This blogpost is now featured in the book, The Quran and I :)
Monday, August 31, 2009
Reading The Quran 2
Another contribution from my Singaporean friend :) Reading the Qur’an II
No matter how intelligent we are, we will never know everything. Our views, ideas, perspective, judgments, prejudices and demands for rights are skewed by our limited knowledge. But faith is beyond knowledge… it pierces into the soul and moulds the heart.
“When the Qur’an is read, listen to it with attention, and hold your peace that you may receive Mercy.”[7:204]
“Alif Lam Ra. These are the Symbols (or Verses) of the perspicuous Book. We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an, in order that you may learn wisdom” [12:1-2]
“We know indeed that they say, ‘It is a man that teaches him.’ The tongue of him they wickedly point to is foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.”[16:103]
“We send down (stage by stage) in the Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy to those who believe: to the unjust it causes nothing but loss after loss”[17:82]
“Ha Mim. By the Book that makes things clear – We have made it a Qur’an in Arabic, that you may be able to understand (and learn wisdom). And verily, it is in the Mother of the Book, in our Presence, high (in dignity), full of wisdom.”[43:1-4]
It is quite incredible how many people in the non-Arabic speaking world read the Qur’an in Arabic (some even memorise it) without understanding the language. I have often heard the criticism that the demand to read the Qur’an in Arabic causes non-Arabic speaking Muslims not to know its meaning - Muslims do not understand their own sacred text, they read blindly.
Of course the ideal is to read the Qur’an in Arabic and understand it. But many of us do not consider learning Arabic a priority in the way we view learning the English language (or even Mandarin, nowadays). Nonetheless, I would be slow to advocate that it is sufficient to only read the translations of the Qur’an.
I was lucky enough to be in a household where I would wake up to the sound of my father reading the Qur’an in the mornings. He was the early riser who would continue to read the Qur’an after he does his prayers at dawn. I would wake up and hear his recitations. It was very comforting to hear the melodious sounds even before I opened my eyes, the rhythm went deep inside and became a part of me, my morning serenade
Sometimes I saw my father in tears as he recited the Qur’an. Considering that my father, a typical Arab man, would normally not show any emotion, these occasions moved me. It made my father, more than just a father, human.
It is inexplicable and I do not fully understand how it works, but I know that the years of waking up to my father’s Qur’anic recitations have done wonders to keep and protect my faith. It is like no matter how far I go away, it will keep me from going too far astray, it will cause me to look for the solitary mosque in a predominantly non-Muslim country.
I always know that there is talent in the family (we can sing), but instead of singing for the purpose entertaining, perhaps the talent is best meant to recite the Qur’an to benefit the little ones. I know I benefited from it.
No matter how intelligent we are, we will never know everything. Our views, ideas, perspective, judgments, prejudices and demands for rights are skewed by our limited knowledge. But faith is beyond knowledge… it pierces into the soul and moulds the heart.
“When the Qur’an is read, listen to it with attention, and hold your peace that you may receive Mercy.”[7:204]
“Alif Lam Ra. These are the Symbols (or Verses) of the perspicuous Book. We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an, in order that you may learn wisdom” [12:1-2]
“We know indeed that they say, ‘It is a man that teaches him.’ The tongue of him they wickedly point to is foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.”[16:103]
“We send down (stage by stage) in the Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy to those who believe: to the unjust it causes nothing but loss after loss”[17:82]
“Ha Mim. By the Book that makes things clear – We have made it a Qur’an in Arabic, that you may be able to understand (and learn wisdom). And verily, it is in the Mother of the Book, in our Presence, high (in dignity), full of wisdom.”[43:1-4]
It is quite incredible how many people in the non-Arabic speaking world read the Qur’an in Arabic (some even memorise it) without understanding the language. I have often heard the criticism that the demand to read the Qur’an in Arabic causes non-Arabic speaking Muslims not to know its meaning - Muslims do not understand their own sacred text, they read blindly.
Of course the ideal is to read the Qur’an in Arabic and understand it. But many of us do not consider learning Arabic a priority in the way we view learning the English language (or even Mandarin, nowadays). Nonetheless, I would be slow to advocate that it is sufficient to only read the translations of the Qur’an.
I was lucky enough to be in a household where I would wake up to the sound of my father reading the Qur’an in the mornings. He was the early riser who would continue to read the Qur’an after he does his prayers at dawn. I would wake up and hear his recitations. It was very comforting to hear the melodious sounds even before I opened my eyes, the rhythm went deep inside and became a part of me, my morning serenade
Sometimes I saw my father in tears as he recited the Qur’an. Considering that my father, a typical Arab man, would normally not show any emotion, these occasions moved me. It made my father, more than just a father, human.
It is inexplicable and I do not fully understand how it works, but I know that the years of waking up to my father’s Qur’anic recitations have done wonders to keep and protect my faith. It is like no matter how far I go away, it will keep me from going too far astray, it will cause me to look for the solitary mosque in a predominantly non-Muslim country.
I always know that there is talent in the family (we can sing), but instead of singing for the purpose entertaining, perhaps the talent is best meant to recite the Qur’an to benefit the little ones. I know I benefited from it.
Ignorant Muslims - Another comment - From Utusan Malaysia
Bersihkan imej Islam akibat tindakan si jahil
Oleh ABDULLAH BUKHARI ABDUL RAHIM
TINDAKAN sekumpulan pihak yang mengarak serta memijak kepala lembu ketika membuat bantahan tentang cadangan pembinaan kuil di Selangor sebenarnya suatu tindakan yang jahil bersulamkan kebiadapan melampau.
Kebiadapan mereka itu walaupun kelihatan seperti membela hak orang Islam di Malaysia, namun ia jelas ketara tambah memburukkan lagi imej Islam di mata golongan bukan Islam.
Label dan momokan Islam sebagai agama yang ganas seolah-olah sudah disahkan oleh tindakan bodoh mereka.
Islam amat bertegas tentang penghinaan kepada agama lain yang bakal mengundang permusuhan yang tidak berkesudahan kerana setiap insan akan bermati-matian mempertahankan akidah anutan mereka walau dengan nyawa sendiri.
Larangan provokasi ini dijelaskan oleh al-Quran, maksudnya:
Dan janganlah kamu cerca benda-benda yang mereka sembah yang lain dari Allah, kerana mereka kelak, akan mencerca Allah secara melampaui batas dengan ketiadaan pengetahuan. Demikianlah Kami memperelokkan pada pandangan tiap-tiap umat akan amal perbuatan mereka, kemudian kepada Tuhan merekalah tempat kembali mereka, lalu Ia menerangkan kepada mereka apa yang mereka telah lakukan. (al-An'am [6:10]).
Keharmonian Malaysia yang sudah sekian lama terjalin di atas rasa toleransi kaum dan agama, pastinya akan mengundang kekeruhan apabila kepercayaan orang Hindu dihina sedemikian rupa.
Bayangkan apakah reaksi umat Islam sekiranya tulisan Allah diarak, diinjak dan dibakar pula oleh para penganut Hindu yang tersinggung dengan tindakan jahil kumpulan terbabit.
Untuk itu satu langkah drastik perlu dilakukan oleh pihak berkuasa agama seperti Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim) dan Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan untuk segera mencuci tahi yang telah dipalitkan oleh kumpulan terbabit.
Sekiranya pihak berkuasa agama boleh segera bersidang untuk mengeluarkan fatwa berikutan kenyataan politik sesetengah tokoh yang dirasakan mengancam akidah umat Islam, situasi kritikal seperti ini lebih lagi perlu diutamakan.
Jelaskan segera kepada penganut agama lain, bagaimana Islam melarang sama sekali tindakan sedemikian. Peranan pihak berkuasa agama perlu disegerakan untuk menjernihkan kembali kekeruhan yang melanda bertepatan dengan firman Allah, maksudnya:
Dan kalaulah Allah tidak mendorong setengah manusia menentang pencerobohan setengahnya yang lain, nescaya runtuhlah tempat-tempat pertapaan serta gereja-gereja (kaum Nasrani), dan tempat-tempat sembahyang (kaum Yahudi), dan juga masjid-masjid (orang Islam) yang sentiasa disebut nama Allah banyak-banyak padanya dan sesungguhnya Allah akan menolong sesiapa yang menolong agama-Nya (agama Islam); sesungguhnya Allah Maha Kuat, lagi Maha Kuasa (al-Hajj[22:40]).
Hak penganut Hindu untuk mendirikan rumah ibadat mereka tidak pernah dibantah oleh Islam. Itulah keistimewaan Islam yang agak terbuka dengan pengamalan agama lain selagi mana penganut agama itu masih berstatus dhimmi (bernaung di Negara Islam) dan bukannya harbi (memusuhi Islam).
Selain itu, pendekatan penerangan melalui media arus perdana perlu segera dibuat bagi mengubat luka para penganut Hindu di Malaysia.
Sekiranya tindakan lambat diambil, luka itu akan bertukar menjadi barah yang sukar diubati lagi.
Bahkan barah ini kelak boleh menjadi penyebab gagalnya gagasan 1Malaysia. Pengalaman perit konflik agama yang menumpahkan darah di negara luar perlu dijadikan teladan oleh pihak berkuasa agama di Malaysia.
Kepada mana-mana kumpulan yang bercadang untuk melakukan sebarang tindakan provokatif di masa hadapan, silalah bertanya dahulu kepada ahlinya.
Hayatilah firman Allah:
Maka bertanyalah kamu kepada orang yang mengetahui jika kamu tidak mengetahui (al-Anbiya'[21:7]).
Jangan sampai apabila kekacauan telah meletus kerana tindakan bodoh sesetengah pihak, pihak yang tidak bersalah pula menerima kesan akibatnya.
Renunglah ancaman Allah di dalam ayat ini:
Dan jagalah diri kamu daripada (berlakunya) dosa (yang membawa bala bencana) yang bukan sahaja akan menimpa orang-orang yang zalim di antara kamu secara khusus (tetapi akan menimpa kamu secara umum). Dan ketahuilah bahawa Allah Maha berat azab seksa-Nya (al-Anfal[8:25]).
PENULIS ialah Pensyarah Jabatan TilawahAl-Quran, Pusat Bahasa, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia
Oleh ABDULLAH BUKHARI ABDUL RAHIM
TINDAKAN sekumpulan pihak yang mengarak serta memijak kepala lembu ketika membuat bantahan tentang cadangan pembinaan kuil di Selangor sebenarnya suatu tindakan yang jahil bersulamkan kebiadapan melampau.
Kebiadapan mereka itu walaupun kelihatan seperti membela hak orang Islam di Malaysia, namun ia jelas ketara tambah memburukkan lagi imej Islam di mata golongan bukan Islam.
Label dan momokan Islam sebagai agama yang ganas seolah-olah sudah disahkan oleh tindakan bodoh mereka.
Islam amat bertegas tentang penghinaan kepada agama lain yang bakal mengundang permusuhan yang tidak berkesudahan kerana setiap insan akan bermati-matian mempertahankan akidah anutan mereka walau dengan nyawa sendiri.
Larangan provokasi ini dijelaskan oleh al-Quran, maksudnya:
Dan janganlah kamu cerca benda-benda yang mereka sembah yang lain dari Allah, kerana mereka kelak, akan mencerca Allah secara melampaui batas dengan ketiadaan pengetahuan. Demikianlah Kami memperelokkan pada pandangan tiap-tiap umat akan amal perbuatan mereka, kemudian kepada Tuhan merekalah tempat kembali mereka, lalu Ia menerangkan kepada mereka apa yang mereka telah lakukan. (al-An'am [6:10]).
