader is forced to conclude that the author shares the misleading Indonesian habit of describing party bosses, as well as wealthy businessmen and women, as oligarchs.
This is equivalent to saying not just that the two Clintons have served and serve the oligarchs of Wall Street and of other sectors of the American economy around which the one per cent cluster, but that, if not Hillary, at least Bill is an oligarch himself. This only obfuscates the situation rather than clarifying it.
In a democracy operating in a capitalist economy, it can be taken for granted that party bosses will not eke out frugal existences. This does not, however, warrant their being described ipso facto as oligarchs.
If Megawati is an oligarch, when did she become one? Presumably she was not part of the Soeharto-era oligarchic elite. I have no doubt that money has flowed towards her in recent years at a faster pace than that at which the Ganges flows towards the Bay of Bengal. But does this mean she is in the same sociological category as people like Bakrie? He was super-wealthy before taking over Golkar.
Is SBY now also an oligarch? If not, why does his name appear immediately after Chairul Tanjung’s? Chairul may have been the richest Indonesian ever to have held the post of coordinating minister for the economy. If SBY has indeed become an oligarch, perhaps there was a case after all for tapping Ani’s phone.
Are all the leaders of Indonesian political parties oligarchs? If not, which are oligarchs and which are not? How does one distinguish one from the other?
On another front, I am as fervent an admirer of pop culture as the author seems to be, but even I draw the line at quoting a Time magazine headline as evidence of what is happening in Indonesia.
Some very wealthy Indonesians supported Prabowo in the 2014 presidential campaign and other very wealthy Indonesians supported Jokowi. It is up to the author to establish that there were more of the former than of the latter. Maybe that was the case, but there needs to be proof, and Time magazine won’t help out here.
One interesting question is how much of Indonesian-Chinese business backed Jokowi out of fear that Prabowo would reassume the anti-Chinese politics he practised in 1997-98. I can readily imagine that Sofjan Wanandi ‘worked his butt off’ trying to raise money for Jokowi from the community from which he himself, Liem Bian Khoen, sprang.
It makes one nostalgic to be reminded of the Manichean dimension of last year’s choice between the evil Prabowo and the knight in shining armour who opposed him and won. How simple political analysis becomes when one faces such a black and white choice. But what has Jokowi the reformer done since taking office to justify that Manicheanism?
We need to study the “Rohingya” Muslims for what they are, Bangladeshi Muslims, not indigenous to Myanmar, and a threat to the Buddhist-based polity of Myanmar society. No amount of academic dribble will change that fact that the “Rohingya” should be repatriated to Bangladesh from where they originate. And, if as claimed, the “Rohingya” are a cultural element critical to Myanmar society, why are there so many “Rohingya” women dressed in hijab and niqab, not standard fare for Shaf’i Islam, and why have more and more “Rohingya”, who are simply Bangladeshis, found in Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Dubai ? For a “poor” and “pitiful” lot, they seem rather driven and adept, when it comes to religious devotion. I see no relationship between Bangladesh, the Gulf Cooperation Council (who will spend money to export Wahhabism, but not repatriate “Rohingya”) and Myanmar. Like the Shi’ite presence in Lebanon; the “Rohingya” are not an indigenous element, are not a core cultural component of Myanmar society, and instead we should be asking why the Government in Dhaka has been so quiet about their own brethren (but not quite enough to hide the Islamic fanatics and vigilante groups that dominate Bangladesh, as they would Myanmar, if given the chance).
