Khamis, 5 Januari 2012

Anwar Ibrahim

Anwar Ibrahim

Watch Out: The Fuzz is on Facebook in Malaysia

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 06:20 PM PST

Wall Street Journal
By Shibani Mahtani

Malaysia's cops are stealing a page from dissident movements across the globe, and turning to social media to keep troubles from spreading in their own backyard.

After activists in the Middle East and elsewhere used Facebook and other websites to rally countrymen against undemocratic regimes in recent years, the Royal Malaysia Police are now using their own official Facebook and Twitter pages – typically filled with traffic warnings and information on crime rates – to hopefully prevent a planned rally in support of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on Jan. 9, when the verdict on his two-year sodomy trial is expected.

Sharing photos and videos of past riots – including the raucous London demonstrations that shook Britain last August – the Malaysian police warned that peaceful assemblies can easily devolve into chaos, and "should be a lesson" to Malaysians.

With a title of "Is this what you want?" the Royal Malaysia Police Facebook page includes a report from the ABC network in the U.S. of the London riots showing buildings being torched and smashed, and protestors overwhelmed by police in parts of central London.

"Peaceful assemblies that have become riots overseas should be a lesson to us if we want to pursue freedom and the right to self-expression," said the caption accompanying the video.

The Malaysian police are also using their Facebook pages to share police videos of student demonstrations earlier this week, in which students from a university in northern Perak gathered to demand greater academic freedom. These videos were originally shared through the police's official YouTube page.

The police also interviewed a shopkeeper – only identified as 'Mr. Kenny' – who, according to the site, was seeking to persuade anyone planning to rally on Jan. 9 against to refrain from protest, claiming that previous grassroots movements and rallies have affected his business.

Unlike some failed efforts at engagement between the police and citizens in some parts of the world, the Malaysian police seem to have been surprisingly successful at their social media efforts. Their Facebook page, which usually offers more practical information like updates on police activities, crime rates, safety tips and traffic reports, has more than 100,000 likes and is significantly more popular than many other government-led Facebook campaigns. The government's Twitter account, launched in September last year, has almost 10,000 followers.

Most of the comments on the videos posted by the Malaysian police agreed with the sentiments behind them. Many even praised the police for "cleaning what is dirty" and "keeping the peace" in the country.

The issue of public protests in Malaysia has long been a testy one, particularly after last year's "Bersih" (meaning clean in English) rally, in which police used water cannons and tear gas to break up a 20,000-strong protest demanding free and fair elections. In a move to placate critics, Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak promised to scrap the country's feared Internal Security Act and instituted new protest laws, which still drew criticism from those arguing they continued to limit dissent.

Those planning to rally in support of Mr. Anwar – dubbed the "901 rally" – insist that the event will be peaceful. They have indicated their willingness to work together with the police, though authorities and non-governmental organizations remain fearful that if the rally turns violent, scenes similar to last year's "Bersih" rallies will cause chaos in the nation's capital.

Malaysia’s Anwar Says Opposition Will Survive Jailing

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 06:14 PM PST

www.timeslive.co

Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim said his coalition will survive even if he is jailed on sodomy charges, as his nationwide tour ahead of next week’s verdict rolls on despite police warnings.

Anwar was charged in 2008 with having sex with a male former aide and a verdict in the long-running trial is due to be handed down on Monday. If found guilty, the 64-year-old politician faces up to 20 years in jail.

Anwar has condemned the allegations as a government plot to destroy his image in the conservative Muslim-majority country, and reverse the unprecedented electoral gains the opposition made in 2008 polls.

To rally support ahead of the verdict, he has embarked on a nationwide tour that began Tuesday in southern Johor and will sweep through six other states before a courthouse demonstration on Monday.

Anwar told a gathering of about 500 people in central Negeri Sembilan state, near the capital Kuala Lumpur, late Wednesday that his three-party opposition alliance would not crumble without him.

“Anwar in jail, Anwar out of jail… it doesn’t matter. The most important (thing) is people should overthrow UMNO,” he said during a fiery hour-long speech, referring to the ruling United Malays National Organisation.

Pacing on a makeshift stage set up in a parking lot, Anwar said he was innocent of the allegations and called on his listeners to “save our country” from government corruption and mismanagement.

