Burma Konflikt – sind Buddhisten brutale Killer?

KYAUK-PHYU – Truth is Not Obvious

Überall in USA, Europa und in der muslimischen Welt erzählt man von der Verfolgung der Rohingyas – und zeigt so, dass der sonst “achso” friedliche Buddhismus angeblich doch eine ganz andere Seite hat.

Doch wie verhält sich die Sache in Wahrheit?

Wie “unschuldig” sind die armen Verfolgten wirklich?

Und wie geschickt inszenieren sie diesen vermeintlichen Genozid?

Nach einigen Stunden Recherche fanden wir all das – macht Euch schon selbst ein Bild!

(mehr Infos/Zusammenfassung in den kommenden Tagen)


Major Massacres of Buddhists in Bangladesh – Ongoing Genocide
These are just 5 of the 13 large massacres of Buddhists in Bangladesh


A woman from Maungdaw describes the huge surprise attack on June 8, 2012, by the Muslims and episodes of violence and death she experienced during her life in Maungdaw.


Hate Speech like this is common in the Muslim world – kill all Buddhists, and Hindus, and everyone who is not Muslim.


Three Rakhine Buddhists – a young monk, a young man, and a woman tell the horrors they experienced in 2012 in Arakan.


WARNING – VERY VIOLENT – Muslims beating Buddhists to death near Maungdaw.


Bengali Muslims (Rohingya) training to kill Buddhists, NOT intending to live in peace and harmony with them.


More here: https://arakan-reality.smugmug.com/ARAKAN-the-CONFLICT-VIDEOS/



Screenshots (klick on one Foto to open Gallery)

more INFOS

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


Muslim and Buddhist Violence, Terroism & Genocide compared

This slideshow requires JavaScript.


In these papers, Sultan Ahmed puts forth the new and preposterous history of the ‘ArakanMuslims’. He claims Muslims ‘
settled down in Arakan about the year 788 
’.It is in the 7th century that Mohammed lived and Islam began – and Arakan was 5000 longmiles away. It took many centuries for Islam to even reach half of that distance. It was inthe 13th century that the Bengal area and the Turkish lands even started to becomeMuslim. Thefamous ancient Buddhist university of Nalanda, in India, was entirelydestroyed by Muslim invaders in the late 12th century, and the great Buddhist PalaKingdom succumbed to the Muslim conquest in the 13th century. Turkish lands startedchanging to Islam in the 13th century, and its Roman Empire capital of Constantinople(now Istanbul) fell to the Muslim armies in the 15th century.It is abundantly clear that suchstatements as Sultan Ahmed put forth (and are once again being touted today) aboutMuslims arriving in Arakan in the 8th century, are undisputedly false fantasy, backed by noevidence, and impossible to be true.




Arakan Rohingya National Organisation – Myanmar/Bangladesh, also known as A conglomerate of Arakan Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF) by Nurl Islam

The Rohingya Patriotic Front (RPF) was an Islamist insurgent group in Rakhine State, Myanmar (Burma); consisting of Rohingya fighters led by Muhammad Jafar Habib, who was the former Secretary of the Rohingya Liberation Party (RLP)

Rohingya Solidarity Organisaton (RSO) (Dr. Yunus faction),

Rohingya Solidarity Organisaton (RSO) (Mohammad Zakaria faction),

Armed Wing  Rohingya National Army (RNA) is an active group formed 2001




The Invention of the 'ROHINGYA' and the Manipulation of History and Facts
The Invention of the ‘ROHINGYA’ and the Manipulation of History and Facts

Poor Rohingyas ?

The immensely wealthy Saudi Arabian charity Rabitat al Alam al Islami began sending aid to the Rohingya refugees during the 1978 crisis, and it also built a hospital and a madrassa (seminary) at Ukhia south of Cox’s Bazaar. Prior to these events, there was only one political organisation among the Rohingyas on the Bangladesh-Burma border, the Rohingya Patriotic Front (RPF), which was set up in 1974 by Muhammad Jafar Habib, a native of Buthidaung in Arakan and a graduate of Rangoon University. He made several appeals — most of them unsuccessful — to the international Islamic community for help, and maintained a camp for his small guerrilla army, which operated from the Bangladeshi side of the border.

