Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Cubic Listening
Kronologi Kes Listen Bawani @ UUM
‘Allah’ & Freud’s Borrowed Kettle
Allah is not the problem, mankind is

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 03:37 PM PST

I would like to jump onto the "Listen, Listen, Listen" bandwagon. At first, I thought the whole episode reeked of a local reality show. Then I googled "KS Bawani" and found her Facebook page, i.e. Bawani KS. Interestingly, she only had seven likes in December and as I write now, she has more than 19,700 likes! Bawani became an overnight sensation after her video went viral. Popular Malaysian artistes like Yuri and Namewee even made video parodies of the incident.

My take on the whole thing. Sharifah is the epitome of an absolute power corrupting absolutely. Just like BN who was in power for the past 55 years and has become complacent. Bawani is the epitome of the suppression of freedom. Just like the Rakyat who allowed BN to be in power year in year out for the past 55 years. The Rakyat who was supposed to be the boss who voted BN, the servant to serve them, have the tables turned on them. Now, the Rakyat is subjected to draconian laws that restrict freedom of expression and speech (Peaceful Assembly Act, Police Act and Sedition Act) and restrict freedom of information (OSA) so that they can continue to plunder the nation's wealth by dishing out mega contracts to cronies and deplete the nation's natural resources.

Sharifah had the audacity to say that she was being respectful towards Bawani. It is so typical BN style to be oblivious of their follies. Asking critics (no matter how constructive) to leave the country if they are not happy is another example BN's arrogant style. Expecting other party to "listen, listen, listen to me" and not allowing the other party to speak is the actual depiction of the relationship among the BN's main component parties of UMNO, MCA and MIC. When UMNO talks, the others just listen and agree.

Where do we go from here? Quo vadis? Remember pre-2008 when BN had the two thirds majority and the effects of the 2008 political earthquake that denied them the two thirds majority? Remember the pre-2008, exhibition of Ketuanan Melayu during the UMNO general assembly and the post-2008, incessant attacks on the opposition being the main agendas of UMNO and MCA general assemblies? That showed us that we the Rakyat possess the power to make a difference. The Peoples' Power (Makkal Sakti). We need to remove them from power in order to remove these shackles that are preventing us to move forward to a better future. Make them "listen, listen, listen" to us !!!

Nicole Tan Lee Koon

Secretary, Seremban branch, DAP NS

Tweet handle : @loyarbaik

Website : Nicole Tan Lee Koon, Social Politico

Facebook : http://www.facebook.com/nicoletanleekoon

Facebook Page : http://www.facebook.com/nicoleleekoontan

Kronologi Kes Listen Bawani @ UUM

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 02:55 PM PST

Oleh : Mahasiswa UUM

Daripada seorang sahabat yang ada di tempat kejadian #Listen. sila lihat kronologi di bawah.

Saya akan cuba jelaskan apa yang berlaku kerana saya adalah salah seorang yang berada di dalam dewan terbabit dan mengikuti perkembangan forum ini seawal seminggu sebelum forum ini berlangsung, kerana minat sebagai seorang mahasiswa terhadap tajuk forum berkenaan pada awalnya. Saya akan cuba jelaskan dalam bentuk kronologi;

[SEBELUM PROGRAM]

Seminggu sebelum forum ini berlangsung, saya sudah mendaftarkan diri sebagai peserta sewaktu borang pendaftaran diagihkan di dalam kelas. Kenapa saya begitu cepat untuk mendaftarkan diri? Adakah saya ini peminat Puan Sharifah? Harus untuk kamu semua tahu, bahawasanya sewaktu publisiti program itu digembar-gemburkan beberapa perkara menarik minat diri ini untuk turut serta;

[1] TAJUK

Tajuk forum pada hari kejadian yang digembar-gemburkan ialah "Seiringkah Mahasiswa Berpolitik?" cukup jelas dan umum. Ini perkara pertama yang membuatkan saya mendaftar sebagai peserta tanpa berfikir panjang.

[2] MODERATOR

Moderator pada hari kejadian dikatakan saudara yang saya hormati YDP MPPUUM (gambar) sendiri iaitu Saudara Ku Amirul, dia adalah pimpinan tertinggi di dalam kampus ini, wajar bagi saya menaruh harapan besar untuk mendengar penjelasan beliau tentang "SEIRINGKAH MAHASISWA BERPOLITIK?".

