Sidang Media: Pilihanraya Bebas Keganasan

Hari ini pada pukul 3 petang team Rapera bersama dengan lebih kurang 30 NGO-NGO, peguam-peguam, dan individu-individu berkumpul untuk menyatakan hasrat mereka supaya PRU 13 ini bebas daripada keganasan.

Berikut adalah antara saranan-saranan yang dipersembahkan pada sidang media tersebut:

Disebabkan kesedaran ini serta kecintaan kita pada Negara, kami menyarankan perkara-perkara berikut:-

·        agar calon-calon lebih bertanggungjawab dan menapis ucapan mereka supaya tidak menyentuh perkara-perkara yang berbaur perkauman, agama, peribadi yang tiada kaitan untuk menjatuhkan pihak lain. Ia adalah untuk mengelakkan perselisihan dan politik keganasan berlaku akibat sikap tidak berpuas hati sesetengah pihak lain.

·        Calon-calon harus menampakkan etika dan bertanding dalam suasana sihat tanpa mewujudkan kebencian dalam diri penyokong mereka terhadap calon lain yang bertanding,  sekali gus mengelakkan unsur keganasan.

·        Calon-calon juga harus bertanggung jawab dalam memimpin dan menasihati penyokong-penyokong mereka supaya beradab dan tidak sesekali mencetuskan sebarang provokasi.

·        Kami juga menyarankan supaya dalam pilihan raya ini Islam tidak dipolitikkan sehingga boleh mencetuskan perpecahan diantara rakyat Muslim. Perpecahan dan pergaduhan diantara masyarakat Melayu adalah merbahaya untuk kestabilan negera kerana mereka merupakan populasi yang tertinggi di Negara ini. Sebarang keretakan serius dalam masyarakat Melayu akan memberi kesan buruk kepada Negara amnya.

·        Calon-calon juga diingatkan supaya tidak menghina atau membuat sesuatu yang boleh ditafsir sebagai percubaan untuk meruntuhkan institusi Rakyat yang bertanggunjawab terhadap keamanan Negara seperti Agensi Penguatkuasaan PDRM, SPR, Barisan pertahanan Negara dan lain-lain. Ini adalah penting untuk mengelak sebarang keganasan selepas keputusan pilihanraya diumumkan.

·        Kami menyeru supaya calon-calon fokus kepada isu-isu dan perkara-perkara yang dapat mendatangkan manfaat kepada Rakyat dan Negara daripada membangkitkan isu-isu yang bertujuan untuk menanam perasaan kebencian.

·        Kami difahamkan bahawa agensi penguatkuasa keselamatan negara sudah bersiap sedia untuk memantau dan melakukan segala sesuatu yang dibenarkan oleh undang-undang Negara untuk menjaga keselamatan Rakyat amnya. Kami menyokong penuh usaha pasukan keselamatan untuk menjalankan tanggungjawab mereka.

·        Kami juga menyarankan pihak penguatkuasa keselamatan mengambil langkah-langkah awal untuk menepis sebarang rancangan untuk mencetuskan kekecohan jika terdapat intelligence reports dan bertindak dengan tegas dalam lingkungan undang-undang Negara.

·        Pihak SPR juga telah mengeluarkan panduan mengenai etika berkempen dan tatacara kelakuan penyokong. Harap calon-calon baca dan amalkannya.

·        Kami menyeru supaya semua calon-calon membuat kenyataan rasmi mengutuk sebarang keganasan politik serta sebarang tingkah laku intimidasi terhadap sesiapa.

Akhir sekali, kita yang hadir disini yakin bahawa kesemua Rakyat Malaysia mahukan satu proses pilihanraya yang bebas daripada keganasan. Terima kasih juga kepada semua rapera-rapera yang telah berkerja keras dalam masa yang begitu suntuk untuk menjayakan sidang media ini.

Salam

Politics and Politicians - George Carlin

Relevant to our society with some modifications?



Peace

Pilihanraya atau Silap Mata ?

Menjelang pilihan raya, pelbagai ceramah dianjurkan oleh semua pihak yang bertanding.

Pelbagai isu dibangkitkan kini.