Keharmonian Malaysia yang sudah sekian lama terjalin di atas rasa toleransi kaum dan agama, pastinya akan mengundang kekeruhan apabila kepercayaan orang Hindu dihina sedemikian rupa.
Bayangkan apakah reaksi umat Islam sekiranya tulisan Allah diarak, diinjak dan dibakar pula oleh para penganut Hindu yang tersinggung dengan tindakan jahil kumpulan terbabit.
Untuk itu satu langkah drastik perlu dilakukan oleh pihak berkuasa agama seperti Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim) dan Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan untuk segera mencuci tahi yang telah dipalitkan oleh kumpulan terbabit.
Sekiranya pihak berkuasa agama boleh segera bersidang untuk mengeluarkan fatwa berikutan kenyataan politik sesetengah tokoh yang dirasakan mengancam akidah umat Islam, situasi kritikal seperti ini lebih lagi perlu diutamakan.
Jelaskan segera kepada penganut agama lain, bagaimana Islam melarang sama sekali tindakan sedemikian. Peranan pihak berkuasa agama perlu disegerakan untuk menjernihkan kembali kekeruhan yang melanda bertepatan dengan firman Allah, maksudnya:
Dan kalaulah Allah tidak mendorong setengah manusia menentang pencerobohan setengahnya yang lain, nescaya runtuhlah tempat-tempat pertapaan serta gereja-gereja (kaum Nasrani), dan tempat-tempat sembahyang (kaum Yahudi), dan juga masjid-masjid (orang Islam) yang sentiasa disebut nama Allah banyak-banyak padanya dan sesungguhnya Allah akan menolong sesiapa yang menolong agama-Nya (agama Islam); sesungguhnya Allah Maha Kuat, lagi Maha Kuasa (al-Hajj[22:40]).
Hak penganut Hindu untuk mendirikan rumah ibadat mereka tidak pernah dibantah oleh Islam. Itulah keistimewaan Islam yang agak terbuka dengan pengamalan agama lain selagi mana penganut agama itu masih berstatus dhimmi (bernaung di Negara Islam) dan bukannya harbi (memusuhi Islam).
Selain itu, pendekatan penerangan melalui media arus perdana perlu segera dibuat bagi mengubat luka para penganut Hindu di Malaysia.
Sekiranya tindakan lambat diambil, luka itu akan bertukar menjadi barah yang sukar diubati lagi.
Bahkan barah ini kelak boleh menjadi penyebab gagalnya gagasan 1Malaysia. Pengalaman perit konflik agama yang menumpahkan darah di negara luar perlu dijadikan teladan oleh pihak berkuasa agama di Malaysia.
Kepada mana-mana kumpulan yang bercadang untuk melakukan sebarang tindakan provokatif di masa hadapan, silalah bertanya dahulu kepada ahlinya.
Hayatilah firman Allah:
Maka bertanyalah kamu kepada orang yang mengetahui jika kamu tidak mengetahui (al-Anbiya'[21:7]).
Jangan sampai apabila kekacauan telah meletus kerana tindakan bodoh sesetengah pihak, pihak yang tidak bersalah pula menerima kesan akibatnya.
Renunglah ancaman Allah di dalam ayat ini:
Dan jagalah diri kamu daripada (berlakunya) dosa (yang membawa bala bencana) yang bukan sahaja akan menimpa orang-orang yang zalim di antara kamu secara khusus (tetapi akan menimpa kamu secara umum). Dan ketahuilah bahawa Allah Maha berat azab seksa-Nya (al-Anfal[8:25]).
PENULIS ialah Pensyarah Jabatan TilawahAl-Quran, Pusat Bahasa, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
NEW BOB AGENCY - What the Quran says about Non-Muslim places of worship
This blogpost is now featured in the book, The Quran and I :)
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Have A Meaningful Hari Merdeka
Hi Guys! This is our first Merdeka Advert – catch it tomorrow at The Sun. I reiterate a proposed social contract and the idea of 17 days of ‘rising above politics and partisan’ point of view.
Dear Brother and Sister Malaysians,
We need to reflect upon and re-establish our rules of interaction and engagement.
We need guiding principles that are above everyone, every party, every grouping; be they ethnic, age, background or geography. We need this so we can really communicate with one another.
We need a Social Contract.
Yes we have struggled and debated, some say we do not have a Social Contract and of those who say we do, some are for it and some against it.
I propose a Social Contract that synergizes our past, present and future. A Social Contract based on our shared values, Rukun Negara and Federal Constitution.
I propose a Social Contract that...
1. See wrong as wrong and right as right, no matter who did it.
2. No individual or community is left behind, regardless of race or geography.
3. All Malaysian children receive a first rate education, every child is supported and encouraged to achieve her or his maximum potential.
4. We DO NOT introduce racism and division to our children at home or at school.
5. We recognize that Malay customs form our core culture and the Indigenous, Chinese, Indian and other traditions play strong supportive roles to make our nation a unique and exciting brand.
6. While we practice our own religions, we learn about and try to understand the religions of our fellow Malaysians.
7. We work towards zero poverty – it’s superfluous to have skyscrapers and state of the art structures when there are Malaysians who do not have a place to call home.
8. We help each other in business and transfer knowledge and skills from one community to another.
9. We practice sustainable development without corruption.
10. We provide adequate health care for all and care for those with special needs.
11. We treat non-Malaysians serving in our nation, Asians or Europeans, with equality, respect and dignity
12. We look at our constitution as a whole and not pick and choose out of context to suit an argument.
13. Do unto your Malaysian brother and sister as you would like them do unto you, after all,
14. We are Many Colors but One Race; Bangsa Malaysia.
17 Special Days
Since 1996, I proposed that the seventeen days from Hari Merdeka Aug 31st to Hari Malaysia September 16th , be days of reflection and understanding, when we suspend all partisan biasness and embrace each other as One. Seventeen days of truce and understanding and the celebration of our Many Colors, One Race.
Let’s spend the seventeen days expanding our ability to empathize and increasing our capacity to open up and understand others. To look for shared values and embrace the beautiful differences.
Let’s stop pointing fingers and take definite ‘can do’ actions which are within our capabilities, like making an effort to learn about the other first, instead of demanding that others understand us. Let’s Google about each other’s religions and customs and learn the basic tenets of each tradition.
If you do not have many friends from the other ethnic or religious groups, make a few this seventeen days – start on Facebook, take the important first step.
Listen to the other side. Learn and appreciate similarities and differences. Find solutions, not to make the other look bad and to prop up your position and feed your Ego, but to rise above partisan politics, to act as a human being and Malaysian first, and reform ourselves, and our country.
It is not about which party and who wins, it is about making things better. It is about bringing back our beloved nation to the original ideals of Rukun Negara and the Federal Constitution. It is a time to think for everyone, not just your own little grouping, choose to see yourself as part of a larger entity, as one of the same.
Do your best to live up to the ideals of your tradition and of our collective traditions. Be like Gandhi and learn ‘To hate the Sin and not the Sinner.’ Practice Christianity’s “turning the other cheek “, emulate Buddha’s practice of not hurting others, and remember, Prophet Muhammad himself declared that those who hurt non-Muslims, hurt him.
When we open our hearts and practice Unity, we talk to each other better.
Dear Brother and Sister Malaysians, we can do it!
Let us add value,
Have a meaningful Hari Merdeka
Anas Zubedy
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
What does the Quran says about Alcohol Consumption?
I have received quite a few smses and phone calls about the ‘alcohol’ issue – especially relating to Kartika. Many wanted my opinion on the subject. Personally, I wish to suggest that best for anything Islam, we must first and foremost refer to the Quran. Here, I would like to repost an earlier article on the subject. Muslim must decide to choose who to listen to - their leaders, politicians, their own whim and fancies or choose the Quran (as their guide), as the Malays put it “ Pandai-pandai lah kita memilih “.
Personally I do not consume alcohol.
However, contrary to popular belief, the Quran did not ban the alcohol – just like that.
The Quran approaches the issue in three stages spread over many numbers of years. The Quran see alcohol consumption and gambling from a sociological perspective and deemed them as a social problem – not a legal one and definitely not a political issue.
There were three stages.
At the initial stage, when queried about gambling and intoxicants, the Quran suggested,“They will ask thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say’ In both there is great evil as well as some benefits for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring’ (Quran 2:219)
During the trial period, the Quran pointed out the following.“ O, You who have attained to faith! Do not attempt to pray while you are in a state of drunkenness, (but wait) until you know what you are saying; not yet (while you are) in a stage requiring total absolution, until you have bathed...(Quran 4:43)
Note that at this stage, the Muslims have already been practicing their daily prayers. The verse was aimed at ‘those who have attained to faith' but yet at the time are still boozes who go drunk.
And finally, at the final stage, the Quran pointed that,‘O, You who have attained to faith! Intoxicants and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing: Shun it, then, so that you might attain to a happy state.’(Quran 5:90)
According to traditions (Al-Bukhari) the Muslims during that time were so ready to accept this commandment that they poured forth all their alcoholic beverages stored on the ground the very same day of it’s prohibitions, i.e. as the poets suggested, wine flowed in the streets of Madinah.
Are we ready to pour away our alcoholic beverages on the streets of Kuala Lumpur?
Also read Marina's post on the subject http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/2009/08/lrtq2-mercy-and-repentance-at-heart-of.html
Syed's http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.com/2009/08/hassan-ali-temple-of-doom.html and http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.com/2009/08/lrtq-2-alchohol.html
Walski's http://asylum60.blogspot.com/2009/08/lrtq2-intoxicating-rhetoric.html
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Reading The Quran 1
I feel that this article written by my Singaporean friend is perfect as my first blogpost for our LRTQ2 campaign. I was the (rude) stranger she mentioned in it ... since then she and I are real good friends :)Reading the Qur’an I
Sometimes we get a message through a person we encounter… often it is up to us to go beyond a perceived insult to our ego to decrypt the message:
“Read in the name of your Lord and Cherisher, Who created – Created man out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood: Proclaim! And your Lord is Most Bountiful, - He Who taught (the use of) the Pen, - Taught man that which he knew not. Nay but man does transgress all bounds, In that he looks upon himself as self sufficient. Verily, to your Lord is the return (of all)” [96:1-9]
One evening when I was out station in the neighbouring country, I found myself in the midst of a discussion on religion and reading the Qur’an. I already had a full day of meeting that day and another heavy discussion was really just too much for me to bear. Besides, I knew too little about religion to get deeply involved.
But still I needed to contribute to the conversation: “I want to learn Arabic so that I can read the Qur’an”, I announced.
A man, a little less than a stranger to me, replied, “How long have you been saying this? It is not going to happen. It is just an excuse. You might as well start by reading a translation of the Qur’an in a language that you understand.”
I was appalled by the audacity of the man – how could he just brush aside my noble intention like that. And how could he be so sure that it was “just an excuse”… he hardly knew me! I felt insulted. I went back to being silent for the rest of the evening.
Back in my hotel room, I kept remembering the words of the man a little less than a stranger to me. It pierced deep. After a long pause and some soul searching, I had to admit it: if I put my ego aside, the man was right. Not knowing Arabic was just an excuse. I needed to start to know the Qur’an. I had no more excuse. A translation could never replace reading the Qur’an in the language it was revealed in, but reading the translation would be a start for me to get to know the Qur’an.
