|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 16:09:34 GMT
The terrorists targeted Christian churches. No Buddhist or Hindu temples were struck. Any guerrilla act in Sri Lanka and one assumes it's the angry Tamil Hindu minority. But I don't see why Tamils would attack Christians and not Buddhists, their adversarial majority. I think it's most likely these terrorists are Muslim. A very high percentage of Tamils are Christians in Sri Lanka. In fact the Tamil ethnicity is the biggest base for Catholics in SL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 16:16:10 GMT
The terrorists targeted places where tourists would go. Churches, hotels, a zoo. My guess: Since it's the Easter weekend, more tourists would have visited churches than mosques or temples. I think it's most likely these terrorists are assholes. It was obviously a religiously motivated attack. If not Hindu and Buddhist temples would have been struck on their holidays. They were not. See a slight edit in my previous post.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 21, 2019 16:27:20 GMT
The terrorists targeted Christian churches. No Buddhist or Hindu temples were struck. Any guerrilla act in Sri Lanka and one assumes it's the angry Tamil Hindu minority. But I don't see why Tamils would attack Christians and not Buddhists, their adversarial majority. I think it's most likely these terrorists are Muslim. A very high percentage of Tamils are Christians in Sri Lanka. In fact the Tamil ethnicity is the biggest base for Catholics in SL.
And the "Moors" or Muslims in Sri Lanka also speak Tamil.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 16:32:19 GMT
A very high percentage of Tamils are Christians in Sri Lanka. In fact the Tamil ethnicity is the biggest base for Catholics in SL.
And the "Moors" or Muslims in Sri Lanka also speak Tamil. So what? Tamils (almost 99%) are either Hindus or Christians.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 21, 2019 16:47:17 GMT
And the "Moors" or Muslims in Sri Lanka also speak Tamil. So what? Tamils (almost 99%) are either Hindus or Christians. Hindus, Muslims, Christians - all the religious minorities in Sri Lanka speak Tamil. The fact that most Christians are also Tamil is probably irrelevant. And your stats are misleading because they exclude the Tamil-speaking Muslims who are demographically listed as "Moors" but are still Tamil. If you include the "Moors" as Tamil then 40% of Tamils are actually Muslim.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 16:52:43 GMT
So what? Tamils (almost 99%) are either Hindus or Christians. Hindus, Muslims, Christians - all the religious minorities in Sri Lanka speak Tamil. The fact that most Christians are also Tamil is probably irrelevant. And your stats are misleading because they exclude the Tamil-speaking Muslims who are demographically listed as "Moors" but are still Tamil. If you include the "Moors" as Tamil then 40% of Tamils are actually Muslim. Tamil speakers are Muslims? Sure, many of them. But ethnic Tamils are Muslims? No. They are Christians and Hindus. Muslims in SL are mainly from Moor and Malay ethnicity.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 21, 2019 21:18:02 GMT
Hindus, Muslims, Christians - all the religious minorities in Sri Lanka speak Tamil. The fact that most Christians are also Tamil is probably irrelevant. And your stats are misleading because they exclude the Tamil-speaking Muslims who are demographically listed as "Moors" but are still Tamil. If you include the "Moors" as Tamil then 40% of Tamils are actually Muslim. Tamil speakers are Muslims? Sure, many of them. But ethnic Tamils are Muslims? No. They are Christians and Hindus. Muslims in SL are mainly from Moor and Malay ethnicity. I post this with some reservation however our news service is tending to blame 'extremist conservative Buddhist monks' which to me until now had been a contradiction in terms, however there is a Buddhist majority in Sri Lanka and certain element apparently associate the Christians with post-colonialism which would account for the combination of tourist and Christian targets. They resent the influence of the West. We shall see. It is definitely not Muslim according to the reports, and as you said the Tamils are split.
