Category: Agama

Chinese Nationals Using Malaysia As Transit Point To Join Islamic State

PUTRAJAYA — More than 300 Chinese nationals have used Malaysia as a transit point on their way to join the Islamic State (IS) militant group in Syria and Iraq, Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi revealed today.

They had moved on to a third country from Malaysia prior to entering Syria and Iraq, he said, adding that this was disclosed to him by China’s Vice Minister of Public Security Meng Hongwei at a meeting at his office here today.

Ahmad Zahid said Kuala Lumpur and Beijing viewed seriously this security threat and were committed to curbing it in a more comprehensive manner.

“Although there exists an arrangement between Malaysia and China to combat terrorism through counter-terrorism measures, this problem is serious.

“This is because ties exist at the international level between terrorists in China and those in other countries in the Southeast Asian region,” he told reporters after Meng had called on him.

Asked about the possibility of these Chinese nationals having ties with Malaysians, Ahmad Zahid said no information had been received on that.

On another matter, the minister said there had been no proposal or discussion yet on the issuing of visas free to tourists from other countries besides China.

When announcing measures to strengthen Malaysia’s economic resilience yesterday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had said visas would be issued free to tourists, including from China.

Ahmad Zahid said tourists from China visiting Malaysia still had to apply for a visa but they were exempted from having to pay the fee of 80 yuan (RM46.45).

He said the Cabinet decided that an official announcement on the free-visa measure would be made after all rules and conditions had been refined by the Malaysian Immigration Department.

“We will make an official announcement at the Malaysian embassy and consulates general in China,” he said.

Source: www.themalaymailonline.com

January 22, 2015
Inconvenient Questions (Part 1) : Reacting To The Charlie Hebdo Attack

This is a two part debate.

In Part I :The Charlie Hebdo killings. The Sydney hostage crisis. The Peshawar school massacre. As leaders in the West march in solidarity for freedom of speech, are there no exceptions to this absolute freedom? Who will be accountable when there is retaliatory action where life is lost? Are we witnessing a new age of instability driven by ideologies that offer no middle ground? What’s Singapore’s position on the matter?

Source: http://inconvenientquestions.sg

January 22, 2015
A Muslim’s Response To Anti-Islam Protesters In Germany

Dear 25,000 Anti-Islam Dresden Protesters and Pegida,

I hear you marched in your thousands against my religion. Last week, and last month. You marched against immigrants, foreigners, and anyone a shade darker. I will not draw comparisons to Nazi Germany. I will not call you bigots, I will not insult you, and I will not label you. But we do have a problem.

You marched with banners claiming your city is overcrowded with Muslims. Yet 0.1% of Dresden are Muslim. You marched claiming immigrants are cramming your schools and leaving your children to travel miles for an education. Yet 2.5% of Dresden are foreign-born.

You claim that Germany is being invaded by Muslims. Yet only 5% of Germans are Muslim.

You march “against the Islamization of the West”. Yet within a century containing two World Wars, the decolonisation process, countless civil conflicts, foreign intervention, globalisation, and further displacement, Muslims remain a fringe minority in Europe. Less than 6%. A pretty lousy colonisation process, no?

You marched against refugees and asylum seekers, claiming Germany is their target for welfare and social security. Yet according to UNHCR, there are 51.2million refugees worldwide. Germany caters for less than 0.01% of them. Is that too much to ask? Is such a humanitarian obligation too large for the Refugee Convention 1951 your government ratified? Or is it actually punitive, for example, in comparison to Lebanon where every fourth person is a Syrian refugee?

Protesters, you are not alone. In my country, Britain, we have our own anti-immigration party. Ukip won their first seat in Clacton with nothing but anti-migrant rhetoric. Yet only 4.3% of Clacton are foreign-born. In a Parliamentary-based system, where each constituency elects a representative to voice their views, there is nothing Ukip can do for the people of Clacton.

Do you see a pattern? Perhaps I should explain. Your kind tend to establish themselves where their “problem” does not actually exist. Is this therefore an issue of negative perception? Fear of the unfamiliar? Intolerance in ignorance? Scapegoating an underclass? Media misinformation?

I will elaborate. London has a 36.2% foreign-born population. Relatively, that is fifteen times the population of foreigners in Dresden. A far greater diversity. Ukip poll the lowest in London compared to the rest of the country– in every demographic, foreign or not. London is a metropolis of brown, black, and white working side by side. We thrive. I saw an atheist today. Guess what? I did not try to convert him nor behead him for blasphemy; I helped him off the bus. He was 74 years old.

Does that make sense?

Your only insight into Islam is a box in your living room. Confirmation bias andcognitive dissonance infest the information you expose yourself to. Information which dehumanises and polarises anyone unlike you.

You enjoy the far-right media portrayal of Islam. It makes you feel good. Superior. Better. The barbaric Muslims, we are. We disrespect women, and we impose our beliefs on to others.

Yet did you know that Turkey, Indonesia, and Bangladesh, all Muslim majority stateshave had more elected female heads of state than almost every other Western country? Did you know that the Quran explicitly says “there is no compulsion in religion” (2:256), and our Prophet clarified “whomever hurts a non-Muslim will not smell a whiff of paradise”?

Did you know that your twisted misrepresentation of my religion helps the terrorists? Did you know that you and the terrorists agree on what seems to form an integral part of your identity: that Islam is violent? Did you know that you even use the same methodology to proclaim this; taking a verse out of context and evading any intellectual discourse?

What are Muslims to you, anyway? Arabs? Less than 20% of us are Arab. Indian or Pakistani? Again, less than 20%. Turkish? Less than 5%. Nothing else? That is more than half of us you cannot identify.

