1947 DOCUMENTS BETWEEN JAMIATUL-ULAMA (the party of the Arakan Muslims), and BRITISH OFFICIALS, ARE REVEALING !

by Rick Heizman, July, 2014, San Francisco ! THERE ARE SEVERAL POINTS OF INTEREST IN THESE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE

VERY RELEVANT TO THE SITUATION, AND ESPECIALLY TO THE PERCEPTION OF THE CURRENT SITUATION IN ARAKAN: !

1) In these documents, notice that the Muslims NEVER used the term Rohingya to describe or label themselves. They always referred to themselves as the Muslims or Arakan Muslims. They identify themselves by religion more than anything else, and more than anyone else. (example: the Chin, Kachin, and Karen (Kayin) dont call themselves the Christians or the Chin Christians, Kachin Christians, or Karen Christians. And the Burmese dont call themselves the Buddhists, or the Burmese Buddhists.

These days, ignorant and misguided Western writers and journalists - who think they know everything even better than the indigenous Rakhine Buddhists - are often screeching to others that those people who object to using the term Rohingya, and instead refer to them as Bengali Muslims, or simply Bengalis are exhibiting bigotry and ignorance - when actually those accusers are the ones trying to impose their own ignorance and bigotry, and showing that they have no qualms about falsely accusing and demonizing an entire Buddhist Culture that is deeply rooted in their own homeland.

IF THE MUSLIMS DID NOT USE THE TERM ROHINGYA AT THAT TIME, THEN IT PROVES THAT IT WAS MADE UP FOR A DEVIOUS PURPOSE. There is already plenty of proof that Rohingya is a recently made term to use - along with a made-up history - in order to fool people into sympathizing with the unbridled victimhood, and tacitly supporting their real aims of seizing the land of the Rakhine Buddhists, demonizing the Buddhists so that they have no support, and eliminating them. People who dont believe that are simply people that dont know the history and the incidents that have occurred making their goal more and more in reach. And, dont be fooled by any notion that they will be happy and content to be granted Burmese citizenship. They do NOT want to be part of an infidel-led country, and they will simply use citizenship as a way to gain a population superiority and then leave the nation of Burma / Myanmar.

1

Before this +me, the Muslims were called Bengali-Muslims or Chi;agong-Muslims (which indicate that they came from outside Burma) by the Bri+sh, themselves, and others. Between the end of WWII and independence they began to use the term Arakan Muslims in order to showcase themselves as being as deeply imbedded in the land of Arakan as the Buddhists - despite the fact that their Bengali language (specically Chi;agongian Bengali because most of them came from Chi;agong) is NOT a language from Arakan. To help this manipula+ve eort they concocted a new and preposterous history - see number 3 below. Ul+mately, the term 'Arakan Muslims' failed it's sly purpose, and then the term 'Rohingya' - unknown to anyone including the Muslims - started to appear and be used.

2) These papers also show the objections, and even disgust, that officials had with the demand of the Muslims to have a State or Territory made for one particular religion. The Governor of Burma - H. E. Rance - wrote in response, Religion itself cannot be the basis of nationality. It has no precedent in Burma or in the world. Sultan Ahmed, leader of the main party of the Muslims - Jamiatul-ulama-e Islam - and other top Muslim leaders were inspired by and communicating with the leaders of soon-to-be Pakistan, which would be carved out of India purely because of religion - the Muslims of India demanded their own country - Ghandi was aghast. Some of the Arakan Muslims advocated joining Pakistan, others wanted a separate country - both ways would require war in order to break it off from the nation of Burma.

3) In these papers, Sultan Ahmed puts forth the new and preposterous history of the Arakan Muslims. 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 long miles away. It took many centuries for Islam to even reach half of that distance. It was in the 13th century that the Bengal area and the Turkish lands even started to become Muslim. The famous ancient Buddhist university of Nalanda, in India, was entirely destroyed by Muslim invaders in the late 12th century, and the great Buddhist Pala Kingdom succumbed to the Muslim conquest in the 13th century. Turkish lands started changing 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 such statements as Sultan Ahmed put forth (and are once again being touted today) about Muslims arriving in Arakan in the 8th century, are undisputedly false fantasy, backed by no evidence, and impossible to be true.

His claims that the Muslims and Buddhists lived side by side peacefully are simply romanticized history to conceal real history. Indian historians claim that during 5 centuries of Muslim conquest and rule about 80 million Hindus (and Buddhists) were killed in Indian lands - which included Bengal. And, even more galling is his mention of the 1942 massacre in Maungdaw, of 40,000 Buddhists by Muslims using British weapons that were supposed to be used against the Japanese invaders - but Sultan Ahmed called it communal riots when 40,000 innocent people were killed. True, they were innocent. 40,000 Buddhists killed, hundreds of Buddhist villages burned, more than 100,000 Buddhist refugees fled for their lives. It is the largest massacre in contemporary Burmese history, and the only one to be properly called a GENOCIDE in the correct definition of the word.

2

History shows what Arakan would be like today, if it had become a Muslim State: In 1948, the popula+on of East Pakistan, (later becomes Bangladesh) included 28% Hindu people, now there are 9%. Bangladesh was overwhelmingly Buddhist for many many centuries, now the remaining Buddhists are 0.7% - less than one percent of the popula+on. In 1948, Pakistan had about 20% Hindu, Buddhist, Chris+an, and Sikh. Now: 1.6% Hindu, 1.8% Chris+an, 0.18% Buddhist, 0.06% Sikh, total about 3.5% non-Muslims.

HERE ARE THE DOCUMENTS: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3

This eort, as documented in these historic le;ers of 1947 failed (for the Muslims) and on January 4, 1948, Burma became independent. This meant nothing to the Muslims - they had other plans. On June 9, 1948 the Mujahid Party sent a le;er - an ul&matum - to the new government of The Union of Burma. It was a list of demands, including: The areas between the Kaladan and Naaf rivers must be recognized as the Na+onal Home of the Muslims of Burma (and this is the land they had ethnically cleansed of Buddhists in the last 6 years!) The Mujahid Party must be granted legal status as a poli+cal organiza+on in the new government of Burma (and this party preaches holy war against the Buddhists who have lived there for centuries!) The Mujahidin ghters who had been captured and jailed (for slaughtering Buddhists, and burning and destroying villages, temples and monasteries) must be uncondi+onally released. .......and those were just three of the demands. The new central government, s+ll trying to recover from the assassina+on of Bogyoke Aung San - Burmas hero, father-gure, and hope for the new independent country - refused these outrageous demands, and quickly the Muslims in northern Arakan declared jihad (holy war) on Burma. The Mujahidin launched a vicious campaign and destroyed all the Buddhist villages in northern Maungdaw Township (the southern parts had been destroyed 6 years earlier).

4

False and impossible history:

!!!5

6

7

8

!!9

The British response:

10

The memorialists refer to some of the Muslims , who believe that they were granted the right to form their own Muslim State in exchange for helping the British fight the Japanese - there seems to be no basis for this - and no evidence or corroboration.

11

12