By sheer coincidence, when I opened up one of the drawers in my hotel room I saw a Yusuf Ali’s version of the translation of the Qur’an in English. That night, after doing my Isya’ prayers, I started reading a translation of the Qur’an.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Let's Read The Quran (2)
Peace!Good news, we are bringing back the Let’s Read The Quran Campaign this Bulan Puasa.
Campaign name: Let’s Read The Quran (2)
Logo/icon: As the above
During the first campaign (January 14 – February 14 2009) there were four friends Syed, Walski, Marina and Anas who got together in the campaign and about 50 blogs participated helping us reach a larger audience.
This time around, four more friends will be part of the main team; they are Art Harun, Jahamy, Pah Nur and Nizam Bashir.
To recap, the campaign is not only for Muslims, but also for our brothers and sisters who are Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs and those who believe in God and a proper way of doing things – come join us and share your ideas! You can join this campaign even if you are an atheist!
The goal of this campaign is to encourage people to read the Quran in the language they understand most and find in it areas of common value for our day to day living.
We also want to hear your feedback and comments.
What is the Campaign all about?
Read the Quran in the language that you are familiar with.
When will the campaign start and end?
August 22nd to September 21st (Hari Raya Aidil Fitri)
Where?
Participating blogs in the blogosphere.
Why?
So more people know what the Quran says and what the Quran does not say and to match its relevance to our daily lives.
Who?
Anyone who wants to – the more the merrier! If you have a Blog, Facebook, etc carry the logo/icon.
How?
- To join the campaign, place the accompanying logo/icon at your blog.
- Write or share short articles based on the Quranic text.
- Share what you find in the Quran with family and friends.
- Ask questions about the Quranic message- Read the Quran – eg click here http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch , www.altafsir.com
Peace and Thanks,
Marina Mahathir http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com
Syed Akbar Ali http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.com
Walski http://asylum60.blogspot.com
Art Harun http://art-harun.blogspot.com
Pah Nur http://lunchatthelakeclub.blogspot.com
Rapera http://jahaberdeen.blogspot.com
Nizam Bashir http://nizambashir.com and,
Anas Zubedy http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com
Syed Akbar Ali http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.com
Walski http://asylum60.blogspot.com
Art Harun http://art-harun.blogspot.com
Pah Nur http://lunchatthelakeclub.blogspot.com
Rapera http://jahaberdeen.blogspot.com
Nizam Bashir http://nizambashir.com and,
Anas Zubedy http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com
Thursday, August 20, 2009
We want peaceful and non-disruptive demonstrations that get the message across
Below is our (zubedy) Bulan Puasa and Hari Raya Advert - it will be featured in the Star tomorrow 21st August. This ad is the fifth of the “What Malaysians Want " series. Thank you to all who provided feedback and suggestions.
What Malaysians Want:
Peaceful and non-disruptive demonstrations that get the point across
Peaceful demonstrations are part and parcel of democracy. Our Federal Constitution through Article 10 grants us the right to freedom of speech, expression and assembly. It is an excellent avenue for the Government to get direct feedback from the Rakyat. It provides our nation with another means of checks and balances – a must have for a society to stay just and stable. Peaceful demonstrations are also safety valves, healthy channels for the Rakyat to vent out their frustrations openly as opposed to going underground.
We need support systems and processes, a mature culture and approach towards peaceful demonstrations - one that expresses the Rakyat’s aspirations while minimizing disruptions. For the Rakyat, peaceful demonstrations are a last resort, when nothing else works, when all other avenues are exhausted. Peaceful demonstrations should not be the first choice used opportunistically.
Our constitution also assures the right to choose to support or not to support a cause. It guarantees the right to earn a decent living, to grow rich both materially and spiritually. When one party exercise their right, it must not infringe upon the rights of others. We must look at the constitution in its totality, not pick and choose whatever and whenever it suits us.
Both BN and PR governments need to assign appropriate spaces for the purpose of large demonstrations. Neither a stadium nor downtown Kuala Lumpur is suitable. All parties need to exercise empathy when choosing when and where to demonstrate; people need to march on roads not arenas but they need to stay away from areas where businesses are conducted.
When we take away the income of the poor even for a day, for some it may mean a day with no food on the table. For our foreign-born Indonesian and Bangladeshi brothers and sisters losing a day’s wage of RM 30.00 means a loss of one week’s income back home. Merchants and business organisations need sales during the weekends to survive and make a profit to continue providing employment to the thousands under their care. The nation cannot prosper when every time the Rakyat voice their concerns businesses lose millions of ringgit.
In ancient times, smart Kings apportion days for their subjects to air grievances so that they can listen to problems and mismanagement directly, bypassing ineffective and corrupt officials. Today in our era of democracy, peaceful demonstrations serve the same exact purpose. But we need to do it right; with empathy, the ability to place oneself in another’s shoes; from all sides.
The Rakyat has the right to air their feelings. They should be able to hoist their placards and hope to be heard. It is for government leaders, new and old media, and those with the means, to translate their call into news, policies and actions that makes a difference.For this to happen, we need peaceful and non-disruptive demonstrations that get the point across.
The goal is getting the point across.
At zubedy we believe at the heart, all Malaysians want good things for themselves and for their brother and sister Malaysians, simply because our nation cannot prosper as a whole if some of us are left behind.
Let us add value,
Have a meaningful Ramadhan and Aidilfitri
The previous “What Malaysians Want Series “ were:
A Social Contract
http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-propose-social-contract-this-wesak.html
What Malaysians Want:
Peaceful and non-disruptive demonstrations that get the point across
Peaceful demonstrations are part and parcel of democracy. Our Federal Constitution through Article 10 grants us the right to freedom of speech, expression and assembly. It is an excellent avenue for the Government to get direct feedback from the Rakyat. It provides our nation with another means of checks and balances – a must have for a society to stay just and stable. Peaceful demonstrations are also safety valves, healthy channels for the Rakyat to vent out their frustrations openly as opposed to going underground.
We need support systems and processes, a mature culture and approach towards peaceful demonstrations - one that expresses the Rakyat’s aspirations while minimizing disruptions. For the Rakyat, peaceful demonstrations are a last resort, when nothing else works, when all other avenues are exhausted. Peaceful demonstrations should not be the first choice used opportunistically.
Our constitution also assures the right to choose to support or not to support a cause. It guarantees the right to earn a decent living, to grow rich both materially and spiritually. When one party exercise their right, it must not infringe upon the rights of others. We must look at the constitution in its totality, not pick and choose whatever and whenever it suits us.
Both BN and PR governments need to assign appropriate spaces for the purpose of large demonstrations. Neither a stadium nor downtown Kuala Lumpur is suitable. All parties need to exercise empathy when choosing when and where to demonstrate; people need to march on roads not arenas but they need to stay away from areas where businesses are conducted.
When we take away the income of the poor even for a day, for some it may mean a day with no food on the table. For our foreign-born Indonesian and Bangladeshi brothers and sisters losing a day’s wage of RM 30.00 means a loss of one week’s income back home. Merchants and business organisations need sales during the weekends to survive and make a profit to continue providing employment to the thousands under their care. The nation cannot prosper when every time the Rakyat voice their concerns businesses lose millions of ringgit.
In ancient times, smart Kings apportion days for their subjects to air grievances so that they can listen to problems and mismanagement directly, bypassing ineffective and corrupt officials. Today in our era of democracy, peaceful demonstrations serve the same exact purpose. But we need to do it right; with empathy, the ability to place oneself in another’s shoes; from all sides.
The Rakyat has the right to air their feelings. They should be able to hoist their placards and hope to be heard. It is for government leaders, new and old media, and those with the means, to translate their call into news, policies and actions that makes a difference.For this to happen, we need peaceful and non-disruptive demonstrations that get the point across.
The goal is getting the point across.
At zubedy we believe at the heart, all Malaysians want good things for themselves and for their brother and sister Malaysians, simply because our nation cannot prosper as a whole if some of us are left behind.
Let us add value,
Have a meaningful Ramadhan and Aidilfitri
The previous “What Malaysians Want Series “ were:
A Social Contract
http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-propose-social-contract-this-wesak.html
Politicians who cooperate and compete to make Malaysia a better place http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-meaningful-vaisakhi.html
Development Without Corruption
http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2008/12/have-meaningful-xmas.html
A First-Rate Education
http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/01/what-malaysian-want.html
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
zubedy's coming Merdeka Advertisement
Dear everyone,
I am now preparing, reflecting, thinking and writing about the above advert. This year we plan advertise for Merdeka Day too, our first Merdeka Day ad. I am considering talking about the ‘social contract’. As a new nation, we must constantly look at the understanding between us and be mindful about what we need to do. I find that while many talk, discuss and debate about the social contract, not many know ‘what the social contract’ is. Some say there was never a social contract while others say there was. Either ways, when we argue over ‘hot air’, what we get is more ‘hot air’.
During the last Wesak day, I decided to propose a social contract. I want to improve it and write another one and publish it as the Merdeka advert. I will be most happy to listen to your ideas. How to make it better?
Click here http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-propose-social-contract-this-wesak.html to read the Wesak advert. Write your feedback by this coming Sunday, please. Thanks.
Peace, anas.
I am now preparing, reflecting, thinking and writing about the above advert. This year we plan advertise for Merdeka Day too, our first Merdeka Day ad. I am considering talking about the ‘social contract’. As a new nation, we must constantly look at the understanding between us and be mindful about what we need to do. I find that while many talk, discuss and debate about the social contract, not many know ‘what the social contract’ is. Some say there was never a social contract while others say there was. Either ways, when we argue over ‘hot air’, what we get is more ‘hot air’.
During the last Wesak day, I decided to propose a social contract. I want to improve it and write another one and publish it as the Merdeka advert. I will be most happy to listen to your ideas. How to make it better?
Click here http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/05/i-propose-social-contract-this-wesak.html to read the Wesak advert. Write your feedback by this coming Sunday, please. Thanks.
Peace, anas.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Ku Li's Speech - What do you think?
Ku Li: BN power-sharing model broken, needs new one
( Taken from the Malaysian Insider)
MELBOURNE, Aug 9 — The ruling Barisan Nasional’s racial power-sharing model is broken with the races now polarised, veteran Umno politician Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah charged today, adding it needs to begin anew with “our common humanity”.
The Gua Musang MP also said race was just a constructed category and called for new ways of mediating conflicts among the races in the country, despite the recent shrill cries of Malay supremacy among his fellow Umno colleagues and Umno-held media.
“The racial power-sharing model now practised by Barisan is broken. It takes more honesty than we are used to in public life to observe that this is not a temporary but a terminal crisis. An old order is ending,” Tengku Razaleigh told the Kelab Umno Australia at the Melbourne University.
Umno stalwart Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah has charged that BN’s racially-driven model can no longer work in today’s society. — Picture by Jack Ooi
He noted the major races remained polarised despite the country’s economic growth and progress towards multiracial politics although the government and opposition are still largely mobilised along racial lines.
“It is not yet time to herald a new dawn. Instead, we are in a transition full of perils and possibilities,” the Kelantan prince said in a copy of the speech sent to The Malaysian Insider.
He told his audience Barisan Nasional was put together to ensure that every community had a place at the table but it was not a permanent solution and the coalition has to wake up to the fact that it no longer worked.
“It was designed as an interim work-around, an early stage on the way to ‘a more perfect union’ and not as the desired end-state. Over the years, however, we have put up barricades around our system as if it were a fore-ordained and permanent ideal.
