Pages

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Malaysian Muslims denounce Christian conversion efforts - World - GMA News Online - Latest Philippine News

Malaysian Muslims denounce Christian conversion efforts - World - GMA News Online - Latest Philippine News:
SHAH ALAM, Malaysia - About 2,000 slogan-shouting Malaysian Muslims gathered near the capital on Saturday to denounce alleged Christian attempts to convert Muslims, widening a religious rift that could cost Prime Minister Najib Razak minority votes in upcoming polls.

The rally led by non-governmental bodies comes amid an escalating row over accusations of covert conversions among Muslims and a raid on a Methodist church, which has divided Muslims and angered ethnic minorities.

Men, women and families gathered in a stadium in a suburb outside Kuala Lumpur to unite against what they said were attempts to evangelize Muslims, an offence in a country where over half the population follows Islam.

"We have gathered today to save the faith of Muslims due to the threat of apostasy," Yusri Mohamad, chairman of the organising committee, told the crowd.

"Some people say they (non-Muslims) work hard to spread their religion and that there is nothing wrong with apostasy. These are the voices which we want to drown out with our gathering today."

Ethnic Malays, who make up over half of the population, are Muslim by birth and constitutionally forbidden to leave the faith. Non-Muslims are guaranteed freedom of worship.

The protest follows a recent meeting in a church which was raided by Islamic authorities on suspicion of attempts to convert Muslims. The church said it was a charity meeting.

In keeping with Muslim tradition, men wearing skullcaps and women in traditional dress and headscarves sat separately in the stadium on Saturday as clerics delivered fiery speeches and urged followers to remain faithful.

Banners strung across the stadium read "Say no to apostasy, don't challenge the position of Islam" and "Together let's prevent apostasy".

Religious singing groups entertained the crowd, while they chanted "Let's gather to save the faith of Muslims" and "Allahu Akbar" (God is greatest).

"This gathering is good so that Muslims can unite because the recent raid on the church has raised fears about apostasy," said Muhammad Basori Hassan, a trader in his 30s, who attended the protest.

The four-hour gathering was peaceful and the turnout was a fraction of the 10,000-strong crowd which took to the streets in July to demand electoral reforms, but analysts said it would have ramifications for Najib in the next general election.

Malaysia's next election is not due until 2013 but many expect Najib to call one early next year before economic growth, projected at 5 percent in 2011, slows amid a possible global downturn.

Khoo Kay Peng, a political analyst, said the protest would only further stoke fears among minorities and would not garner new Malay support for the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition.

"For people who are already voting for Barisan Nasional, the gathering is preaching to the converted as there will always be fears by some that outspoken Chinese will erode Malay rights," he said.

"Barisan needs instead to move to the centre and bridge the gap."

Analysts say political parties have traditionally used race and religion to sway support in this multi-ethnic Southeast Asian country.

In recent years, ethic strife between Malays, Chinese and Indian minorities has inflamed racial tensions. But the squabble between Muslims and Christians has taken centerstage amid a rash of church bombings, the seizure of Bible shipments and legal action over the Christian use of the word "Allah". — Reuters

'via Blog this'

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

In good faith

In good faith

INTER-religious difficulties in the country are being successfully resolved through mediation. According to the chairman of the Committee for the Promotion of Inter-Religious Understanding, Datuk Azman Amin Hassan, who is also the director-general of the Department of National Unity and Integration, out of 320 cases reported to the department, 299 have been solved by mediators trained by the International Islamic University working jointly with the department. Given Malaysia's ethnic and religious plurality, such efforts should be deemed necessary and important because any faith-based differences of opinion can easily be exploited by the ruthless and unscrupulous to foment social unrest. That the inter-faith dialogue comes under the prime minister's portfolio testifies to the emphasis given towards defusing such problems. It is indeed heartening to know that efforts put in place through public policy are actually bearing fruit.

Malaysian politics can all too readily fragment along religious lines and it is common knowledge that religious parochialism can lead zealots astray, and stepping on the toes of the several other communities is only too easy. Unfortunately, while faith itself is meant to bring the best out of humanity, there are aspects of it that when misconstrued can only have negative outcomes. A recent example of inter-ethnic violence poisoned by religious sentiments leading to national disintegration is post-Tito Yugoslavia. Today we speak of the Balkan states of Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia and Serbia. It is a pity that Yugoslavia had to be relegated to history when as a nation it was an economic exemplar of the countries under Soviet influence. Attacks on Coptic Christians in Egypt show that even communities that have coexisted for a long time can break out into conflict.

It is, therefore, unrealistic to be dismissive of niggling problems of religion when these divisions may run deep in history. Hard-won economic prosperity alone may not be enough to cement ethnic and religious ties because affluence can bring its own challenges and contestations. Furthermore, piety is not to be cheated with secularism, as the Yugoslav socialist experiment demonstrated. The angst of centuries of religious misunderstanding, passed down the generations, cannot be swept under the carpet. Rather, there is a need to understand the religious grievances voiced by the different communities so as to encourage better understanding between them. An ongoing and continuous inter-faith dialogue builds the bridges that reinforce acceptance, moderation, compromise and mutual help. More of it should be done to lay the cultural foundations of 1Malaysia, which embraces the nation's diverse sensitivities under the banner of Islam as its official religion.