“I’m not guilty. I’m a victim of slander… there is no case if they follow the facts or the law,” he told the townspeople, many in Muslim traditional dress and brandishing party flags and pictures of Anwar.

He also took swipes at ruling party politicians, often raising laughter, accusing them of aiming to create divisions between majority ethnic Malays and the multicultural nation’s ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.

After his speech, the crowd applauded and proclaimed the innocence of the opposition leader, a former finance minister who was sacked and jailed a decade ago on separate sodomy charges widely seen as politically motivated.

“Everybody knows Anwar has not done anything wrong ever. (The government) is playing the same card, the same game,” 21-year-old university student Izzat Haffiz told AFP.

Despite low turnout in the opening days of the tour, organisers are hoping the crowds will increase dramatically when Anwar visits opposition-held Kelantan state late Thursday and northern Penang on Saturday.

The government has warned people against turning up at the courthouse protest Monday, and police have said they will crack down on anyone caught distributing posters as well as blogs “inciting people to attend the rally”.

“Police have to handle this matter carefully as the planned rally poses a threat to public security,” police internal security chief Salleh Mat Rasid said according to state media.

Deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin also criticised the opposition for going ahead with the nationwide tour and the rally at the court — the scene of previous large demonstrations relating to Anwar’s legal dramas.

“Many sides have already voiced their objections against the gathering,” Muhyiddin told the New Straits Times newspaper.

“By going ahead with it, they are showing that they’re going with the assumption that the courts already have a negative verdict.”

Anwar, a former deputy prime minister, spent six years in jail on sodomy and corruption counts in a stunning fall from grace after he fell out with his then boss, former premier Mahathir Mohamad.

The sodomy conviction was eventually overturned and he was released in 2004, allowing him to revive his political career as leader of an opposition alliance which has for the first time threatened UMNO’s half-century hold on power.

Prime Minister Najib Razak is widely expected to call fresh elections this year, hoping to regain a strong mandate after promising reforms on the economy as well as civil liberties.

AP Interview: Malaysian In Sodomy Trial Slams Law

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 06:08 PM PST

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

With the verdict in his sodomy trial days away, Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on Thursday decried the laws he’s charged with breaking, calling them archaic rules that can be abused to promote intolerance, invade people’s privacy and punish them too harshly.

The remarks place Anwar, who denies the charges that he sodomized a young male former aide, alone among senior Malaysian politicians. Government and opposition leaders alike in this Muslim-majority nation usually avoid making statements that could be perceived as a nod to gay rights, partly because of discomfort among religious conservatives.

Sodomy in Malaysia is punishable by 20 years in prison and whipping with a rattan cane. The 64-year-old Anwar said he is bracing for the possibility of a long prison sentence when the Kuala Lumpur High Court delivers a decision Monday. He will not face the whipping penalty because of his age.

“My view is that you can’t have laws to be abused for political purposes and to be seen to be punitive and to be unjust to others,” Anwar said in a telephone interview while traveling on a six-day tour of the country for opposition rallies ahead of the verdict.

Anwar’s 26-year-old accuser, Saiful Bukhari Azlan, testified that Anwar coerced him into having sex at a Kuala Lumpur apartment in 2008. Anwar did not take the witness stand but criticized the proceedings in a long courtroom tirade from behind the lawyers’ table, where he could not be cross-examined.

Anwar, who is married with six children, insists he is innocent and claims the sodomy charge is part of a government conspiracy to discredit him and destroy the opposition’s chances of winning general elections widely expected this year. Prime Minister Najib Razak has denied any plot.

The anti-sodomy law is seldom and selectively enforced, often only in cases of sexual abuse of children and teenagers, but gay rights activists have long claimed that it encourages homophobia. New York-based Human Rights Watch last month urged Malaysia to abandon laws banning same-sex relations.

Anwar said that although he believes government must prohibit same-sex marriage and prevent public obscenity, he also believes that current sodomy laws could “be abused to show violent discrimination or intolerance.”

“Our present laws are deemed to be rather archaic,” Anwar said. “The whole idea (should be) to encourage people to understand not to be seen to be so punitive. In this case it’s worse — you can go and probe and peep into people’s bedrooms just to try to smear them.”

