GOOD TERRORIST; BAD TERRORIST

By Dr Chandra Muzaffar

The French military operation in Mali has brought to the fore the blatant double standards in the approach of certain Western nations to the whole question of terrorism.

In the case of Mali, France, with the support of Britain, Germany and the United States, has committed itself to combating diehard militants who are determined to use violence to establish their power and authority. Yet in Libya, these countries and their allies in West Asia and North Africa (WANA) had no compunctions about colluding with militant groups to oust Muammar Gaddafi in a bloody and brutal campaign which killed tens of thousands of people in 2011.

Their hypocrisy becomes even starker in Syria. Western powers and groups from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Turkey have been providing funds, logistical support and sophisticated weapons to rebels within Syria and mercenaries from a number of other countries, to overthrow the Bashar al-Assad government. Many of these armed groups, like their counterparts in Libya and Mali, justify their acts of terror and violence in the name of Islam --- albeit a distorted and perverted interpretation of the religion.

Different armed groups in Iraq at different times in the course of the US led occupation of that country have also, it is alleged, received material assistance from countries in the region and the US. It is an established fact that the US under Ronald Reagan gave enormous financial and military aid to so-called “jihadist” groups fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The US has often condoned acts of terror perpetrated by its close ally, Israel, against Palestinians and other Arabs. Indeed, the US itself is regarded in some circles as a “terrorist state”, given its record of killing innocent civilians in various parts of the world, including Latin America, West Asia and Southeast Asia. 

What this shows is that there is terrorism that is condoned and terrorism that is condemned by Western powers and other states. If violence serves their interests, it is acceptable. If it doesn’t, the militants are targeted. In other words, there are ‘good terrorists’ and ‘bad terrorists’.

One of the main reasons why the militants in Mali have to be defeated --- from France’s standpoint --- is because France imports huge amounts of uranium from that country for its nuclear plants that generate 80% of its electricity. It is not because France abhors violence or seeks to protect human life! Besides, France wants to maintain its hegemonic grip upon West Africa and parts of North Africa at a time when resource rich Africa is becoming increasingly important to the global economy.

The ulterior motives for Western military action in Libya; for their covert operations in Syria; for their hobnobbing with militant groups in Iraq; and for their collusion with Jihadists in Afghanistan have been exposed in numerous studies. There is no need to repeat them here. Suffice to note that that they have very little to do with defending human rights or upholding democracy. It is the overwhelming desire to perpetuate their military, political, economic and cultural hegemony over the world which is the real reason why the US and its allies seek to crush terrorism in one instance and consort with it in another instance.    

    Why is it that this irrefutable truth about the attitude of the centres of power in the West to terrorism is not widely known?  Why is it that citizens in Western democracies who are supposed to be informed and educated are not ashamed of the double standards and the hypocrisy that surround the war on terror? One of the primary reasons is because the media --- both the old and the new --- does not want to tell the whole truth.

More often than not, the media regurgitates the propaganda put out by the centres of power in the West. If it is the ‘bad terrorists’ that say French troops are pursuing, the latter are projected in the media as heroes on a noble mission, without any analysis of the root causes of the conflict or what the motives are for launching the assault. If, on the other hand, it is the ‘good terrorists’ sponsored by the West who are responsible for some merciless slaughter somewhere, their barbarity is either played down by the media or the whole incident is turned and twisted to present the adversary as the perpetrator of the killing.

This has been happening in the case of Syria. In one of the most recent episodes the ‘good terrorists’, the rebels, claimed that the horrendous attack on Aleppo University on 15 January 2013 that killed 87 people, many of them students, was the work of the Bashar government. This was the story that most media carried though a number of newspapers and television channels also reported the government’s denial. However, when evidence emerged that showed that the ‘good terrorists’ were the actual culprits and independent journalists and student groups in Syria, apart from a number of foreign governments, condemned the ‘good terrorists’ for their savagery, very few media outlets gave any prominence  to their remarks.

It is through distorted reporting and analysis of this sort that the media conceals the double standards and hypocrisy of the centres of power in the West. This is why we should on our own look for alternative sources of news and analysis and use the information at our command to challenge the powerful to be honest and consistent about the fight against terrorism.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).

Listen Listen and The Quran

Listen Listen Listen !

THE ORIGINAL:

LISTEN LISTEN LISTEN NAMAWEE STYLE

THE PARODY SONG

THE DANCE  REMIX !!!!

MY VOTE GOES TO.....LISTEN BY BEYONCE !!!!

My comments : res ipsa loquitor. Dont understand? Well, as Sharifah says...I have a degree and you have O Levels! (reminded me of a Muslim Convert Academic who keeps reminding people that his ideas has to be accepted because he has a PH.D even when his arguments are all flawed !!!)  he he he

Salam @ Peace

Himpunan Rakyat #KL112 - what is it???

Chat with Hishamuddin Rais and Adam Adli on the #KL112.

http://www.mobtv.my/talkshow-2714.html

Ramai Sangat Nak "Pertahankan" Islam

Ramai betul orang politik, "sarjana" dan ulama agama nak "pertahankan" Islam dengan pelbagai ucapan sambil perut kenyang, tempat tidur yang enak dan gaji tetap bulanan,

90:11. "Namun begitu, dia tidak mendaki pendakian,

90:12. Dan tahukah kamu apakah ia pendakian?

90:13. Memerdekakan seorang hamba,

90:14. Atau memberi makan pada hari kelaparan,

90:15. Kepada anak yatim kaum kerabat yang dekat,

90:16. Atau seorang miskin dalam penderitaan."

(Quran 90:11 - 16)

Apalah Salahnya Amanat Haji Hadi?