“In doing so, we have turned a half-way house into our destination, as if we must forever remain a racially divided and racially governed society,” said the politician popularly known as Ku Li.
He said the ideal should be a free and united society in which individuals can express their ethnic and religious identities without being imprisoned in them, adding “We must aim for a society in which public reasoning and not backroom dealing determines our collective decisions.”
Tengku Razaleigh, who lost out again for a shot at the Umno presidency last year, said the power-sharing model in Malaysia was an elite style of government justified by the virtue and competence of natural leaders of the communities.
“It does not work when political parties are led by the ignorant and the corrupt who have no standing in the communities they claim to represent,” he said bluntly, saying the country now has top-down rule and power had become increasingly unaccountable with Umno beholden to the executive.
“Our decades under highly-centralised government undermined our power-sharing formula, just as it undermined key institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the rule of law.
“Our major institutions have survived in appearance while their substance has eroded. Seen in this light, the election results of March 8, which saw the Barisan Nasional handed its worst defeat since 1969, was just the beginning of the collapse of a structure which has long been hollowed out,” Ku Li said.
He told the Kelab Umno Australia that they are generation of transition and would play a key role in determining the country’s outcome.
“We need a new beginning to racial relations in Malaysia, and you must pioneer that beginning. We need to re-design race relations in Malaysia, and you must be the architects and builders of that design,” he told his audience.
He advised them to take advantage of the perspective of distance in overseas education to reformulate questions and come out with answers for the nation.
“Begin with our common humanity. Respect for our common humanity must override all lesser affiliations, including race,” he said, noting one of Islam’s most powerful contributions to human civilisation has been its insistence on the equality of all human beings.
“Islam tolerates no notions of racial superiority or inferiority. All human beings are equal before God. That same principle of equality is absolutely fundamental to democracy, and democracy is a foundational principle of our Constitution.
The veteran politician said democracy is part of the nation’s make-up and although the citizens can gravitate to racial groupings, it should not overshadow the allegiance to the constitution and the claims of equal dignity.
“Political parties based on race or religion must never be allowed to do or say anything contrary to justice and equality,” he added.
Bucking the trend in his party that espouses Malay supremacy, Tengku Razaleigh said Malaysians must anchor themselves in the constitution and restore its primacy as it establishes the equality of citizenship.
“It gives us the framework of law and order within which we become a nation. It establishes the primacy of the rule of law, the sovereignty of Parliament, the independence of the judiciary and civil service and of our law enforcement agencies. These are the institutions which guarantee the freedom and sovereignty of the people,” he added.
Ku Li has challenged the young generation, which he calls the “generation of transition”, to move beyond making race their sole identity. — Picture by Jack Ooi
Speaking on race, he noted that while it united people in a common feeling, it can also divide and said that Malaysians are not just diverse in race but diverse in different ways, including location, class, social status, occupation, language and politics.
“We would be terribly impoverished as persons if our identity was given ahead of time and once and for all, merely by our membership of a fixed racial category. I would be a very dull person if you could tell who I was simply by looking up my race,” he said, adding it was not the most importance category in the world.
He pointed out that race would retard growth as individuals and hence as a society, apart from turning people into stereotypes and maintain a view of the world bordering on racist.
“I want to urge you, as the makers of the new social landscape we need in Malaysia, to reject taking race to be a unique and fixed categorisation, to reject race as a central category of social and political life,” Tengku Razaleigh said, reiterating it was just an identity and a constructed category.
He railed against the politics of race saying it will always divide, “and the ultimate solution to intra-racial problems it leads us to is, in the end, violence.”
“It is easy to identify the practitioners of this kind of racial politics. They will rely on veiled threats of communal violence even as they take part in democratic politics,” he added.
The Umno veteran also called for new ways of mediating conflicting claims between the races, new ways of bringing people to the table, of including everyone in the decision-making process.
“These new ways must be based on more open conceptions of who we are. Malaysia’s major races have lived together not just for decades but for centuries. Their cultures have interacted for millennia. In that time there has been mutual influence, mixture and cross-pollination at a depth and on a scale that our politics, popular culture and educational curriculum have largely pretended does not exist.
“It is time to embrace this real diversity in our political and personal lives. Our racial identities are not silos in a cornfield, forever separate, encased in steel, but trees in our rainforest: standing distinct but inexplicable without each other and constantly co-evolving,” he said.
Tengku Razaleigh pointed out that he was not recommending anything novel to the audience as it was cardinal principles in the constitution and the faiths, including Islam.
“Let us have the sense of perspective to see our ethnic identities against these cornerstone principles of religion and ethics, and let us now educate our young, apprentice our youth, and conduct ourselves according to these principles.
“And then let us have a new beginning for Malaysia,” he said when ending his speech.
( Taken from the Malaysian Insider)
MELBOURNE, Aug 9 — The ruling Barisan Nasional’s racial power-sharing model is broken with the races now polarised, veteran Umno politician Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah charged today, adding it needs to begin anew with “our common humanity”.
The Gua Musang MP also said race was just a constructed category and called for new ways of mediating conflicts among the races in the country, despite the recent shrill cries of Malay supremacy among his fellow Umno colleagues and Umno-held media.
“The racial power-sharing model now practised by Barisan is broken. It takes more honesty than we are used to in public life to observe that this is not a temporary but a terminal crisis. An old order is ending,” Tengku Razaleigh told the Kelab Umno Australia at the Melbourne University.
Umno stalwart Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah has charged that BN’s racially-driven model can no longer work in today’s society. — Picture by Jack Ooi
He noted the major races remained polarised despite the country’s economic growth and progress towards multiracial politics although the government and opposition are still largely mobilised along racial lines.
“It is not yet time to herald a new dawn. Instead, we are in a transition full of perils and possibilities,” the Kelantan prince said in a copy of the speech sent to The Malaysian Insider.
He told his audience Barisan Nasional was put together to ensure that every community had a place at the table but it was not a permanent solution and the coalition has to wake up to the fact that it no longer worked.
“It was designed as an interim work-around, an early stage on the way to ‘a more perfect union’ and not as the desired end-state. Over the years, however, we have put up barricades around our system as if it were a fore-ordained and permanent ideal.
“In doing so, we have turned a half-way house into our destination, as if we must forever remain a racially divided and racially governed society,” said the politician popularly known as Ku Li.
He said the ideal should be a free and united society in which individuals can express their ethnic and religious identities without being imprisoned in them, adding “We must aim for a society in which public reasoning and not backroom dealing determines our collective decisions.”
Tengku Razaleigh, who lost out again for a shot at the Umno presidency last year, said the power-sharing model in Malaysia was an elite style of government justified by the virtue and competence of natural leaders of the communities.
“It does not work when political parties are led by the ignorant and the corrupt who have no standing in the communities they claim to represent,” he said bluntly, saying the country now has top-down rule and power had become increasingly unaccountable with Umno beholden to the executive.
“Our decades under highly-centralised government undermined our power-sharing formula, just as it undermined key institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the rule of law.
“Our major institutions have survived in appearance while their substance has eroded. Seen in this light, the election results of March 8, which saw the Barisan Nasional handed its worst defeat since 1969, was just the beginning of the collapse of a structure which has long been hollowed out,” Ku Li said.
He told the Kelab Umno Australia that they are generation of transition and would play a key role in determining the country’s outcome.
“We need a new beginning to racial relations in Malaysia, and you must pioneer that beginning. We need to re-design race relations in Malaysia, and you must be the architects and builders of that design,” he told his audience.
He advised them to take advantage of the perspective of distance in overseas education to reformulate questions and come out with answers for the nation.
“Begin with our common humanity. Respect for our common humanity must override all lesser affiliations, including race,” he said, noting one of Islam’s most powerful contributions to human civilisation has been its insistence on the equality of all human beings.
“Islam tolerates no notions of racial superiority or inferiority. All human beings are equal before God. That same principle of equality is absolutely fundamental to democracy, and democracy is a foundational principle of our Constitution.
The veteran politician said democracy is part of the nation’s make-up and although the citizens can gravitate to racial groupings, it should not overshadow the allegiance to the constitution and the claims of equal dignity.
“Political parties based on race or religion must never be allowed to do or say anything contrary to justice and equality,” he added.
Bucking the trend in his party that espouses Malay supremacy, Tengku Razaleigh said Malaysians must anchor themselves in the constitution and restore its primacy as it establishes the equality of citizenship.
“It gives us the framework of law and order within which we become a nation. It establishes the primacy of the rule of law, the sovereignty of Parliament, the independence of the judiciary and civil service and of our law enforcement agencies. These are the institutions which guarantee the freedom and sovereignty of the people,” he added.
Ku Li has challenged the young generation, which he calls the “generation of transition”, to move beyond making race their sole identity. — Picture by Jack Ooi
Speaking on race, he noted that while it united people in a common feeling, it can also divide and said that Malaysians are not just diverse in race but diverse in different ways, including location, class, social status, occupation, language and politics.
“We would be terribly impoverished as persons if our identity was given ahead of time and once and for all, merely by our membership of a fixed racial category. I would be a very dull person if you could tell who I was simply by looking up my race,” he said, adding it was not the most importance category in the world.
He pointed out that race would retard growth as individuals and hence as a society, apart from turning people into stereotypes and maintain a view of the world bordering on racist.
“I want to urge you, as the makers of the new social landscape we need in Malaysia, to reject taking race to be a unique and fixed categorisation, to reject race as a central category of social and political life,” Tengku Razaleigh said, reiterating it was just an identity and a constructed category.
He railed against the politics of race saying it will always divide, “and the ultimate solution to intra-racial problems it leads us to is, in the end, violence.”
“It is easy to identify the practitioners of this kind of racial politics. They will rely on veiled threats of communal violence even as they take part in democratic politics,” he added.
The Umno veteran also called for new ways of mediating conflicting claims between the races, new ways of bringing people to the table, of including everyone in the decision-making process.
“These new ways must be based on more open conceptions of who we are. Malaysia’s major races have lived together not just for decades but for centuries. Their cultures have interacted for millennia. In that time there has been mutual influence, mixture and cross-pollination at a depth and on a scale that our politics, popular culture and educational curriculum have largely pretended does not exist.
“It is time to embrace this real diversity in our political and personal lives. Our racial identities are not silos in a cornfield, forever separate, encased in steel, but trees in our rainforest: standing distinct but inexplicable without each other and constantly co-evolving,” he said.
Tengku Razaleigh pointed out that he was not recommending anything novel to the audience as it was cardinal principles in the constitution and the faiths, including Islam.
“Let us have the sense of perspective to see our ethnic identities against these cornerstone principles of religion and ethics, and let us now educate our young, apprentice our youth, and conduct ourselves according to these principles.
“And then let us have a new beginning for Malaysia,” he said when ending his speech.
Friday, August 7, 2009
To Beer Or Not To Beer?
Personally I do not consume alcohol. I do not take business from the likes of GAB or Carlsberg. Okay, we also do not accept business from Tobacco and Gambling based company too. We are kosher :)
However, contrary to popular belief, the Quran did not ban the alcohol – just like that.
The Quran approaches the issue in three stages spread over many numbers of years. The Quran see alcohol consumption and gambling from a sociological perspective and deemed them as a social problem – not a legal one and definitely not a political issue.
There were three stages.
