Morsi is a Quran reader and memorized all pages

Eighty years experience and comprising members from all Orthodox Muslims around the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood is one of Muslim parties that are obsessed with building a country that is totally Islamic assimilating the Prophet Mohamed’s administration.

And Morsi was the man, the Muslimin Brotherhood’s choice when he won the presidential election last year. Only now he is a man with a lot of promises and or perhaps has forgotten which verses of the Quran he needs to understand and uses to help him keep up his presidential palace and office.

In equal if not slightly lower in the international arena standard is our Hadi Awang. He memorizes Quran and knows every verse of the revealed book as he speaks to crowd practically every time he is on a public speaking round in the country.

Now we ask, what is wrong with the Quran knowledge and using the knowledge in ruling a country that failed to give peace and stability to the people of a country?.

Is there anything else beside knowing and memorizing verses of Quran which makes a progressive leader of a Muslim country like here in Malaysia?.

Kita faham anda di tindas, tetapi kami tidak menindas anda. Mengapa perangi kami?. Wahai Kiram 111

Filipina mempunyai penduduk seramai 92.3 juta dan akan menjangkau keparas 101.2 juta orang pada 2014.

Terdapat sebanyak 13 etnik Bangsa Moro yang beragama Islam, dan mereka merupakan hanya 5% daripada keseluruhan penduduk Filipina, atau seramai 4.615 juta. Mereka adalah minoriti didalam sebuah negara Christian Catholic. Kaum terbesar diantara 13 etnik Bangsa Moro ialah Maguindanaoan, Marano dan Tausug.

Perkataan Sulu merujuk kepada penduduk di Laut Sulu iaitu kepulauan di Selatan Filipina. Tausug pula merujuk kepada orang orang Sulu.

Dari semenjak pemeritahan Sepanyol, kaum Bangsa Moro telah di jajah supaya agama di tukar kepada Christian. Dari semenjak itu kaum Tausug atau orang orang Sulu atau Bangsa Moro melawan pemerintah mereka, sehingga sekarang.

Sikap kaum minoriti yang melawan kaum majority walaupun berasaskan pencabulan agama mereka, adalah sikap yang akan di tentang habis habisan oleh pemerimtah. Dari Sepanyol, US dan Jepun, sikap menentang kaum Bangsa Moro terhadap pencabulan hak asasi mereka keatas kehidupan beragama Islam merumitkan pembangunan di kawasan Laut Sulu.

Keadaan ini berlarutan apabila sikap kerajaan terdahulu di Filipina mengamal prosess pembicaraan yang berat sebelah, menghukum pesalah atau penjenayah yang menetang pemerintah tanpa bicara, kes penderaan yang serius keatas semua mereka yang menentang kerajaan dan di klasifikasikan sebagai penganas telah membentuk berbagai bagai kumpulan bagi menjaga hal ehwal kaum Bangsa Moro. Ini termasuk MNLF, dan splinter group dari MNLF, iaitu MILF serta Abu Sayaf.

Setelah Libya dan lain negara Islam di Middle East, dan KM Sabah Tun Datu Mustapha tidak operatif, kewangan kumpulan tersebut tersekat dan untuk mendapat dana menjadi kumpulan ganas menyerang dan mengambil tahanan sebagai umpan untuk bayaran tebusan.

Mindanao merupakan sebuah pulau yang paling padat di dunia, yaitu 209.1 orang/km2, tetapi bekalan letrik harus di catu serta amat kekurangan bekalan seperti air dan lain lain keperluan fasiliti. Dari tindakan diskriminasi yang amat meluas di kawasan ini, Bangsa Moro selalu di tindas.

Walaubagaiamana pun tindakan diskriminasi adalah berpunca dari sikap kaum ini sendiri, iaitu suka menentang pemerintah dengan secara ofensif, satu sikap yang telah di tunjukkan kepada kita di Lahad Datu.