[3] MISTERI PANELIS

Panelis jemputan pada hari kejadian di"rahsia"kan, saya ini jiwa ingin tahu, jiwa mencari ilmu, jiwa mencari solusi, apabila panelis di"rahsia"kan, hati saya membuak-buak mencari siapakah mereka? Sememang hati saya berteka-teki mungkinkah tokoh-tokoh ilmuan negara? Ataupun ahli akademik yang berautoriti tinggi akan mengupas tajuk ini.

Tiga point di atas menjadikan saya mungkin antara peserta terawal mendaftar, nampak seperti gelojoh, tapi gelojoh saya gelojoh gilakan "ilmu".

Adakah persoalan saya "SEIRINGKAH MAHASISWA BERPOLITIK" selama ini akan dijawab pada hari kejadian dengan berlandaskan prinsip-prinsip ilmu dan keterbukaan agama?

[SEWAKTU PROGRAM]

~SEJAM AWAL PROGRAM~

Saya berada di sana 9.15 pagi lebih kurang. Sewaktu penulis sampai, makan pagi disediakan, makanan disediakan untuk 2000 peserta, "tingginya peruntukan program ni". Saya masuk dewan, dan saya lihat background pentas tertulis satu tajuk yang berlainan dengan apa yang saya ketahui sebelum ini, adakah tajuk diubah? Menunggu dan menunggu lebih kurang pukul 10 pagi barulah persoalan penulis terjawab dengan ketibaan VIP jemputan dan panelis diumumkan.
Antara 4 panelis :
1. Presiden Pertubuhan Suara Wanita 1Malaysia
2. Peter Yap (salesman)
3. Gulam Muzafar (banker)
4. Mazli Mutazam (Pengetua Kolej Proton, UUM)

~ 2 JAM AWAL PROGRAM~

Saya sedikit kecewa dengan senarai panelis yang ada namun kerana jiwa ini dahagakan penjelasan mengenai isu ini, terus berada di dalam dewan terbabit moga-moga, mereka dapat mengulas tajuk ini dengan baik. Malang kerana apa yang saya hajati tak tercapai dan lebih malang lagi forum telah berubah kepada isu kepimpinan wanita, dan ini senarai isu yang dimainkan
[1] Ambiga pencetus demokrasi.
[2] Kes Nurul Izzah dengan kebebasan beragama.
[3] Bersih.
[4]Mahasiswa berdemonstrasi PTPTN.

Dari 10.00 pagi sehingga 12.30 tengah hari, isu ini lah yang diulas, langsung tiada hujah ilmiah dan hanya membawa pandangan sebelah pihak, berulangkali panelis-panelis di atas sana menyatakan bahawa mereka tidak berpolitik kepartian tetapi ingin menunjukkan pimpinan wanita yang bermasalah di negara dan ingin dijadikan iktibar, saya akur! Tapi kenapa pimpinan pembangkang sahaja yang diserang? Maksumkah pimpinan wanita kerajaan? Mana kes menteri Shahrizat Jalil dengan NFC? Kes "First Lady" Rosmah Mansur dengan cincinnya? Satu sahaja ingin saya utarakan, adakah adil kamu menyerang sebelah pihak hanya kerana "mereka" berhaluan kiri?

~SEJAM SEBELUM TAMAT PROGRAM~

Saya melihat di sebelah, seorang peserta sedang menulis di satu helaian borang. Bila saya perhatikan, ada yang tidak kena dengan helaian borang ini, yang menganjurkan adalah NGO tetapi kenapa di bawah helaian kertas ini berisikan biodata diri dan tempat mengundi dun dan parlimen.