At the initial stage, when queried about gambling and intoxicants, the Quran suggested,
“They will ask thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say’ In both there is great evil as well as some benefits for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring’ (Quran 2:219)
During the trial period, the Quran pointed out the following.
“ O, You who have attained to faith! Do not attempt to pray while you are in a state of drunkenness, (but wait) until you know what you are saying; not yet (while you are) in a stage requiring total absolution, until you have bathed...(Quran 4:43)
Note that at this stage, the Muslims have already been practicing their daily prayers. The verse was aimed at ‘those who have attained to faith' but yet at the time are still boozes who go drunk.
And finally, at the final stage, the Quran pointed that,
‘O, You who have attained to faith! Intoxicants and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing: Shun it, then, so that you might attain to a happy state.’
(Quran 5:90)
According to traditions (Al-Bukhari) the Muslims during that time were so ready to accept this commandment that they poured forth all their alcoholic beverages stored on the ground the very same day of it’s prohibitions, i.e. as the poets suggested, wine flowed in the streets of Madinah.
Are we ready to pour away our alcoholic beverages on the streets of Kuala Lumpur?
However, contrary to popular belief, the Quran did not ban the alcohol – just like that.
The Quran approaches the issue in three stages spread over many numbers of years. The Quran see alcohol consumption and gambling from a sociological perspective and deemed them as a social problem – not a legal one and definitely not a political issue.
There were three stages.
At the initial stage, when queried about gambling and intoxicants, the Quran suggested,
“They will ask thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say’ In both there is great evil as well as some benefits for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring’ (Quran 2:219)
During the trial period, the Quran pointed out the following.
“ O, You who have attained to faith! Do not attempt to pray while you are in a state of drunkenness, (but wait) until you know what you are saying; not yet (while you are) in a stage requiring total absolution, until you have bathed...(Quran 4:43)
Note that at this stage, the Muslims have already been practicing their daily prayers. The verse was aimed at ‘those who have attained to faith' but yet at the time are still boozes who go drunk.
And finally, at the final stage, the Quran pointed that,
‘O, You who have attained to faith! Intoxicants and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing: Shun it, then, so that you might attain to a happy state.’
(Quran 5:90)
According to traditions (Al-Bukhari) the Muslims during that time were so ready to accept this commandment that they poured forth all their alcoholic beverages stored on the ground the very same day of it’s prohibitions, i.e. as the poets suggested, wine flowed in the streets of Madinah.
Are we ready to pour away our alcoholic beverages on the streets of Kuala Lumpur?
Same old, same old... or have we changed for the better?
Wow! I wrote this in 1998 and yet it is so surreal ... Malaysian Politics have not change much, many of us are still Bi-Polar - " if you are not with me, you are against me " approach.
I remember that my friends in REFORMASI refused to place the article in their website because I said nice things about Dr M and the Malaysian newspaper did not print it I assume because I have something positive to say about Brother Anwar.
The good news is that I build my business (without being a crony and without contracts from the government) and can advertise my sentiments and ideas.
I guess, I too have not changed!
Do you think Malaysians have changed for the better?
Peace, anas
MAKING SENSE OF THE POLITICAL CRISIS
-THE MAHATHIR-ANWAR ISSUE-
A commentary by Anas Zubedy
Many find it difficult to make sense of the current political crisis affecting the nation. The local dailies have a tendency to paint an incomplete picture while the foreign press gravitates toward exaggeration. Both of cause is doing a disservice to you and I.
Furthermore, pro-Anwar supporters seem to see no wrong in him. Vice-versa with pro-Mahathir supporters. In reality, both Mahathir and Anwar are not absolute angels with one hundred percent goodness nor are they absolute Satan only bent on doing wrong. They are both human beings, like you and I.
It is with these in mind that I set to write the following ' Question/Answer Approach' in explaining the crisis. I do not claim to be unbiased, as I too am limited to my own world-view of what is right and wrong. I want to state it up-front so as you are reading, you will notice my partiality and adjust your thoughts appropriately.
I disagree with quick-fixed solutions.
Thus, I am not for 'street demonstrations' and Indonesian styled revolution. I prefer a slow but sure
approach for political, social and cultural change. To explain simply, while
I agree with the goals for bringing continuous reformation, I do not agree
with the platform used. I may not like Suharto's policies, but I also
disagree with the manner the revolution took place. You see, the problem
with such a revolution, neither side will ever be ready. Can we accept a
revolution that causes young children being raped and a whole community
being made to suffer? Regardless if there are rich or arrogant, a death of
an innocent child equals to the death of humanity. Period.
I have relatives in Indonesia. Our neighbours in Medan are surviving with only one meal per day! Since the food distribution structures were broken (before the revolution, they were mainly maintained by ethnic Chinese), now you may have Rupiah but you cannot find milk, rice nor sugar.
In short, Indonesians have 'rights' but no 'rice'.
Now that does not mean that I see no right in Anwar. He has done many good
deeds. To name but a few,
1) Burning desire to eradicate poverty and provide cheaper homes for poorer
Malaysians.
2) Openness to cultural dialogues and shared values within the world's
varied spiritual traditions.
3) Willingness to listen to opposing ideas, etc.
Let us now go to the various topics at hand. Many of which are questions and
comments either e-mailed to me or was spoken via the telephone.
Does Mahathir has the right to sack Anwar?
Yes! As the Prime Minister he has sole rights to choose and fire whoever he
wants in his cabinet at his whim and fancy. As the President of UMNO and
leader of the coalition, it is an accepted rule. As anyone who signs up to
become an UMNO member he/she also give their word to live by the rules that
govern the organization. Until and when the rules have change, one must
stick to it. In fact, in these rules lay the strength of the coalition and
UMNO. Such rules provide a centralized power and stability to the
organizations' survival.
In summary, if you want to be an UMNO member, government Member of
Parliament or Minister, you must follow the rules laid out by the party you
subscribe to. If you find the rules unfair, you must first win the
majority's heart and change the rule from within. Until then, the rules apply.
Why do you think Mahathir sacked Anwar?
According to the Prime Minister, Anwar was sacked because he is a Sodomite.
Whether this is true or false, I choose to remain neutral as I am not a mind
reader nor am I God. Furthermore, I think there are some between us who may
not mind if he is a Sodomite as long as he does not lie about it and at the
same time is a capable leader. However, if you choose to lead in an
organization like UMNO and a country like Malaysia, I would suggest you
stick to heterosexuality.
Perhaps, the first reason for the sacking….
The events since the financial and economic crisis started since late last
year seems to suggest that Anwar did not play a good role as a second man.
Many a time he has contradicted his boss, Dr. Mahathir. In fact, viewed from
my own level of patience, Dr Mahathir was rather a patient man. I would have
sacked Anwar earlier. Let me explain. If I am the number one man, I will
encourage my number two and the rest of the management team to express their
ideas. I would also encourage massive debates and arguments within closed
doors. But, once a decision has been made, we walk out with that decision as
our own. In short, unless my second man and the management team managed to
convince me otherwise, I stick to my ideas and I will expect them to do the
same. That is a basic organizational rule, " The Principle of Authority". In
an organized group, the supreme authority must rest somewhere.
Yet, that does not mean that one must be a geek in an organization. On the
contrary one must be daring. But, as suggested by my former Managing
Director who was managing an organization that is more than a century old, "
BE DARING, BUT DON'T BE STUPID!".
Perhaps the second reason …
After the UMNO general assembly this year, there were a few of us who
suggested that Anwar's days were numbered. In politics, such miscalculation
by Anwar and his gang will prove fatal. Both Zahidi and him will have to go.
The swift action taken by Dr. Mahathir just days after the assembly in
appointing Tun Daim as Special Functions Minister, was a clear sign.
Conspiracy and counter-conspiracy were perhaps played on both sides. Anwar
recently had openly announced that he had instructed the UMNO youth leader
to attack Mahathir during the assembly. In his bid to topple Mahathir, he
pays the price for failing (however, we will later discuss whether the price
he is made to pay is fair). He could have waited, but he chose not to.
Mahathir of cause must make his move. It is only natural. That is politics.
Perhaps, the final reason …
Earlier this year, Mahathir will announce an interest rate cut and Anwar
will counter him the very next day. It was clear that Anwar was leaning
towards IMF styled measures while Mahathir was opposed to it. At that time,
the business community, you and I were confused about which direction the
economy is heading two. Perhaps, the Chinese dailies were right. Using an
old Chinese analogy, they described Anwar's sacking as " In a three-horsed
carriage, If one horse is running in a different direction, It is better to
cut it loose".
I see the timing of which Anwar's sacking took place just a few days after
the resignation of key Bank Negara officials and one day after the
imposition of capital control as too much of a coincidence. Mahathir may
have decided that Anwar must go during the assembly, but the timing was
probably decided because of the currency control measures. In fact, to
succeed with the new measures, the Prime Minister must have complete support
from the administration. A disobedient second man will do his plans harm. In
fact, he would have to chop anyone who is not in sync with the program if he
want to realize his goal by insulating the economy. The capital control is
as much a political gamble by Mahathir as Anwar's during the UMNO assembly.
Unfortunately for Dr. Mahathir, he miscalculated Anwar's support and
willingness to mount an opposition. Now, with political instability, the
measures are undermined. In reality, the 'rakyat' will suffer.' Dua gajah
berlaga, semut mati di tengah-tengah'
Does Anwar has the right to question Mahathir's move to sack him?
No.
Does Anwar has the right to know why Mahathir sack him?
Yes. Anwar has a right to know why he was asked to go, yet, he cannot argue
against it. He can try to explain, win back Mahathir's trust etc, etc but
failing which, he should have resigned or accept UMNO's and Barisan's rules.
That is the name of the game.
Does the 'rakyat' have the right to know why the Deputy Prime Minister was
sacked?
Yes! While the rule within Barisan and UMNO applies to members of the
organization, the 'rakyat' have the right to know why their number two man
has been sacked. It would have been better and I would have been happier if
the Prime Minister was to call for a special press conference or explain his
actions in detail. He must first explain to the general public his rights as
a Prime Minister, Barisan and UMNO's supreme leader as explained earlier in
this article. He should also express his misgivings towards his deputy while
at the same time excuse himself for not being able to relate certain
information that may obstruct justice as some may infringe on forthcoming
legal cases. He should also plea with humility to his 'rakyat' to have
patience with his decisions, as he has to act in accordance to his best
knowledge. Now, that is statesman like. I expect no less from a Prime Minister.
What about the manner of which the sodomy chargers were thrown against Anwar?
Badly. It seems that Anwar is now guilty until proven innocent. That is
unfair. The affidavits served on Nallakaruppan with regards to Anwar should
not have been made public, as Anwar was not a party to the application
before the judge. Furthermore, Anwar has been put to trial by the media.
Both local and foreign media are playing to the entire issue in one way or
the other.
What can Anwar do?
Sue! Sue the Prime Minister for defamation, sue whomever who claim that he
is a sodomite. He did not have to wait for the powers that be to take him to
court. He can make the first move. (By the way, according to legal
proceedings he has six years to do so).
Why did he not do so? Why "reformation" instead?
Your guess is as good as mine. According to the Prime Minister, Anwar was
fishing to be caught under ISA so that he can avoid going to open court. Be
that as it may, let us wait and see.
Does Anwar has a right to form a reformation movement?