In the early 1980s, more radical elements among the Rohingyas broke away from the RPF to set up the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (RSO). Led by a medical doctor from Arakan, Muhammad Yunus, it soon became the main and most militant faction among the Rohingyas in Bangladesh and on the border. Given its more rigid religious stand, the RSO soon enjoyed support from like-minded groups in the Muslim world.

These included JeI in Bangladesh and Pakistan, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-e-Islami (HeI) in Afghanistan, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (HM) in the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and the Angkatan Belia Islam sa-Malaysia (ABIM), and the Islamic Youth Organisation of Malaysia. Afghan instructors were seen in some of the RSO camps along the Bangladesh-Burma border, while nearly 100 RSO rebels were reported to be undergoing training in the Afghan province of Khost with Hizb-e-Islami Mujahideen.

The RSO’s main military camp was located near the hospital that the Rabitat had built at Ukhia. At the time, the RSO acquired a substantial number of Chinese-made RPG-2 rocket launchers, light machine-guns, AK-47 assault rifles, claymore mines and explosives from private arms dealers in the Thai town of Aranyaprathet near Thailand’s border with Cambodia, which in the 1980s emerged as a major arms bazaar for guerrilla movements in the region. These weapons were siphoned off from Chinese arms shipments to the resistance battling the Vietnamese army in Cambodia, and sold to any one who wanted, and could afford, to buy them (…)

More here: http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/publication/faultlines/volume14/Article1.htm













Wikileaks: Document form 1970:

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/02RANGOON1310_a.html  (ARNO Cooperation with AlQuaeda ) 

CDA a national organization against torture and human rights violations


Tracking Terrorism.org


Burma Citizenship Law








Islamists want Sharia state inside Bangladesh

Rohingya Islamist Movement and Rohingya Insurgency from 1947-1970 and later







Lintner, Bertil (1972). Burma in Revolt: Opium and Insurgency Since 1948. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

Pho Kan Kaung (May 1992). The Danger of Rohingya. Myet Khin Thit Magazine No. 25

Lintner, Bertil (October 19, 1991). Tension Mounts in Arakan State,. This news-story was based on interview with Rohingyas and others in the Cox’s Bazaar area and at the Rohingya military camps in 1991: Jane’s Defence Weekly.


Fotos of “peaceful Rohingya” Destroying of Temples and Buddha Statues:

(also check the other foto folders on that site – careful: very graphic, very cruel)


Muslimische Presse:


 Update 25, August 2016 from FB

INTERVIEW with Rakhine History Expert on the recent communal conflict in RakhineState

28. August 2012 um 12:42

Mawkun magazine interviewed Dr. Jacques P. Leider, a Rakhine history expert, on the recent communal conflict in Rakhine State. He has conducted academic research on Rakhine State for more than two decades.

By Nyan Lynn and Zayar Hlaing 

“Rohingya is a name, not an ethnic category, that has been revived in modern days to identify Muslims in Rakhine as a separate social group. One may eventually compare it with the name of the Chinese Muslims in Myanmar who are called ‘Panthay’.  ”


Dr. Jacques P. Leider (Photo: Zayar Hlaing)

Dr. Jacques P. Leider (Photo: Zayar Hlaing)

MAWKUN: What does “Rohingya” mean?

 LEIDER: I would like to say that “Rohingya” is definitely an old,though rare word. It is not a newly invented word from the 1950s as was often stated. It is tracedin an article by a British medical doctor, Francis Hamilton, at the end ofthe 18th century. He states that this was the word that the Muslims living in Rakhine at that time used for themselves. The word is derived from the Bengali noun for Arakan which is Roshanga, but people like to produce more fanciful explanations to beautify the meaning of the word. The name “Rohingya” is apparently not traced in earlier literature. It is also not found in British colonial sources that say in fact very little about the Muslims in Rakhine before 1870.

MAWKUN: As far as we interviewed Bengali people in Sittwe, Buthidaung and Maungdaw areas, most of them even haven’t heard of the word “Rohingya”. (We interviewed them through translators because we don’t understand their language. They don’t understand our Myanmar language either.)