NST Editorial 11/10/2011
Read more: In good faith http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/16goo/Article/#ixzz1aXXAJ4Va

Monday, October 10, 2011

Sultan amat tersinggung

Oleh AZIAN AZIZ

SHAH ALAM 10 Okt. – Siasatan Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) ke atas majlis Thanksgiving Dinner yang diadakan di Dewan 3, Kompleks Dream Centre di Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya pada 3 Ogos lalu mendapati berlaku cubaan untuk memesongkan kepercayaan dan akidah umat Islam

Sehubungan itu Sultan Selangor, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah melahirkan rasa amat tersinggung dengan usaha-usaha pihak tertentu yang cuba melemahkan kepercayaan dan akidah orang Islam di negeri ini.

Berikutan adalah kenyataan penuh Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah:-

Beta selaku Ketua Agama Islam Negeri Selangor amat mengambil berat di atas tindakan yang dilakukan oleh Bahagian Penguatkuasan, Jabatan Agama Islam, Selangor (JAIS) yang telah menjalankan pemeriksaan ke atas majlis 'Thanksgiving Dinner' yang diadakan di Dewan 3, Kompleks Dream Centre, Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya pada 3 Ogos 2011 yang lalu.

Beta amat berharap agar rakyat Negeri Selangor tanpa mengira bangsa dan agama tidak menyalahanggap dan mempertikaikan tindakan JAIS tersebut sebelum mengetahui dengan jelas fakta sebenar mengenai tindakan yang telah diambil oleh pihak JAIS.

Sebagai sebuah Jabatan Kerajaan Negeri yang bertanggungjawab menguatkuasakan undang-undang Islam dalam Negeri ini, JAIS mempunyai tugas yang berat untuk memastikan Agama Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini sentiasa dipelihara dan dimartabatkan selaras dengan kedudukan Agama Islam sebagai agama Negeri Selangor di bawah Perkara XLVII Undang-Undang Tubuh Kerajaan Selangor, 1959 dan juga agama Persekutuan di bawah Fasal (1) Perkara 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Pihak JAIS telah menyembahkan kepada Beta laporan penuh mengenai pemeriksaan yang telah dijalankan di kompleks Dream Centre, Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya tersebut dan juga tindakan susulan yang telah diambil oleh JAIS. Beta sendiri telah meneliti laporan tersebut dengan terperinci dan Beta berpuas hati bahawa tindakan JAIS tersebut adalah betul dan tidak menyalahi mana-mana undang-undang yang berkuat kuasa di Negeri Selangor ini.

Tindakan JAIS tersebut adalah selaras dengan bidang kuasa yang diperuntukkan di bawah Enakmen Tatacara Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 2003, Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 1995 dan Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Perkembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) Negeri Selangor, 1988.

Agama Islam yang diamalkan dalam Negeri Selangor ini adalah sebuah agama yang penuh toleransi. Penganut agama Islam sentiasa dipupuk agar menghormati penganut-penganut agama lain.

Walaupun begitu, mana-mana pihak tidak boleh mengambil kesempatan untuk cuba mengembangkan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam.

Ini adalah selaras dengan Fasal (1) dan (4) Perkara 11 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Perkembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) Negeri Selangor, 1988 yang tidak membenarkan pengembangan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam.

Perkara XLVII Undang-Undang Tubuh, Kerajaan Selangor 1959, Fasal (1) Perkara 3 dan Fasal (1) Perkara 11 Perlembagaan Persekutuan telah memberikan hak kebebasan beragama kepada penganut agama lain untuk mengamalkan ajaran agama mereka masing-masing dengan aman dan harmoni.

Hak kebebasan tersebut telah pun berjalan dengan penuh harmoni dalam Negeri ini. Beta amat berharap keharmonian tersebut yang telah wujud sekian lama terus dikekalkan.

Peliharalah hak dan agama masing-masing dan jangan sekali-kali cuba mempengaruhi dan memesongkan fahaman dan kepercayaan orang Islam terhadap agama Islam.

Merujuk kepada siasatan pihak JAIS, terdapat keterangan bahawa ada cubaan untuk memesongkan kepercayaan dan aqidah umat Islam.

Tetapi keterangan yang diperolehi tidak mencukupi untuk tindakan undang-undang diambil.

Oleh itu setelah meneliti dengan secara mendalam laporan oleh pihak JAIS dan setelah mendapat nasihat dari pakar-pakar agama dan undang-undang, Beta bersetuju tiada pendakwaan terhadap mana-mana pihak.

Walau bagaimanapun Beta menitahkan JAIS memberikan kaunseling kepada orang Islam yang terlibat dalam majlis tersebut supaya aqidah dan kepercayaan mereka terhadap Agama Islam dapat dipulihkan.

Beta juga menitahkan JAIS supaya menjalankan aktiviti dakwah terhadap orang Islam dengan lebih kerap dan tersusun supaya akidah dan kepercayaan mereka terhadap Agama Islam dapat dipelihara dan dipertingkatkan.

Beta amat berharap selepas daripada ini, apa-apa kegiatan dan aktiviti yang sedang berjalan atau yang akan berjalan bagi tujuan mengembangkan ajaran agama lain kepada penganut Agama Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini hendaklah dihentikan segera dan tiada kegiatan dan aktiviti yang serupa dijalankan di masa hadapan.