Yes. So do you and I. Why the big fuss? Of cause, your and my idea of a
reform movement may differ from Anwar's. Mine would concentrate more
inwardly to members of the reform movement rather than asking for the other
parties to change. Remember that when Gandhi suggested tolerance, he was
willing to take even fatal blows from the opposite party. He was inward
looking than outward. Moreover, he suggested the judge preceding his case to
give him the maximum sentence for his defiance of tyranny (if the judge
truly believes in the empire's law).
So are you saying that the ISA is right?
No! I disagree with the ISA. But, that is the law of the country and until
such a day that the law is abolished, I will respect it. That does not mean
I like the law or it meant that I think the law is fair. So, if I do decide
to take to the streets, at the same time I must accept the fact that I could
be taken away. That is the price one must pay for not following the law that
we are so aware of. Similarly, those students who are expelled or punished
for breaking the University and University Colleges Act, there must not
complain. If you cannot do the time, don't do the crime. It would be real
stupid to break a law knowingly and later claim the law is unfair. As stated
earlier, 'be daring but don't be stupid'.
So what can we do with the ISA and similar laws?
If we really have strong convictions that we do not want to and cannot live
with such laws we can choose to vote against the government in elections. On
the other hand, of cause we also must consider the current government in
totality. If viewed in totality that the current government is good enough
even though we dislike certain aspects of the administration of the country,
then we must find a more gradual approach towards abolishing them. Perhaps
through genuine persuasion, providing alternatives and working gradually
from within the government. It is less exciting (you cannot shout and scream
on the streets for instance), slower but surer.
Going to the street and demanding the Prime Minister's resignation is not
the answer. It is not even legal for a democracy for the silent majority has
yet to vote. The laws were there since independence and will still be there
even if Mahathir passed away this morning. Will Anwar abolish them? Any
answer is academic for the time being. Suffice to say that he did not show
any clear signs of such reformation in his sixteen years in office. In fact,
if we remember correctly, he was a party to 'Operation Lallang' back in 1987
when a host of opposition and NGO leaders were taken in. Recently, even when
his good friend Nallakaruppan were taken in, we do not see any signs of his
'reformation'.
You seem to doubt Anwar's sincerity?
Yes.
Anwar is a great guy. I sincerely like his quest for interacial-religious
understanding and his support for poverty eradication policies as well as
his advocate for art and culture. But, his sincerity took a dip after he was
sacked. For the second time he change colors a little too fast. When he was
head for ABIM he was fiery and critical towards UMNO. A week later he joined
that very same organization. In a short time later, he fought to lead the
youth wing of UMNO.
Similarly, within a week after his dismissal he attacked the very
organization and leader he was fully giving support to just a month ago
(reference to his declaration in Penang in support of a no contest for
Mahathir in the next UMNO election.) He even signed in defense of Guan Eng.
He is also willing to use all the secrets he holds as a comrade in arms
(then) with the current government as blackmail. He criticizes the very
projects he was a party to just a few months ago, etc,etc,etc. I found all
these a little too much.
But what about Mahathir?
Like I said earlier, both men are neither perfect nor one hundred percent
flawed. They both have contributed for the good of the nation as well as the
bad. My main concern is that the 'rakyat's' perceptions of the public
instruments have been diluted over the years. Now, the people of Malaysia
have doubts each time that the police said something. They also doubt the
court of law. Their perceptions may be true or incorrect yet, perceptions
are perceptions. That is something the government must look into. I believe
events that took place within our judicial system since the early eighties
have contributed to this and Mahathir is very much a party to it. I hope, a
visionary as he is will be able to visualize a future that is better than
today in terms of public perceptions to law enforcers and judiciary.
Ironically, ten years ago I wrote about Mahathir's problem with his then
deputy Musa Hitam which directly escalated this negative perception.
So where do we go from here?
I suggest we choose 'rice' over 'rights' for the time being. We have lived
with ISA and Mahathir for umpteen years or more, so why not another few
years till our economy picks up. The capital control measures are sensitive
enough and we need not add problems like a political crisis. These measure
needs our wholehearted support and have a chance to work in the short run.
Anwar and his men must give way especially since his IMF styled measure
screwed badly. The old man has been proven right both in his attack towards
the speculators as well as his misgivings towards IMF. Yet, Anwar's case
must go on. He should be allowed to clear his name and sue all the relevant
parties that defamed his name if he was found innocent. All under the ISA
should also be released as soon as possible. It will only reflect well on
the Home Minister as well as calm the situation.
Anas Zubedy
September 1998
I remember that my friends in REFORMASI refused to place the article in their website because I said nice things about Dr M and the Malaysian newspaper did not print it I assume because I have something positive to say about Brother Anwar.
The good news is that I build my business (without being a crony and without contracts from the government) and can advertise my sentiments and ideas.
I guess, I too have not changed!
Do you think Malaysians have changed for the better?
Peace, anas
MAKING SENSE OF THE POLITICAL CRISIS
-THE MAHATHIR-ANWAR ISSUE-
A commentary by Anas Zubedy
Many find it difficult to make sense of the current political crisis affecting the nation. The local dailies have a tendency to paint an incomplete picture while the foreign press gravitates toward exaggeration. Both of cause is doing a disservice to you and I.
Furthermore, pro-Anwar supporters seem to see no wrong in him. Vice-versa with pro-Mahathir supporters. In reality, both Mahathir and Anwar are not absolute angels with one hundred percent goodness nor are they absolute Satan only bent on doing wrong. They are both human beings, like you and I.
It is with these in mind that I set to write the following ' Question/Answer Approach' in explaining the crisis. I do not claim to be unbiased, as I too am limited to my own world-view of what is right and wrong. I want to state it up-front so as you are reading, you will notice my partiality and adjust your thoughts appropriately.
I disagree with quick-fixed solutions.
Thus, I am not for 'street demonstrations' and Indonesian styled revolution. I prefer a slow but sure
approach for political, social and cultural change. To explain simply, while
I agree with the goals for bringing continuous reformation, I do not agree
with the platform used. I may not like Suharto's policies, but I also
disagree with the manner the revolution took place. You see, the problem
with such a revolution, neither side will ever be ready. Can we accept a
revolution that causes young children being raped and a whole community
being made to suffer? Regardless if there are rich or arrogant, a death of
an innocent child equals to the death of humanity. Period.
I have relatives in Indonesia. Our neighbours in Medan are surviving with only one meal per day! Since the food distribution structures were broken (before the revolution, they were mainly maintained by ethnic Chinese), now you may have Rupiah but you cannot find milk, rice nor sugar.
In short, Indonesians have 'rights' but no 'rice'.
Now that does not mean that I see no right in Anwar. He has done many good
deeds. To name but a few,
1) Burning desire to eradicate poverty and provide cheaper homes for poorer
Malaysians.
2) Openness to cultural dialogues and shared values within the world's
varied spiritual traditions.
3) Willingness to listen to opposing ideas, etc.
Let us now go to the various topics at hand. Many of which are questions and
comments either e-mailed to me or was spoken via the telephone.
Does Mahathir has the right to sack Anwar?
Yes! As the Prime Minister he has sole rights to choose and fire whoever he
wants in his cabinet at his whim and fancy. As the President of UMNO and
leader of the coalition, it is an accepted rule. As anyone who signs up to
become an UMNO member he/she also give their word to live by the rules that
govern the organization. Until and when the rules have change, one must
stick to it. In fact, in these rules lay the strength of the coalition and
UMNO. Such rules provide a centralized power and stability to the
organizations' survival.
In summary, if you want to be an UMNO member, government Member of
Parliament or Minister, you must follow the rules laid out by the party you
subscribe to. If you find the rules unfair, you must first win the
majority's heart and change the rule from within. Until then, the rules apply.
Why do you think Mahathir sacked Anwar?
According to the Prime Minister, Anwar was sacked because he is a Sodomite.
Whether this is true or false, I choose to remain neutral as I am not a mind
reader nor am I God. Furthermore, I think there are some between us who may
not mind if he is a Sodomite as long as he does not lie about it and at the
same time is a capable leader. However, if you choose to lead in an
organization like UMNO and a country like Malaysia, I would suggest you
stick to heterosexuality.
Perhaps, the first reason for the sacking….
The events since the financial and economic crisis started since late last
year seems to suggest that Anwar did not play a good role as a second man.
Many a time he has contradicted his boss, Dr. Mahathir. In fact, viewed from
my own level of patience, Dr Mahathir was rather a patient man. I would have
sacked Anwar earlier. Let me explain. If I am the number one man, I will
encourage my number two and the rest of the management team to express their
ideas. I would also encourage massive debates and arguments within closed
doors. But, once a decision has been made, we walk out with that decision as
our own. In short, unless my second man and the management team managed to
convince me otherwise, I stick to my ideas and I will expect them to do the
same. That is a basic organizational rule, " The Principle of Authority". In
an organized group, the supreme authority must rest somewhere.
Yet, that does not mean that one must be a geek in an organization. On the
contrary one must be daring. But, as suggested by my former Managing
Director who was managing an organization that is more than a century old, "
BE DARING, BUT DON'T BE STUPID!".
Perhaps the second reason …
After the UMNO general assembly this year, there were a few of us who
suggested that Anwar's days were numbered. In politics, such miscalculation
by Anwar and his gang will prove fatal. Both Zahidi and him will have to go.
The swift action taken by Dr. Mahathir just days after the assembly in
appointing Tun Daim as Special Functions Minister, was a clear sign.
Conspiracy and counter-conspiracy were perhaps played on both sides. Anwar
recently had openly announced that he had instructed the UMNO youth leader
to attack Mahathir during the assembly. In his bid to topple Mahathir, he
pays the price for failing (however, we will later discuss whether the price
he is made to pay is fair). He could have waited, but he chose not to.
Mahathir of cause must make his move. It is only natural. That is politics.
Perhaps, the final reason …
Earlier this year, Mahathir will announce an interest rate cut and Anwar
will counter him the very next day. It was clear that Anwar was leaning
towards IMF styled measures while Mahathir was opposed to it. At that time,
the business community, you and I were confused about which direction the
economy is heading two. Perhaps, the Chinese dailies were right. Using an
old Chinese analogy, they described Anwar's sacking as " In a three-horsed
carriage, If one horse is running in a different direction, It is better to
cut it loose".
I see the timing of which Anwar's sacking took place just a few days after
the resignation of key Bank Negara officials and one day after the
imposition of capital control as too much of a coincidence. Mahathir may
have decided that Anwar must go during the assembly, but the timing was
probably decided because of the currency control measures. In fact, to
succeed with the new measures, the Prime Minister must have complete support
from the administration. A disobedient second man will do his plans harm. In
fact, he would have to chop anyone who is not in sync with the program if he
want to realize his goal by insulating the economy. The capital control is
as much a political gamble by Mahathir as Anwar's during the UMNO assembly.
Unfortunately for Dr. Mahathir, he miscalculated Anwar's support and
willingness to mount an opposition. Now, with political instability, the
measures are undermined. In reality, the 'rakyat' will suffer.' Dua gajah
berlaga, semut mati di tengah-tengah'
Does Anwar has the right to question Mahathir's move to sack him?
No.
Does Anwar has the right to know why Mahathir sack him?
Yes. Anwar has a right to know why he was asked to go, yet, he cannot argue
against it. He can try to explain, win back Mahathir's trust etc, etc but
failing which, he should have resigned or accept UMNO's and Barisan's rules.
That is the name of the game.
Does the 'rakyat' have the right to know why the Deputy Prime Minister was
sacked?
Yes! While the rule within Barisan and UMNO applies to members of the
organization, the 'rakyat' have the right to know why their number two man
has been sacked. It would have been better and I would have been happier if
the Prime Minister was to call for a special press conference or explain his
actions in detail. He must first explain to the general public his rights as
a Prime Minister, Barisan and UMNO's supreme leader as explained earlier in
this article. He should also express his misgivings towards his deputy while
at the same time excuse himself for not being able to relate certain
information that may obstruct justice as some may infringe on forthcoming
legal cases. He should also plea with humility to his 'rakyat' to have
patience with his decisions, as he has to act in accordance to his best
knowledge. Now, that is statesman like. I expect no less from a Prime Minister.
What about the manner of which the sodomy chargers were thrown against Anwar?
Badly. It seems that Anwar is now guilty until proven innocent. That is
unfair. The affidavits served on Nallakaruppan with regards to Anwar should
not have been made public, as Anwar was not a party to the application
before the judge. Furthermore, Anwar has been put to trial by the media.
Both local and foreign media are playing to the entire issue in one way or
the other.
What can Anwar do?
Sue! Sue the Prime Minister for defamation, sue whomever who claim that he
is a sodomite. He did not have to wait for the powers that be to take him to
court. He can make the first move. (By the way, according to legal
proceedings he has six years to do so).
Why did he not do so? Why "reformation" instead?
Your guess is as good as mine. According to the Prime Minister, Anwar was
fishing to be caught under ISA so that he can avoid going to open court. Be
that as it may, let us wait and see.
Does Anwar has a right to form a reformation movement?
Yes. So do you and I. Why the big fuss? Of cause, your and my idea of a
reform movement may differ from Anwar's. Mine would concentrate more
inwardly to members of the reform movement rather than asking for the other
parties to change. Remember that when Gandhi suggested tolerance, he was
willing to take even fatal blows from the opposite party. He was inward
looking than outward. Moreover, he suggested the judge preceding his case to
give him the maximum sentence for his defiance of tyranny (if the judge
truly believes in the empire's law).
So are you saying that the ISA is right?
No! I disagree with the ISA. But, that is the law of the country and until
such a day that the law is abolished, I will respect it. That does not mean
I like the law or it meant that I think the law is fair. So, if I do decide
to take to the streets, at the same time I must accept the fact that I could
be taken away. That is the price one must pay for not following the law that
we are so aware of. Similarly, those students who are expelled or punished
for breaking the University and University Colleges Act, there must not
complain. If you cannot do the time, don't do the crime. It would be real
stupid to break a law knowingly and later claim the law is unfair. As stated
earlier, 'be daring but don't be stupid'.
So what can we do with the ISA and similar laws?
If we really have strong convictions that we do not want to and cannot live
with such laws we can choose to vote against the government in elections. On
the other hand, of cause we also must consider the current government in
totality. If viewed in totality that the current government is good enough
even though we dislike certain aspects of the administration of the country,
then we must find a more gradual approach towards abolishing them. Perhaps
through genuine persuasion, providing alternatives and working gradually
from within the government. It is less exciting (you cannot shout and scream
on the streets for instance), slower but surer.
Going to the street and demanding the Prime Minister's resignation is not
the answer. It is not even legal for a democracy for the silent majority has
yet to vote. The laws were there since independence and will still be there
even if Mahathir passed away this morning. Will Anwar abolish them? Any
answer is academic for the time being. Suffice to say that he did not show
any clear signs of such reformation in his sixteen years in office. In fact,
if we remember correctly, he was a party to 'Operation Lallang' back in 1987
when a host of opposition and NGO leaders were taken in. Recently, even when
his good friend Nallakaruppan were taken in, we do not see any signs of his
'reformation'.
You seem to doubt Anwar's sincerity?
Yes.
Anwar is a great guy. I sincerely like his quest for interacial-religious
understanding and his support for poverty eradication policies as well as
his advocate for art and culture. But, his sincerity took a dip after he was
sacked. For the second time he change colors a little too fast. When he was
head for ABIM he was fiery and critical towards UMNO. A week later he joined
that very same organization. In a short time later, he fought to lead the
youth wing of UMNO.
Similarly, within a week after his dismissal he attacked the very
organization and leader he was fully giving support to just a month ago
(reference to his declaration in Penang in support of a no contest for
Mahathir in the next UMNO election.) He even signed in defense of Guan Eng.
He is also willing to use all the secrets he holds as a comrade in arms
(then) with the current government as blackmail. He criticizes the very
projects he was a party to just a few months ago, etc,etc,etc. I found all
these a little too much.
But what about Mahathir?
Like I said earlier, both men are neither perfect nor one hundred percent
flawed. They both have contributed for the good of the nation as well as the
bad. My main concern is that the 'rakyat's' perceptions of the public
instruments have been diluted over the years. Now, the people of Malaysia
have doubts each time that the police said something. They also doubt the
court of law. Their perceptions may be true or incorrect yet, perceptions
are perceptions. That is something the government must look into. I believe
events that took place within our judicial system since the early eighties
have contributed to this and Mahathir is very much a party to it. I hope, a
visionary as he is will be able to visualize a future that is better than
today in terms of public perceptions to law enforcers and judiciary.
Ironically, ten years ago I wrote about Mahathir's problem with his then
deputy Musa Hitam which directly escalated this negative perception.
So where do we go from here?
I suggest we choose 'rice' over 'rights' for the time being. We have lived
with ISA and Mahathir for umpteen years or more, so why not another few
years till our economy picks up. The capital control measures are sensitive
enough and we need not add problems like a political crisis. These measure
needs our wholehearted support and have a chance to work in the short run.
Anwar and his men must give way especially since his IMF styled measure
screwed badly. The old man has been proven right both in his attack towards
the speculators as well as his misgivings towards IMF. Yet, Anwar's case
must go on. He should be allowed to clear his name and sue all the relevant
parties that defamed his name if he was found innocent. All under the ISA
should also be released as soon as possible. It will only reflect well on
the Home Minister as well as calm the situation.
Anas Zubedy
September 1998
Thursday, August 6, 2009
"Bint Noor"
Another short but sweet one from my Singaporean friend : )
I had only one afternoon in Tarim to look for my uncle (he was actually my step-uncle, my grandfather had two wives, one in Tarim and one in Singapore). The houses had no number but persons with the same surname tend to live in the same village. I had his photograph. I knew that, like my grandfather, my uncle was an Imam.
At the village where people with my mother’s surname lived, we stopped a passerby, showed him my uncle’s photograph and asked where we could find him. We were pleasantly surprise to hear that he was leading the prayer in the nearby mosque. We were told to come back in an hour.
We came back, a little less than an hour, and waited. We recognised my uncle (from the photograph) as we saw him leaving the mosque. I approached. I gave my peace greetings. I held out the photograph, pointed to myself and said “Bint Noor”.
He did not ask me any question. There was no conversation. He looked at me, teary eyed with joy, extended his arm and welcomed me. He gestured us to follow him home.
We got to my uncle’s home and met my aunt (his wife) and cousins (his children). Within five minutes relatives from the whole village came (they had no telephone in the house, much less handphones).
The usual restriction against men and women being in the same room was not applied – both my male and female relatives wanted to meet us since it was not usual to meet relatives from Singapore. The language barrier was overcome with facial expressions, gestures and a dictionary."
I had only one afternoon in Tarim to look for my uncle (he was actually my step-uncle, my grandfather had two wives, one in Tarim and one in Singapore). The houses had no number but persons with the same surname tend to live in the same village. I had his photograph. I knew that, like my grandfather, my uncle was an Imam.
At the village where people with my mother’s surname lived, we stopped a passerby, showed him my uncle’s photograph and asked where we could find him. We were pleasantly surprise to hear that he was leading the prayer in the nearby mosque. We were told to come back in an hour.
We came back, a little less than an hour, and waited. We recognised my uncle (from the photograph) as we saw him leaving the mosque. I approached. I gave my peace greetings. I held out the photograph, pointed to myself and said “Bint Noor”.
He did not ask me any question. There was no conversation. He looked at me, teary eyed with joy, extended his arm and welcomed me. He gestured us to follow him home.
We got to my uncle’s home and met my aunt (his wife) and cousins (his children). Within five minutes relatives from the whole village came (they had no telephone in the house, much less handphones).
The usual restriction against men and women being in the same room was not applied – both my male and female relatives wanted to meet us since it was not usual to meet relatives from Singapore. The language barrier was overcome with facial expressions, gestures and a dictionary."
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Peaceful Demonstration/ Street Protest - What is your opinion?
Here are 2 differing views on peaceful demonstration/street protest. Pls do read both and write in your comments. I am thinking of writing an advert with regards to this issue and would like to hear from you.
Thank you.
Anas Zubedy
Why do Malaysians march?
Yeo Yang Poh (The Sun, 3 Aug 2009)
WHY march, when the government has said that it will review the Internal Security Act? Why march, when there are other very cosy ways of giving your views and feedback?
One would understand if these were questions posed by nine-year-olds. But they are not. They are questions posed by the prime minister of this nation we call our home. Answer we must. So, why?
Because thousands who died while in detention cannot march or speak any more. That is why others have to do it for them. Because persons in the corridors of power, persons who have amassed tremendous wealth and live in mansions, and persons who are in the position to right wrongs but won’t, continue to rule our nation with suffocating might. And they certainly would not march. They would prevent others from marching.
Because the have-nots, the sidelined, the oppressed, the discriminated and the persecuted have no effective line to the powerful. Because the nice ways have been tried ad nauseam for decades, but have fallen on deaf ears. Because none of the major recommendations of Suhakam (including on peaceful assembly), or of the commissions of inquiry, has been implemented.
Because the proposed Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) is not in sight, while corruption and insecurity live in every neighbourhood; and (despite reasoned views expressed ever so nicely in opposition) Rela (people’s volunteer corps) is being brought in to make matters even worse. The proponents in “Su Qiu” (remember them?) were not marchers. In fact it is hard to find nicer ways than “su qiu”, because the term means “present and request” or “inform and request”. In terms of putting forward a view or a request, it is the height of politeness.
Yet they were labelled “extremists” – they who did not march. And now you ask, why march? Because you gave non-marchers a false name! You called them the “silent majority”, who by virtue of their silence (so you proudly argued with twisted logic) were supporters of government policies since they were not vocal in raising objections.
You claimed to be protecting the interest of the “silent majority”. Now some of them do not want to be silent anymore, and you are asking why? Yes, because double standards and hypocrisy cannot be covered up or explained away forever; and incompetence cannot be indefinitely propped up by depleting resources.
Because cronyism can only take care of a few people, and the rest will eventually wake up to realise the repeated lies that things were done in certain ways purportedly “for their benefit”. Because the race card, cleverly played for such a long time, is beginning to be seen for what it really is – a despicable tool to divide the rakyat for easier political manipulation.
Because it does not take much to figure out that there is no good reason why Malaysia, a country with abundant human resources and rich natural resources, does not have a standard of living many times higher than that of Singapore, an island state with no natural resources and that has to import human resources from Malaysia and elsewhere. Because, in general, countries that do not persecute marchers are prosperous or are improving from their previous state of affairs, and those that do are declining.
Because Gandhi marched, Mandela marched, Martin Luther King marched, and Tunku Abdul Rahman marched. Because more and more people realise that peaceful assemblies are no threat at all to the security of the nation, although they are a threat to the security of tenure of the ruling elite.
