The US-based news portal said this based on Najib's speech in June at a dinner to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Cheras Umno branch where he had urged party members to emulate the exploits of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (Isis) members as they had been able to defeat the Iraqi armed forces despite being outnumbered.
"The nation's Commander-in-Chief teed-off on Christmas Eve with the radical Islamist prime minister of Malaysia, who praised the actions of terrorist groups such as the Isis for their victories," it wrote.
Recent inhuman terror attacks from fundamentalist Islamic organisations have sent tremors round the world. As a scared world dissects the causes and tries to find solutions, many stress the role of the ‘moderate Muslim’, or educated and modern Muslims who have kept quiet or not spoken up enough in all this.This is the result when you are a double-faced leader doing double-talk all the time. You never know which side of you will be picked up by the media. To a large extent, this double-face and double talk political trait is present in all BN leaders, and they will continue to thrive as long as the majority of the people are unaware of it
However, it isn’t as simple. To find solutions, it is important not to assign blame to a whole group of people. The first step is to try and understand the moderate Muslim point of view.
Examiner.com's report, however, made no mention of the fact that the prime minister's office had later clarified that Najib's words were taken out of context and had on many occasions reiterated that the militants' actions ran counter to the Islamic faith and culture and humanity.
It also failed to mention that Najib had condemned Isis and religious extremism at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on September 27.
Besides Obama and Najib, others who joined in the golf game were White House aides Joe Paulsen and Mike Brush.
"Obama's advisers have told the news media that the president is simply taking advantage of the 'warm temperatures in Hawaii to hit the links,' the report further stated.
Examiner.com said there are many others who believed Obama had a "soft spot" in his heart for Muslims, even "radical ones".
"Imagine the outcry if a Republican president played a round of golf with the leader of a nation that terrorises homosexuals, oppresses women and supports terrorist organisations. It would be the lead story in every major news outlet," it quoted former NYPD detective and member of a US Marine intelligence unit Sidney Franes as saying.
The report also stated Malaysia punished homosexuality in accordance to Shariah laws, unlike the US which does not frown on same-sex marriage and allowed openly gay men and women to serve in its military.
It also cited Malaysian legislation which provides for caning and jail of up to 20 years for homosexuality and said Malaysian women were treated as "second-class citizens" and subjected to "enormous cruelty" if they were accused of "adultery or fornication".
"The fact that our president would play golf with the leader of such a repressive regime speaks volumes of his ignorance or arrogance. And yet he and his administration have repeatedly targeted US police officers and intelligence officers for their vitriol.
"Yes, it speaks volumes of Barack Obama's (true) character," it quoted Iris Aquino, a former police officer and a homeland security adviser as saying.
Najib had come under heavy criticism following news and pictures of him golfing with the US president in Hawaii, at a time when the country is hit by severe floods.
He is said to be on his way back to Malaysian and would be going to Kelantan to personally oversee the emergency response to the country's worst flooding in decades that has seen nearly 120,000 people evacuated.
Imagine this. You have grown up respecting a religion and its holy texts. Along with customs and rituals you have also affirmed a lot of positive values – compassion, honesty, humility, love, integrity, generosity. You are a rational, scientific human being but still give religion an important place in your life. After all it teaches you humanity, makes you a better person and keeps you positive.
Now imagine a small section of people, who claim to share your religion, spreading hate and violence. They claim to be defending the same religion you love and respect, but their actions do not agree with your conscience at all. This fringe group is a paradox. It upholds something you love, but acts in a manner you despise.
The actions of these people involve killing innocents including kids, brutalising women or bombing and gunning down people. Soon, this fringe group grabs headlines. Your religion gets associated with terror, hate, intolerance and violence. Even though people from other religions don’t say it, you can feel their prejudice towards you. With every incident, your religion gets more tainted.
You try to avoid the mess, going about your normal life, as a moderate. But soon, you are blamed too. You are blamed for keeping quiet. You are blamed for having a soft spot for terrorists. You are blamed for not screaming loud enough to shut the fringe down.
That, unfortunately, is the predicament of the vast majority of Muslims today. The ‘moderate Muslim’ or the ‘peace-loving Muslim’ watches haplessly as on one hand fundamentalists on the fringe damage the religion’s image and on the other hand non-Muslims accuse them of not doing enough.
What is a moderate Muslim to do?
The answer is not easy. It is simple to blame educated, modern Muslims, as if they could somehow end the mindlessness that is going on in the name of their religion. But if others were to put themselves in Muslim shoes, they would realise choices are limited.