LEIDER: I cannot confirm the statement that you make because as a foreigner I did not access the areas of Buthidaung and Maungdaw. But I heard several times both in Myanmar and in Bangladesh that not all the Muslims in Rakhine State want to be referred to as Rohingya, but simply as Rakhine Muslims. Rohingya is a name, not an ethnic category, that has been revived in modern days to identify Muslims in Rakhine as a separate social group. One may eventually compare it with the name of the Chinese Muslims in Myanmar who are called “Panthay”.

MAWKUN:What kind of underlying reasons might the educated Bengalis abroad have behind promoting the word “Rohingya”?It is widely believed in Myanmar that so-called Rohingya Bengali want to be recognized as ethnic so that they can later claim for aself-governing region. What is your view on it?

 LEIDER: The Muslim leaders you refer to have successfully promoted the term to give their community a specific identity which they link to the history of the Muslims in the old Rakhine kingdom. They link this ethnic claim to the issue of citizenship. It has been a strategically successful choice as the international media have adopted and widely spread the term “Rohingya”. TheRohingyaMuslims wanted to set themselves apart from other communities of Indian origins in Myanmar that do not make the claim of being a specific ethnic group. Mentioning the project of a “self-governing region”, I think you refer to claims that had already been put forward back at the time of Myanmar’s independence and after. I am not aware that the Rohingya representatives that have been elected to the current parliament in Naypyidaware arguing for a self-governing region.

From a historical point of view, we have to recall two salient facts. The first is that the majority of Muslims in Rakhine would most likely trace their origin to the important Bengali immigration that developed during the British colonial period and which is well documented after 1870 till the early decades of the 20th century. Unlike other Indian immigrants who were in trade and port activities or served the British administration, the Bengalis were mostly tilling the land.

The second fact is that an old Muslim community existed in Rakhine in the precolonial period. This Muslim community of probably mixed Persian and Indian origins developed at least since the late 15th century. After the Rakhine kings obtained control over Chittagong, probably in the middle of the reign of King Min Phalaung (1571-93), many of their subjects in the kingdom were local Muslims.

In the early 17th century, the kings raided East Bengal to fight off Mughal invasions and deported people to be resettled in the Kaladan valley or to be sold off as slaves. Educated Muslims served at the court. Rakhine foreign policy was not anti-Muslim, it was anti-Mughal.  Ten, fifteen years after the conquest of Rakhine by King Bodawphaya, many inhabitants, both Buddhists and Muslims migrated back to Southeast Bengal. The old community was absorbed by the more numerous immigrants and the descendants of both communities melted into a single one.

MAWKUN: What are the root causes of the recent conflict?

LEIDER: An answer to that question comes from a long-term rather than short-term perspective.Indeed this conflict is not new, it is complex and has gone from bad to worse. Many decades back, immigration needed regulation but the British did not restrain the flow of Indian laborers that came to settle in Rakhine. The risk of communal clasheswas foreseen by observers in the 1920s as tensions already mounted between the communities.

When the Japanese invaded Burma in 1942, communal clashes erupted as thousands of people fled to India. At the time of independence and during the 1950s, the Muslims who were overall a minority in Rakhine, but locally a dominant majority, did not aim at integration into Rakhine society, but rather wanted to defend their separate character. Tension never abated as Muslims and Buddhists remained divided both culturally and politically.

This did not change within the authoritarian context after 1962. But governments on both sides – on the one hand East Pakistan, later on Bangladesh and on the other Myanmar — didn’t tackle this situation head-on. Repression, harassment and a lack of political transparency on the migration issue could only make the situation worse. On behalf of the Muslims, the conflict was expressed mostly in terms of the lack of legal rights. There has been in fact a lot of ambiguity.

While the Muslims had the right to vote even in the 1950s, they were pushed back through the restriction or the denial of citizenship after 1982.  More generally government policy aimed at containing both Muslim and Rakhine political demands while exploiting the local rivalry.  From the perception of the Buddhist Rakhine, the conflict has constantly remained an unsettling cultural issue as they feel that their identity is threatened and they see the numerous Muslims as alien to their land. It does not help that both Muslims and Buddhists tend to focus in their self-representations on their own community deriving legitimacy from exclusivist interpretations of the past.