|
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Apr 21, 2019 22:37:20 GMT
Tamil speakers are Muslims? Sure, many of them. But ethnic Tamils are Muslims? No. They are Christians and Hindus. Muslims in SL are mainly from Moor and Malay ethnicity. I post this with some reservation however our news service is tending to blame 'extremist conservative Buddhist monks' which to me until now had been a contradiction in terms, however there is a Buddhist majority in Sri Lanka and certain element apparently associate the Christians with post-colonialism which would account for the combination of tourist and Christian targets. They resent the influence of the West. We shall see. It is definitely not Muslim according to the reports, and as you said the Tamils are split. Apparently there have been a number of attacks by "hardline" Buddhist groups in the area last year, targeting Christians and Muslims. More data should clear up who's responsible. Very sad whoever it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 21, 2019 22:44:53 GMT
Hindus, Muslims, Christians - all the religious minorities in Sri Lanka speak Tamil. The fact that most Christians are also Tamil is probably irrelevant. And your stats are misleading because they exclude the Tamil-speaking Muslims who are demographically listed as "Moors" but are still Tamil. If you include the "Moors" as Tamil then 40% of Tamils are actually Muslim. Tamil speakers are Muslims? Sure, many of them. But ethnic Tamils are Muslims? No. They are Christians and Hindus. Muslims in SL are mainly from Moor and Malay ethnicity. I'm saying "Moors" is just an antiquated colonial word used to refer to Tamil speakers who are Muslim by religion. Ethnically they are Tamils. These terms are rarely finite. But if they speak Tamil in a land dominated by the Sinhalese, they are Tamils. Language usually tells all about a people's origin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 23:22:56 GMT
Tamil speakers are Muslims? Sure, many of them. But ethnic Tamils are Muslims? No. They are Christians and Hindus. Muslims in SL are mainly from Moor and Malay ethnicity. I'm saying "Moors" is just an antiquated colonial word used to refer to Tamil speakers who are Muslim by religion. Ethnically they are Tamils. These terms are rarely finite. But if they speak Tamil in a land dominated by the Sinhalese, they are Tamils. Language usually tells all about a people's origin. That site doesn't say that they are Tamils. Just Tamil speakers who are all people in certain northern regions of SL. People of Tamil ethnicity in SL are either Shaivites or Christians. Not even non-Shaivite Hindus except for rare exceptions. And the Christian Tamils are mostly Catholics (over 85% and rest all others are 15%). Muslims are those who came as traders from outside. They are of Moor or Malay decent.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 21, 2019 23:30:46 GMT
I'm saying "Moors" is just an antiquated colonial word used to refer to Tamil speakers who are Muslim by religion. Ethnically they are Tamils. These terms are rarely finite. But if they speak Tamil in a land dominated by the Sinhalese, they are Tamils. Language usually tells all about a people's origin. That site doesn't say that they are Tamils. Just Tamil speakers who are all people in certain northern regions of SL. People of Tamil ethnicity in SL are either Shaivites or Christians. Not even non-Shaivite Hindus except for rare exceptions. And the Christian Tamils are mostly Catholics (over 85% and rest all others are 15%). Muslims are those who came as traders from outside. They are of Moor or Malay decent. Well you're closer to it than me. But if they are Arab or Malay why not speak Arab or Malay or the majority Sinhalese language? They speak Tamil. Odd that they would adopt that minority language if they're native language was not Tamil. Moors are in Morocco. The term is being used loosely in Sri Lanka to describe Muslims. And there are Muslims in Tamil Nadu, the Indian state.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 21, 2019 23:52:23 GMT
That site doesn't say that they are Tamils. Just Tamil speakers who are all people in certain northern regions of SL. People of Tamil ethnicity in SL are either Shaivites or Christians. Not even non-Shaivite Hindus except for rare exceptions. And the Christian Tamils are mostly Catholics (over 85% and rest all others are 15%). Muslims are those who came as traders from outside. They are of Moor or Malay decent. Well you're closer to it than me. But if they are Arab or Malay why not speak Arab or Malay or the majority Sinhalese language? They speak Tamil. Odd that they would adopt that minority language if they're native language was not Tamil. Moors are in Morocco. The term is being used loosely in Sri Lanka to describe Muslims. And there are Muslims in Tamil Nadu, the Indian state. It is because how those Moors reached SL. It's not a case of Moors directly reaching Sri Lanka. There are two broad categories of Moors. 1. Moors of the Land and the Mouros da Arabia/Mouros de Meca (Moors from Arab) are two main groups of Moors. But these people from the Muslim world first landed to India (mostly current day Afghanistan) and then at various stages they entered Sri Lanka through passing South India. "Pathans of Tamil Nadu" for example are not Tamils. They are Moors who first settled in Afghanistan (Pashto people) and then seeking greater riches settled in Tamil Nadu in India. Eventually, they moved down to Sri Lanka. Also, the main trading center between Arab and subcontinent was Kerala (southern tip of India). Many Moors first came to Kerela and thus learned the Tamil language (for business purposes as they were traders) and then they settled to Sri Lanka. Bringing to SL their Tamil language.