“At the same time, thinkers in both countries are wary of the rising tide of exclusion that anti-Rohingya rhetoric implies.” Mr Farrelly “thinking” is only synchronical when he speak of a “hybrid zone in Northern Arakan” probably counts himself among the thinkers even though he does not see diachronogically that – if Northern Arakan were turned into a buffer zone (a sort of Burmese Lebanon ?) the Muslim demographic pressure would then be put on Southern Arakan … Cohen’s diagnostic is right. But only measures tackling Muslim demography and migrations taken at the international level and integrating Far Eastern values and criteria (also those of China) can open perspective for agreeable solutions
I assume you are being flippant, since you engage in hyperbole, that I did not. I don’t recall stating Islam will take over Zimbabwe, let alone the World. The discussion, which has hardly been touched on in New Mandala, is BANGLADESH’S responsibility in controlling its population and inhibiting the spread of militant Islam, pointed out not the least, by Bangladeshi activists themselves. The slap at Wirathu is funny; is that the only Buddhist “extremist” you can come up with ? Wirathu made the cover of the always objective Time magazine, but Hamas terrorists Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Meshaal never did, and unlike Wirathu, they have killed Arabs and Israelis and have much blood to show for it. I think DAESH and Al-Qaeda would be fairly obvious examples, as well. Wirathu has as much validity being on Time Magazine, as Justin Bieber. Myanmar is a scapegoat, as can easily be seen, by how many former fawning groupies of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, have now turned on her, because she doesn’t toe the Islamo-Leftist dichotomous line about the “genocide” of the Bengali “Rohingya” Muslims with a colourful, and totally meaningless, name. I am sure the Buddha would not agree with Bengali Muslims raping Bamar women, and nor would agree with the obverse. Yet, I do not recall any accounts of “Rohingya” women being raped by Buddhist monks, do you ? The mere fact that there are many Buddhists in, and out of, Myanmar that have defended the “Rohingya” (I believe even some on New Mandala), obviously shows (whether I concur or not) that there is no Buddhist conspiracy against Bengali or Bangladeshi Muslims, unlike the daily occurrence of Ahmadi Muslims being burned alive in their mosques by fellow Muslims, in Bangladesh. Since the Left has taken upon itself to deny the Popperian Null Hypothesis, and hold two competing contradictory ideologies at once, as Orwell and Kafka pointed out long ago, Myanmar has chosen not to do so, and instead, looks to the wise advice of individuals like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a colleague of DASSK, who has made the rather obvious statement, that Islamic radicalism is neither liberal nor tolerable. We have seen such radicalism spread from Pakistan to Bangladesh, ironic, given that Bangladesh was created, in part, to recompense Bengali Muslims for their mistreatment at the hands of Punjabi Muslims, 45 years ago. It is hardly funny or deserving of derisive commentary, that Myanmar wishes not to become, what Malaysia has, a soon-to-be Islamic State. Given the demographics of the “Rohingya” in Myanmar, non-Muslims are rather wise in being concerned. In the end, your silly and sarcastic comments reflect more on your own lack of knowledge, than the reality of the situation.
You are right. We must not allow the evil Muslims to take over a peaceful and tolerant
Buddhist country like Myanmar because they will conquer the whole world next! The enlightened monk Wirathu is doing a very good job pointing to the evil ways of the Muslims who prey exclusively on Buddhist women. The stories that Buddhist men raped Muslim women in Rakhine state are all lies. We must show no mercy in purifying Myanmar. I am sure the Buddha would agree.
I was born in 1939.japan serender when I was 6 years old. After world war 2′ Thai priminister who join with Japan try to claim lost from Japan. That make Japanese priminister mad and call Thai is Siamese talk. Now I don’t know that how many Thai priminister tell a lie. Some of them repeat lie many times, we call it habitual liar,Gohog pen sundarn. So international p artner that use tone good friend of Thailand name our country Tor la land. pk.
Al that is needed is for the repatriation of all Bengali and Bangladeshi Muslims to Bangladesh and an acknowledgment from Sheikh Hasina Wajed that she has completely failed in both birth control policies, and stemming Islamic fanaticism in Bangladesh, now reaching into Myanmar. In addition, the persecution of animist hill tribes, Christians, Hindus and Ahmadi Muslims, in Bangladesh, must cease, and the Government stop covertly supporting terrorist groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir and Jaish-e-Islami, which want to turn Bangladesh (and Myanmar, eventually) into Wahhabi-Salafi Islamic States with Shari’a Law and Hudud. No Bamar Buddhist will stand for this, and BOTH President Thein Sein and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are 100 % correct for standing on the same page for Myanmar sovereignty, territorial integrity and the right of Buddhist women, in particular, to be free from rape and abuse, by “Rohingya” Muslims.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
‘I don’t recall stating Islam will take over Zimbabwe’
But Peter, they might. It all starts with bearded cricketers …
A happy end for Abhisit
Sorry, you are serious, you think Abhisit paid Newin,I think you need to consider this idea, it is unlikely in the extreme. Far more likely is that Newin believed he could accrue more power and influence by being part of a new government. That is the actions were initiated by Newin, not by Abhisit.
There are many character who played a part in these events, do you really prefer any of them to Abhisit?
As I have stated history will judge him as having failed in many ways, but I suspect it will view him as having tried to fight a democratic parliamentary fight, I am not sure that history will judge others so kindly.