Sedangkan Islam menyuruh umatnya menghurmati pemerintah tidak kira siapa, dan memohon agar agama pegangan masing masing di hurmati tanpa mengunakan kekerasan. Sikap ofensif kaum Bangsa Moro harus di tukar mentelahan lagi mereka merupakan kaum minoriti agar kawasan yang diduduki oleh Bangsa Moro mendapat perhatian dari pemerintah. Sikap berkerjasama seperti yang di tunjukkan oleh kaum Tausug di Malaysia harus di contohi di mana mereka boleh di assimilasikan bersama lain lain bangsa seperti kaum Dayak Sabah, dan lain lain bangsa bagi memastikan keamanan sejagat di kawasan itu.

Sikap Kiram 111 menyerang Sabah adalah satu sikap yang keji, seperti mana perlakuan kaum minoriti tersebut di Filipina. Sikap begini lah yang harus di tentang habis habisan. Dan mereka yang mempunyai kemahuan untuk melawan kuasa besar yang mendamaikan kehidupan adalah satu kesilapan besar kerana kesejahteraan pengikut mereka dari tindakan yang akan merumitkan kaum mereka dengan tindakan tersebut.

Jadi apa kah asas Kiram 111 menyerang Sabah, sedangkan di Sabah kaum Tausug atau Sulu di beri perhatian yang tinggi oleh pemerintah?

Tentu lah ada dalang yang ingin memporak perandakan Sabah bagi tujuan jahat mereka dengan mengambil kesempatan dari kesusahan yang dialami oleh Bangsa Moro di Filipina. Dan siapa kah dalang itu?. Kita lihat cerita kesudahan nya nanti.

Saudi Arabia – the land of the Kings (Tanah Raja Raja).

Jikalau aku pergi ke Saudi Arabia, dan aku kata aku anak raja, dia orang akan percaya bagai nak rak.

Kenapa. Kerana, dalam seribu diantara 25.7 juta rakyat Saudi, saorang adalah anak raja. Jikalau aku pakai jubah mahal dan pakai Ferrari merah yang tidak bernumbor, memang sah aku bukan jurujual pasar malam, mesti aku dia orang kata anak raja. Dan bila aku bercakap bahasa Kelantan dalam loghat German, baru dia orang sedar aku bukan anak raja tulen atau separuh tulen.

Dua tiga hari lepas, Putera Diraja Arab Saudi, Putera Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz telah meninggal dunia. Dia berumur 86 tahun. Nama sahaja Putera tetapi, umur sudah tidak boleh masuk atau join menjadi ketua Putera UMNO, kerana terlebih had umur.

Pendek kata, keturunan anak Raja Al Saud yang ada sekarang teramat lah tua belaka, macam umur D Nik Aziz, dan mereka ini akan di pilih menganti Putera Sultan yang terkena kanser perut yang sudah hampir tiga tahun dan meninggal dunia.

Bab hendak memilih penganti beliau di Saudi Arabia ini adalah susah dan rumit sikit. Terdapat seramai 22, 000 keturunan Raja Al Saud yang layak, itu sebabnya pengebumian mayat beliau terliwat sikit, seperti lah pengkebumian Gaddafi, tetapi didalam sitiuasi yang berbeza.

Para penganti Raja Abdullah memang lah payah hendak diceritakan. Setelah Raja Abdullah mengambil alih dari Fahd, beliau telah menubuh Majlis Allegiance, atau Majlis Kesetian Kastria yang mana semua pengikut mesti menunjukan kesetiaan tidak berbelah bahagi kepada Raja. Mereka terdiri dari keluarga dan anak anak raja (43 orang anak Al Saud) semacam dengan apa yang terdapat di Vatican.

Tetapi, Raja Abdullah setelah melihat Putera Sultan yang sedang sakit telah melantik Putera Naif sebagai penolong Raja melangkau Majlis Allegiance itu. Putera Naif, 82 tahun, pun sakit tenat terkena penyakit Lukemia.