Conflicts get worse when there are no shared visions about the land and its history and with such a blatant lack of communication as we see in Rakhine. There is a huge gap between the two groups that cannot be bridged by short term crisis management or trusting that the government could simply mend the divisions by better security policies.

MAWKUN: Some international media and groups use such words as “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” when referring the recent conflict. In a recent opinion published by The New York Times, a Bangladesh professor uses“ethnic cleansing”. Do all these word reflect the real situation in Rakhine State?

 LEIDER: I do not agree with such extreme formulations. This is not a war of people who feel superior to others and it’s not a fight about who has the better religion. The war of propaganda, notably on the internet where all kinds of expressions are used to attack the other, does not say necessarily much about the nature of the conflict itself. The fact is that immigrant Muslims and Buddhist Rakhine were brought together to live side by side in historical circumstances they did not create themselves.

When you call the “Rohingya” stateless, because of their ambiguous and unprotected legal status, it is right to call the Rakhine voiceless as for them history over the last two centuries has been mostly a long phase of conquests, subjection and pressure where they felt as constantly losing. The recent violence is above all the release of long held back desperation and anger. That’s also shown by the way that the violent clashes erupted.

The current situation started as a criminal case.After the Rakhinelady was raped, it was the police’s job to find and arrest the criminals. The failure to do so efficiently sparked an act of wanton brutality against a group of Muslims. Describing the events with all their brutality from that moment onwards as ethnic cleansing and genocide blurs the sight on all the factors that underlie the conflict, basically everything that has gone wrong in Arakan during the last century. Like in many other places, here we see people looking basically for justice, progress and the affirmation of their identity.

In a situation where people fight each other, the responsibility the government is supposed to have is to separate them. But separation, soon to be criticized as segregation, is no more than a short term option for security purposes, it’s not defining a political perspective for people living together in the same country that calls for social and economic development.

MAWKUN: What is the best way to prevent the future conflicts from happening?

 LEIDER: It does not look as if the present confrontation has been solved. It has just started and all the parties involved are simply accusing each other about wrong-doing and failures. People have been more resolutely taking sides and the communities have been further antagonized. The language has become ruder and positions more radicalized.

The path towards improvement starts with readiness to communicate and agree on some common aims. But that can only take place when those who have suffered feel that their grievances are fully taken into account. More than ever, the Rakhine feel unfairly treated as the focus of reports is on the humanitarian plight of the Rohingyas.

We should certainly not question the legitimate purpose of reports on human rights. They contribute to transparency, but the recipes to address the tensions lie in the political field. We can name them: giving a voice to those who have suffered, offer mediation and engage people on grounds of common interest such as education and health. Any realistic prospect for the future development of Rakhine has to include and integrate the presence of the people who are now living there. The question of citizenship will be for sure a core issue in upcoming debates, but sovereign states have to take pragmatically into account all the resident population, be they citizens or not.

MAWKUN: Rakhine people are criticizing that UN and other international agenciesare favoring Bengali people very much, and that they are there only to help Bengalis. What would you like to comment?

 LEIDER: The identity of Buddhist Rakhine is strongly marked by their perception that since the end of their kingdom they have not been masters of their own destiny. The feeling of loss of identity has worsened with the social and economic pressure of Indian immigration during the colonial period. Basically this condition did not change since independence.

With the recent engagement of UN and INGOs in favor of the Rohingyas as a most vulnerable community, the common Rakhinehave resented the fact that they were once more losing. It does not mean, I think, that Rakhine are worse off in Myanmar than other citizens, but it is rather a sensation of unfairness. I think that responsible staff of UN and INGOs are now getting aware of this problem and have understood why they have become the target of public violence.

MAWKUN: Some assume that Rakhine State could become another Kosovo in the future. What would you like to comment on this?