Sesungguhnya Beta selaku Ketua Agama Islam Negeri Selangor ini amat mengambil berat dan berasa amat tersinggung dengan usaha-usaha pihak tertentu yang cuba untuk melemahkan kepercayaan dan aqidah orang Islam dalam Negeri Selangor ini.

Beta menitahkan Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (MAIS) dan JAIS supaya sentiasa mengadakan pemantauan rapi dan mengambil tindakan sewajarnya tanpa perlu teragak-agak lagi selaras dengan bidang kuasa yang diperuntukkan di bawah undang-undang.

Beta juga ingin mengambil kesempatan ini untuk mengucapkan terima kasih kepada semua pihak yang telah mengambil berat berkaitan isu ini dan yang telah memberikan kerjasama dan sokongan yang tidak berbelah bahagi kepada JAIS.


Sunday, September 11, 2011

The real fight for Islam

By IMAM FEISAL ABDUL RAUF

Authentic orthodox Islam is inclusive, deep, beautiful and wisdom-based, and it’s about time moderate Muslims reclaimed their religion from the extremists whose narrow and violent version has created a mountain of suspicion, fear and hatred.
IN the last half-century, an extremist version of Islam, untrue to Muslim history and profoundly dangerous to Muslims and non-Muslims all over the world, has done its best to hijack the faith of 1.4 billion people, making it seem parochial, judgmental, narrow, self-righteous and violent.
By extremism, I mean militant intolerance of differing points of view, which leads to denying others the right to different opinions, and potentially to their freedom and humanity.
We need to reclaim Islam as a modern, moderate, compassionate, just, open, and tolerant religion that is protective both of individual freedoms and collective human rights. We need to seek to move a mountain of suspicion, myth, fear and hatred – and provide a new vision for Islam in America and the world.
My tradition
Imam Feisal speaking at the Perdana Global Peace Forum in KL on Dec 16, 2005.
Like the great majority of the world’s Muslims, I am an orthodox Muslim: neither an “Islamist” nor a “radical jihadist.” Orthodox and authentic Islam is an inclusive, deep, beautiful and wisdom-based religion.
From the earliest times, Muslims routinely incorporated pre-Islamic institutions, laws and customs into their practice when they did not violate the Quran or the Prophet’s directives. In Malaysia, for example, this was known as adat Melayu, which had the force of law according to the Syariah.
Drawing on the Quran and the Hadith, Muslim historians, theologians and jurists developed an Islamic history and theology drawn partly from Christian and Jewish texts, commentaries, spiritual practice, theology and jurisprudence. The spires of Christian churches calling the pious with ringing bells metamorphosed into tall minarets from which the muezzinwould call the faithful to prayer.
And the distinctive dome of the Byzantine Orthodox Cathedral Hagia Sophia, built more than 30 years before the birth of the Prophet, was adopted by Muslims as a ubiquitous fixture of later mosques.
The past half-century has fostered the myth that all knowledge other than that contained in the Quran and the sayings of the Prophet are “un-Islamic.” But history shows us that it was an enlightened tradition of seeking out, engaging, embracing and absorbing knowledge and wisdom in all fields of human endeavour that is the true Muslim reality.
I am a Kuwaiti-born, Egyptian-American citizen. I grew up in Great Britain, Malaysia and Egypt, and have lived in the US since 1965, when I was 17. I attended Simpang Lima primary school in Klang, and the Victoria Institution in Kuala Lumpur, before studying at Columbia University in New York and graduate school at Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey.
I became a naturalised American citizen in 1979. I am an imam and the son of an eminent Egyptian imam and scholar, who was sent by al-Azhar University to be the imam and director of the Islamic Center in New York, and then of the Islamic Center in Washington DC Before that, he was the first principal of the Muslim College Klang, the first Head of the Islamic Studies Department at the University of Malaya, and the first Rector of the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur.
We arrived in New York in December 1965 to a new life in the US, and I have served since 1983 at the Al-Farah Mosque in Tribeca, about a dozen blocks from the former World Trade Center.
Like my father, I have been deeply involved in interfaith work for well over a quarter century now with all faith communities, but mainly with Jews, Christians and Buddhists. In the aftermath of 9/11, as imam of a mosque so near Ground Zero, I was in demand as a speaker on extremists and terrorists, on the relationship between the Muslim world and the West, helping non-Muslim Americans understand the nature of the divide.
When I opened the floor to questions, they invariably fell into three categories: first was the “What is Islam?” class of questions, such as, “What is the difference between Sunni, Shia, and Sufi? What is the role of women in Islam? Does Islam believe in separation of church and state?”
The second category was what I called “The 9/11 questions,” such as “Why is bin Laden popular in the Muslim world?” “Why are Muslims so angry at America?” “Why do political liberation movements in the Muslim world use the language of Islam?” “Is suicide bombing allowed in Islam?”
The third category contained just one question, and while I succeeded in answering the questions very well in the first two categories, my efforts to provide answers to the third left me deeply dissatisfied.
Fighting extremism
This question first cropped up when my friend, Rabbi David Rosen, invited me to address the quarterly Board of Governors meeting of the American Jewish Committee on Dec 10, 2001 – 90 days after 9/11. The audience unanimously agreed with me that the status quo between Jews and Muslims was unacceptable.
But they went further; they pushed me on what we could do together to improve this relationship, and specifically, what we could do to turn around US-Muslim world relations.
I talked generally about mutually educating each other about our religions and cultures. At the same time, I knew cultural and religious appreciation could not by itself transform a relationship that had gone very wrong. Three months later, at the end of a lecture I gave at the Greenwich (Connecticut) Presbyterian Church, an elderly lady stood up and asked me, “What can a good Christian woman like me do to help?”
Here again was the same question, and I could not answer it!
And if I could not, who could? This question, hugely important to answer, stayed with me for months. I knew I had to do some serious study and thinking. I soon realised that to resolve the problems that people referred to as “Muslims versus the West,” or the “US-Muslim divide,” we all needed something concrete that could help bridge the growing polarisation between America and the Muslim world, and between Muslim Americans and their non-Muslim neighbours.
I spent more than a year analysing the problems and figuring out what it would take to bridge this divide.