Bila saya tanya kepada peserta terbabit dari mana datangnya, rupanya borang itu diedarkan awal program lagi, patutlah saya tak dapat kerana agak lewat. Saya ambil gambar borang untuk mencari jawapan kenapa borang ini agak ganjil pada pandangan saya. Kemudian sesi soal jawab dibuka, saya sudah bersedia ingin bertanya, malang terus berpanjangan apabila dua soalan sahaja dibuka. Tidak sempat saya sampai di mikrofon untuk bertanya soalan di tengah-tengah dewan itu sesi soalan telah ditutup. Saya mula rasa "semacam". Saya tahu bukan saya sahaja yang ingin bertanya tetapi tidak berkesampaian, selepas jawapan diberikan oleh Puan Sharifah, tiba-tiba beliau meminta kami berdiri, dan kemudian YDP MPP menjadi ketua membaca ikrar. Saya tidak mengikutnya kerana saya langsung tidak jelas apa yang ingin diikrarkan sebenarnya (mungkin tidak teratur seperti yang sebenar tetapi secara asas beginilah).

~MISS BAWANI MENGHANGATKAN SUASANA~

Selesai sahaja ikrar, sejurus sahaja semua dipersilakan duduk, sedang asyik Puan Sharifah bercakap di hadapan, satu suara minta untuk diberi perhatian kerana ingin melontar pendapat. Ya itu adalah Bawani. Perisitwa inilah yang menjadi bualan sekarang, dan mengegar satu Malaysia, saya mempunyai beberapa pandangan yang berbeza dalam kejadian ini.

[1] Menyokong TINDAKAN Bawani.
Saya bersetuju dengan apa yang DIPERSOALKAN oleh Bawani, sahabat-sahabat yang tidak berada di majlis berkenaan perlu tahu kami menghabiskan masa selama 3 jam untuk mendapat ilmu pengetahuan, tetapi hanya provokasi murahan dengan melabel dan mengecam "mereka" yang berhaluan kiri. Tajuk forum telah lama terbabas. Dan pihak penganjur mempersoalkan kenapa tidak bertanya sewaktu sesi soal jawab dibuka, saya rasa penganjur perlu sedar bahawasa penganjur hanya membuka 2 soalan untuk kami bertanya sedangkan TAJUK forum belum lagi terungkai! Hujah Miss Bawani cukup padu dengan fakta numberic dan perbandingan dengan negara-negara luar, syabas untuk Miss Bawani.

[2] Tidak Menyokong NADA SUARA Bawani
Saya yang berada di majlis berkenaan kurang bersetuju dengan nada suara yang digunakan oleh Miss Bawani. Nada suara yang digunakan agak terbabas dari kawalan emosi, mungkin sahabat pembaca tidak bersetuju dengan pandangan ini, tapi inilah pandangan saya yang berada disana, dengan nada suara yang agak tinggi, membuatkan peserta kurang jelas apa yang diperkatakan oleh Bawani sendiri, dan jika kamu berada di tempat kejadian, kamu akan berdebar, dan kelihatan seolah satu pergaduhan "tarik rambut" akan berlaku.

[3] Sepenuhnya Tidak Bersetuju Dengan Puan Sharifah
Puan Sharifah dikatakan mempunyai pendidikan yang tinggi dan dikhabarkan cukup profesional, tetapi respon terhadap kejadian ini cukup mendukacitakan. Puan Sharifah lebih berpengalaman, Puan Sharifah lebih intelektual, Puan Sharifah lebih matang sepatutnya dalam mengawal suasana seperti ini. Dengan hujah Bawani yang matang, malangnya Puan Sharifah telah mengambil satu keputusan cukup memalukan, dengan beranalogi suatu yang tidak patut, menghina, merendahkan suara mahasiswi. Sememang wajar jika Puan Sharifah MEMOHON MAAF kepada Miss Bawani pada pandangan saya.

Selesai selesai sesi "PANAS" ini, forum berlangsung dengan penuh meriahnya bersama "GALAXY NOTE CLONE".

[SELEPAS PROGRAM]

Selesai forum, 2000 peserta sekali lagi diberi makanan tengah hari percuma. Ramai yang berbicara kejadian panas ini, tetapi hanya berlegar di kalangan pelajar UUM. Ada yang menyokong dan ada yang mengkeji tindakan Bawani. Tetapi sebulan selepas program ini berlangsung barulah isu ini tersebar dan menjadi bualan seluruh Malaysia.