Pelbagai taktik dan kaedah digunakan dan dipersembahan.

Adakah silap mata juga akan timbul? Ada silap mata yang boleh merugikan dan menghancurkan kesejahteraan.


Bagaimana pula peranan fakta dan track record?

Pandai-pandai lah menilai.

Salam.

DAP Deregistered After PRU ???

Politicians are at it again - manipulating facts to gain public sympathy and VOTES and probably also to prevent the Registrar of Societies to do its job in  accordance with the law, This time, the politicians who are being naughty are from the DAP.

There was a complaint against the election of the CEC members by DAP MEMBERS themselves. The ROS has to investigate as it procedurally should. Since investigations are ongoing, the status of the CEC in the future is therefore uncertain in law. A full inquiry has to be done by ROS to determine whether there is any validity in the complaint by the DAP's members. 

At this moment, TODAY, the CEC has not been declared invalid nor has DAP been deregistered. The Election Commission (SPR) has also recognised the '"rocket" symbol and has allowed tis symbol to be used in this PRU13. NO issue on symbol! Period.

SO, any talk of DAP using another symbol to contest has no basis in law but purely an election tactic to garner sympathy votes and to confuse the voters. It is also aimed to politically associate ROS with BN so as to achieve various objectives - including  to pressure ROS not to act on the complaints by the DAP. I think we should stop having different sets of laws for politicians regardless of from which political party they come from.

It is shameful to use these tactics to trick the ignorant sections of the public to vote for DAP. It surely sounds like dirty politics.

Lets assume that investigations finally show that the CEC was not elected in accordance with the law. There are several possibilities. Lets assume the "worst" possibility - DAP is deregistered (which I doubt). If DAP is deregistered  will it affect the status of the DAP candidates who may have won in PRU13? 

The answer is: NO ! Recall that UMNO was once deregistered and it did not affect the status of the UMNO MPs and Aduns. They still remain as valid members of Parliament and State Assemblies. Let us not forget that independents do not stand on the platform of any political parties. There is no legal prerequisite that an election candidate must belong to a political party - any solo goreng pisang seller also can be a candidate.

Peace !

When do you stop being immigrant?

If we do not Vote carefully, we lose and only the Politicians win!

BY now, the Malaysian voters already know who will be the candidates from all sides. Any remaining doubts will be removed on 20^th of April, which is the nomination day. Polling day has already been fixed on the 5th of May 2013. Hence from the 20^th of April to the midnight of 4^th May, we will be witnessing election campaigning from the candidates.

Election campaigning is of course intended to persuade the voters who have yet to decide. It is never influences the hard core supporters of political parties. The hard core supporters owe their loyalty to the party and not to the Rakyat’s interest. There is also another specie of voters who will vote and persuade others to vote based on their narrow, selfish interests. Again, these people will not be influenced by the campaigning period.

To be able to vote wisely, it is important to have as much facts and information as possible about the political parties and the candidates. The more accurate information and facts that you have, the more able you are to make better decision objectively. Unfortunately, most of us are prone to subjectivity, sentiments and emotions – something we should be wary of when we attend election rallies and hear their fiery speeches.

For sure each side will expose the weaknesses and defects of the other side – which is good for the Rakyat to know! The voters then will have to weigh the weaknesses and the strengths to make a decision as to who deserves their vote. There will also be “spinning” and various “tactics” used to influence the voters. We must be able to identify these accurately so that we do not become a victim of misinformation.

The qualification, experience and the overall personality of the candidate is important. It is not just a simple criterion of “new or old faces”, “young or old”, “religious or otherwise”. It has got to be an overall list of items that you may want to include in your own checklist. After all, the bottom line has always been that NO political party has a system that is able to throw up the best of citizens for political leadership. So, we are left with choosing the best from who are available.

At the end of the day, make sure it is the RAKYAT and not the politician that wins.

Good luck in your voting and hope you make the right choice in the interest of our Nation.

Peace !

Inside Story - Is it time for change in Malaysia?

