The difficulty I'm having here is you're relying purely on anecdotal evidence.
I'm sure there are some people in this group who have passports. I'm sure there are also some people from other countries trying to benefit from the humanitarian aid. However we know the opposite is true too. There are people who have lived there for generation that don't have passports. There are people who are from that area that are being murdered, terrorised and displaced. Are they the majority, or are they the minority? That's not just a question of perceptions, that's a question of facts and evidence.
You're choosing to believe anecdotal evidence that suits your worldview. You've taken the position that you don't like Myanmar being portrayed negatively and you want to defend them. What is the chance that you're then discarding real evidence that contradicts that viewpoint and exaggerating the other evidence to support it? Based on what you've said in here, I'd say it's quite likely.
The people on the other side of the argument - the media, the UN etc. - have no reason to assume the worst about Myanmar. The "liberal" media in Western countries are almost universally in favour of Aung San Suu Kyi so if anything are likely to lean towards her perspective. Many people would suggest this has been kept fairly quiet for a fairly long time in part because of that particular bias.
Regardless, let's assume both sides are biased. In that case we have to rely on the evidence . Do you really think you're providing robust, credible evidence in support of your view? If it was true that this is just a witch-hunt driven by fake news from people outside Myanmar, then why is it the government are finding it so difficult to provide robust, credible evidence? They're the one with all of the power here.
If you're relying on anecdotal evidence from eye witnesses then you get into murky waters very quickly, because there are plenty of accounts that directly contradict yours:
I sometimes have to based on anecdotal evidence when so called facts from outsides can be a bit ridiculous. Also some people asked if I had some personal experience with this to even talk about this subject. So I provided some. And at times, while trying to solve this kind of issues, you have to understand from personal points rather than looking at facts where you have no idea they came from. Usually nothing ever gets done anywhere at all. If some people and countries like to take that route, so be it. Many issues in this world will keep happening.
I think it is fair to say that not everyone who should have the citizenship in the country got it.
But, it is more of some cases being very complicated than lack of trying from recent goverments efforts. Su kyi and the previous government repeated how they were trying to solve that problems and they did a lot of times.
So my point is people need to stop crying about how they are denying citizenship. Because it is not true.
There are lists and lists of violence crimes, murder happening there in the area and around on some of the newspapers since 2014 to keep a record. Victims were from all ethical races. They even killed their own government appointed officials just because they are one and accused of government's men or spying on them etc. But, those people were mostly a few brave ones who really wanted to communicate between groups.
A lot of minorities who were minding their own business got killed horribly like getting their heads, limbs chopped.
Now, you asked me about people being displaced or murdered in the area are minority or majority. The area called buthitaung maung taw has 97% 'rohinga' and 3% other ethicals.
Most ethical groups live in their own areas and know not to cross the areas if possible. If they do, they know the risk and crimes do happen when they do.
People of other ethicals can not enter their villages anymore. Hell even police force can't for the fear of their lives. Only heavy armed military forces can.
Again this event happened because of the attacks on border stations which was 2nd times in less than 2 years and many weapons got stolen from ther. The government know that they are trying to collect the weapons that way and concern it would be a regular occurancce. So they tried to clean up on some of the villages where they got informed terrorists were hiding. Once they went there, many of them were on fire and people have fled already. How do you prove it though? Like the eye witness like you posted it above? I am sure there are both sides of it. Depends on what narratives you are going. I am sure both sides have some correct evidence depending on the situations of course. If you catch a monk doing it right there, he does it. Does it mean it happen everywhere like that? Many sources closed to military concluded that most of village burning down was to blame on them and for some terrorists to flee with them since the military can not just stop hundreds of thousand of people running out of fear.
My mom's family came from there. I was back in that state and around there for awhile very recently. Talked to a lot of Arakineses there about the situation. Many were outraged about how outside media were biased against them pointing out all the shit they had to put up with too but when people want to help, they all talk about 'rohinga' being victims only. Of course a lot of stuff I heard are pretty horrible too as how they like to rape arakinese women if they pass by their villages, kill men etc. Like you said, who knows since your evidence probably put me into murky water now.
I personally think that both sides have a fair share of shits doing and going on. The hatred there from BOTH sides is pretty intense. It went to a huge issue in 2014 with the rape and murder case of Arakinese girl as someone posted the video earlier in this thread and both sides went far extreme everywhere.
The su kyi government position is pretty simple. They will try to work it out. Arakinese don't like them as they want tougher actions against 'rohinga'.
The military position is more or less going after rebel/terrorists groups when get attacked which they did twice in less than 2 years. It didn't help that those groups wanted to make an state for their own. I am not stating they are all angels while chasing down those groups. The emotions of their members of troops getting killed horribly would played on their mind as well as the fear of getting ambushed and killed whenever they enter some of those villages.
The fleeting 'rohinga' from this event? I am sure many are scared and had nothing to do with terrorism and they will be able to come back when things settle down. Or they can hope someone else will take them because they think it might be better for them.
Su kyi said they were a lot of rohinga villages which are untouched by anyone and are protected by armed forces.
As I said before, arguing, naming, accusing of government doing shit would not help. It is mostly as what su kyi said ethical and social issues tension. There are lots of Arakinese and other ethical muslims who are free to go and do whatever they want to do there and around the country.
What makes things worse now and before whenever they attacked governments posts and stations is how some of their villages hid some of them who did. Then, when the security forces came in, they ambushed them along the road, then ran back into the village forcing the security forces to chase them and it made everything messy and innocent people came in the picture that way. Then the crying of murdering innocent people shout out then the media jumped in.
How many of media covers how much of other ethics who had to fled and killed due to this event?
People from all ethics usually fled due to the intensive battles, terrorists hiding and total and general chaos among the public around. Not because of the military committing 'horrible crimes'. When the armed forced tried to get everything in order, that's when they get called for being brutal. If the reports are accurate that 400k + a lot more running around, you can bet there would be many shit going on. It won't be totally peaceful without any kind of accidents.
So you can either say well your evidence are not credible as I could say many of others. It is up to you. I am not here to win the argument or own the issue. I am here to provide some info that people outside may not know and there is no such thing as only one side is the one all getting it in such big issue like that.
The su kyi government did a lot of pressings for the previous event and this event. They regularly did the pressing at times saying they didn't have credible sources yet and they would come back later with better stuff which they did both times. But since they were waiting for all the facts to come in to make a credible press, everywhere else is shouting all kinds of shit quoting ridiculous stuff and making a lot up. So when su kyi came out with all the stuff she now knew as credible by her own sources, they criticized how late she was and dismiss as what she said bs or not even taken seriously or made a headline at all.
So that's how it goes. I am pretty much in the middle for the issues with burmese standard. I have argued against my own family and friend views. But, I too am fed up with a lot of shit outside press are going for because they usually fuel more hatred both sides to keep going on as many from one side might take advantage of it and some from the other side feel they get hard done by.