This is Anwar’s second time on trial for sodomy. A former deputy prime minister, Anwar was found guilty in 2000 of sodomizing his family’s ex-driver, but Malaysia’s top court freed him from prison in 2004 after quashing his conviction and nine-year sentence.

The current charge surfaced in 2008, several months after Anwar led the opposition to its best electoral results since independence from Britain in 1957.

Anwar said Thursday that regardless of the verdict, his three-party alliance is determined to unseat Najib’s long-ruling coalition in the next elections and form an administration that would curb corruption and racial discrimination. The opposition now controls slightly more than one-third of Parliament’s seats.

“The likelihood of our winning elections … is not a far-fetched idea,” Anwar said. “We believe that change is imminent and for the benefit of all Malaysians.”

Jadual Jelajah Anwar Ibrahim 6 Jan-7 Jan 2012

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 04:21 PM PST

Jumaat 6 Januari 2012 – Lembah Pantai & Kelana Jaya

 

9.00 mlm –  Lembah Pantai – Dewan Gasing Indah, Seksyen 5, PJ

11.00 mlm – Kelana Jaya – Kompleks Sukan 3K, Persiaran Kewajipan, Subang Jaya

 

Sabtu 7 Januari 2012 – Pulau Pinang, Pahang & Terengganu

 

7.00 pagi – Permatang Pauh – Madrasah An Nahdoh, Kubang Semang

3.30 ptg – Indera Mahkota – Markas PAS, Kampong Balok, Kuantan

9.00 mlm – Kuala Terengganu – Pejabat PKR Kuala Terengganu, Gong Kapas

11.00 mlm – Hulu Terengganu – Kampong Gaung, Kuala Berang

Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim Esok Jumaat 6/1/2012 Di Masjid Al-Firdaus,Bandar Baru Selayang

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 08:55 AM PST

Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim akan menunaikan solat Jumaat esok 6 Januari 2012 di Masjid Al-Firdaus,Bandar Baru Selayang

Rakaman Siri Jelajah Anwar Ibrahim Di Seremban 4/Jan/2012

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 03:18 AM PST

Anwar Ibrahim at the London School of Economics, March 18, 2010

Posted: 05 Jan 2012 02:59 AM PST

Admin:  rencana ini telah diterbitkan pada Mac 24 2011. Ianya merupakan Jawapan kepada tuduhan pluralisme yang dilemparkan kepada Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim

Public lecture by Anwar Ibrahim at the London School of Economics, March 18, 2010

Let me begin with a cryptic line from T.S. Eliot's "Burnt Norton":

Go, go, go, said the bird: Human kind cannot bear very much reality.

But I say bear it we must for indeed, it is a stark reality of our world that certain religious groups hold that only certain fundamental doctrines may lead to salvation. This exclusivist outlook unfortunately cuts across the board as between religions as well as within the denominations. In Christendom, we have seen the schisms and consequent upheavals arising from this sense of exclusivity. Within Islam, Sunni, Shiite and Sufi denominations have had a chequered history and continue to present the world with a scenario of violence and bloodshed. The backlash against Muslim migration to Europe has become more acrid in the aftermath of 9/11 and 7/7 with right wing political parties benefitting from the new bout of xenophobia and fear mongering. France's ban on the burqa has elicited heated emotion on both sides, but many Muslims scratched their heads in disbelief when Switzerland outlawed minarets.

Back in the 13th century, the mystical poet Jelaluddin al-Rumi wrote in the Mathnavi:

The lamps are different but the Light is the same, it comes from Beyond; If thou keep looking at the lamp, thou art lost; for thence arises the appearance of number and plurality.

Those verses couldn't be more relevant for us today. Despite rancorous debates linking religion to conflict and discrimination, it remains a fact that at a personal level religious experience boils down to certain universal concepts. Where does man come from? What is his purpose? What happens when he dies? The spiritual path subscribes us to a universal quest for truth and the pursuit of justice and virtue. We rejoice in beauty, both within ourselves and in what surrounds us. We long for knowledge, peace and security amid the mysteries and uncertainties of the universe. In our disjointed world filled with ugliness, violence and injustice, religion gives all of mankind an opportunity to realize values which unify humanity, despite the great diversity of climes and cultures.