Everywhere is War: European Warlords Strike Again - This Time in Mali

By Gerald A. Perreira

Until the philosophy
that holds one race superior
and another inferior
is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned
Everywhere is war

Anyone listening to the imperialists and corporate media reports/analyses of what is taking place in Mali,   will be left feeling confused. But we know that confusion and commotion are an integral part of the imperialists’ game plan.

Both the Bible and the Quran warn us that the devil is the author of lies and confusion.

The Hon Elijah Muhammad taught us to recognize the nature of the devil and how the devil operates in the contemporary context. He taught us to see the devil not as some mythical figure, but as a reality, a   living force moving amongst us, who knows its time is up and will do anything to maintain its rule upon the earth. This worldview is way outside the bounds of Western discourse, but integral to an understanding of what is really taking place in Mali and across the region.  

The situation in Mali is not that confusing – actually it’s as simple as this:

Go back many years. Imagine you are the Brother Leader, Muammar Qaddafi. Your goal is one of a unified, strong Africa, able to throw off the yoke of imperialism and neo-colonialism. You know that Africa’s liberation cannot be realized without unity, and also that the first step on this long journey is to rid Africa of its remaining inept, neo-colonial regimes.

Leading the African Union meant that Qaddafi had to deal at a state to state level with the very neo-colonial regimes that he also knew had to be removed. To further complicate the matter, Qaddafi had long-standing and strong relationships with a number of liberation movements, revolutionary organizations and parties throughout Africa, that were opposing the neo-colonial regimes in some of these countries.

All sides of the political and ideological divide knew this about Qaddafi – that he had assisted liberation struggles throughout Africa, and for that matter throughout the world, with the sole intention of achieving African liberation and the victory of the oppressed worldwide. That his intentions were genuine was clear, since in many instances, under his leadership, Libya provided assistance to groups which definitely did more harm than good to Libya’s geo-political interests, simply complicating things for this often beleaguered nation.

I recently heard a National Geographic travel writer, trying to pass himself off as an expert on North Africa, and in particular, Libya and Mali, saying that Qaddafi played one tribe off against the other. What nonsense!

When I hear European journalists and some African factotums talking about Qaddafi playing one tribe off against the other, then I realize that we have to tell this story. Muammar Qaddafi was listened to by all sides, which is why he was so often asked to mediate in negotiations to resolve conflicts. Only someone who had not been at these meetings, and did not understand the ancient and complex nature of the African environment, could dismiss what Qaddafi was doing as ‘playing one off against the other’.

On Our Own Terms – African Solutions to African ProblemsThose involved in the struggle for African unity know that mediating in the affairs of tribes cannot be achieved within the confines of the Westminster model of governance. Qaddafi was struggling to make peace in Africa in order to lay the groundwork for real development and liberation. As already mentioned, he understood that the only way for Africa to be free was for Africa and Africans, on the continent and in the Diaspora, to unite into a power bloc, and he also knew that it was imperative to apply African solutions to African problems.

The Libyan Jamahiriya, emerging as it did out of an African-Arab cultural environment, does not separate the individual from the community, but rather sees both as interdependent and part of an integral whole. In such a worldview, values which solidify and integrate the community are emphasized, while at the same time recognizing the rights, responsibility and role of the individual. This is in contrast to the liberal democratic tradition of the European community of nations or so-called ‘developed world’, where the individual is considered ‘absolute’ and where rugged individualism is encouraged.

In this framework of inter-connectedness, the prosperity of one means the prosperity of the other. Instead of pitting the interests of the individual and the community against one another, as is found in both capitalist and communist states, African communalism, or what Qaddafi refers to as ‘natural socialism’, recognizes the interests of all.

African philosopher, Polycarp Ikuenobe points out that:

‘While Africans recognize that individuals have natural rights, which derive from their natural individuality, interests and desires, these rights and individuality would be abstract and meaningless except when they are contextualized, made substantive, given material contents, and made meaningful in the context of a community.’

The detached, atomized individual is a European concept and is alien to the African traditions of Ubuntu, Ujamaa and Ishtirakiyah, principles which form the foundation of  systems of governance based on African communalism  or what was referred to in the Libyan Jamahiriya as ‘natural socialism’.