Also, the brutal Portuguese occupation was very hard on Muslims. Muslims/Buddhists/Hindus were being wiped out by the Portuguese. Then many Sinhalese speaking Moors fled to interiors that were dominated by Tamils. And thus they took on the Tamil language.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 22, 2019 0:00:21 GMT
Well you're closer to it than me. But if they are Arab or Malay why not speak Arab or Malay or the majority Sinhalese language? They speak Tamil. Odd that they would adopt that minority language if they're native language was not Tamil. Moors are in Morocco. The term is being used loosely in Sri Lanka to describe Muslims. And there are Muslims in Tamil Nadu, the Indian state. It is because how those Moors reached SL. It's not a case of Moors directly reaching Sri Lanka. There are two broad categories of Moors. 1. Moors of the Land and the Mouros da Arabia/Mouros de Meca (Moors from Arab) are two main groups of Moors. But these people from the Muslim world first landed to India (mostly current day Afghanistan) and then at various stages they entered Sri Lanka through passing South India. "Pathans of Tamil Nadu" for example are not Tamils. They are Moors who first settled in Afghanistan (Pashto people) and then seeking greater riches settled in Tamil Nadu in India. Eventually, they moved down to Sri Lanka. Also, the main trading center between Arab and subcontinent was Kerala (southern tip of India). Many Moors first came to Kerela and thus learned the Tamil language (for business purposes as they were traders) and then they settled to Sri Lanka. Bringing to SL their Tamil language.
Also, the brutal Portuguese occupation was very hard on Muslims. Muslims/Buddhists/Hindus were being wiped out by the Portuguese. Then many Sinhalese speaking Moors fled to interiors that were dominated by Tamils. And thus they took on the Tamil language.
Interesting stuff, under the circumstances...thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 22, 2019 0:18:23 GMT
Well you're closer to it than me. But if they are Arab or Malay why not speak Arab or Malay or the majority Sinhalese language? They speak Tamil. Odd that they would adopt that minority language if they're native language was not Tamil. Moors are in Morocco. The term is being used loosely in Sri Lanka to describe Muslims. And there are Muslims in Tamil Nadu, the Indian state. It is because how those Moors reached SL. It's not a case of Moors directly reaching Sri Lanka. There are two broad categories of Moors. 1. Moors of the Land and the Mouros da Arabia/Mouros de Meca (Moors from Arab) are two main groups of Moors. But these people from the Muslim world first landed to India (mostly current day Afghanistan) and then at various stages they entered Sri Lanka through passing South India. "Pathans of Tamil Nadu" for example are not Tamils. They are Moors who first settled in Afghanistan (Pashto people) and then seeking greater riches settled in Tamil Nadu in India. Eventually, they moved down to Sri Lanka. Also, the main trading center between Arab and subcontinent was Kerala (southern tip of India). Many Moors first came to Kerela and thus learned the Tamil language (for business purposes as they were traders) and then they settled to Sri Lanka. Bringing to SL their Tamil language.