The result was the Cordoba Initiative in November 2002 which I created with the help of my friend John S. Bennett, the former Vice-President of the Aspen Institute in Colorado.
We named it after the 300-year period (8th–11th centuries) of the Cordoba Caliphate (in what is now Spain) during which Jews, Christians and Muslims lived in the most enlightened, pluralistic and tolerant society on earth.
Cordoba began as a multi-faith initiative designed to bridge West-Muslim world relations by breaking the cycle of mistrust, misunderstanding and irrational fear that exists between Islam and the Western world. It became clear, from invitations to international forums, that it had to be multinational. With the support of then Malaysian Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, we made Kuala Lumpur our Muslim world headquarters, with New York City our Western world headquarters.
One project of this initiative has been the Shariah Index Project to define the meaning of the term “Islamic State” from an Islamic legal point of view, and then to measure such “Islamicity” meaningfully – including that of non-Muslim-majority nations.
This would help determine the proper balance in the Muslim world (and elsewhere) between institutions of political power and authority, on the one hand, and institutions of religious power and authority, on the other – the Muslim equivalent of the religion-state relationship.
In the US, church-state separation is practically a religious precept; not so in the Muslim world. The work of this group is a powerful antidote to the perversion of Islam that is currently shaping so much of the political-religious discourse in the Muslim world. It is even more relevant now in the wake of the 2011 Arab Spring and the concern that many Westerners have about the role of Islamic religious parties, such as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
Cordoba House was another of the Initiative’s projects, designed as a community centre and a multi-faith space at 51 Park Place, in the same lower Manhattan neighbourhood of Tribeca, about 10 blocks south of my mosque on West Broadway.
My longer-term interfaith vision, which I had wanted to realise for 20 years, was to establish an Islamic community centre modelled on the Y’s – the YMCA, YWCA, YMHA, YWHA – originally religious institutions serving their own people that have become genuine, whole community institutions in American cities.
The remarkable 92nd Street Y, for instance, on New York’s Upper East Side, now reaches a diverse range of people with a rich variety of programmes, lectures, and concerts, though it was originally intended only for Jews.
I intended Cordoba House to be a “Muslim 92nd Street Y,” with an interfaith board, interfaith worship space, a dedicated Islamic prayer space (a mosque) in a building that would architecturally be thoroughly American – not a transplant from 13th century Cairo.
But Cordoba House, now known indelibly, if inaccurately, worldwide as the Ground Zero Mosque, became a flashpoint in 2010 for all of the unhealed wounds of 9/11, and for opportunistic Islamophobes throughout the US and the world. That this effort aroused such controversy and vitriol demonstrates the size of the task that confronts us if we truly wish to erase our misunderstandings and misconceptions. But it also became a kind of Rorschach test for Americans and people all over the world.
Our office received thousands of letters, e-mails and phone calls of support from all 50 states and around the world, from Indonesia to Israel. Michael Bloomberg, the Jewish Mayor of New York, held a press conference to proclaim the city’s tradition of religious tolerance. New Yorkers held candlelight vigils on our behalf. President Barack Obama defended our constitutional right to build Cordoba House where we wished. These expressions confirmed my deep conviction that the great majority of Americans did not want to be at war with Muslims or the Muslim world.
In his 2011 State of the Union address, Obama uttered a sentence unthinkable for an American president a decade ago: “And as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that American Muslims are part of our American family.”
The entire Congress – Democrats and Republicans alike – rose in a spontaneous standing ovation.
As I took in Obama’s words and Congress’ applause on my television screen, tears welled up. It was not only the President’s words; it was the immediate, spontaneous bi-partisan response of the Congress – and it took place after the controversy over Cordoba House had exposed many raw emotions on all sides.
I felt a rush of emotion, convinced that I was watching the key turning point for American Muslims, and potentially for the entire complex of relations between the United States and the Muslim world.
Truly, as the proverb has it, the night is darkest just before the dawn. US-Muslim relations had bottomed out: the only direction to go from here was up – which is one reason I am so genuinely hopeful about the future.
The future
My fondest hope is for my Muslim brothers and sisters throughout the world to reclaim their fundamentally moderate and merciful religion from the extremist Muslims, and from the extremist non-Muslims who have made a profession out of distorting our religion. And that non-Muslims will understand the values and real traditions of our faith.
The real battleground is not between America and the Muslim world, or between Muslims and Jews, or Christians, or Hindus or atheists; the real conflict is between the moderates of all faith traditions, including moderate atheists, against all the extremists of all faith traditions, and that includes extremist atheists.
Agnostics and atheists can be as ethical or as immoral as any proclaimed Muslim. And it is with a deep sense of gratitude and pride to my Malaysian heritage that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has championed this idea by launching the Global Movement of Moderates to rally all moderates of all religions against all extremists of all religions.
His speech on this at the United Nations last year, and at Oxford University in May, was widely regarded by US and European leaders, who are hoping that the new movements in the Arab world will look to nations like Malaysia as an example of how to build a successful and prosperous Islamic country that is democratic, religiously and ethnically pluralistic and moderate; a nation that confirms the overwhelming majority of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims’ profound disagreement with the fundamentalist, narrow, parochial interpretations of Islam that have gained force in recent decades.
We are a nation (umma) that sees Orthodox Islam as far more beautiful, wise, truthful, open, and merciful: a tradition and a faith worth rescuing from the extremists.
■ This article is an extract from the introduction in Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s forthcoming new book, Moving The Mountain: Beyond Ground Zero To A New Vision Of Islam In America, which will be released by Free Press in May 2012.