Where the multiparty system, emerging as it did out of the European cultural and historical context tends to fragment and divide, the Jamahiriyan system seeks to build social cohesion, unity and partnership.

In the Green Book, Qaddafi outlines clearly the social architecture that derives from what he understands to be a ‘natural order’:

The tribe is an extended family that has grown as a result of procreation. The tribe is in effect, a large extended family, and it then follows that the nation is the tribe that has also grown as a result of procreation. The nation is a large extended tribe; and the world is the nation that has diversified into a multitude of nations. The world therefore is an enlarged nation.

The relationship that binds a family together is the same relationship which binds the tribe together, the nation and the world. Nevertheless, the larger the multitude of people, the weaker this bond becomes… This is a sociological fact, denied only by the ignorant.

…This is why it is very important for the human community to preserve the cohesion of the family, the tribe, the nation and the world, in order to profit from the advantages, benefits, values and ideals yielded by the solidarity, cohesion, unity, familiarity and love of the family, tribe, nation and humanity...the tribe provides its members with the natural benefits and social advantages that the family provides for its members, for the tribe is a secondary family. It is worth mentioning here that an individual may sometimes behave in a dishonorable manner that a family will not condone: yet because the family is relatively small in size, this individual will not be aware of its supervision. In contrast, individuals, as members of the tribe, cannot be free of its watchful eyes.’

Qaddafi understood the primacy of ‘culture’ and that the cultural context is the foundation out of which all ideologies and social systems emerge.  He agreed with the view of Afrocentric psychologist, Wade Nobles, that culture is ‘a general design for living and patterns for interpreting reality’. That is why he chose to work so closely with traditional leaders/chiefs throughout Africa and the Tuaregs of the Sahel. Both groups had managed to keep their African traditions/culture alive, despite having been marginalized under colonialism and by successive neo-colonial regimes. This conception of culture is also why, from the outset of the Al Fateh revolution in 1969, Qaddafi necessarily rejected the Western multi-party parliamentary system and Western ideologies.

In 2010, at a meeting in Tripoli, Qaddafi addressed 175 traditional leaders from across the African continent. He told them that ‘African traditions were being replaced with Western culture and that multi party politics was destroying Africa’.   The chiefs agreed, accusing Africa’s political leaders of ‘neglecting traditional values and marginalizing Africa’s indigenous institutions.’

Yahaya Ezemoo Ndu, leader of Nigeria’s African Renaissance Party and Chairperson of the newly formed Pan-African international, ARM, in a recent interview, quoted Professor Catherine Achaolonu-Olumba, when he warned Africans that if they failed to recognize the importance of their own culture and cultural institutions, they would never achieve liberation:

‘To all Africans, Blacks and all deprived peoples all over the world, we say culture is everything! Those who took your cultures from you took everything from you. Your culture is your life, your past, your present, your science, your religion, your closest link to the One True God. You are your culture and your culture is all you have – it is your link to all knowledge available in the Universal Mind of the Creator. Your culture is you…’

Ndu went on to say:

‘Most of the problems confronting Africans are traceable to inappropriate governance systems. The Western World, led by the United States, has been forcing electocracy down the throat of Africans, claiming that it is ‘democracy’, while in fact, the United States does not experience, and has never experienced true democracy’.

There are over 100 tribes in Libya alone innumerable tribal groups throughout Africa. The concept of the ‘tribe’ is misunderstood in European political discourse, and tribal forms of organization are automatically dismissed as being backward and having no merit. However, as Qaddafi rightfully acknowledges, family and tribe are the basis of all African societies and tribal forms of organization will never be relinquished. The current nation-state borders in Africa are colonial constructs, and often secondary to indigenous concepts of tribe and tribal nations. That is why tribes do not always recognize nation-state boundaries drawn up and left by the colonizers, and furthermore why some tribes, even if they exist across a number of ‘nation-state’ borders, can be considered as constituting a nation in and of themselves.

This is one of the reasons why the imposition of the alien system of multi-partyism into Africa, where tribal loyalties are so honored, has led to disaster. Political parties can never demand the loyalty and support that one’s tribe can. Eventually, the multi-party system exacerbates any tribal conflict that exists and even creates tribal conflict where it did not previously exist. It actually works against the existing indigenous forms of social organization, creating chaos and failed states.