 LEIDER:The Union of Myanmar is not yet falling apart and Rakhine State is not about to declare itself as an independent republic either. No foreign power interferes with the Rohingya as Serbia is involved with the Serb minority in Kosovo. So the comparison with Kosovo against the background of the dismembering of former Yugoslavia is a bit farfetched.

MAWKUN: Like RakhineState, Assam of India has also seen a communal violence in which Bengali immigrants get involved. The conflict killed several dozens and displaced more than 200,000. What similarities are there between Rakhine conflict and Assam (India) conflict?

 LEIDER:The comparison of Rakhine with the border and migration issues in Northeast India jumps to mind as we follow the current events in Assam. If there are some similarities, there are also differences. In both cases, the governments have come under local and international criticism not to have foreseen the mounting of tensions and prevented the outbreak of violence.

All over the world, we see that border-crossing economic migration cannot be stopped, but at best managed. There is an uneasy mix of official denial, lack of security, exploitation, and late response that often prevails. It is hurting the local population, the migrants but ultimately also the reputation of governments that mishandle the people.When governments sense the advantage of economic migrants for their national economies, they may be less keen to take action on illegal migrants. This is not the situation we see in Rakhine where one community feels threatened by the presence of another.

MAWKUN: Is a huge population of Bangladesh a big burden to its neighboring and regional countries? If ‘yes’, what sorts of trends can be seen in the future?

 LEIDER:Let us not make the mistake to reduce the conflict in Rakhine to a singular issue of ‘illegal Bangladeshi immigrants’ as your question suggests. Taking illegal immigration as an argument to question the existence of Muslims in Rakhine in general is not acceptable. Since many years, Muslims from the Bangladesh/Myanmar border area board ships to reach Thailand and Malaysia where they identify themselves as “Rohingya” and are treated as stateless refugees. So it does not look as if northern Rakhine is such an attractive place for illegal migrants from Bangladesh.

On the other hand, economic migrationsurely is one important aspect in a broader regional picture. But saying – what many local people see indeed as an established fact – that there has been illegal immigration is simply not enough. We mayhear and know about a porous border, corruption, failure of authorities to track population movements etc. But since decades, any serious discussion is hampered by a lack of statistics, reliable information and background. Bangladeshi migration to Northeast India has been reported again and again, but what has been the real situation of migration along the border with Myanmar since independence we do not know.

Having said that, in today’s world, governments are not in a position to simply kick out people, however questionable their identity or their way of crossing the borders may be. I want to say it again: One key question is if migration for economic reasons is sustainable in the host countries. The many hundreds of thousands of Myanmar migrants to Thailand provide cheap labor in an economy that needs them. There is often a huge gap between the political will to register migrants and control them and the economic pressures that let people move and look for subsistence whatever the governments initiate.

 MAWKUN: Recently, a Pakistani Taliban Group (TTP) threatens to attack Myanmar to avenge for the blood of Muslims. How much worrisome is it not only for the people in Rakhine State but also those in the entire nation? If they do so, what sort of social and political setting shall we see in the near future?

 LEIDER:Muslim leaders in Myanmar will most probably not welcome the vociferous declarations of Taliban groups, but reject them. Extremist groups are keen and generally successful to catch the attention of the public, especially with an issue that is already internationalized and spread by the media. So it looks as if, though they are mere outsiders, they are implicated already. The fact is they are not and they do only represent their own extremist viewpoints for their own sake. Terrorist threats when they are recognized as security issues to the state and the people,have to be dealt with by cooperation between governments. Communal strife and violence are worrying enough and efforts have to be made to contain them so that terrorist networks cannot take hold.