You assume our identity by our race. Is it not disheartening to you that such a narrow world view is legitimately held by so many? Does it not display a perspective so constrained to the contents of immediate life and prejudice? Is that not likely to lead to ignorant assumptions and offence in face of what is unbeknownst?

What becomes of the German Muslim, I wonder? Is he spared because he is white? Or is he declared a traitor and shunned? Is it difficult to choose between racism and neglecting a fellow countryman? Choose neither. Choose education. Tolerance. Kindness.

Detach from the vicious cycle of far-right media (who are unfamiliar with foreigners) feeding the far-right populace (who are unfamiliar with foreigners) what they should think about foreigners.

I ask you, have you ever met a Muslim? “Met” is not a synonym for shouting abuse at or stabbing to death in or outside their home. No, have you ever sat with a Muslim? Talked to a Muslim? Worked with a Muslim?

You should. At an airport perhaps, where we are 42 times more likely to be searched, and thus declared safe for human interaction.

Sincerely,
A Real-Life Muslim (not the ones on TV)

Source:www.huffingtonpost.co.uk

January 22, 2015
No Contradictions In Condemning Charlie Hebdo Murders And Cartoons

I am surprised the report “Latest Charlie Hebdo cover continues to roil Muslim world” (Jan 18, online) asserts that the reaction across the Muslim world was “somewhat contradictory” because Muslims in general condemned both the murders and the cartoons.

There is no contradiction. Condemning the murders is a non-issue, as no sane person would justify such actions, yet it does not mean we must agree with the cartoonists’ actions.

This is not a black-and-white issue; there is room for a nuanced view, which is the position of most Muslims. Killing is unacceptable; so is mocking the faiths of others. Instead of being contradictory, this position is the closest to justice.

The two acts are not equal, no doubt, but neither are both moral. Thankfully, most Singaporeans have never believed in unlimited free speech, especially when it comes to denigrating religion.

Most humans accept that it is vile and vulgar to insult another person’s parents. It would perhaps be instructive to state that Muslims consider our Prophet to be dearer to us than our parents.

So, it is unreasonable to expect us to be comfortable with others mocking him in the name of freedom and satire. Even if we believe in complete freedom of speech, including the freedom to offend, there is no need to laud the people of Charlie Hebdo as martyrs, heroes or the saving grace of humanity, as some have done.

People who believe in complete free speech should defend their right to say what they want without defending what is said, or worse, elevating it to an undeserved status.

They may have a right to say what they want, considering the boundaries French society has set for itself, but that does not make them good humans. Many others have the same right, yet choose to exercise the right to respect, not offend.

Source: Walid Jumblatt Abdullah at www.todayonline.com

January 22, 2015
Malaysia’s Catholic Church Loses Final Bid To Use “Allah” In Its Publication

KUALA LUMPUR — Malaysia’s Catholic Church yesterday lost its final bid to be allowed to use the word “Allah” in its weekly newspaper printed in Bahasa Malaysia, drawing to a close a five-year battle.

With no more legal avenues to pursue for the right to use the word “Allah” in the weekly Herald, its editor, Reverend Father Lawrence Andrew, expressed disappointment that the Federal Court’s dismissal of the appeal would further undermine the rights of minorities.

Rev Andrew said it was an important constitutional case on the right to profess one’s faith and said he hoped that the rights of minorities, including the poor and the underprivileged, would not be trampled upon.

However, the Malay rights group Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) said the Catholic Church should lay down arms and accept defeat as it lauded the Federal Court’s decision.

Isma president Abdullah Zaik Abd Rahman lauded the Federal Court’s decision, saying it was in accordance with the Federal Constitution and was made to preserve national harmony in Muslim-majority Malaysia.

“The ‘Allah’ polemic should end now with the court’s ruling. I hope the church abides by the decision for the sake of the country’s harmony,” he said. “Stubbornness will not benefit anyone,” Mr Abdullah said, adding that any failure by the church to accept the court’s decision would result in prolonging the standoff between Christians and Muslims in Malaysia over use of the Arabic word.

“We will continue to be in crisis if we do not accept the decision from the country’s judiciary,” the Isma leader added.

During the case, however, Rev Andrew was asked if allowing the use of the word would “open up old wounds and cause public unrest”.

He said he did not understand how trouble could arise as “Allah” had been used for a long time by Bahasa Malaysia-speaking Christians.

“Malay has been the language in the church in Malaya for centuries and I have shown evidence than BM was already a language of worship for hundreds of years in devotional booklets. And during this period, there was no trouble whatsoever, so I don’t see an possibility of evoking trouble,” the priest said.

Despite appearing to be at the end of the road, the church’s lead counsel, Dr Cyrus Das, said the issue was not necessarily over.

It could be raised through other cases, Dr Das said, adding that the matter of constitutional rights of minorities could still be taken up. The merits of the church’s case in the dispute over the use of the word “Allah” need to be raised in the courts in other cases on the same topic, especially on the Home Minister’s powers to ban words and the scope of prohibitions. “There are other constitutional issues that have not been addressed and this can be taken up in other cases,” he said.

Mr Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, president of the Muslim Lawyers Association, appeared to agree.

“Muslims are unhappy because the word ‘Allah’ was used to refer to a non-Muslim God, but it is not a blanket ruling that non-Muslims cannot use the word,” he added.

MCA politician Gan Peng Sieu, who is also a lawyer, described the Federal Court’s decision as a great injustice.

“The Federal Court is skirting away from answering constitutional issues which are left hanging. The people were expecting the Federal Court to do more as this is beyond politics. The duty of the Federal Court is to preserve and defend the Federal Constitution and the current state of the ‘Allah’ issue will not do any good for the country,” said Mr Gan, whose party, MCA, is a component member of the ruling Barisan Nasional government.

Source: www.todayonline.com

January 22, 2015