Abd-l Alkalimat points out the contradiction of importing the very systems which have been used to destroy us:

‘The basis for our social, political and economic systems can better be found among the communal traditions of our people rather than among those who have used their systems to oppress if not annihilate us.’

The success of a given system is entirely dependent on whether the particular system in place is in tune with and meets the needs of the people it is meant to serve.

As Africans, our struggle must be focused on achieving our inalienable right to self-determination – to develop our own political and economic systems and put in place our own political structures, free of interference from the outside world. Only we can turn the tables – only we can achieve our own liberation from systems that continue to keep us in a state of dependency and disarray. 

Talk is cheap…
Bringing about the kind of unity, prosperity, and dignity that could lead to an independent and democratic United States of Africa is a long and tumultuous journey, which not everyone would have the courage to embark on. Theory is one thing, and a vital component, however, concrete action has to start somewhere. Qaddafi and the revolutionary Libyan Jamahiriya put Libya’s wealth where their mouth was and began to work with others to support the coming together of Africa, by upgrading telecommunications systems, enhancing infrastructural development, engaging in joint commercial projects, building educational institutions, providing healthcare, advancing  loans to African governments, and the setting up of African based lending institutions with plans for an African currency, which would have put an end to our continued dependency on the Euro/American Empire and their financial institutions.

Much analysis is produced by those who are not actively engaged in the struggle to change the world, but engaged only in interpreting it. They provide us with endless academic critiques of those who are active, finding fault with everything.  The late African revolutionary, Kwame Ture, always said, ‘never to waste our energies in lengthy conversation or debate with anyone who was not actively involved in the struggle for liberation in one way or other, since they would never be able to fully understand the issues at stake and would necessarily be dealing only with abstraction.’

Anyone who is engaged in struggle knows that the world is a brutal and complex arena. African unity is a journey that is fraught with overwhelming challenges that cannot always be resolved the way we would wish. This is not to act as an apologist for mistakes made, but simply to acknowledge that if criticism is to be constructive then it must be part of a discourse that is anchored in the reality of what it means to fight imperialism and injustice on all its fronts in 2013.  

The intellectual warrior, Franz Fanon understood this, based on his own involvement in the Algerian struggle for liberation, when he boldly claimed,

'Everybody will have to be compromised in the fight for the common good. No one has clean hands; there are no innocents and no onlookers. We all have dirty hands; we are all soiling them in the swamps of our country and in the terrifying emptiness of our brains. Every onlooker is either a coward or a traitor'.

As we say in the Caribbean – ‘yuh think it easy?’

The Mali story…When the progressive leader, Amadou Toure, was elected president of Mali in 2002, Muammar Qaddafi welcomed him onto the scene. Toure believed that African conflicts/problems should be resolved within the framework of the African Union and he supported the vision of a United States of Africa. In such an environment, Qaddafi was able to broker a peace agreement between the Tuaregs and the Toure administration. Qaddafi had offered the Tuaregs what no one else had – to live in Libya with all of the benefits that that brought – free healthcare, education, housing etc. This was a gift to the Tuareg people and also in line with Qaddafi’s understanding of this part of the world outside of the boundaries of the artificial borders created by colonialism. In fact, the Libyan Jamahiriya had authorized Africans from all over the continent to cross its borders freely.

Once Qaddafi was murdered and Libya was handed over to the current barbaric alliance of Arab supremacists, monarchists and Al-Qaeda affiliated Wahabi-Salafi heretics, the Tuaregs, many of whom had been integrated into the Jamahiriyan military since the early 70s, had no choice but to return home.

What happened next?The National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), largely made up of Tuareg returnees, laid claim to a land mass in Northern Mali which they call Azawad. They claimed Azawad as their ancestral homeland and it came under their jurisdiction with little opposition from the Malian army.