Selepas 30 tahun lebih, amanat Haji Hadi menjadi isu yang hangat dikalangan pihak-pihak tertentu.  Haji Hadi di “desak” untuk memberi penjelasan dan meminta maaf diatas pengumuman amanat tersebut.

Namun, apa salahnya dengan amanat tersebut?

Amanat tersebut dikatakan telah mengakibatkan perpecahan dikalangan umat Melayu Muslim sehingga mencetuskan tindakan dua imam satu masjid, dan sebagainya. JIka benarlah amanat tersebut telah mengakibatkan perpecahan Melayu Muslim, mengapa baru sekarang begitu hebat perkara ini dijadikan isu? Apakah perpecahan amat ketara hari ini ekoran amanat tersebut dan bukannya faktor-faktor lain? 

Apakah jika wujud perpecahan sedemikian, sepanjang 30 tahun, sistem pendidikan kita serta kehadiran begitu banyaknya institusi agama, ceramah agama, aktiviti agama dan lain-lain yang berkaitan dengan agama tidak mampu menyatukan balik Melayu Muslim?

Jadi apa salahnya amanat Haji Hadi?

Ada pula yang mendakwa bahawa amanat ini telah menimbulkan permasalahan akidah. Persoalanya, “permasalahan akidah” yang macam mana? Adakah amanat ini telah menimbulkan fahaman yang begitu salah terhadap Islam sehingga akidah terancam atau diancam?

Bukankah diNegara kita ini, sejak merdeka, Kerajaan telah “memakmurkan dan memartabatkan” (dua perkataan yang amat diminati oleh politikus Melayu) ajensi-ajensi agama disetiap Negeri? Bukankah Melayu Muslim sudah dididik untuk menerima ajensi-ajensi agama ini sebagai pemantau dan penentu “akidah” dalam Negara ini?

Bagi tujuan pemantauan “akidah” dan “hal-hal agama”, ajensi-ajensi ini telah diberikan pelbagai kuasa oleh undang-undang. Sekiranya ajensi-ajensi ini tidak pun mengambil sebarang tindakan terhadap Haji Hadi, mengapa pula yang lain yang tidak berhak disisi undang-undang berkokok begitu kuat sekali? Kalau ajensi agama tidak membuat komen atau mengambil berat mengenai amanat Haji Hadi ini, bukankah ia bermakna, amanat itu tidak bermasalah?

 Lagipun, bukankah kita telah pun serahkan kuasa untuk menentukan apa yang sah dan yang tidak sah disisi Islam kepada ajensi-ajensi agama ini? Mengapa kali ini orang-orang yang tidak kaitan dengan ajensi agama pula yang bising? Mengapa pengecualian ini?

Lebih daripada 20 tahun yang lalu, saya telah kritik amanat ini berdasarkan fahaman saya berdasarkan Al-Quran. Namun, masa itu, tidak ada pun Melayu Muslim, apatah lagi politikus UMNO atau cendekiawan Melayu  yang sambut. Hari ini, menjelangnya PRU13, ramai pula yang nak bersuara.

Apa tujuannya? Untuk mengalakkan perbincangan agama yang sihat? Untuk “membela” Melayu dan “mempertahankan” Islam?  Atau sekadar menimbulkan isu hangat untuk PRU13?

Inilah nasib Melayu kebanyakkan – selalu diperkudakan oleh golongan elitis politik dan golongan elitis agama.

Salam.

Power hungry greedy politicians.

I am sorry if I am going to repeat the same message in this posting.

Do not trust the politicians. Check and verify what they say and do with information, data and thinking. They are always in the habit of projecting themselves as clever and caring when often then not, they are neither.

Politicians also have the habit of doing the most common thing and making it appear as an extraordinary feat or policy.

They like to pretend to be busy but are actually wasting our time and resources  doing all the things they shouldn't and not doing and not doing what they should.

Do not trust gullibly either the mainstream media nor the so called social media. The virus of lying and spinning has shamelelssly affected both.

There are people who are willing to be paid to lie and misled the Rakyat.

I am concerned that the spirit of awareness among the Rakyatnappears to be dwindling. Maybe it is the lethargy of watching the politicians continuing to insult our intelligence and demean the less knowedleagble Rakyat among us.

But we have to stay alert.

The Rakyat must continue to remain relevant.

Do not give what politicians want - total unquestioned power to manage this country.

peace !

Which Hat Are You Wearing?

Many people fail to realise that roles in life takes over your life most of the time - as I said, without you realising it or not wanting to realise it. Of course it seems almost trite to say that we take on many roles in life – parent, worker, friend, citizen and so on. That’s trite and is of no problem. It does not cause you or others any problem by itself. We are naturally multi-tasking creatures even before the word “multi-tasking” was commercialised.

However, when I say “people fail to realise that roles in life take over their life”, I indicate something sinister, something that is not so nice and can be monstrous most of the times. People always have a main role that they invest of their life in, relative to the other roles that they play. Many a times, for the ordinary person who thinks he is going on with his life blissfully; his main role has been forced upon him – only because he has chosen to NOT think and/or to be a slave of others in life.

When I was 16 and in form 4, I was troubled by the adults’ insistence about a lot of things. Ranging from how one should bersalam or handshake to the “importance” of schools and higher education. Quite frankly, even then I could not see how those things are important as they exist and even now I think I am correct. Just to digress for a bit, take the handshake or the bersalam, which require physical contact between your palms and the others’ palms, which is projected as an “accepted” way of greeting someone. I used to be paranoid about it (and still am) because I have seen many times what happens in the men’s toilets! This is over and above all the scratching, touching here and there and then transmitting to you the bacteria on the pretext of “good social behaviour”! To top it all, some even go so far as to sell the idea that a firm handshake marks self-confidence – this would put Tun Dr Mahathir as a person with no confidence as he has a gentle handshake (which I approve).