Putera Sultan mempunyai hasil dari menjadi Menteri dan Raja sebanyak USD270 billion ( kali empat numbor itu brother untuk jadikan RM). Seperti Gaddafi, Putera Sultan telah membahagikan harta dan tempat berkerja di kerajaan Arab Saudi kepada anak anak beliau.

Semua kerja menteri yang mempunyai kuasa untuk approve projek diberi kepada keluarga di raja. Putera Naif telah memberi cadangan supaya anak beliau Mohammed menjadi menteri Menteri Dalam Negeri sekiranya beliau menjadi Putera Raja.

Perebutan kuasa diantara Raja Raja dan anak anak Raja termasuk saya penyamar Raja di Saudi Arabia memang menjadi bahan cakap secara diam diam di Saudi Arabia.

Dan sesiapa yang menjadi raja akan menjadi penjaga Kaabah dan Majid Nabiwi di Madinah. Ini lah kuasa raja yang terbesar di Saudi Arabia dan menjadi kuasa keatas pengaruh politik keatas semua umat Islam di seluruh dunia. Pandai.

Dengan kuasa politik dan kuasa agama itu, Raja Al Saud telah mengembangkan keluarga mereka sebagai Raja enterprise, atau raja berniaga dan membuka perniagaan dan membahagikan kawasan kawasan Saudi Arabia kepada suku sakat kaum di Raja mereka.

Oleh kerana terdapat perbezaan umur yang ketara, dan jikalau di Malaysia mereka yang berumur sedemikian telah lama berundur, di Saudi Arabia tidak.

Anak anak raja yang muda dan beribu ribu lagi saudara mara mereka mengejar kekayaan minyak Arab Saudi dan diberi pilihan untuk memilih tempat didalam kerajaan Arab Saudi itu masih belum pasti dipilih untuk menjaga Kaabah dan Madinah. Sedangkan pergerakan kemajuan adalah datang dari anak muda dan mereka yang berfikiran lebih moden seperti yang disuarakan mengikut selera baru di Tunisia dan Mesir.

Maka pemilihan kuasa diantara Raja Raja yang sudah tua tua dan sakit sebagai motif untuk memilih raja kerana harus juga menjaga Kaabah dan Madinah adalah  dianggap berselindung disebalik kuasa agama, tidak memajukan Saudi Arabia sedikit pun. Tetapi yang sebenarnya pemilihan ini adalah kerena dengan menjadi raja kaum kerabat yang sudah tua tua itu mempunyai kuasa untuk mendapat hasil yang lumayan dan membahagikan hasil itu kepada seluruh kaum keluarga mereka yang beribu ribu ramai nya.

Jikalau aku dipilih jadi Raja besuk, aku pun akan boleh mengumpulkan USD700 billion dalam masa sebulan. Buat Bond, and SWF baru.

Begitulah bila Kaabah dan Madinah menjadi sandaran supaya ketua keluarga yang sangat tua di pilih, maka Saudi Arabia akan tetap menjadi macam sekarang. Obama sudah kata, dia sudah bagi lama masa, entah entah di hantar spy menjadi raja baru. Putera Raja Obamasi.

Tetapi apa yang kita tahu kekuatan agama Islam akan timbul dari Timur. Dan mungkin dari negara China. Dan sudah tentu nama Raja Obamasi di Arab Saudi tidak akan menjadi satu kenyataan yang pasti.

American dreams

Current number of unemployed people in America is 14.1 million, displaced out of their jobs after economic slowdown. This is representing a rate of 9.2% of total population an increased by more than half million people over the month.

More and more jobless citizens are forced to live in tents, and in New Jersey some displaced workers choose to occupy a new American dream in tents or make shift temporary sheds to cover their heads at night and day.