A happy end for Abhisit
“Abhisit has tried, he has played by the rules, even when they are bad rules, he has tried to move the democrat party forward, he has won significant votes despite intimidation and vote buying and has never instituted a coup. He will be viewed by history as having failed, but without him Thailand would have been a much poorer place today.”
The significant votes he won were not significant enough. In other words, votes by real Thai people which would have made him PM. He never bought votes? Who buttered Newin’s bread that made Abhisit PM?
Indonesia and the Rohingya: de-legitimising democracy?
Indonesia is not Bangladesh’s dumping ground. The Bangladeshi “Rohingya” are not Jakarta’s problem, but Dhaka’s problem. Indonesia has enough problem of its own than to deal with radicalized Bengali Wahhabis. If you want international intervention, then let the wealthy GCC house these Bangladeshis, since the Arabs always preach about the Ummah and “brotherhood”, let them put their enormous Swiss bank accounts where their mouths are, and they can also ask Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei to help out, in between his orgy sessions with underage girls.
Islam and the state in Myanmar
Whether it’s true that Arab and Persian seamen and traders reached the Arakan as early as the 8th C or the “Rohingya scholars” perpetuated the myth, it does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that these people are descended from those seamen and traders. Did William the Conqueror leave distinctive indigenous Normans in Kent like “Texicans” whom these people seem inspired by?
A happy end for Abhisit
“Did Khun Abhisit every organise a mob to attack his opponents”
Khun Abhisit didn’t have to. He let the Thai army do that.
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
I can’t decide what’s worse: your repugnant bigoted views or your flatulent writing style.
Islam and the state in Myanmar
There is recorded evidence of Muslims living in Arakan dating back to the 8th century.
A happy end for Abhisit
Whilst mildly amusing this article again shows a huge gap between reality and the opinions expressed here.
Let me ask, did Khun Abhisit ever appear to you to have issued an illegal variation to Thai law on the Friday before illegally selling his Telecom business on the Monday. A business that had its value only because of it being built first on an effective monopoly, that was developed and maintained despite it being massively against the Thai public interest. Did he illegally avoid paying tax on the profits he made in this type of transaction?
Did Khun Abhisit every organise a mob to attack his opponents, as he was attacked in Pattaya, or was that an example of the sort of democracy that you think Thailand should have, that is mob rule, with attempts to intimidate opponents. Have you forgotten the blood on this gates, have you forgotten so many similar incidents?
Did he give regional targets for drug dealer arrests, which resulted in many deaths, yet reduced actual availability of drugs a negligible amount?
Did he instruct regional governments to report reduced road deaths irrespective of reality, but collating this figures not centrally but regionally?
In other words is he the only rogue who needs to move out of politics, or is he in comparison to self serving politicians, of which there are many examples in all parties, a comparatively well intentioned man struggling against groups on both sides of him who have no intention of allowing democracy to really exist, as they control papers, radio airways, television news and talk shows and advertising. Oh yes, remember the award of the exclusive advertising on the underground the a long established (well several days at least) firm that just happened to be on paper owned by a certain Mr Oak!
Abhisit has tried, he has played by the rules, even when they are bad rules, he has tried to move the democrat party forward, he has won significant votes despite intimidation and vote buying and has never instituted a coup. He will be viewed by history as having failed, but without him Thailand would have been a much poorer place today.
Naypyitaw stories: from street trader to hotel manager
Good life story.
Admirable young man !!!
Naypyitaw stories: from street trader to hotel manager
If it’s all about speaking good English in Burma, they shouldn’t have kicked out the Brits. Burma didn’t even join the British Commonwealth after Inependence.
I remember the story about how Ne Win was upset at his daughter’s poor English after he “nationalised” all the “missionary schools” in Burma, including MEHS (Methodist English High School) where the kids of the elite Burmese, like Ne Win’s daughter, used to go. The other well-known “institution” was SPHS (St. Paul’s High School).
By the way, in case younger people don’t remember, Ne Win (he was called number 1) was the original dictator of Burma, who started this military era with a coup d’etat in 1962. All these new guys: Than Shwe, Khin Nyunt, … are his progenies!
Mind you, I am not implying that Burma’s stupid problems will be solved overnight by bringing back English missionary schools, but hey, I did learn English in Burma!