As I was saying, in form 4, I realised that adults are very preoccupied in “forcing” onto you roles that you should play and some of my peer-mates were already subtly indoctrinated. Some of the kids will play the role of bullies and some others will have to play the role of the victim. When you belong to a group (as you must in school), you are expected to take on certain roles too. You are either the one making fun of the other members or the one who is being made fun of. This role stays so long as you want to be part of the group. If you beong to one group, you cannot belong to others. I recall I never belonged exclusively to one single group but belonged to many, diverse groups, including the ones considered the “best” and “worst” in school.  This was a taboo but I got away with my charm, my tongue and my understanding of perceptions of “reward and punishment”.  Ah-hem. Ah-hem. Furthermore, Geminis get bored with uniformity and familiarity very fast!

This obsession with playing a role to the extent of it being completely unrealistic, “unidealistic”, damaging and mostly ludicrous continues into most people’s adult’s life. It has become so common that this sickness has been accepted as normal, acceptable behaviour.

Hence, if you have a strong interest in religious issues and religious studies, you are not “allowed” to dance, sing and have a good time in public. This interest in things “godly” is supposed to divorce you from things “worldly”. What if you happen to believe that everything, I mean everything is indeed godly and hence, you want to talk about God in the pub? Sure, this is going to cause discomfort on both sides, I mean to those who say “tsk, tsk” and those other who say “er…I am feeling guilty” but that proves my point.

BUt this sickness has reached a societal scale such that the whole society frowns upon a “religious” person dancing on stage. Frankly, one of my many fantasies has been to do a moon walk on stage as an introduction or an interlude while I am talking about the beauty of the Quran as a guidance for humankind. I am so sure, those who can’t even pronounce “Michael Jackson” will be on my case saying I am insulting the religion! Why must I allow these misfits to undermine my multi-talents???

It is both a blessing and a tragedy of life that you often meet people with whom you cannot have fun talking intellectually nor can you have fun just being silly. Often, people do not get it that there is a big difference between choosing to be silly for fun and being stupid as a matter of ignorance. Too many try to impose roles out of ignorance but appear to succeed because the ignorant are usually in the majority – victory by brawn not by brains. Are these not school bullies grown up into positions of power?

So many will themselves into “adult behaviour” by sheer imitating of other adults who themselves have never thought about what is “adult behaviour”. Hence, you have ignorant adults creating values and modes of behaviour for others to follow. Being an ardent reader of history and human behaviour all my life, this worries me – the sub standards set by sub-standard minds when they are in the majority! We have to wait a lifetime or more for them to understand and mature. In the meantime, the cast us into the role of a “rebel” or a “trouble maker” or an “impractical person”.

Needless to say, politicians are always the best examples of what is wrong in society or examples of anomalies of human behaviours. They not only are role-players, they are comical at that. They become comical because they forget what they say or was asked to “stand for” (by their advisers) when they play different roles. So, you have a politician for example, talking about press freedom at the Press Association dinner and then passing laws in parliament literally restricting any form of freedom of expression. You have them talking about democracy and then denying freedom of faith. And the list goes on. This is not surprising because, most of what they say does not come from their heart nor from knowledge. It is all about populist stances and protection of vested interests.

The sick obsession with dominant role playing that I cannot understand is among Muslims. They play the “role of Muslims” faithfully when they are in the mosque or at a “religious function” or attending “religious rituals”. However, they become very different when they play other dominant roles, for example at their work or business or profession or career. For instance, is there or should there be any difference in behaviour between a Muslim enforcement officer and a non-Muslim one? How about Judges, businessmen, lawyers, doctors, civil servants, politicians, and so on? Should there be a difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim one? Or does the role matter? Being a Muslim, I cannot help but feel completely irked whenever I have to deal with a Muslim enforcement officer or civil servant who behaves in a very “unIslamic way”.  To me this is a result of confusion about roles.

Anyway, there is so much more to write on roles, especially something which, at 16 years old, I labelled as “the victim of categorisation”. I now know that this label can be aptly applied to analyse how we relate to classification and stereotyping of races and so on. But that has to wait another day – if.

But for now the question is – why are we not free to wear all the hats that we choose?

Peace !

Jangan Mempolitikkan Agama???

Ekoran daripada kenyataan Nurul Izzah baru-baru ini berkaitan dengan isu kebebasan beragama seperti yang dimaksudkan dalam Quran 2:256, kedengaran beberapa seruan supaya agama tidak dipolitikkan.  Saya amat “bersetuju” dengan seruan ini tertakluk kepada beberapa perkara.

Seharusnya kita tidak memperalatkan agama untuk tujuan politik mahupun untuk tujuan-tujuan dimana kita tergolong didalam golongan yang dimaksudkan oleh Allah didalam surah At-Taubah ayat 9:

“Mereka menjual ayat-ayat Allah dengan harga yang sedikit, lalu mereka menghalangi manusia dari jalan Allah; sesungguhnya amat buruklah apa yang mereka kerjakan” (Quran 9:9)

Saya percaya manusia yang berani memperalatkan ayat-ayat agama untuk tujuan kepentingan diri semata-mata adalah manusia yang tidak insaf akan azab yang boleh diturunkan oleh Allah kepadanya. Malangnya, ini adalah keadaan yang agak lazim kerana manusia sering tidak sedar kesakitan azab yang diundang olehnya. Maka, ia tidak berfikir panjang didalam memperalatkan agama untuk kepentingan peribadi semata-mata. Kita dapati pengajaran ketidaksedaran manusia terhadap azab Allah didalam cerita Firaun itu sendiri dimana FIraun hanya sedar pada saat yang paling akhir bahawa Allah lah yang Maha Pencipta.