The congress today compromised with the debt issue between rivals in the government. Republicans and Democrats agreed to raise debt ceiling to $17trillion and the agreement will reduce the debts at$2.5trillion pa over ten years. Both rivals agreed to reduce spending and cuts but this will need endorsement by the congress as soon as possible.

As a comparison, the unemployed American represents at least 1/2 of Malaysian‘s population of 28 million. Some of them are under government subsidy and benefits.

A great nation that has gone astray from the time Mr Bush had decided to spend money to destroy weapons of mass destruction belonging to Mr Saddam the great, which, by the way weren’t found in Iraq. Mr Saddam’s death doesn’t stop his missing weapons of mass destruction to ‘mass-destruct’ the American people after all. It will take a longer time to completely destroy the whole American dreams, as it seems from the dangling debt issues which fret the whole world’s economy too. And countries in Europe too, which spent money to aid the American finding the missing weapons and became partners in killing Saddam are messy with huge debts. Mr Saddam surely has arisen from his grave to “9/1” the American and his enemies once more, but this time is much harder.

Using a Merc, but live in a makeup tent is a dream come true after failing the one and only American dream.

Good luck to all of you Americans. We have seen the worst. This isn’t that bad. At least you guys have a chair and a lounge in the tent, and proper non leaking  roofs. Some other people in the countries you guys have “destroyed” or wage a war can see the star at night and the sun at daytime while living in their tents.

Foreign Funds in Bershit 2.00 are likely to bring Taliban liked people into Malaysia against the west

In the end, the Bershit 2.00’s funding by the foreign-based associations or closely related organizations of the US Government will attract anti-bershit 2.00 movements into this country. Knowing fully well that the bershit 2.oo is an American based initiative and the strong enemy of this western state is living and embroiling in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan and the like states, they are likely coming here to counter their common enemy.

It’s a sadden moment for all Malaysian when this is happened when the government is trying to uphold a multi-racial society to the next millennium achieving greater progress just because of the new economic world order.

There will be counter movements in all foreign involvements as seen in countries like Libya, Tunisia, Bahrain, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, in Middle East, and Philippine and Thailand, in the South East Asia. Certainly they attract groups from similar troubled nations to this country, which are inappropriate and destructive to the government and the well-being of the people.

We don’t want American’s enemies to breed hatred to a country we normally see as a great country by empowering bershit 2.00 in menacing the incumbent government for the sake of the new economic world order. We don’t want Taliban’s treats in return!

Just look how hatred to the Americans is being accomplished by another brutal act of hatred, does anyone want it here?.

Warning: Disturbing Graphic Images – This material is very painful to watch and contains graphic imagery.


Why not following the Saudi’s beheading the head of bersih 2.00 participants?

1,600 police reports, and surely this is the best method to deter the insurgents. Behead them, like the Saudis do.

Sometimes what other people do in other countries such as in the Saudi Arabia in preventing crimes or punishing criminals such as proven disloyalty to the King of the country is very harsh, but then, beheading the head of the criminals in front of the public is one way of stopping the aggressiveness among people in the plural society like us.

Saudi Arabia is a country that still use capital punishment in the form of beheading the criminals in front of the public as a deterrent to would be doers or intending criminals.

Partipas is likely more interested to promote the move.

I am sure if such a law is implemented, neither Ambigat Natanpuyu nor Chin Peng will come in to promote any bias demonstration such as Bersih 2.00 among the Malaysian population at all.

Watch the Saudi be-header works in the Youtube and you will understand what I mean.

We have the right to fight a decent war against traitors?

If you're lucky, she will sing you a song at Kelab Sultan Sulaiman Kg Bharu Kuala Lumpur Jam 3.00 this evening, come over.

Government must brave – Khalid Ibrahim.

Give the rakyat the opportunity to attend a peaceful demonstration organized by bersih 2.0.

There are, of course, two sides in the above equation. The ones who need to do demonstration and the ones who oppose to the demonstration that organized by bersih 2.0, the opposition’s own arm of bandits who before accused of creating chaos in the city center of Kuala Lumpur.