Aung Thein
The Rakhaine people trace their societal history in Rakhaineprey as far back as 3325 BCE; with a lineal successions of 227 native monarchs and princes down to the last king in 1784. Since 1784to date the rakhaine people have not been the masters of their own destiny; rather they have been the casualties of the policies and decisions of the Burmans, the British and the Burmans again.
We were silent spectators when the Burmans and British swamped our motherland, Rakhainprey with Muslim migrants.
We were helpless when the politically motivated Muslims massacred thousands of Rakkhaine men, women and children in over fifty villages bordering Bangladesh in 1942; our people massacred in our own homeland!
We, Rakhaine people, do not know deception and lying politics, this is alien to our culture. In today’s world deception and politicking is the order of the day. Our helplessness in determining our own destiny is not helped by the bias attitude of international organizations like UNCHR.
The activities of the present chief of UNCHR during the recent clashes smacks of collaboration with the Rohingyas.  The CIA and MI16 were involved in the exodus of Rohingyas in 1978 and 1991to Bangladesh to create an international crisis; I can vouch for these as the CIA and MI16 agents stayed and eat at my house for days together.

amazing deception, distortion, and dishonesty

(Rick Heizman)
People who know very little about the issue might take a film like this as fact.
But, people who do know about the history and complexities can easily see that every minute of this film is meant to fool people into believing a huge manipulative agenda that tries to condemn and vilify the Rakhine Buddhist people, Aung San Suu Kyi, and even Buddhism, Buddhist monks, and Buddhist thought.
(the terms Rakhine and Buddhist are interchangeable.
The terms Rohingya, Muslim, Bengali, Bengali Muslim are interchangeable.
The State may be called Rakhine State or Arakan.)
(to coordinate the timing, the narration starts at :28 seconds)
:45 Film says ‘what happened next was hidden’
What happened next was NOT hidden, but due to chaos and bad and broken communication systems, it was difficult tot get information – about either the Rakhine or the Rohinyga. But what WAS hidden was the plan and intent of the Rohingya to be seen as the victims, when in fact they were killing and chasing Buddhist Rakhine people out of the land the Muslims wanted for themselves, and themselves only.
1:05 the video shows a mob of people on the street violently throwing rocks through windows of homes – in the video context it is designed to make people think that it is Buddhists attacking Muslims – but that video clip is ACTUALLY MUSLIMS ATTACKING BUDDHISTS! in Maungdaw, June 8, 2012.
1:35 The film says, ‘the Rohingya Muslims were being driven out of the land they were born in’. However, many many of the Rohingya were actually born in Bangladesh, or their parents were. The population of Maungdaw, Buthidaung, and Rathaydaung went from largely Buddhist to almost all Muslim in 60 years. Those Muslims were part of the massive and still on-going flow of Muslims into Arakan.
2:00 The film says ‘some believe it is an attempt to end the existence of the Rohingya, as a people’ Outrageously inflammatory nonsense. More than half the Rohinyga live OUTSIDE Burma – in Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and more. That kind of statement implies that the goal of the Buddhists is to eliminate Rohingya around the world.
2:10 The word GENOCIDE is used, also, to inflame opinion. Okay, let’s talk about GENOCIDE. The film purposely doesn’t mention the REAL GENOCIDES that are historical and well documented – in 1942 the minority Bengali Muslims (the word Rohingya was not used at that time) were armed by the British to fight the advancing Japanese in World War II, but as soon as the British retreated the Bengalis used the weapons – not against the Japanese – but to launch a GENOCIDE against the Buddhists, burning down over 400 Buddhist villages, and slaughtering 30,000 Rakhine people. Since then Rohingya have formed Mujahid (holy warrior fighting for Islam) groups to engage in Jihad (holy war) and declared their goals, numerous times, of a Muslim-only separate state. The talk of many of the leaders and imams of the Rohingya is of eliminating the Buddhist population, and THAT IS ENCOURAGING THEM TO COMMIT GENOCIDE. Example: In 1985, Ahmed Shah, the Chairman of RLO – Rohingya Liberation Organization – freely distributed many copies of his recorded cassette tape urging the Bengalis in the Maungdaw District to drive all non-Muslims out of the District. He was basically calling for the GENOCIDE OF RAKHINE BUDDHISTS and all other non-Muslims of Maungdaw District.