Also, the brutal Portuguese occupation was very hard on Muslims. Muslims/Buddhists/Hindus were being wiped out by the Portuguese. Then many Sinhalese speaking Moors fled to interiors that were dominated by Tamils. And thus they took on the Tamil language.
Okay, thanks for the explanation. However, India itself has a large native Muslim population. Of course the whole partition of India into two states, India and Pakistan, was to accommodate Muslims. And India hosted the Mughal Empire. I'm a bit confused if you would consider Muslims not to be native to the subcontinent now since they've been there over a thousand years. Of course we don't know who took credit for the recent attacks. But if Muslims of Sri Lanka are not ethnic Tamils, it would be all the more reason for them to attack Tamil Christians.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 22, 2019 0:24:00 GMT
e It is because how those Moors reached SL. It's not a case of Moors directly reaching Sri Lanka. There are two broad categories of Moors. 1. Moors of the Land and the Mouros da Arabia/Mouros de Meca (Moors from Arab) are two main groups of Moors. But these people from the Muslim world first landed to India (mostly current day Afghanistan) and then at various stages they entered Sri Lanka through passing South India. "Pathans of Tamil Nadu" for example are not Tamils. They are Moors who first settled in Afghanistan (Pashto people) and then seeking greater riches settled in Tamil Nadu in India. Eventually, they moved down to Sri Lanka. Also, the main trading center between Arab and subcontinent was Kerala (southern tip of India). Many Moors first came to Kerela and thus learned the Tamil language (for business purposes as they were traders) and then they settled to Sri Lanka. Bringing to SL their Tamil language.
Also, the brutal Portuguese occupation was very hard on Muslims. Muslims/Buddhists/Hindus were being wiped out by the Portuguese. Then many Sinhalese speaking Moors fled to interiors that were dominated by Tamils. And thus they took on the Tamil language.
Okay, thanks for the explanation. However, India itself has a large native Muslim population. Of course the whole partition of India into two states, India and Pakistan, was to accommodate Muslims. And India hosted the Mughal Empire. I'm a bit confused if you would consider Muslims not to be native to the subcontinent now since they've been there over a thousand years. Of course we don't know who took credit for the recent attacks. But if Muslims of Sri Lanka are not ethnic Tamils, it would be all the more reason for them to attack Tamil Christians. Good question....I will give a detailed reply sometimes later (may in 12 hours time). Remember it would not be written according to how I feel about the topic but how an average Indian may feel about the issue (or as how I interpret average Indians feel about the issue). |
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 22, 2019 0:29:18 GMT
Okay, thanks for the explanation. However, India itself has a large native Muslim population. Of course the whole partition of India into two states, India and Pakistan, was to accommodate Muslims. And India hosted the Mughal Empire. I'm a bit confused if you would consider Muslims not to be native to the subcontinent now since they've been there over a thousand years. Of course we don't know who took credit for the recent attacks. But if Muslims of Sri Lanka are not ethnic Tamils, it would be all the more reason for them to attack Tamil Christians. Good question....I will give a detailed reply sometimes later (may in 12 hours time). Remember it would not written according to how I feel about the topic but how an average Indian may feel about the issue (or as how I interpret average Indians feel about the issue). Okay, I eagerly await.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Apr 22, 2019 0:54:46 GMT
Thirteen arrested so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 22, 2019 1:51:22 GMT
Thirteen arrested so far.
I find it strange that no-one is attributing blame to any group yet though it is sadi in that article that the government had some warning and
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on Apr 22, 2019 4:10:39 GMT
Thirteen arrested so far.
I find it strange that no-one is attributing blame to any group yet though it is sadi in that article that the government had some warning and NHK just showed a document in their news broadcast that warned of an attack from an obscure Muslim extremist group. It was named but I missed recognizing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 22, 2019 4:12:46 GMT
I find it strange that no-one is attributing blame to any group yet though it is sadi in that article that the government had some warning and NHK just showed a document in their news broadcast that warned of an attack from an obscure Muslim extremist group. It was named but I missed recognizing it. Yeah! Extremism...maybe either Buddhist or Muslim? They ALL suck.
|
|