If for instance – and God forbid – Hindu radical groups had millions of dollars in funding, there were a dozen-plus countries who were officially Hindu nations, rulers of these nations backed the radicals somewhat and the radicals were not afraid to use extreme violence, what could a modern, liberal educated or in other words ‘moderate Hindu’ do?
Well, chances are the moderate Hindu will stay away from all this, and go about his own life, trying to raise his or her family in peace. It doesn’t mean the moderate Hindu is supporting radical groups, is intrinsically backward or doesn’t care. However, the natural human instinct of self-preservation kicks in and not reacting seems the only way out.
The same happens with millions of moderate Muslims, who get disturbed by acts of terror as much as others do. They love their religion and so they cocoon themselves from such heinous acts by forming their own relationship with God.
The bigger question is, what can be done? What do we do to end acts that can only be described as medieval and barbaric, except that they are happening in 2014?
Well, first, we have to stop finding sections of people to dump blame on. It is not about a particular religion. It is also not about a particular religious text prescribing more violence, as some analysts have suggested. All religious texts can be selectively interpreted in different ways. The Bible teaches compassion but also has a lot of violence. The Gita’s famous saying ‘a virtuous war must be fought’ can be seen as justifying violence, as what a radical group finds ‘virtuous’ is slippery terrain. The reason why this interpretation isn’t made more often is that Hindu radical groups don’t have as much power as Muslim radical groups do around the world at present.
The issue is not a particular religion or a particular text; the issue is fringe, radical groups of a particular religion amassing great financial, military, political and media power. This power needs to be curbed, in whatever way possible, with a different strategy for each kind of power.
For this sane voices from all nations and all religions must come together. This is the kind of issue the UN and Nato should deal with together. It requires an organisation equivalent to the UN for all the world’s religions, backed by world leaders. In fact, it is amazing we have no high-profile body that unites religions worldwide and takes on common issues facing all faiths.
These are all big demands. However, it will take time to fix one of the biggest problems in the world: radical religious terror. We, as humans, have not done enough to unite the world’s religions. It is time we did.PAS leaders will need to decide if the party is going to fulfill its promises to its allies or act on self-interests. Apparently PAS is in a quandary. Whether to support the Election Commission's (EC) redelineation of parliamentary constituencies, which would create more Malay-Muslim-majority federal seats.Or oppose it with allies in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR), who believe it just a way for the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) to increase seats and get their customary two-thirds parliamentary super-majority lost inthe past two general elections.A source in the Islamist party said they would benefit from the additional seats in Malay-majority areas, particularly in Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah and Perlis, should the redelineation exercise take place
The four states did not get extra seats when electoral boundaries were redrawn in 2003, which the source believed was to halt the party's progress after it won big in the 1999 general election.
"PAS is now in a dilemma. Ditelan mati emak, diludah mati bapa," said a senior PAS leader, quoting a Malay phrase which meant facing a difficult situation.There isn't really a dilemma for PAS.
The Islamist political party just has to decide whether it wants to fulfil its promises to its allies in PR and the voters who supported the coalition or act on self-interests and join BN in expanding the federal Parliament.The 52% of the electorate supported a coalition that promised good governance, an Islamic welfare state and equity for all – just as much as the remaining 47% voted to stick with BN.The only difference is that BN kept the government due to the unequal electorate in each federal seat, especially in rural areas which have far fewer voters than in urban areas.If PAS believes redrawing the seats in the four Malay states will help it, then it is delusional. In recent history, the Islamist party could only last one term in Kedah and Terengganu, unlike its long reign in
Kelantan.So, even the Muslims in these Malay-majority states have rejected them, not the others. What are the chances that creating more seats will mean a greater share for PAS?Zero. Because the only coalition profiting from more federal seats will be BN, especially politicians who believe Malays need to unite to ensure Malay supremacy.The PAS leadership has to think far and deep in this matter, particularly those who have been working on reaching out to other communities. PAS has to decide which is more important, principles or interests.The principle of pledging to keep within a coalition and the promises made to the people or the interest of just winning along ethnic and religious lines.Its allies PKR and DAP will also have to decide what the PR coalition is all about. A loose grouping of parties only interested in winning power without concrete social and economic policies or a coalition that wants a better Malaysia for Malaysians.That goes beyond religion, vernacular schools, cheaper fuel and cars, or going to the streets at the drop of a hat.Two elections have seen PR gaining ground on promises to be better than BN. The next election will be based on PR and BN's respective track records – not promises which remain just that – promises.
No comments:
Post a Comment