Kita juga berharap mereka yang menyeru supaya “agama tidak dipolitikkan” tahu apa yang mereka maksudkan. Jangan pula seruan supaya “agama tidak dipolitikkan” bertukar menjadi satu lesen untuk menjauhkan Muslim daripada usaha mendekatkan diri mereka kepada Islam.  Politik mempunyai satu ciri yang amat merbahaya dan kejam - politik boleh mengwujudkan atau membenarkan kewujudan satu suasana dimana kebebasan seorang Muslim untuk mengamalkan Islam seikhlas mungkin dikawal sehingga berupa menindas.

Saya khuathir bahawa seruan “agama jangan dipolitikkan” dijadikan sebagai satu alasan untuk mempolitikkan agama oleh pihak-pihak berkepentingan.  PIhak-pihak berkepentingan ini termasuk mereka yang berada didalam arena politik, ekonomi dan juga yang berada didalam arena agama. Didalam sejarah manusia, memang sesuatu yang bukan baru bagi golongan berkepentingan dan munafik memperalatkan agama bagi tujuan kuasa, harta, atau kedudukan. Kita harus mahu faham perkara-perkara ini secara jelas sebelum menerima atau menolak ungkapan “agama jangan dipolitikkan” secara membuta tuli.

“Kemudian mereka menjualnya dengan harga yang murah, beberapa dirham yang dihitung, kerana mereka tidak menghargainya”. (Quran: 12:20)

 Apabila agama dipolitikkan oleh institusi-institusi politik pula, terutamanya yang mempunyai kuasa undang-undang, ia berupaya untuk menggangu kepertanggungjawapan individu (individual accountability) kepada Maha Penciptanya. Undang-undang yang tidak konsisten dengan ajaran Allah didalam Al-Quran mampu bersikap zalim dan memesong manusia daripada jalan yang dianjurkan oleh Allah.  Pada saya, apa-apa undang-undang dengan apa nama sekali pun tidak harus melanggar perintah Allah didalam surah Al An’Aam ayat 94:

“Dan sungguh kamu datang kepada Kami sendiri-sendiri sebagimana Kami jadikan kamu pada pertama kali, dan kamu tinggalkan dibelakang kamu(dunia) apa yang telah Kami kurniakan kepada kamu. Dan Kami tiada lihat berserta kamu penolong-penolongmuyang kamu anggap bahwa mereka itu di antara kamu sebagai sekutu-sekutu Allah. Sungguh telah putus (pertalian) antara kamu dan telah hilang daripadamu apa yang pernah kamu anggap (sebagi sekutu-sekutu Allah)”. (Quran 6:94)

Pada saya amat mustahak bagi seorang Muslim yang ikhlas dan mengambil berat pengabdiannya kepada Allah untuk memahami ayat diatas yang dengan jelas, yang anatara lain, memberi amaran bahawa kita sendirilah yang akan dipertanggungjawapkan diatas perlakuan kita, bukan orang lain. Ayat itu menjelaskan perkara-perkara berikut:-

1)      1) Seperti mana kita dilahirkan sendiri-sendiri, kita juga akan kembali kepada Allah seorang diri tanpa iringan;

2)      2) Segala-gala yang kita himpunkan dimuka bumi akan ditinggalkan

3)      3) Penolong-penolong, penasihat-penasihat yang kita gunakan dimuka bumi sebagai “sekutu-sekutu” Allah telah putus hubungan dengan kita apabila kita kembali kepada Allah. Pada saya maksud “sekutu-sekutu” ini boleh bermaksud sumber-sumber yang selain daripada Allah untuk mendapatkan ilmu berkaitan ajaran Nya.

Perkara ini perlu difikirkan secara mendalam dan teliti kerana mengambil sekutu-sekutu disamping Allah boleh menjurus kepada syirik. Sekutu-sekutu ini juga mampu memesongkan kita daripada jalan Allah jika kita tidak berawas dan leka dengan menganggap bahawa penolong-penolong ini akan mendekatkan kita dengan Allah. Allah yang Maha Mengetahui telah menjangka keadaan seperti ini berlaku didalam surah Az Zumar ayat 3:

“Ketahuilah hanya bagi Allah agama yang suci (diinul khaalishu). Dan orang-orang yang mengadakan pelindung-pelindung selain-Nya berkata - "Kami tidak menyembah mereka melainkan supaya mereka lebih mendekatkan kami kepada  Allah".  Sesungguhnya Allah akan memutuskan diantara mereka mengenai apa yang mereka memperselisihkan. Sesungguhnya Allah tidak memberi petunjuk kepada orang yang dusta, lagi sangat ingkar”. (Quran: 39:3)

Cuba fikirkan mengenai perkatan “menyembah” (“buduhum) yang digunakan didalam ayat diatas dan perkataan “hanyalah Engkau yang kami sembah” (Iyyaka na’budu) didalam surah Al-Fathihah.  Bukankah “menyembah” Allah bermaksud menuruti ajaran-ajarannya? Begitu juga menyembah (buduhum) pelindung-pelindung selain Allah bermakna kita menuruti ajaran pelindung-pelindung ini.  Didalam konteks ayat-ayat ini, tidakkah merbahaya jika seorang Muslim dipaksa menerima (menyembah) fahaman manusia-manusia lain dengan tujuan “untuk mendekatkan diri kepada Allah” tanpa kebebasan untuk menilai apa yang diajar? Kita telah pun lihat sebentar tadi bahawa manusia-manusia lain ini, sepandai mana pun mereka, tidak akan mengiringi kita apabila kita kembali kepada Allah nanti.