PANDANGAN PERIBADI PENULIS
SAYA MENYOKONG BAWANI SEPENUHNYA CUMA MUNGKIN PERLU DIBAIKI BEBERAPA PERKARA, DAN KEPADA PEMBACA NILAILAH SENDIRI. CUMA YANG MASIH MENJADI PERSOALAN SAYA, PERUNTUKAN YANG CUKUP TINGGI DIPERLUKAN UNTUK PROGRAM SEPERTI INI (2 KALI MAKAN UNTUK 2000 PESERTA, 10 GALAXY NOTE CLONE TIDAK TERMASUK SAGUHATI) DARI MANA DATANGNYA UNTUK PROGRAM YANG SEBEGINI RENDAH KUALITINYA???

‘Allah’ & Freud’s Borrowed Kettle

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 10:09 AM PST

Alwyn Lau

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Not long after, Man messed it up. Somehow we managed to produce greed, pollution, bad music and value meals. We also started parties like UMNO which gave birth to bigger groups like Barisan Nasional - and now even God is in trouble.

What's the name of God if not the name for truth, love and power which over-shadows the pain of the world? What's the on-going controversy over the name of God – 'Allah' - if not a game of shadows?

East Malaysian Christians have been calling God 'Allah' since creation; therefore any suggestion that they should now be disallowed to do so is akin to cronies telling the orang asli their forest homes are now up for grabs.

Barisan Nasional is getting desperate, so why not churn up some friendly-fire? Why not strike at the heart of Pakatan's "Odd One In", PAS? Of course, many are wondering: Why couldn't PAS' Syura Council wait till May to throw cold water over the Sikhs and Bornean Christians? What a divine mystery. Then again, maybe we shouldn't discredit God. For surely He is pragmatic enough to not fling a spanner into an election that may potentially topple an unjust government, whatever His approved name(s)?

Also, the whole fiasco sounds like Freud's story of the borrowed kettle. A man borrowed a kettle from his neighbour. Later when he returned the kettle, the neighbour complained that it's broken and there are cracks. The man vehemently denied it – in three ways. First, by insisting that he didn't borrow that particular kettle at all. Second, by claiming the returned kettle is in perfect condition. Finally, by explaining that the cracks were already there when he borrowed it. Even the pot would conclude that something isn't right. The very contradictories of the replies prove the falsity of the man's denial.

Does this not resemble PAS' response? At first, it was no problem : Non-Muslims can use 'Allah' (which, really, is like telling an American it's fine to call his mother Mum). This later evolved to Okay, non-Muslims can use it as long as they don't abuse it (which is like telling a Brit that he has the right to call his PM 'David' as long as he doesn't insult other perspectives of 'David'). Then the u-turn came and suddenly the word is exclusively for Muslims (which is like a theologian disagreeing with Webster Dictionary's definition of the word 'the'). But in the latest twist it became: Okay, non-Muslims can use it as long as they believe in one God (which is like telling A&W they can continue serving Coney Dogs as long as this doesn't violate the 'one sausage' rule).

Does the above sound like a 'borrowed kettle' argument to you? Doesn't the form of PAS' responses render suspect their whole argument? Probably the two most confused parties here are the average atheist and God Himself.

Finally, fretting over who can or cannot use 'Allah' sounds like the biggest red herring in Malaysia, given our many problems - like too many cars, too little water, and some folks saying 'listen' too many times. On this point, it is interesting to note how nobody grabbed the mike from Sharifah Zohra Jabeen and how, in fact, many in the auditorium applauded her berating of law student, KS Bawani. Why didn't someone stop Sharifah? Doesn't this remind you of the case in the United States where a crime was taking place and, despite many people watching through their windows, nobody helped? Why not? Because they believed someone else would.

The parallel between the UUM fiasco and the 'Allah' controversy is how, even right now, no one from within the government dares to 'grab the mike' from the Islamic authorities (including the Sultan) regarding this issue. Why? Because 'Allah' is exclusively for Muslims. Because Islam doesn't restrict the use of 'Allah' to Muslims, but the word shouldn't be abused. Because the Christians believe in three gods and thus shouldn't use 'Allah' in their Bibles.

Do we see the broken kettle? Or are we waiting for someone else to point it out?

Allah is not the problem, mankind is

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 09:59 AM PST

In each religion, it is only normal for their religion to tell them that theirs is the only and correct religion. Others are not correct. In fact, they are false. This is alright, because the constitution allows freedom of religion. But what a person believes must only be confined to himself or herself. They are not to extend what they believe onto others. If that is done, it will cause war.