3:10 The film says the population of Rakhine State is about one million (1,000,000) Buddhist and 800,000 Muslims. Very far from the truth, there are about THREE MILLION Buddhist and 800,000 Muslims, and it is the Muslim population that has grown so quickly with massive migration across the border from Bangladesh.
The film tries to make people think that the Muslims and the Buddhist have nearly the same numbers in Arakan, and that Arakan is the Rohingya homeland and birthplace just as it is for the Rakhine Buddhist.
Every time the film mentions population it is severely wrong, and calling Arakan the Rohingya ‘homeland’ and the ‘land they were born in’ many times does not make it true. That is deliberate manipulation to make falsehoods become facts over time. Simple question: what language do Rohingya speak? What language do Bangladeshis speak? Answer: Bengali. It’s called Bengali because it comes from Bengal part of India and Bangladesh. And so do they.
3:45 The film says ‘the Rakhine Buddhist prefer to call the Rohingya ‘Bengalis, or Bengali Muslims’, implying that is it wrong to call them Bengali Muslims. But it is correct! That is what they were know as, by the British, and even by themselves. They didn’t have the word ‘Rohingya’ yet, and they were from Bengal, and spoke Bengali, and ate Bengali food, and ‘Bengali Muslim’ made it clear who they were, what language they spoke, and what religion they were. Later, some of them realized that ‘Bengali Muslim’ pointed to their place of origin, and that is why they came up with ‘Rohingya’, and a new fabricated history.
5:00 The woman implies that Rakhine people, even children, throw rocks at the Muslims every time they see them. Completely false. That comment is meant to demonize the Rakhine Buddhists. In all my time in Arakan and other parts of Burma (about 2 years) doing projects in rural areas, I never saw that happen, and I never heard of that happening. What she said cannot be believed without any corroboration.
5:45 The film mentions ‘a Rakhine Nationalist Party’ and again many times in the film, and the narrator says the word ‘Nationalist’ in an ugly spiteful tone, in order to demonize the Rakhine for even daring to recognize and be proud of their identity, language and culture. The film SHOULD mention the Rohingya Super Nationalist Parties, such as the Rohingya Solidarity Organization (RSO) and the Arakan Rohingya Islamic Front (ARIF). These groups were sending members to Pakistan and Afghanistan for heavy weapons and explosives training with Al-Qeada Hizb-e-Islami Mujahideen and the Taliban. In March 2011, between 80 to 100 Rohingya were captured after training in combat and bomb making deep in the jungles of northern Maungdaw.
11:25 The film show a mob of muslims surging down the streets of downtown Maungdaw attacking and breaking windows, and the narrator says it’s not sure if this scene happened before or after police fired warning shots in the air. Al Jazeera was deliberately evasive with this so people would think it was all started by Rakhine police.
The police only fired warning shots in the air AFTER THE MUSLIMS STARTED KILLING BUDDHIST PEOPLE ON THE STREET, BURNING HOMES AND SHOPS, AND GOING ON A RAMPAGE. And just before this the men came streaming out of their ‘holy’ mosques, armed with long heavy wooden clubs, instructed by the ‘holy’ imams to kill all the Buddhists, burn their homes and shops, and do this for Allah and we will have our own pure muslim land here.
14:40 A woman says she was raped by 20 men. But something seems very fake about her. I would normally tend to believe a woman like this, but this one is not convincing to me at all. She seems way too well, has no emotion,
and looks like an actress playing a part in a deceptive film. And then, they say she died in Bangladesh? So, no one can interview her now.
20:10 A woman says, ‘A brother went out and was immediately attacked by a monk from the monastery, and cut to pieces.’ That is extremely hard to believe without any sort of corroboration, and with my experience in Burma and in Arakan I have never seen anything that would lend credibility to this situation happening.
Rohingya talk about killing Rakhine Buddhist,
not about reconciliation, peace, and learning to live together, with respect.
18:50 A young girl says, ‘If I was older, I would have killed those Rakhine’.
20:35 A man talks about he and his brothers killed 4 or 5 Burmese security men.
20:40 A mother talks, proudly, about her young son who insisted on going out (during the evening of June 8 in Maungdaw) to fight Rakhine, and he killed two Rakhine (she looks proud) and then he was caught and killed.
I suppose they tried, but could not find any Rakhine Buddhist to say something like that.


I can keep going , there’s more, but I think this is enough to show you the slant of this film.
Rick Heizman, San Francisco, Dec 16, 2012


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s