Bagaimanakah seorang Muslim dapat beriman kepada surah 17 ayat 36 jika ia tidak mempunyai kebebasan untuk menolak pandangan atau tafsiran manusia lain?

“Dan janganlah kamu turuti apa yang kamu tiada pengetahuan mengenainya; pendengaran, dan penglihatan, dan hati - semua itu dipertanggungjawapkan”. (Quran: 17:36)

4)      4) Quran 6:94 itu juga juga dengan jelas menekankan sifat kepertanggungjawapan diri (“self-accountability”), Ini bermakna kita sendirilah dan bukan orang lain yang akan dipertanggungjawapkan diatas kepercayaan dan tindak-tanduk kita diatas muka bumi. Kepertanggungjawapan adalah mustahil tanpa kebebasan untuk menilai, dan untuk membuat keputusan bagi diri sendiri. Masing-masing memikul dosa masing-masing and orang lain tidak dipertanggungjawapkan dalam hal ini. Fakta ini diulang beberapa kali didalam Al-Quran walaupun ada pihak-pihak berkepentingan seolah-olah tidak mahu mengakui perkara ini. Sebagai contoh, didalam surah Faathir ayat 18 yang bermaksud:

“Orang yang berdosa tidak akan memikul dosa orang lain; dan jika orang yang berat dosanya memanggil orang lain untuk memikul dosa itu tidak sedikit pun akan dipikulkan untuknya meskipun yang dipanggil itu adalah sanak saudaranya. Sesungguhnya yang kamu dapat memberi peringatan hanyalah kepada orang-orang yang takut kepada Tuhannya (sekalipun) mereka tidak melihat Nya, dan mereka mendirikan solat; dan sesiapa yang menyucikan dirinya, dia hanyalah menyucikan untuk dirinya sendiri. Kepada Allah lah tempat kembali. (Quran: 35:18)

Quran 35:18 amat jelas dalam beberapa perkara dan menjelaskan bahawa peringatan yang diberikan hanya boleh diterima oleh mereka yang takut kepada Tuhan walaupun tidak dapat melihatnya. Pada saya, ayat ini jelas menekankan kepentingan kerohanian atau spiritualism dan bukanlah kepatuhan jasmani atau superficial seperti mana yang dikehendaki melalui paksaan.  Apabila rohani itu betul, jasmani akan secara automtis turut serta. Sebaliknya, jika rohani tidak betul atau tidak yakin, yang tampak ialah jasmani yang munafik atau hipocrtite. Dimana Allah menekankan yang “isi” mengapa pula kita memesongkan manusia dengan menekankan hanya yang “kulit”?

(Begitu juga sila rujuk Quran 53:38 -39)

Berdasarkan latarbelakang ayat-ayat diatas, kita kembali kepada perbincangan proses mempolitikkan agama. Hakikat yang sebenarnya di Negara ini ialah, agama sudah pun dipolitikkan dari pelbagai segi, diantaranya seperti berikut:-

1) Parti politik PAS sendiri namanya adalah “Parti Islam SeMalaysia”. Parti ini meletakkan dasar perjuangannya berlandaskan agama. Bagaimana kita boleh katakan jangan mempolitikkan agama apabila pihak berkuasa telah membenarkan satu parti politik yang memilih agama sebagai dasar perjuangannya ditubuhkan? Undang-undang Negara sendiri telah membenarkan agama dibicarakan dan diperjuangan oeh parti politik didalam arena politik. How more political can religion be when it is already a political platform?

2) Parti politik UMNO pun sering membicarakan isu-isu agama dan sering pula bersaing dengan PAS dalam tafsiran, pendekatan serta program-program “agama”. Isu hudud, umpamanya kini dibicarakan dengan hebat didalam medan politik. Rakyat berpersepsi bahawa perbincangan hudud ini bagi PAS  ialah supaya ahli PAS yakin bahawa PAS masih berpegang kepada pelaksanaan hudud. Bagi UMNO-BN pula ialah untuk menakutkan orang yang bukan agama Islam terhadap hudud. Perbincangan-perbincangan ini langsung tidak akademik atau berilmiah dan tidak langsung dibincang dalam suasana untuk memahami apa itu “hukum hudud” serta nas-nasnya.

3) Berdasarkan kupasan diatas, menjadi kelakar apabila ada sesiapa yang mengatakan “jangan politikkan agama” tanpa memahami bahawa mempolitikkan agama sudah menjadi budaya dan institusi di Negara ini. The politicisation of religion is already a culture and an institution in this country. Disini lah cabarannya kepada individu Muslim dan rakyat apabila agama telah diambil alih oleh orang-orang politik sebagai senjata politik untuk meraih sokongan.

Apabila orang-orang politik mengambil alih sesuatu yang dianggap sensitif seperti agama, maka suara ulama-ulama agama yang jujur, lurus dan berilmu serta suara-suara mufakir-mufakir akan ditenggalamkan oleh tekanan politik.  Ini adalah kerana orang-orang politik akan menggunakan segala yang mungkin untuk mengekalkan monopoli mereka diatas senjata tersebut termasuk mengupah ulama-ulama agama yang berkepentingan dan cetek pemikiran (walaupun mempunyai pendidikan formal yang menarik daripada institusi pengajian tinggi yang dihormati).