Lembu Susu

I wish to share my thoughts to laypersons and have intentional omitted out Scriptures from both the Quran and the Bible, so as to make it easy reading for both divide.

1. The word 'Allah' is meant only for Muslims and for all who hold the view that there is only one God, according to the PAS Majlis Syura. This view resonates well with the majority of Muslims in Malaysia. The non-Muslims and the Christians must understand that the reason PAS do not allow the word 'Allah' in the Bible translation was because of theological reasons. Christians hold the view that God is a Trinity; that is, the belief in a Triune God (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Though the Christians maintain that they believe in One God, the concept of the Trinity is unacceptable in Islam. Hence, if the Christians were to use the word 'Allah' for their God, then, it will not represent correctly the 'Allah' of the Muslim God.

2. The Christians, on the other hand, has a problem if they use the word 'Allah' without qualification. The problem is that the 'Allah' of the Bible is not the same as the 'Allah' of the Quran. For example, the Christians believe the Bible teaches monogamous marriages, but in the Quran, polygamy is allowed, albeit with certain conditions. Moreover, in the Quran, jihad also involves wiping out infidels, which is not advocated at all in the New Testament of the Bible. Hence, when the Christians use the word 'Allah' for God, they have to clarify, that though the word 'Allah' is the same word being used for 'God' by both the Christians and the Muslims, yet, the 'Allah' revealed in the Bible is different from the 'Allah' in the Quran.

3. The bottom line is this: 'Allah' is just a word to denote 'God'. It is how you fill that word with meaning. This is where the teachings in the Quran and in the Bible gives meaning to the word 'Allah' by each religion.

4. But if we are to look it from another angle, actually, Allah is greater than any human words can express. Allah cannot be confined to a word. Words are only necessary to help man connect to Him, but He is greater than a word. In fact, there is no word that is sufficient to address Him. He is beyond words. He cannot be reduced to just a word, 'Allah'. He is greater than any words mankind can call Him.

5. So, on 'Allah's side, there is no issue for the Muslims and there is no issue for the Christians. He will never be confused by the Christians or by the Muslims.

6. As for Muslims and Christians, there are also no confusion with the word 'Allah', as the years have proven. It is how you fill the meaning of the word 'Allah'. The teachings from the Quran and the Bible will give understanding and meaning to that word, by each one's religion accordingly.

7. Every person will believe his or her religion is the correct and right one. Malaysia has existed in harmony all these years because of the mutual respect shown towards another person's religion and faith.

8. In each religion, it is only normal for their religion to tell them that theirs is the only and correct religion. Others are not correct. In fact, they are false. This is alright, because the constitution allows freedom of religion. But what a person believes must only be confined to himself or herself. They are not to extend what they believe onto others. If that is done, it will cause war.

9. Though Islam is the religion of the Federation, the Constitution allows freedom of religion. Hence, to stretch one's belief and impose it on others infringes on the rights of a citizen.

10. The non-Muslims cannot impose on the Muslims their beliefs, neither can the Muslims' beliefs be imposed onto the non-Muslims. Instead, there must be mutual respect for one another's beliefs.

11. No one can tell another religion what word they can use and what word they cannot use. If this is allowed, it will break down the peace and harmony that was built and cherished all these years. It will be the same as telling them, 'you cannot practice your own religion, because your religion violates my religious beliefs; and we all know that it is common for almost every religion, if adhered fully, will violate another. If this happens, then, there will be provocation and war.

So, in conclusion, may the one in authority not use their authority to impose one's beliefs onto another, just because this is what they believe in. Instead, the call for restraint and respect over one another's faith and belief should be paramount and be upheld. Let the Muslims respect the non-Muslims' faith and beliefs, and vice-versa the non-Muslims respect the Muslims' faith and beliefs. If 'Allah' is consider a sacred word to the Muslims, then, keep it within the context of that religion. Don't impose it on another, who may not share the same beliefs. The Christians have no intention to hurt or to confuse the Muslims. They are only asking for their right to practice their own religion, using a word that has been there and has already being used all these years.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Khamis, 17 Januari 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan