During the 18th Century, a time when the Crown controlled much of the world, the border between the region which became Bangladesh and that which is today known as Myanmar, was much more ambiguous than that between the two nations today.
Ambiguity of a border doesn't somehow mean the rapid swelling of the Bengali Muslim population in Myanmar was due to lack of border demarcation. The British Raj basically allowed anyone to come in to "Mandalay" in the service of the Empire - which was generally not in the service of the local people or their sovereignty.
I like being labeled as a "pedant" as I see it as an indicator of my education and life experiences.
More like an insufferable dolt doesn't see the problem in being insufferable or a dolt - it's an intrinsic feature of the malady.
I grew up in a British colony. I have many English, a few Scottish and one Welsh friend - not one of them has ever made a complaint about the BBC exhibiting "pro-Muslim bias". As with many Islamophobes, it appears that simply reporting the facts causes some people to claim bias when their own viewpoints are shown to lack factual support.
You probably don't know enough English, Scots, or Welshmen then. The only ones who voted against Brexit were in London ('Londonistan')
And why would English, Scots or Welsh care about Myanmar's Muslim problem?
It's no small irony that socialists like you remain conveniently quiet on the way Muslims treat minorities. Muslims and their socialist sympathizers prefer contrived terms like "Islamophobia" over more meaningful terms like xenophobia, because Islam easily outdoes everybody else on xenophobia and intolerance. Therefore pretending "Islamophobia" is something other than a backlash to Muslim intolerance allows one the pretense of having one's cake and eating it too.
"Lefties hate Christians"? Really? It's more like Lefties refuse to support bigots and racists who use their own definitions of their faith in attempts to justify their hatred and irrational actions against those of other beliefs.
No, it's more like Lefties have fluid morals, and will selectively revise the past - including their own past - to play fast and loose with whom they support. Today they're at war with Eurasia, tomorrow with Oceania.
Lefties, including those at the BBC, relish targeting certain races and ethnicities, showing that they're bigots and racists, in spite of their pretensions to the contrary.
This is my last response because we have wandered far off the topic of the thread in discussing persecution of Muslims in Myanmar instead of the atrocities taking place in Syria.
Very predictable for you to run away when you're on shaky ground. Yes, I understand that you don't like your hypocrisies exposed - like the Left's selective sympathies for Christians in Myanmar contrasted with their disdain for Christians in Syria.
These hypocrisies can be easily recognized as a Pecking Order:
Muslims > Women > Christians
If Muslims are in conflict with Women's rights, then throw Women's rights under a bus while emphatically supporting Islam.
If Muslims are in conflict with Christians, then throw Christians to the lions while emphatically supporting Islam.
If Feminists are in conflict with Christians, then tell the Christians to **** off.
The pecking order is the result of Socialist "reasoning" by political expediency. And this is how most socialists end up standing for nothing except whatever fashionable grievance of the moment has caught their emotional fancy.