In 2009, there was a major Tuareg uprising against the Malian government and Muammar Qaddafi was asked by both sides to play a mediating role. During these negotiations, President Toure made a number of concessions, promising to address the legitimate long term grievances of the Tuareg. These promises were not honored, and with Qaddafi no longer there to guide and mediate, and the Tuaregs now being forced to return to Mali, they had no choice but to claim their homeland. 

  

Muammar Qaddafi inspects troops wearing  traditional Tuareg dress

President Toure quickly realized that a military solution was not possible and agreed to enter into negotiations with representatives of the MNLA. Days later, seemingly from out of nowhere, we saw a full blown coup in Mali. The US trained coup leader, Captain Amadou Sanogo, opposed the idea of Tuareg autonomy. At the time of the coup he claimed that President Toure was benefitting financially from the drug trade, suggesting that this was why he was ready to make concessions to the MNLA. This was untrue. For one thing the MNLA are not the ones who are involved in the expansive and lucrative drug trade in the Sahel – in fact they oppose it. It is well documented that the drug traffickers are Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and their front organizations across the region. That is why Qaddafi said that the so-called rebels in Benghazi were not only Al-Qaeda affiliated but were on drugs. It is interesting to note that Captain Sanogo was photographed recently with US ambassador, John Price, and the two were said to be laughing and talking like long lost friends. President Toure ended up in Senegal.

Next Move…
Also, from out of nowhere - Salafi militias enter Mali - Ansar Al Dine and the Movement for Unity and Jihad. Groups never before seen or heard of in Mali – made up primarily of non Malians and backed by guess who? Correct, the Gulf State Pretenders to Islam and NATO. They had one shared objective – to crush the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), since they shared Qaddafi’s vision for a united Africa and would have set up a Jamahiriya type state - Azawad style. The MNLA also adhere to an Islamic theology of liberation, rather than the Wahabi aberration parading as Islam, that the Gulf States and their imperialist backers depend on for their continued repression and plunder. The setting up of such a liberated zone would have provided a refuge for those loyal to Qaddafi and his ideas.

And so, they got rid of Toure and all hope of a peaceful solution to the issue of an autonomous Azawad and they unleashed their dogs of war, the Islamists, into Mali to beat back the progressive National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA). The MNLA, however, were too clever to be seduced into an all out war with these foreign and reactionary Islamist forces, financed by one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism, the Qatari ruling elite, so they melted into the population, as only a liberation force with the backing of the people can do.

The MNLA had made it abundantly clear from the outset that they had no interest in seizing any territory outside of Azawad, including the capital Bamako, or causing havoc in Mali. This further ruffled the imperialists, since there is nothing they dislike more than the prospect of peaceful, progressive African based solutions to African conflicts.

With no MNLA to fight, the Islamists then proceeded to wreck havoc in Mali as they do everywhere they are deployed, and went on a killing spree and the French invaded to reign in their own proxy army,   definitely not to save Malians from the brutality of the Islamists.  The French realized that they had better reign in the dogs of war they themselves had unleashed, lest, unsuspectingly, while using the Islamists to prevent the huge deposits of uranium, which France depends on for their continued energy supply, from falling into MNLA hands, the Islamists themselves stole Mali from under France’s nose.

European Warlords in Re-scramble for African ResourcesUnfortunately for Africa, we have everything that the US and Europe want and need. The story is not as complex in Mali, or for that matter throughout Africa, as they would have us believe - actually it is quite simple – the lifestyle enjoyed by Europeans on this earth – life as only they know it - is over without unfettered access to African resources.

With Qaddafi out of the way, one of the biggest remaining threats to their free reign in Africa is African resistance movements which are loyal to his vision. Groups such as the MNLA and JEM are high priority targets for imperialist military operations and their killer drones, a weapon straight out of their own Sci-Fi, which enables them to kill by remote control.  The US, imposing itself as the judge, jury and executioner, has killed thousands of human persons this way, while at the same time posturing as the world’s leading democrats. Their world is undeniably bizarre and Orwellian. 

Unmanned Predator Drone firing missile

It is estimated that there are over 60 Drone bases in the US alone and more than 60 across the globe.  The most recently installed Drone base is in Niger, Northwest Africa. The plan is for such bases to be installed throughout the continent. US president, Barack Hussein Obama, has shown himself to be little more than a warlord and black only in color. Mentally incarcerated, he is the perfect candidate for the role of first black US president – and what a public relations coup: to have a black man at the helm when re-colonizing Africa.