Monday, July 25, 2011

National Security Council told ex-Perlis mufti a threat - Malaysiakini

The National Security Council was today briefed on the dangers that former Perlis mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin and several other religious figures posed for their links with Wahabism and terrorism.

NONEA source disclosed today that the matter was discussed in a closed briefing attended by state muftis and representatives of Islamic religious departments from all over Malaysia.

Forty young 'Umno ulama' were also alleged to be on a 'watch list' of possible terror suspects, in the council briefing held this morning.

“The Saudi government was alleged to have been behind their activities,” the source told Malaysiakini.

As at press time, however, the claim has remained unsubstantiated as all attempts to reach the council, which comes under the Prime Minister's Department, failed.

According to the source, the governments of Kuwait and Bahrain were also accused of being behind the movement at the meeting which started at about 9.30am.

Among those said to have addressed the council were southern Thailand religious leader Ismail Lutfi and popular religious preacher Muhammad Uthman El-Muhammady.

more at: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/170978


Sunday, June 19, 2011

Irony of the Iranian Women's Burqa Ban | Religion Dispatches

  • The ban on Iranian women’s athletic attire by FIFA, the body that governs international soccer, gave rise to a heartbreaking scene—women streamed onto the field weeping and mourning the loss of their careers as this was an Olympic-qualifying match. No longer internationally competitive, the team will not be funded by the state and will die an unfortunate death—in a field characterized by racial and cultural diversity. Or is international soccer merely a field for Western cultural assimilation, a sphere that rejects cultural diversity?

    Muslim women’s head-covers again prove to be the ultimate political and cultural test of pluralism. These women, who set out only to compete in sports, are now the symbols of political tension and cultural warfare. Crush the hijabi and you have dealt another resounding slap to Osama—oh, wait, he’s too dead to feel the slap.

    As Every-Muslim-Woman, I’m bored. I am bored to tears of the head-cover or veil being the cynosure of the global gaze. I am embarrassed for the community of nations that, like a broken record or a doddering old fellow, cannot stop droning on and on about “In our day, we never saw such an unseemly piece of fabric on women’s heads/faces/necks/arms/legs; whatever happened to nice girls wearing skirts to work/school/sports?”

    But part of me wants to turn around and tell the global-Western, headscarf-obsessed gaze to simply deal with it, as I told the Muslim community to deal with tennis star Sania Mirza’s short skirts.

    Then I do a double-take, and ask the global-Western, anti-hijabists to recall their political-cultural identities. Weren’t we Westerners supposed to be privatized individuals? Weren’t we supposed to live and let live? Don’t we laugh up our sleeves at authoritarian states and cultures that arrange marriages, control women’s clothes and sex lives, and generally run other people’s lives? Aren’t we the cool heads who bloody well leave each other alone and mind our own business? If you don’t want them taking away your guns or your porn, you’d better not call them out to take away our hijabs.

    There are voices calling for wisdom: leave the hijabis and the burqa-wearers alone; perhaps, in time, they will raise bare-headed daughters. Perhaps they will get tired of being rabble-rousers (because surely, a woman in a burqini is only trying to thumb her nose at us). But, the anti-hijabists respond, what if they don’t? What if they turn into a strong, populous community of veiled women? And what if they walk through the streets, making us look bad?

    One might ask, who’s looking? And the response might be: we are; and we don’t like burqas in the street. They gross us out. So let’s bring out the street cleaners/passport-check and throw them out. But who gets to decide what a hypothetical eyesore is? And what do we do once we’ve decided a particular item of clothing is an eyesore? Surely some process of discussion in the democratic community ought to ensue, and if most people agree, well, then it may be possible to create—oh, I don’t know, a little ghetto, with the conservative religious Muslims in it, you know what I mean?—so that they don’t remain an eyesore.