Naypyitaw stories: from street trader to hotel manager
Great story Olivia. Thank you. Sean
Rice, repression and rule by force
The saddest thing about Thailand today and its past is that few Thais, even those who claim to have moral intentions, really care about fairness and objectivity in solving the nations problems. Nothing has changed. The failure of Thailand continues with this coup. There are no honest, untainted, heroes to lead the nation. The king is hardly alive and he was never outspoken on bringing justice to all. When he goes, the are no moral leaders to rise up for the benefit of all. There is no one who is strong enough to take on the abusers who have always controlled things in Thailand. What hope is there for the average Thai? Sad state.
The empire strikes back
This post would have gained somewhat in persuasiveness had the author ventured a definition of ‘oligarch’. In the absence of such a definition, the reader is forced to conclude that the author shares the misleading Indonesian habit of describing party bosses, as well as wealthy businessmen and women, as oligarchs.
This is equivalent to saying not just that the two Clintons have served and serve the oligarchs of Wall Street and of other sectors of the American economy around which the one per cent cluster, but that, if not Hillary, at least Bill is an oligarch himself. This only obfuscates the situation rather than clarifying it.
In a democracy operating in a capitalist economy, it can be taken for granted that party bosses will not eke out frugal existences. This does not, however, warrant their being described ipso facto as oligarchs.
If Megawati is an oligarch, when did she become one? Presumably she was not part of the Soeharto-era oligarchic elite. I have no doubt that money has flowed towards her in recent years at a faster pace than that at which the Ganges flows towards the Bay of Bengal. But does this mean she is in the same sociological category as people like Bakrie? He was super-wealthy before taking over Golkar.
Is SBY now also an oligarch? If not, why does his name appear immediately after Chairul Tanjung’s? Chairul may have been the richest Indonesian ever to have held the post of coordinating minister for the economy. If SBY has indeed become an oligarch, perhaps there was a case after all for tapping Ani’s phone.
Are all the leaders of Indonesian political parties oligarchs? If not, which are oligarchs and which are not? How does one distinguish one from the other?
On another front, I am as fervent an admirer of pop culture as the author seems to be, but even I draw the line at quoting a Time magazine headline as evidence of what is happening in Indonesia.
Some very wealthy Indonesians supported Prabowo in the 2014 presidential campaign and other very wealthy Indonesians supported Jokowi. It is up to the author to establish that there were more of the former than of the latter. Maybe that was the case, but there needs to be proof, and Time magazine won’t help out here.
One interesting question is how much of Indonesian-Chinese business backed Jokowi out of fear that Prabowo would reassume the anti-Chinese politics he practised in 1997-98. I can readily imagine that Sofjan Wanandi ‘worked his butt off’ trying to raise money for Jokowi from the community from which he himself, Liem Bian Khoen, sprang.
It makes one nostalgic to be reminded of the Manichean dimension of last year’s choice between the evil Prabowo and the knight in shining armour who opposed him and won. How simple political analysis becomes when one faces such a black and white choice. But what has Jokowi the reformer done since taking office to justify that Manicheanism?
Islam and the state in Myanmar
We need to study the “Rohingya” Muslims for what they are, Bangladeshi Muslims, not indigenous to Myanmar, and a threat to the Buddhist-based polity of Myanmar society. No amount of academic dribble will change that fact that the “Rohingya” should be repatriated to Bangladesh from where they originate. And, if as claimed, the “Rohingya” are a cultural element critical to Myanmar society, why are there so many “Rohingya” women dressed in hijab and niqab, not standard fare for Shaf’i Islam, and why have more and more “Rohingya”, who are simply Bangladeshis, found in Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Dubai ? For a “poor” and “pitiful” lot, they seem rather driven and adept, when it comes to religious devotion. I see no relationship between Bangladesh, the Gulf Cooperation Council (who will spend money to export Wahhabism, but not repatriate “Rohingya”) and Myanmar. Like the Shi’ite presence in Lebanon; the “Rohingya” are not an indigenous element, are not a core cultural component of Myanmar society, and instead we should be asking why the Government in Dhaka has been so quiet about their own brethren (but not quite enough to hide the Islamic fanatics and vigilante groups that dominate Bangladesh, as they would Myanmar, if given the chance).