Sepanjang kehidupan saya, saya sering mendengar beberapa ulama agama yang apabila ketandusan hujah bergantung kepada pembelaan seperti “aku fasih bahasa Arab dan aku professor yang dihormati” atau “aku adalah daripada Universiti ….”. Orang yang memahami ilmu “straight and crooked thinking” akan tahu bahawa ini adalah satu alat pemikiran songsang atau taktik yang dipanggil sebagai “appeal to authority” bagi mengabui mata sipendengar daripada isu sebenar. Orang ramai masih lagi terkeliru diantara orang yang bermaklumat atau berpendikian formal dengan orang yang mampu berfikir dan berilmu.  Pada saya, Al-Quran juga ada menyebut mengenai taktik-taktik seperti ini yang digunakan oleh orang yang dianggap “pakar” atau “terpelajar” bagi menyesatkan orang ramai.  Mereka yang mesra dengan Al-Quran akan ketahui amaran Allah untuk berwaspada terhadap golongan mengada-gada seperti ini:-

”Dan begitulah Kami mengadakan di tiap-tiap bandar raya, pembesar-pembesar yang berbuat jahat supaya mereka lakukan tipu daya  dalam negeri itu; Dan mereka memperdayakan melainkan dirinya sendiri sedang mereka tidak menyedarinya” (Quran: 6:123)

“Perumpamaan orang-orang yang dipikulkan Taurat kepadanya, kemudian mereka tidak memikulnya adalah ibarat seekor keledai yang memikul kitab-kitab yang tebal. (itulah) seburuk-buruk perumpamaan kaum yang mendustakan ayat-ayat Allah. Dan Allah tidak memberi petunjuk kepada kaum yang zalim”. (Quran: 62:5)

Amatlah salah jika kita berfikir bahawa semua yang berkelulusan daripada Universiti itu mampu berfikir dan berilmu dan sebaliknya semua yang tidak pernah masuk Universiti itu tidak mampu berfikir dan tidak berilmu. Saya sendiri pernah jumpa beberapa orang yang tidak pun lepas tingkatan lima tetapi adalah seorang genius manakala saya pernah temui beberapa professor berkelulusan PhD atau “pakar” tetapi bodoh macam keldai seperti yang digambarkan oleh Allah didalam Quran 62:5. Apatah lagi didalam bidang agama dimana Allah sahajalah yang mengetahui maksud sebenarnya dan Allah sahajalah yang memberi petunjuk kepada sesiapa yang Ia kehendaki.

Perbezaan pandangan dan pendapat semestinya berlaku kerana Allah lah yang telah membenarkannya berlaku (Quran 41:45). Pada saya, perbezaan pendapat ini merupakan satu lagi rahmat serta ujian kepada diri kita. Ia tidak harus dijadikan sebagai satu masalah atau alasan untuk bermusuhan atau menindas. Allah telah pun memberikan jalan keluar kepada kita apabila kita berhadapan dengan pandangan-pandangan yang berbeza, itu pun kalau kita mahu akur kepada firmanNya:-

“Yang mendengar perkataan, dan mengikuti yang paling baik diantaranya. Mereka itulah orang-orang yang diberi petunjuk oleh Allah dan mereka itu lah orang-orang yang berakal”. (Quran: 39:18.

Maka jelas bahawa bila ada perbezaan pandangan, gunakanlah akal untuk berifkir dan menilai dan jangan pula kita berkelakuan seperti jahiliah dengan bergaduh atau bermusuhan dengan orang yang berbeza pandangan dengan kita. Kita dapati pada hari ini permusuhan yang amat ketera didalam dunia Islam dikalangan mereka yang berlainan mazhab dan fahaman seperti Sunnah wal Jamaah dan Syiah.

Apakah politik yang mengakibatkan permusuhan sengit itu berlaku apabila tafsiran agama diangkat sebagai monopoli satu pihak?

Salam.

NOTA: Harap pembaca merujuk kepada naskah Al-Quran masing-masing dan penulis tidak mengkehendaki sesiapa pun bersetuju dengan pandangan penulis diatas. Sebaliknya, penulis berterima kasih sekiranya ada sebarang maklum balas dan pandangan berbeza. Ilmu Allah itu teramat luas untuk dimiliki oleh seorang atau sekumpulan manusia betapa berilmu pun orang itu diiktiraf. Saya sendiri adalah seorang pelajar kehidupan sehingga keakhir hayat saya.

Boleh Kah Pemimpin Bangsawan Faham Nadi Rakyat Biasa?

Mengapa orang nak masuk politik - untuk kuasa dan kekayaan atau untuk berkhidmat kepada Rakyat?

Boleh kah mereka yang tidak pernah alami kehidupan Rakyat kebanyakan menginsafi keperitan dan cabaran kehidupan mereka?

Boleh kah mereka yang tidak pernah bergelut serta menangis semata-mata untuk mendapatkan kerja bagi membiayai keluarga mereka faham betapa pentingnya peluang pekerjaan diwujudkan?

Mampukah mereka yang tidak pernah mengambil pengangkutan awam atau menunggang motosikal bersama tiga orang anak memahami betapa pentingnya pengangkutan awam yang efisien dan mampu untuk rakyat marhain?

Bolehkah pemimpin bangsawan menyelamai keperluan Rakyat kebanyakkan untuk memimpin mereka?

Tanyalah diri secara jujur.

Salam!

Inspiring Speech by MIchelle Obama

Peace!

Education Policy: What is BN's and PR's policy if either wins the GE13?

Education, needless to say is the cornerstone of a country's development and even civilisation. It is an investment into our children to make them good persons, good and useful citizens. WE cannot look at education merely to produce technocrats but weak and valueless human beings.

It is no secret that almost most will agree that generally the education standards in our country, from primary to tertiary is low. We have been having inconsistent education policies for the past many years that has caused major damage to the education of our kids.

Again, I cannot be accused as being excessive when I say that much of our education policy is weak and not well thought out because it has been unnecessarily politicised rather than being focused on quality and proper objectives. The standard of English in our country has declined to an embarrassing low due to politics interfering into our education policy making process. We produce graduates who seem to lack the ability to think and reason.