    But what if other women start taking up hijabs and burqas? Women’s subjugation could be contagious. Well, then, maybe we could ship them all off to the nearest Muslim country—like Turkey, perhaps. Or then Turkey would vote to keep us out of the EU. A political-cultural observer or historian of Western societies might be permitted to be fearful of the future of liberty and individual freedoms. I just wish they would pick on someone new, merely to spice things up a little, so reading the news wouldn’t be so damned boring. I’m open to suggestions.

    http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/guest_bloggers/4762/irony_of_the_iranian_women's_burqa_ban_/

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Najib for dialogue to resolve religious issues

Najib for dialogue to resolve religious issues

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak (R) and Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud attending the 54th National Quran Reciters Assembly in Kuching yesterday.Picture: Bernama

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

DIALOGUE is the best way to resolve sensitive racial and religious issues, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said yesterday.

He said, however, the dialogues must hinge on sincerity that manifested from maturity to achieve understanding and create harmony among races and religions in the country.

"In the context of relationship among religions, if such dialogues are supported and mediated by respected religious leaders, it will produce multiple positive impacts for the people," he said when opening the 54th National Quran Reciters Assembly here.

Also present was Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud.

Twenty-nine qari (male Quran reciters) and qariah (female Quran reciter) are due to take part in the assembly themed "1Malaysia 1Ummah" at the Dewan Majlis Islam Sarawak. "Suffice to say, the price of peace is very high," said Najib, adding that the government was continuously monitoring religious sensitivities so as to prevent irresponsible quarters from sowing religious discord.

On the theme "1Malaysia 1Ummah", he said it brought a deep wisdom and fulfilled the needs of the people and Muslims.

He said the social contract, historical background and the federal constitution should be capitalised as the framework to guide the people in building a progressive and harmonious 1Malaysia, which culminated in a great 1Ummah.

"Under this scenario, promoting racial tolerance and acceptance among various races, namely the Malays, Chinese, Indians, Melanau, Iban, Kadazan-Dusun, Bidayuh, Bajau, Senoi and more than other 200 ethnic communities should continuously be empowered," said the prime minister. The government would not neglect the Islamic development agenda in its strive to turn Malaysia into a high-income country by 2020, he added.

He said the government acknowledged the role played by the religious community in the march towards Vision 2020, which was proven by raising the allowances of Kafa teachers, takmir teachers and imams to elevate them from the poverty line starting this year.

On the assembly, he said it was a symbol of the government's ongoing commitment to uphold the Al-Quran. "It is such an important annual event, it will definitely bring continuous impact to the 1Ummah strength".Bernama

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Public disagree with OWC’s approach on marriage

Public disagree with OWC’s approach on marriage

KOTA KINABALU: A local lawyer and activist has taken Kuala Lumpur-based Obedient Wives Club (OWC) to task for likening marital sex as ‘first class prostitution’ as it is very degrading to both women and men.

“It is unfortunate that the approach by OWC is to direct the focus of marriage on sex.

“This creates a very negative self-image for both women and men because it assumes that the only way to keep the marriage is to sexualise it and ignore the other important components of a marital partnership such as common goals and hobbies, communication and personal development, respect and love and joint responsibility in child rearing,” said Nilakrisna James.

She was commenting on the recent statement by OWC, providing sex lessons to help wives ‘serve their husbands better than a first-class prostitute’ to help promote harmonious marriages and counter social ills.

Nila reckons that developing a positive self-image and sexual confidence is important for women but this has nothing to do with keeping a man loyal.

She said women should automatically do this for themselves for their own mental and physical well-being and realise that being obedient has nothing to do with being submissive and lascivious in marital sex to the point where they cannot say no.

Nila who is also very active in child and women’s rights movement, stressed women should have the right to say no to sex and not feel pressured by the idea that their husbands would leave them if they do not perform like a whore.

She pointed out women should have sex on their own terms.

“Every couple in a relationship defines their own personal sexual needs and where one man might find a wanton hussy interesting, another might find it totally filthy and unattractive.

“Therefore, women should not delude themselves into thinking that there is a set formula to what turns a man on in bed,” she said.

However, Nila told The Borneo Post that she would give the OWC credit for sensationalizing and opening up the Malaysian people to a debate about sex and if we can openly discuss these matters without shame and embarrassment, then there is hope yet for an open civil society in this country.

“Women, above all else, should be responsible for developing a nation that could learn to respect women the way they are without always sexualising them and demeaning their status,” Nila added.

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Ayatollah Khomeini (24 Sept 1902- 3 June 1989)

Ayatollah Khomeini Biography

Born: September 24, 1902
Khomein, Persia
Died: June 3, 1989
Tehran, Iran

Iranian head of state and religious leader

Ayatollah Khomeini was the founder and supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The only leader in the Muslim world who combined political and religious authority as a head of state, he took office in 1979.

Early life and education

Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini was born on September 24, 1902, according to most sources. The title Ayatollah (the Sign of God) reflected his scholarly religious standing in the Shia Islamic tradition. His first name, Ruhollah (the Spirit of God), is a common name in spite of its religious meaning, and his last name is taken from his birthplace, the town of Khomein, which is about 200 miles south of Tehran, Iran's capital city. His father, Mustapha Musavi, was the chief cleric (those with religious authority) of the town and was murdered only five months after the birth of Ruhollah. The child was raised by his mother (Hajar) and aunt (Sahebeh), both of whom died when Ruhollah was about fifteen years old.