Is this the calling of Arab streets? And if it is, what is the similarity here and there in the middle eastern countries that leaders in the opposition party are following and for what purpose?

Food prices are on the rise everywhere and it’s a global phenomenon, no doubt about it. Malaysia too, like the countries that demoralized due to uprisings by the kind of that in the Arab spring,  suffers by the increasing food prices. We are the “sons and daughters of the government” so to speak, there are hefty subsidies around all of you that have dampen a bit the effect of increasing food prices. There are thousands, or nearly a million who work for the government, or in the government offices, those who enjoy enormous government benefits who may lend you a hand in time of trouble. May be they can pass you a cup of sugar or a beg of rice.

Business is slowing as in the other states worldwide and those businesses in Greece are expecting closure due to the unresolved debt issue that will hammer world’s economy very soon, and we in Malaysia aren’t sparse.

In light of a gloomy world economy the way forward is to make a war, or at a smaller scale, a demonstration. At least that gives our brain some thoughts or ideas how to live. We are the blokes who like little in forging a war, nevertheless the opposition is giving you a chance to be a creative warrior in the coming demonstration. Might as well grab it and learn how to depose the troubled groups. Listen to the song of a ragging war. It’s nice. Cry is  only when there are casualties. Don’t worry about the casualties because they are the purpose of this coming demonstration.

Come over here and listen.

New world order – Amerika dan Britain negara poket kosong.

"Starship Enterprise here, hello, Jupiter and surrounding moons are ours, and so Libya' oil feilds, over and out " Commander Ann Nuu Arr, from Planet Annulus. (Itu pistol air jer, hendak tawan Jupiter, mak oii)

Mari kita sembang-sembang petang hari ini mengenai orang yang menjadi ketua negara negara poket kosong.

Mereka berdua ini tidak lain tidak bukan Mr Barrack Obama dan Mr David Cameron dari US dan UK.

Dua negara yang banyak pengaruh Illuminati bersama dengan kerenah hebat zaman ini berkenaan keinginan mereka untuk menjadi satu pakatan kuasa baru menjelajah dunia atau dengan nama terkenal iaitu, New World Order.

Kedua-dua negara ini adalah negara hampir muflis, atau sudah pun musflis. Muflis maknanya sudah tidak ada duit atau poket kosong. Hutang Amerika ditanggunag sebanyak USD 14.5 trillion dollar, lihat disini.  Manakala Britain pula menanggung hutang sebanyak 1.1 trillion pound. Lihat disini.  Kedua dua negara telah hampir bankrup atau sudah pun muflis.

Orang Amerika memilih Barack Obama untuk mengerjakan orang orang Arab supaya telaga minyak dinegara teluk itu menjadi peyumbang kepada dana hasil negara negera mereka, dan disokong oleh David Cameron dengan kekuatan tentera NATO dan IMF. Amerika telah pun mengheret IMF supaya tunduk kepada mereka dengan menjerat tengkok ketua operasi IMF,  Dominique Strauss-Kahn dengan masaalah seksual.

Lihat apa yang Barrack Obama berkata di Westminster Hall.

President Barack Obama reaffirmed the strong alliance between the US and the UK in an historic address Wednesday to British lawmakers in London’s Westminster Hall, and praised “the revolutions racing through the streets” of the Arab world.

Obama said the relationship between the US and the UK was “one of the oldest and strongest” in the world — even if it got off on the wrong foot.

“It has long been said that the United States and the United Kingdom share a special relationship,” he said.

“Of course, all relationships have their ups and downs. Admittedly, ours got off on the wrong foot with a small scrape about tea and taxes. There may have also been some hurt feelings when the White House was set on fire during the War of 1812. But fortunately, it’s been smooth sailing ever since,” he said.

Manakala David Cameron pula menegaskan bahawa pergolakan di negara Arab harus di beri pertolongan, senada dengan Barrack Obama.