Dante – one of the great poets of the Christian tradition – had much to say about this issue. Surrounded by civil strife that tore asunder the landscape of his 14th century Italian countryside, Dante was well acquainted with factionalism and the struggles for power between the Lords Temporal and the Lords Spiritual. Seeing the damage inflicted by the attempts to overcome these divisions he perceived a solution that was not merely political in nature. Writing in Monarchia he said that the ultimate aims in life are twofold – happiness in this worldly life as well as happiness in the eternal life basking in the vision of God. The attainment of these two goals would come with great difficulty:

"only when the waves of seductive greed are calmed and the human race rests free in the tranquility of peace."

Dante's vision of universal peace could be achieved only when the nations of the world unite in an undivided planetary polity. This was surely a utopian dream but being European it is worth noting that his dream was not of an imperial Europe. Nor did he envision the Church expanding beyond its walls. The ruling authority in this utopian landscape would be the faculty of human reason, linking Dante's vision directly to the philosophical outlook of Muslim luminaries including al-Farabi and Ibn Rushd.

Of course such a New World Order never materialized. On the contrary if there is an enduring legacy of Enlightenment thought on the political geography of the world it is the dissection of empires and dynasties into individual, competing nation states rather than a greater unification.

Much blood was spilled to create and then protect these boundaries. Despite attempts by some to purify their lands, the boundaries drawn around the nation-state have been blurred by the advent of modern transportation and communication. Today's world is perhaps more diverse and integrated than was the case in the golden age of Muslim Spain, where Christians, Jews and Muslims lived in peaceful harmonious coexistence. And yet we can hardly say that the overwhelming result of this new connectivity is peace and harmony.

Today, freedom of religion without which there can be no religious pluralism, is an entrenched constitutional liberty in the established democracies. As such, favoring one religion over another or granting it a position at the expense of others may be considered as being against the spirit of religious pluralism. Yet this still happens even in certain established democracies in Europe while in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia this ambivalence has been virtually taken for granted until recently.

This is why the discourse on religious pluralism must deal with the fundamental question of freedom of religion and by association the freedom of conscience. The question arises as to whether it is the diversity of religions which makes the divided world more divided or the denial of religious freedom that causes it.

I believe I'm not alone in saying that for religious pluralism to flourish in a divided world, it is morally unacceptable to say to people of other faiths:

We believe in our God and we believe we are right; you believe in your God, but what you believe in is wrong.

If the Qur'anic proclamation that there is no compulsion in religion is to mean anything then it must surely be that imposition of one's faith unto others is not Islamic. But to say this is not to deny the reality of religious diversity for the Qur'an also tells us clearly:

"O people! Behold, we have created you from a male and a female and have made you into nations and tribes to that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware."

The Guru Granth Sahib tells us that he who sees that all spiritual paths lead to the One shall be freed but he who utters falsehood shall descend into hellfire and burn. The blessed and the sanctified are those who remain absorbed in Truth.

Whatever the religion, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism and many others, I believe that the higher truths which go beyond mere practice and ritual all converge on the singular truth: and that is from God we were sent forth and unto God shall we return.

Yet certain leaders of the major world religions continue to make exclusivist claims to the eternal truths rather than accepting the commonality that binds us. If we accept that there can be unity in diversity, religious pluralism can therefore be a unifying force, not a cause of division. That is the way to take us away from darkness into light, from war to peace and from hatred and evil to love and kindness.

As for Muslims, there continues to be the problem of those who reject the value of free speech, free press, democracy, and freedom of conscience. They see the culture of religious pluralism as part of a grand conspiracy by 'others' particularly Christians to proselytize and convert Muslims. Pluralism is also a ploy of smuggling Western-style democracy through the back door.