Ayatollah Khomeini's life after childhood went through three different phases. The first phase, from 1908 to 1962, was marked mainly by training, teaching, and writing in the field of Islamic studies. At the age of six he began to study the Koran, Islam's holy book, and also elementary Persian, an ancient language of Iran. Later, he completed his studies in Islamic law, ethics, and spiritual philosophy under the supervision of Ayatollah Abdul Karim Haeri-ye Yazdi, in Qom, where he also got married and had two sons and three daughters. Although during this scholarly phase of his life Khomeini was not politically active, the nature of his studies, teachings, and writings revealed that he firmly believed in political activism by clerics (religious leaders).

Preparation for political leadership

The second phase of Khomeini's life, from 1962 to 1979, was marked by political activism which was greatly influenced by his strict, religious interpretation of Shia Islam. He practically launched his fight against the shah's regime (the king's rule) in 1962, which led to the eruption of a religious and political rebellion on June 5, 1963. This date (fifteenth of Khurdad in the Iranian solar calendar) is regarded by the revolutionists as the turning point in the history of the Islamic movement in Iran. The shah's bloody crushing of the uprising was followed by the exile (forced removal) of Khomeini in 1964, first to Iraq then to France.

Khomeini's religious and political ideas became more extreme and his entry into active political opposition reflected a combination of events in his life. First, the deaths of the two leading Iranian religious leaders left leadership open to Khomeini. Second, although ever since the rise of Reza Shah Pahlavi (1878–1944) to power in the 1920s, the clerical class had been on the defensive because of his movements away from certain

Ayatollah Khomeini. Reproduced by permission of Getty Images.
Ayatollah Khomeini.
Reproduced by permission of
Getty Images
.
religious policies. And third, the shah's granting of diplomatic privileges to the American military personnel in 1964 was viewed as insulting to the Iranian sense of national independence.

Founding the Islamic Republic of Iran

The third phase of Khomeini's life began with his return to Iran from exile on February 1, 1979, after Muhammad Reza Shah had been forced to step down two weeks earlier. On February 11 revolutionary forces loyal to Khomeini seized power in Iran, and Khomeini emerged as the founder and the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

From the perspective of Khomeini and his followers, the Iranian Revolution went through several "revolutionary" phases. The first phase began with Khomeini's appointment of Mehdi Bazargan as the head of the "provisional government" on February 5, 1979, and ended with his fall on November 6, two days after the capture of the U.S. embassy (the U.S. headquarters in Iran).

The second revolution was marked by the elimination of mainly nationalist forces, or forces devoted to the interests of a culture. As early as August 20, 1979, twenty-two newspapers that clashed with Khomeini's views were ordered closed. In terms of foreign policy, the landmarks of the second revolution were the destruction of U.S.-Iran relations and the admission of the shah to the United States on October 22, 1979. Two weeks later, Khomeini instructed Iranian students to "expand with all their might their attacks against the United States" in order to force the extradition (legal surrender) of the shah. The seizure of the American embassy on November 4 led to 444 days of agonizing dispute between the United States and Iran until the release of the hostages on January 21, 1981.

The so-called third revolution began with Khomeini's dismissal of President Abul Hassan Bani-Sadr on June 22, 1981. Bani-Sadr's fate was a result of Khomeini's determination to eliminate from power any individual or group that could stand in the way of the ideal Islamic Republic of Iran. This government, however, had yet to be molded thoroughly according to his interpretation of Islam. In terms of foreign policy, the main characteristics of the third revolution were the continuation of the Iraq-Iran war, expanded efforts to export the "Islamic revolution," and increasing relations with the Soviet Union, a once-powerful nation that was made up of Russia and several other smaller nations.

The revolution began going through yet a fourth phase in late 1982. Domestically, the clerical class had combined its control, prevented land distribution, and promoted the role of the private citizens. Internationally, Iran sought a means of ending its status as an outcast and tried to distance itself from terrorist groups. It expanded commercial relations with Western Europe, China, Japan, and Turkey and reduced interaction with the Soviet Union. Iran also claimed that the door was open for re-establishing relations with the United States.

After the revolution

In November of 1986 President Ronald Reagan (1911–) admitted that the United States had secretly supplied some arms to Iran for their war against Iraq. This controversy led to a lengthy governmental investigation to see if federal laws had been violated in what would become known as the Iran-Contra affair.

In 1988 Khomeini and Iran accepted a cease-fire with Iraq after being pressured by the United Nations, a multi-national, peace-keeping organization. On February 14, 1989, Khomeini sentenced writer Salman Rushdie (1947–) to death, without a trial, in a legal ruling called a fatwa. Khomeini deemed Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses" to be blasphemous, or insulting to God, because of its unflattering portrait of Islam.

Before his death from cancer in Iran on June 3, 1989, Khomeini designated President Ali Khamenei to succeed him. Khomeini is still a popular figure to Iranians. Each year on the anniversary of his death, hundreds of thousands of people attend a ceremony at his shrine at the Behesht-e-Zahra cemetery.

For More Information

Bakhash, Shaul. The Region of the Ayatollahs: Iran and the Islamic Revolution. New York: Basic Books, 1984.

Hiro, Dilip. Iran Under the Ayatollahs. London: Routledge & K. Paul, 1985.

Moin, Baqer. Khomeini: Life of the Ayatollah. New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2000.