While the Euro-American ruling elite plunder the world’s resources, cynically paying lip service to the ‘American Dream’, the tragedy is that Barak Obama seems to believe in it. He has taken it upon himself to target for execution, at whim, anyone, anywhere in the world, whom the Empire deems necessary to exterminate, in order to maintain White Supremacy. Make no mistake: the White House is still the White House.

 Licensed to Kill

 It is reported that John Brennan, whose official title is Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Assistant to the President, draws up the weekly list of those targeted for assassination by drones. These lists are then signed off by the President at a meeting of ‘counterterrorism security officials’ (War Council) held every Tuesday, now dubbed ‘kill list Tuesdays’ in White House circles.

Last year one of those targeted for assassination was Dr Khalid Ibrahim, leader of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), one of the largest groups within the Sudanese Revolutionary Front. He and some senior members of JEM had also been forced to leave Libya and were working to establish a liberated zone in Kordofan.

Only days ago, Tahir El-Faki, a spokesperson for the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), accused the Bashir regime in Khartoum of transporting Salafi jihadists from Mali to North Darfur. He added that some of them had already been in Darfur before being moved to Mali last year. It was reported that the ‘Jihadists’, who are from different countries in the region, including Niger, Chad and Algeria, had been transported using Qatari airplanes. Africa is up for grabs.

And finally, there is the hugely threatening factor of China’s rise as an economic superpower on the global stage. However, China, which is also completely dependent on African resources for its continued economic growth, has an entirely different approach. Not interested in military expansion, they pursue economic and commercial expansion instead. In contrast to the Euro/American Empire, China is willing to negotiate a fair deal within a win-win framework, and is therefore becoming a preferred trading partner for many African states, especially those who want to free themselves from their dependence on economic relations with the unjust and hypocritical Empire. To disrupt the increasingly closer ties between China and Africa is a priority for the imperialists, and so an already crumbling Empire, threatened with its own extinction, is now in full military swing.

Malcolm X knew the enemy well:

‘…when you and I begin to look at him and see the language he speaks, the language of a brute, the language of someone who has no sense of morality, who absolutely ignores law – when you and I learn how to speak his language, then we can communicate. But we will never communicate talking one language while he’s talking another language. He’s talking the language of violence.’  

Fact is they will never stop warring for Africa’s resources until we Africans put an end to the fight ourselves. That is why imperialism can only be buried once and for all in Africa…

And until that day,
The African continent
Will not know peace,
We Africans will fight - we find it necessary -
And we know we shall win
As we are confident
In the victory
Of good over evil

ReferencesIkuenobe Polycarp, Philosophical Perspectives on Communalism and Morality in African Traditions, Lexington Books, OX, UK, 2006

Ndu, Yahaya Ezemoo, Africa’s Role in the Global World, African Executive Magazine, Online Edition, February, 2011

Nobles, Wade, Africanity and the Black Family, Black Family Institute Publications CA, USA, 1985

Qaddafi, Muammar, The Green Book Ithaca Press, UK, 2005 (first published 1975)

Shabazz, Malik (Malcolm X), By Any Means Necessary, Pathfinder, NY, USA, 1970

Title, opening and closing remarks from a speech delivered to the United Nations General Assembly by Haile Selassie in 1963, and later put to music by Robert Nesta Marley. 

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

Gerald A. Perreira is a founding member of the Guyanese organizations Joint Initiative for Human Advancement and Dignity and Black Consciousness Movement Guyana (BCMG). He lived in Libya for many years, served in the Green March, an international battalion for the defense of the Al Fateh revolution and was an executive member of the World Mathaba based in Tripoli. He is the International Secretary for the newly formed, Afrocentric Pan-African International – ARM (African Revolutionary Movement).

This article originally appeared at BayView, National Black Newspaper at this website: http://sfbayview.com/2013/everywhere-is-war-european-warlords-strike-again-this-time-in-mali/

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.