But this is actually an aberration when it comes to the application of Muslim jurisprudence. Outside certain concerns of public policy there is no religious obligation upon Muslims to impose the laws and values of Muslims on the entire society. The Ottoman millet system is but one example of a system crafted by a Muslim state which was grounded in the principle of respect the recognized the rights of non-Muslims to follow freely the dictates of their religion. It was recognized that this was essential to maintain harmony in a pluralistic environment of an expanding empire. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyah, an eight century Hanbali legal scholar offers us a more vivid case. In the case of the Zoroastrian practice of self-marriage whereby men are encouraged to marry their mothers, this is an act deemed morally repugnant from the Muslim perspective. When asked whether the Muslim state should recognize such unions, however, al-Jawziyah affirmed the rights of the Zoroastrians provided their cases not be presented in a Muslim court and that the said practices are deemed permissible within their own legal tradition. So, he said, the Muslim state has no business to interfere.

It is unfortunate that some of the wisdom of Islam's classical scholarship is forgotten. Ideological rigidity remains the stumbling block to progress and reform. Muslims must break free from the old practices of cliché-mongering and name calling, move beyond tribal or parochial concerns. A rediscovery of the religion's inherent grasp of pluralism is very much in need.

The Qur'an declares: Say He is Allah, the One, Allah, the eternally besought of all. One of the greatest medieval Torah scholars, Maimonides, also known by the Arabic moniker Ubaidallah Maimun al-Qurtubi, in expounding the unity of God in Judaism said: God is one and there is no other oneness like His. With reference to the phrase "hallowed be thy name" from the Lord's Prayer (Matt. 6:9), the late Swami Prabhavananda wrote that God's name can be viewed as a mantra, the repetition of which both confers spiritual power and purifies the aspirant's heart and mind. By means of this practice, God's "name is experienced as living and conscious, as one with God—and illumination is attained."

Historically, Muslims viewed the Qur'an as addressing the intellect as well as the spirit. It set out the order in the universe, the principles and certitudes within it, and demanded a thorough examination of them so that we can be certain of the validity of its claims and message. This pursuit would inevitably lead to the realization of the eternal principles of the Divine Unity which in turn springs forth from the Divine Laws. But the Shari'ah was never cast in stone and evolves continuously through this dynamic process. In order to maintain a middle ground, the essential ingredients of an Islamic methodology must then be conceived in a holistic perspective which will be universal and eternal in appeal.

It is said that pluralism in a divided world serves only to cement the schisms leading to the tired and tiring refrain of the 'clash of civilizations' akin to the beating of 'an antique drum'. This seems to be the metaphor that appeals to the imagination of historians and political scientists. The upshot is a clash of visions of history, perceptions, and images which in turn brings about differing and often opposing interpretations, not just of history, but world views. Nevertheless, as Eliot says:

History may be servitude, History may be freedom

We should therefore disabuse ourselves of this notion of the clash between civilizations and refocus our attention on the clash that has been brewing within the umma. We see a more dangerous and portentous clash as one that is intra-civilizational – between the old and the new, the weak and the strong, the moderates and the fundamentalists and between the modernists and the traditionalists.

If we look at history as servitude, we could gloss over the historical perspective and consign it to the realm of academia on the ground that we are already in the 21st century.

Turkey and Indonesia are clearly blazing the trail of democracy for other Muslim nations to follow. The impending accession of Turkey into the European Union is also a clear statement of the level of liberal democracy attained though unfortunately the obstacles thrown in the way by some member countries is very telling of the state of Islamophobia. In Southeast Asia, Indonesia has already reached the finishing line while her Muslim neighbors are still stuck at the starting block. So history is indeed freedom if indeed we are prepared to learn its lessons.

Today, jihad has been invoked by certain quarters to legitimize acts of violence in varied forms and guises, blurring the line between jihad and terrorism. Thanks to the Obama administration, we have seen some palpable change from the Bush policy of selective ambivalence in the war on terror, supporting autocrats in the Muslim world on the one hand, and championing the cause of freedom and democracy on the other. Although after more than a year since the administration took office we have yet to see substantive changes in the substance of American foreign policy with the Muslim world.

Within Islam, freedom is considered one of the higher objectives of the divine law in as much as the very same elements in a constitutional democracy become moral imperatives in Islam – freedom of conscience, freedom to speak out against tyranny, a call for reform and the right to property.

In closing permit me once again to draw on my perpetual reserve in Eliot's Four Quartets:

What we call the beginning is often the end
And to make an end is to make a beginning.
The end is where we start from.
Dicatat oleh di

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan

Langgan: Catat Ulasan (Atom)