IF we look at the Government schools, it is plagued with all sorts of problems such as gangsterism, truancy, low quality teachers and school environment. Too much religion in school, especially "Islam", instead of focusing on academic excellence has also contributed in wastage of resources. We seem to lack commitment to give our children the best education possible in the best environment possible.

We may have KLCC and world class physical facilities at KLIA, but our government schools, especially the National Type schools are generally pathetic. This probably explains why there is an increase in private schools. One barometer of how good our schools are is to ask this question: how many of our Ministers and MPs have their own children studying in Government schools?

After more than 50 years, we still have not come up with a solution to the separation and the consequences of having sekolah kebangsaan and vernacular schools.

With all the above problems, wouldnt the Rakyat like to know what is the education policy and plans that BN or PR have before they cast their vote?

Peace !

Video: General Election 13 Debate on People Issues !

Sorry...this is not on GE13. That I am still wishing for!

This is the US Presidential Candidate Debate.



Peace !

What values are our political leaders bringing to their job?

Values are very important. Values will affect the vision and the decision of our leaders. We must be careful to know what values the leaders we want to lead us have.

In our country, under the generally out-dated and archaic political culture that the majority of our politicians still cling onto, public expression of personal values are not allowed. For this reason, the voters and the public cannot know for sure what values each of them have. For this reason also, the kind of values that are being presented by political parties seem very superficial and artificial, some of which sound like they have been created by some political strategists or image consultants.

We have heard many times, some of our political leaders utter the term"Asian values" and then only to forget about it completely until another political occasion requires it. There had also been situations where "Asian values" had been manipulated by shameful politicians to sneakily justify oppression, especially denial of basic human rights. 

Likewise, the term "Islam" and "Islamic values" have been subjected to tremendous abuse, manipulation and trickery by politicians purely for political purposes with total disregard to the sanctity and right to personal faith. In this regard, quite a number of paid clerics and religious "gurus" shamefully abet their political masters in the manipulation and abuse.  This manipulation and abuse of the term "Islam" and "Islamic values" becomes easy for the politicians because they are either backed by mass supporters or by the very culture in our country that has allowed the politicisation of Islam. 

Terms like "Islam" and "Islamic values" have often been abused to condone denial of basic human rights, oppression and denial of women's rights. The voice that pleads that Islam upholds human rights, women's rights and abhors oppression of any sort is drowned by the smooth operation of the politicians and the shouts of their abettors - the paid clerics and the paid mobs.

Islam has become so politicised in the country such that the right and duty of the individual Muslim to practice his faith as he understands it has been taken away by the politicians in this country. Any cleric or scholar or thinker that denounces this control of faith is either pushed into oblivion or equally oppressed in ways that are possible. Alternative views are not only not allowed but often shout down by supporters organised and approved by hidden hands from above.

So, in the scenario of artificiality, superficiality and hypocrisy that has become part of our political culture, what are the values that these politicians hold? Don't you or the voters want to know or has the time not come yet in Malaysia to understand the impact of this question?

I look at both the Pakatan and the BN political parties and when I critically assess them, I am unable to determine with certainty what positive and encouraging values they represent. Often times, they all seem to say one thing today and another the next. Often times, their general behaviour is not consistent with the rare fine speeches they make. More often, their speeches frighten me to think that those are the values they represent.

DO they respect basic human rights? 

Do they even respect the dignity of a human being? Do they understand what "dignity" is? 

I do not know because I do not really know what values they actually hold.

Peace!

President Obama's 2012 DNC Speech Video And Full Text Transcript

"Michelle, I love you. The other night, I think the entire country saw just how lucky I am. Malia and Sasha, you make me so proud.but don't get any ideas, you're still going to class tomorrow. And Joe Biden, thank you for being the best Vice President I could ever hope for. Madam Chairwoman, delegates, I accept your nomination for President of the United States.

The first time I addressed this convention in 2004, I was a younger man; a Senate candidate from Illinois who spoke about hope -- not blind optimism or wishful thinking, but hope in the face of difficulty; hope in the face of uncertainty; that dogged faith in the future which has pushed this nation forward, even when the odds are great; even when the road is long.

Eight years later, that hope has been tested -- by the cost of war; by one of the worst economic crises in history; and by political gridlock that's left us wondering whether it's still possible to tackle the challenges of our time. I know that campaigns can seem small, and even silly. Trivial things become big distractions.   Serious issues become sound bites.

And the truth gets buried under an avalanche of money and advertising. If you're sick of hearing me approve this message, believe me -- so am I. But when all is said and done -- when you pick up that ballot to vote -- you will face the clearest choice of any time in a generation.   Over the next few years, big decisions will be made in Washington, on jobs and the economy; taxes and deficits; energy and education; war and peace -- decisions that will have a huge impact on our lives and our children's lives for decades to come. On every issue, the choice you face won't be just between two candidates or two parties. It will be a choice between two different paths for America. A choice between two fundamentally different visions for the future.

Ours is a fight to restore the values that built the largest middle class and the strongest economy the world has ever known; the values my grandfather defended as a soldier in Patton's Army; the values that drove my grandmother to work on a bomber assembly line while he was gone.

They knew they were part of something larger -- a nation that triumphed over fascism and depression; a nation where the most innovative businesses turned out the world's best products, and everyone shared in the pride and success -- from the corner office to the factory floor. My grandparents were given the chance to go to college, buy their first home, and fulfill the basic bargain at the heart of America's story: the promise that hard work will pay off; that responsibility will be rewarded; that everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules -- from Main Street to Wall Street to Washington, DC.

I ran for President because I saw that basic bargain slipping away. I began my career helping people in the shadow of a shuttered steel mill, at a time when too many good jobs were starting to move overseas. And by 2008, we had seen nearly a decade in which families struggled with costs that kept rising but paychecks that didn't; racking up more and more debt just to make the mortgage or pay tuition; to put gas in the car or food on the table. And when the house of cards collapsed in the Great Recession, millions of innocent Americans lost their jobs, their homes, and their life savings -- a tragedy from which we are still fighting to recover. Now, our friends at the Republican convention were more than happy to talk about everything they think is wrong with America, but they didn't have much to say about how they'd make it right. They want your vote, but they don't want you to know their plan. And that's because all they have to offer is the same prescription they've had for the last thirty years:

"Have a surplus? Try a tax cut."

"Deficit too high? Try another."

"Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning!"

Now, I've cut taxes for those who need it -- middle-class families and small businesses. But I don't believe that another round of tax breaks for millionaires will bring good jobs to our shores, or pay down our deficit. I don't believe that firing teachers or kicking students off financial aid will grow the economy, or help us compete with the scientists and engineers coming out of China. After all that we've been through, I don't believe that rolling back regulations on Wall Street will help the small businesswoman expand, or the laid-off construction worker keep his home.

We've been there, we've tried that, and we're not going back. We're moving forward. I won't pretend the path I'm offering is quick or easy.   I never have.

You didn't elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth. And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort, shared responsibility, and the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.

And by the way -- those of us who carry on his party's legacy should remember that not every problem can be remedied with another government program or dictate from Washington. But know this, America: Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be met. The path we offer may be harder, but it leads to a better place. And I'm asking you to choose that future". 

The Video

Oppa Gangnam Style Rocks the World !!! So did Kolaveri !!! How???

Is it not amazing how talents and creativity can infect the world when politicians and religionists  do not inhibit them?

This is from Korea - everybody is dancing to it and making up their own versions too!!. In less than two months it has become the most talked about new swag. It has more than 120 million hits of Youtube and increasing by millions in few hours. As of this writing, it gets more than a million view per hour making it currently the number 1 Youtube music video based on the amount of song traffic. This is more than the biggest artists in the world namely Justin Bieber, Katy Perry and One Direction; It has been parodied by different people all over the world; It has garnered hundred thousands of likes in facebook, almost a million tweets and majority of people agree that it has not yet reached its peak of success yet. People even predict it will be the first video to reach a billion hits on Youtube. (http://arielparconjr.com/2012/09/09/oppa-gangnam-style-the-rise-of-k-pop/)



Here is the original song - Oppa Gangnam Style.



And this one is from India - Why this Kolaveri DI. Youtube honoured this track with a gold award for getting the most number of hits within a few weeks, reportedly almost 5 million in just few weeks! It has been sung in many languages all over the world ever since.



And here is the original song:



Here is the "Chinese version". Youtube and you will it in Arabic, English, Spanish and so on!



Talents ! = when those with "power" stay away..:)

Peace!

Stamping on Najib's Face ???

While we celebrate and welcome freedom of expression (which we must protect), it is equally important to ask ourselves whether we will condone its abuse.

Recently, we have the incidents of some people stamping on YAB Datuk Seri Najib's photo. This is also clear from the "Janji DiCapati" clip. Is this the kind of freedom of expression that that will help the development of parliamentary democracy?

The production of the song itself is arguably creative and provides a different view, rightly or wrongly. That, I have no problem. 

However, under the current general political, economic and social conditions in the country, I cannot agree that it is necessary to stamp on the face of the Prime Minister of the country who is where he is democratically and constitutionally. Freedom of expression should not offend the sanctity of parliamentary democracy. Freedom of expression, on the other hand, should uphold the institution of parliamentary democracy.

When  an incident involving YAB Tuan Lim Guan Eng's son was politicised some time back, I wrote on this blog chastising such methods of politicking. I pleaded with rational citizens not to allow the development of such political behaviour in this country. 

Likewise, I am now pleading not to allow politics to undermine the workings of a parliamentary democracy. We have to learn to respect institutions that have been constitutionally set up. 

Critique and undermining are two different things altogether.

Peace !

Happy Merdeka - Are you truly merdeka???

Without the slightest of doubt, we are certainly happy that we have been freed from British rule. This means that we are now free to decide the future of our own Nation and how to distribute the Nation's resources.

We are also free to decide how we want the Nation to be developed and how we, as citizens want to be developed into human beings.

But....

Who is the "we" that is free to decide on the future of this Nation? Is it you and me, the common folks in the country or is it merely the elitist class together with the capitalists?

What is the point of being free from the bondage of British rule only to be enslaved by the elitists, the capitalists and the elite religious class?

Is that the kind of freedom or merdeka that your forefathers imagined for you?

That, at the end of the day, you life should be confined to the dictates of the capitalists who will decide how and where you live? AT the mercy of the "economy" designed by the wealthy elitists which makes you a slave to the banks, to the mega supermarkets (that determine how and what you eat) and so on?

That at the end of the day, if you are fated to belong to the low income group, that you shall be housed in pigeon holes called low cost flats and that too crowded in one area?

That at the end of the day, even how you want to relate to your own creator will be decided, not by your own conscience, but by salaried religious officers? And often times under pain of punishment by the law for not confirming to the State's definition of what your religion should be and how it should be?

Can you be truly merdeka when you cannot even decide what's good for your own soul?

I am happy that this Nation is free from British rule.

I only wish we can be free to be human beings.

Peace and Happy Merdeka.

Salam Aidil Fitri !

Lovely voice and so cute - Lego House Cover