Rajaee, Farhang. Islamic Values and World View: Khomeyni on Man, the State and International Politics. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1983.



Read more: Ayatollah Khomeini Biography - life, childhood, name, death, history, mother, book, old, information, born, year http://www.notablebiographies.com/Jo-Ki/Khomeini-Ayatollah.html#ixzz1OB4VMIL5

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Utusan Malaysia: Behind the print | Free Malaysia Today

Utusan Malaysia: Behind the print | Free Malaysia Today

Utusan Malaysia: Behind the print

Stephanie Sta Maria
| May 11, 2011

Utusan Malaysia's former senior journalist explains why the paper will never be investigated and why Malaysians should take it seriously.

KUALA LUMPUR: Many uncomplimentary descriptions have been accorded to Utusan Malaysia. The more common of those include “irresponsible”, “mischievous ” and “dangerous”. Of that trio, Utusan Malaysia’s former senior journalist, Hata Wahari, says that the third is dead-on.

The mainstream media, for as long as they pander to the government, enjoy immunity from public prosecution. But Utusan Malaysia has earned a special place within this untouchable clique simply by the virtue of being owned by Umno.

This privilege has spawned relentless attacks on the opposition and increasingly frequent inflammatory reports on race and religion. But while most urbanites can see right through Utusan Malaysia’s thinly-veiled propaganda, its rural readership remains staunch believers. For this reason alone, Hata warned that giving Utusan Malaysia the brush-off would be a very bad idea.

“People should worry about the slander it publishes because it is taking root in the rural areas,” he told FMT. “KL and Selangor are multi-cultural and able to discuss Utusan’s reports among themselves to seek clarification.”

“But the rural community is predominantly Malay-Muslim. Who are they going to cross-check their facts with? Neither is there another Malay-language paper to counter Utusan’s reports. The only media they are exposed to is government-owned media.”

“The racial flames are being stoked there and one day it will explode. I’m very afraid of that. If anything were to happen, it will begin in the rural areas. I have said before that another May 13 is likely if Utusan is allowed to continue playing up rubbish issues.”

Hata, who is the president of the National Union of Journalists, was given the boot from Utusan Malaysia on April 21 for allegedly tarnishing the paper’s image with such statements. But the termination came as a relief as he could no longer stomach the editorial content that almost flaunted the paper’s role as an Umno tool. Yet he said it wasn’t always this way.

“When I joined in 1995, Utusan was a paper that focused on Malay grassroots issues more than political ones,” he recalled. “The then editor-in-chief, Khalid Mohammad, had more control over the editorial content and the then prime minister, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, was more open to editorial-related discussions.”

“The Awang Selamat column was used to put forth suggestions on how Umno could address the issues affecting the Malay community. It wasn’t meant to attack people or parties. And even then the column was pulled after two months because of poor response.”

Awang Selamat has since been resurrected and according to Hata, the current column for Mingguan Malaysia is written by the editor-in-chief while the senior editors take turns penning the column in Utusan Malaysia.

Editorial agenda set by Umno

The swing in Utusan Malaysia’s stance came shortly after the 2008 election when Khalid was replaced by Aziz Ishak. According to Hata, the latter does not question the editorial directives set by the Umno political bureau which reportedly sits every Monday night to discuss the paper’s agenda for the week.

Those present are the president Najib Tun Razak, deputy president Muhyiddin Yassin, the three vice-presidents – Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, Hishamuddin Hussein and Safie Apdal – secretary-general Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor and information chief Ahmad Maslan.

The agenda is then communicated to Utusan Malaysia’s editor-in-chief via the prime minister’s office. The paper will run an issue for three days before dropping it completely unless it receives strong public support from top BN ministers.

It’s a clever strategy because by the third day the other media would have snapped it up to continue milking it, which would leave Utusan Malaysia free to start the ball rolling on another issue.

But this strategy has come at a price. Utusan Malaysia’s circulation figures are steadily declining and the paper has reportedly been suffering losses of up to RM20 million since 2009. Figures from the Audit Bureau of Circulation showed that paper’s daily sales have shrank 20% between June 2006 and June 2010.

“Some 50% of Utusan’s sales are government-sponsored,” Hata said. “Thirty-six government ministries subscribe to Utusan and the government spends up to RM50 million annually on advertisements. These are Utusan’s only profits because most organisations are reluctant to advertise.”

As of June 2010, Utusan Malaysia recorded an average sale of 170,558 copies, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulation. Of the number, between 70,000 and 80,000 copies are distributed to newspaper vendors daily, but Hata claimed that nearly half of these are returned at the end of the day.

The highest number of unsold copies are in Kuala Lumpur.

Hata said that many vendors are also uncomfortable with Utusan Malaysia’s front page stories and either conceal the paper behind other publications or hide it under their tables.

“I live in Puchong and of the 15 newspapers vendors, only one carries Utusan,” Hata said. “Most non-Muslim vendors are more comfortable displaying Berita Harian which carries Utusan’s main story on later pages and on a smaller scale.”

“Even some Umno division leaders have admitted their discomfort with Utusan’s extremist stand because they have to answer to their multi-racial constituents. But the political bureau is unconcerned. All it wants is for Utusan to retain the support of the rural Malay loyalists which it is doing very well.”