Because politicians do not mean it when they say with a straight face or a smile that they are the servants and that the people are the masters. No servant would treat his master with tear gas, batons and handcuffs. Because if the marchers in history had been stopped in their tracks, places like India, Malaysia and many others would still be colonies today, apartheid would still be thriving in South Africa, Nelson Mandela would still be scribbling on the walls of Cell 5, and Obama would probably be a slave somewhere in Mississippi plotting to make his next midnight dash for the river.
And because liberty, freedom and dignity are not free vouchers posted out to each household. They do not come to those who just sit and wait. They have to be fought for, and gained. And if you still want to ask: why march; I can go on and on until the last tree is felled. But I shall obviously not. I will end with the following lines from one of the songs sung in the 1960s by civil rights marchers in the US, without whom Obama would not be able to even sit with the whites in a bus, let alone reside in the White House:
“It isn’t nice to block the doorway It isn’t nice to go to jail There are nicer ways to do it But the nice ways have all failed It isn’t nice; it isn’t nice You’ve told us once, you’ve told us twice But if that’s freedom’s price We don’t mind ...”
(Yeo Yang Poh is a former Bar Council president.)
Because they did not care?
MP Goh ( Aug 5th 2009, The Sun)
IN “Why do Malaysians march?” (Comment, Aug 3) Yeo Yang Poh provides an interesting account of why Malaysians march. His views are even more amusing bearing in mind that he is a lawyer, more so a previous president of the Bar Council. Yes, why do Malaysians march?
Let me provide an account from a different perspective. Those who marched, did so because they did not care about the inconvenience caused to the thousands of motorists.
Because those who marched did not care that being a Saturday, thousands of Malaysians and tourists would be running errands, shopping or just enjoying the camaraderie of family and friends. Because those who marched did not care about the possibility of an ambulance desperately weaving its way through the traffic to reach a dying man.
Because those who marched did not care about the discomfort caused to senior citizens who were trapped in traffic in the blistering heat. Because those who marched did not care about the children who would have been at the receiving end of the chaos and disarray.
Because those who marched did not care about the millions of ringgit that traders had lost as a result of the closure of shops and businesses. Because those who marched did not care about the anxiety caused to that pregnant woman who, in labour, was on the way to the hospital. Because those who marched did not care about the thousands of schoolchildren who were late in attending Saturday school or that they were stuck in the traffic as late as 7pm.
Because those who marched courted arrest to be venerated as martyrs. Because those who marched did it for the sake of the publicity. After all, how else were they able to get their five minutes of fame. And bear in mind that leaders of other marches in the last two years were conferred awards and titles. So maybe, just maybe, this was one way of obtaining a few accolades.
Because those who marched knew that it was an action that would attract a reaction from the police and yes, that was what they wanted. After all, how else could they carry on demonising the police and enforcement authorities. Most newspapers carried stories about how high-handed the police were. Yet many missed the point. Who caused the police to react that way?
Because those who marched were ignorant. Are all the marchers aware of the provisions of the Internal Security Act? Because those who marched thought it was fashionable to do so. After all, the government did say that it was planning to review the provisions of the ISA. Yet the marchers marched. Because those who marched had to keep up with the Joneses.
Like Yeo said, they do it in India, Africa and even in the US. Everyone is doing it, so it must be right – let’s march! Because those who marched preferred to go along the destructive route. Because those who march were gullible – influenced by certain quarters who had their own purposes to serve. Because those who marched think that it is the leitmotif of the majority in Malaysia .
Yes, Yeo draws analogies to Africa and the US. Singapore, however, is conspicuously missing – a country that shares similar demography, legislative history and to a certain extent, culture. Love him or hate him, Singapore is what it is today – a successful nation because of the philosophy and vision of Lee Kuan Yew.
nd this is what the octogenarian has to say: “You’re talking about Rwanda or Bangladesh, or Cambodia, or the Philippines. They’ve got democracy, according to Freedom House. But have you got a civilised life to lead? People want economic development first and foremost. The leaders may talk something else. You take a poll of any people. What is it they want? The right to write an editorial as you like? They want homes, medicine, jobs, schools.” (The Man and his Ideas)
Apocryphal or not, there is definitely a grain of truth to it. Yeo, your reasons may be dulcet notes to the leftists but like many others who crave peace and harmony in society, I subscribe to a different view. The one lesson learned from Saturday’s episode is that, the marchers showed us why the ISA should remain.
MP GOH (THE SUN, august 5th 2009)
Thank you.
Anas Zubedy
Why do Malaysians march?
Yeo Yang Poh (The Sun, 3 Aug 2009)
WHY march, when the government has said that it will review the Internal Security Act? Why march, when there are other very cosy ways of giving your views and feedback?
One would understand if these were questions posed by nine-year-olds. But they are not. They are questions posed by the prime minister of this nation we call our home. Answer we must. So, why?
Because thousands who died while in detention cannot march or speak any more. That is why others have to do it for them. Because persons in the corridors of power, persons who have amassed tremendous wealth and live in mansions, and persons who are in the position to right wrongs but won’t, continue to rule our nation with suffocating might. And they certainly would not march. They would prevent others from marching.
Because the have-nots, the sidelined, the oppressed, the discriminated and the persecuted have no effective line to the powerful. Because the nice ways have been tried ad nauseam for decades, but have fallen on deaf ears. Because none of the major recommendations of Suhakam (including on peaceful assembly), or of the commissions of inquiry, has been implemented.
Because the proposed Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) is not in sight, while corruption and insecurity live in every neighbourhood; and (despite reasoned views expressed ever so nicely in opposition) Rela (people’s volunteer corps) is being brought in to make matters even worse. The proponents in “Su Qiu” (remember them?) were not marchers. In fact it is hard to find nicer ways than “su qiu”, because the term means “present and request” or “inform and request”. In terms of putting forward a view or a request, it is the height of politeness.
Yet they were labelled “extremists” – they who did not march. And now you ask, why march? Because you gave non-marchers a false name! You called them the “silent majority”, who by virtue of their silence (so you proudly argued with twisted logic) were supporters of government policies since they were not vocal in raising objections.
You claimed to be protecting the interest of the “silent majority”. Now some of them do not want to be silent anymore, and you are asking why? Yes, because double standards and hypocrisy cannot be covered up or explained away forever; and incompetence cannot be indefinitely propped up by depleting resources.
Because cronyism can only take care of a few people, and the rest will eventually wake up to realise the repeated lies that things were done in certain ways purportedly “for their benefit”. Because the race card, cleverly played for such a long time, is beginning to be seen for what it really is – a despicable tool to divide the rakyat for easier political manipulation.
Because it does not take much to figure out that there is no good reason why Malaysia, a country with abundant human resources and rich natural resources, does not have a standard of living many times higher than that of Singapore, an island state with no natural resources and that has to import human resources from Malaysia and elsewhere. Because, in general, countries that do not persecute marchers are prosperous or are improving from their previous state of affairs, and those that do are declining.
Because Gandhi marched, Mandela marched, Martin Luther King marched, and Tunku Abdul Rahman marched. Because more and more people realise that peaceful assemblies are no threat at all to the security of the nation, although they are a threat to the security of tenure of the ruling elite.
Because politicians do not mean it when they say with a straight face or a smile that they are the servants and that the people are the masters. No servant would treat his master with tear gas, batons and handcuffs. Because if the marchers in history had been stopped in their tracks, places like India, Malaysia and many others would still be colonies today, apartheid would still be thriving in South Africa, Nelson Mandela would still be scribbling on the walls of Cell 5, and Obama would probably be a slave somewhere in Mississippi plotting to make his next midnight dash for the river.
And because liberty, freedom and dignity are not free vouchers posted out to each household. They do not come to those who just sit and wait. They have to be fought for, and gained. And if you still want to ask: why march; I can go on and on until the last tree is felled. But I shall obviously not. I will end with the following lines from one of the songs sung in the 1960s by civil rights marchers in the US, without whom Obama would not be able to even sit with the whites in a bus, let alone reside in the White House:
“It isn’t nice to block the doorway It isn’t nice to go to jail There are nicer ways to do it But the nice ways have all failed It isn’t nice; it isn’t nice You’ve told us once, you’ve told us twice But if that’s freedom’s price We don’t mind ...”
(Yeo Yang Poh is a former Bar Council president.)
Because they did not care?
MP Goh ( Aug 5th 2009, The Sun)
IN “Why do Malaysians march?” (Comment, Aug 3) Yeo Yang Poh provides an interesting account of why Malaysians march. His views are even more amusing bearing in mind that he is a lawyer, more so a previous president of the Bar Council. Yes, why do Malaysians march?
Let me provide an account from a different perspective. Those who marched, did so because they did not care about the inconvenience caused to the thousands of motorists.
Because those who marched did not care that being a Saturday, thousands of Malaysians and tourists would be running errands, shopping or just enjoying the camaraderie of family and friends. Because those who marched did not care about the possibility of an ambulance desperately weaving its way through the traffic to reach a dying man.
Because those who marched did not care about the discomfort caused to senior citizens who were trapped in traffic in the blistering heat. Because those who marched did not care about the children who would have been at the receiving end of the chaos and disarray.
Because those who marched did not care about the millions of ringgit that traders had lost as a result of the closure of shops and businesses. Because those who marched did not care about the anxiety caused to that pregnant woman who, in labour, was on the way to the hospital. Because those who marched did not care about the thousands of schoolchildren who were late in attending Saturday school or that they were stuck in the traffic as late as 7pm.
Because those who marched courted arrest to be venerated as martyrs. Because those who marched did it for the sake of the publicity. After all, how else were they able to get their five minutes of fame. And bear in mind that leaders of other marches in the last two years were conferred awards and titles. So maybe, just maybe, this was one way of obtaining a few accolades.
Because those who marched knew that it was an action that would attract a reaction from the police and yes, that was what they wanted. After all, how else could they carry on demonising the police and enforcement authorities. Most newspapers carried stories about how high-handed the police were. Yet many missed the point. Who caused the police to react that way?
Because those who marched were ignorant. Are all the marchers aware of the provisions of the Internal Security Act? Because those who marched thought it was fashionable to do so. After all, the government did say that it was planning to review the provisions of the ISA. Yet the marchers marched. Because those who marched had to keep up with the Joneses.
Like Yeo said, they do it in India, Africa and even in the US. Everyone is doing it, so it must be right – let’s march! Because those who marched preferred to go along the destructive route. Because those who march were gullible – influenced by certain quarters who had their own purposes to serve. Because those who marched think that it is the leitmotif of the majority in Malaysia .
Yes, Yeo draws analogies to Africa and the US. Singapore, however, is conspicuously missing – a country that shares similar demography, legislative history and to a certain extent, culture. Love him or hate him, Singapore is what it is today – a successful nation because of the philosophy and vision of Lee Kuan Yew.
nd this is what the octogenarian has to say: “You’re talking about Rwanda or Bangladesh, or Cambodia, or the Philippines. They’ve got democracy, according to Freedom House. But have you got a civilised life to lead? People want economic development first and foremost. The leaders may talk something else. You take a poll of any people. What is it they want? The right to write an editorial as you like? They want homes, medicine, jobs, schools.” (The Man and his Ideas)
Apocryphal or not, there is definitely a grain of truth to it. Yeo, your reasons may be dulcet notes to the leftists but like many others who crave peace and harmony in society, I subscribe to a different view. The one lesson learned from Saturday’s episode is that, the marchers showed us why the ISA should remain.
MP GOH (THE SUN, august 5th 2009)