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
“At the same time, thinkers in both countries are wary of the rising tide of exclusion that anti-Rohingya rhetoric implies.” Mr Farrelly “thinking” is only synchronical when he speak of a “hybrid zone in Northern Arakan” probably counts himself among the thinkers even though he does not see diachronogically that – if Northern Arakan were turned into a buffer zone (a sort of Burmese Lebanon ?) the Muslim demographic pressure would then be put on Southern Arakan … Cohen’s diagnostic is right. But only measures tackling Muslim demography and migrations taken at the international level and integrating Far Eastern values and criteria (also those of China) can open perspective for agreeable solutions
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
I assume you are being flippant, since you engage in hyperbole, that I did not. I don’t recall stating Islam will take over Zimbabwe, let alone the World. The discussion, which has hardly been touched on in New Mandala, is BANGLADESH’S responsibility in controlling its population and inhibiting the spread of militant Islam, pointed out not the least, by Bangladeshi activists themselves. The slap at Wirathu is funny; is that the only Buddhist “extremist” you can come up with ? Wirathu made the cover of the always objective Time magazine, but Hamas terrorists Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Meshaal never did, and unlike Wirathu, they have killed Arabs and Israelis and have much blood to show for it. I think DAESH and Al-Qaeda would be fairly obvious examples, as well. Wirathu has as much validity being on Time Magazine, as Justin Bieber. Myanmar is a scapegoat, as can easily be seen, by how many former fawning groupies of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, have now turned on her, because she doesn’t toe the Islamo-Leftist dichotomous line about the “genocide” of the Bengali “Rohingya” Muslims with a colourful, and totally meaningless, name. I am sure the Buddha would not agree with Bengali Muslims raping Bamar women, and nor would agree with the obverse. Yet, I do not recall any accounts of “Rohingya” women being raped by Buddhist monks, do you ? The mere fact that there are many Buddhists in, and out of, Myanmar that have defended the “Rohingya” (I believe even some on New Mandala), obviously shows (whether I concur or not) that there is no Buddhist conspiracy against Bengali or Bangladeshi Muslims, unlike the daily occurrence of Ahmadi Muslims being burned alive in their mosques by fellow Muslims, in Bangladesh. Since the Left has taken upon itself to deny the Popperian Null Hypothesis, and hold two competing contradictory ideologies at once, as Orwell and Kafka pointed out long ago, Myanmar has chosen not to do so, and instead, looks to the wise advice of individuals like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a colleague of DASSK, who has made the rather obvious statement, that Islamic radicalism is neither liberal nor tolerable. We have seen such radicalism spread from Pakistan to Bangladesh, ironic, given that Bangladesh was created, in part, to recompense Bengali Muslims for their mistreatment at the hands of Punjabi Muslims, 45 years ago. It is hardly funny or deserving of derisive commentary, that Myanmar wishes not to become, what Malaysia has, a soon-to-be Islamic State. Given the demographics of the “Rohingya” in Myanmar, non-Muslims are rather wise in being concerned. In the end, your silly and sarcastic comments reflect more on your own lack of knowledge, than the reality of the situation.
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
You are right. We must not allow the evil Muslims to take over a peaceful and tolerant
Buddhist country like Myanmar because they will conquer the whole world next! The enlightened monk Wirathu is doing a very good job pointing to the evil ways of the Muslims who prey exclusively on Buddhist women. The stories that Buddhist men raped Muslim women in Rakhine state are all lies. We must show no mercy in purifying Myanmar. I am sure the Buddha would agree.
Rice, repression and rule by force
I was born in 1939.japan serender when I was 6 years old. After world war 2′ Thai priminister who join with Japan try to claim lost from Japan. That make Japanese priminister mad and call Thai is Siamese talk. Now I don’t know that how many Thai priminister tell a lie. Some of them repeat lie many times, we call it habitual liar,Gohog pen sundarn. So international p artner that use tone good friend of Thailand name our country Tor la land. pk.
Action needed in the Buddhist-Muslim zone
Al that is needed is for the repatriation of all Bengali and Bangladeshi Muslims to Bangladesh and an acknowledgment from Sheikh Hasina Wajed that she has completely failed in both birth control policies, and stemming Islamic fanaticism in Bangladesh, now reaching into Myanmar. In addition, the persecution of animist hill tribes, Christians, Hindus and Ahmadi Muslims, in Bangladesh, must cease, and the Government stop covertly supporting terrorist groups like Hizb-ut-Tahrir and Jaish-e-Islami, which want to turn Bangladesh (and Myanmar, eventually) into Wahhabi-Salafi Islamic States with Shari’a Law and Hudud. No Bamar Buddhist will stand for this, and BOTH President Thein Sein and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are 100 % correct for standing on the same page for Myanmar sovereignty, territorial integrity and the right of Buddhist women, in particular, to be free from rape and abuse, by “Rohingya” Muslims.