Leading nations’ financial support for the so-called Arab Spring will reduce extremism and immigration, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has said.

The UK is giving £110m over four years for political and economic development in North Africa and the Middle East.

Orang-orang tidak berduit bercakap pasal negara orang lain kerana ada potensi untuk diambil alih kerana minyak adalah kuasa didunia. Walau pun tidak berduit Britain sanggup bayar duit pendahuluan kepada projek “gores dan menang” di negara-negara Arab.

Tidak ada siapa pun dinegara Arab dan North Afrika (Libya) yang telah memohon duit dari mereka berdua. Tetapi oleh kerana sepakat dengan Illuminati dan New World Order, mereka menunjukan belang “hidung jenis baik” kepada masyarakat dunia.

Apabila Bahrain menembak mati para perusuh Syiah di negara kecil itu dengan pertolongan Arab Saudi, Amerika dan Britain mendiam diri. Ini kerana, Raja Abdullah Abdul Aziz adalah kawan baik dan penyumbang utama kepada kuasa mereka di negara Arab. Amerika dan Britain perlu kepada minyak Libya yang lebih baik dari semua jenis minyak didunia dan mempunyai ‘reserve” terbesar dan mempu menyumbangkan dana kewangan yang genting kepada kedua negara bankrup ini.

Lihat apa yang Barrack Obama berkata.

In a televised speech on the Middle East, the US president set out the shape for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal Link to this video.

Barack Obama has sought to realign American policy on the Middle East, pledging to shift from decades of support for autocratic regimes to backing for pro-democracy movements, and setting out the shape of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

Facing criticism that the US has repeatedly been behind the curve in response to the Arab spring, Obama promised a “new chapter” in US diplomacy. He placed Washington on the side of popular uprisings not only in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya but also in Syria and, for the first time, in Bahrain – a longtime American ally.

“The status quo is not sustainable,” Obama said, referring to Arab autocracies and to the Israeli-Palestinian impasse.

Mereka menggangap saudi Arabia bukan negera diktator, dan semua negara Arab lain adalah diketuai oleh pemerintah jenis diktator. Sebelum ini, kesemua mereka ini menjadi sahabat baik Amerika kecuali Libya.

Apa kah New World Order.

The common theme in conspiracy theories about a New World Order is that a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government—which replaces sovereignnation-states—and an all-encompassing propaganda that ideologizes its establishment as the culmination of history’s progress. Significant occurrences in politics and finance are speculated to be orchestrated by an unduly influential cabal operating through many front organizations. Numerous historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to achieve world domination through secret political gatherings and decision-making processes.

Prior to the early 1990s, New World Order conspiracism was limited to two American countercultures, primarily the militantly anti-government right, and secondarily fundamentalist Christians concerned with end-time emergence of the Antichrist. Skeptics, such as Michael Barkun and Chip Berlet, have expressed concern that right-wing populist conspiracy theories about a New World Order have now not only been embraced by many left-wing conspiracy theorists but have seeped into popular culture, thereby inaugurating an unrivaled period of people actively preparing for apocalypticmillenarian scenarios in the United States of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. These political scientists warn that this mass hysteria may not only fuel lone-wolf terrorism but have devastating effects on American political life, such as the radical right wooing the radical left into joining a revolutionary Third Position movement capable of overthrowing the U.S. government and partitioning America along ethnoregional lines.

Until now, the world we’ve known has been a world divided—a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and cold war. Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a “world order” in which “the principles of justice and fair play … protect the weak against the strong …” A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.

Untuk bacaan selanjutnya lihat disini.

Semasa perang saudara di Libya ramai yang telah ditangkap Gaddafi merupakan talibarut CIA dan “special force” dari Britain dan Amerika. Mereka telah lama menghasut para penduduk di Benghazi supaya melawan Gaddafi.

Cubaan ini berjaya mengheret mereka yang setia kepada negara Islam Libya itu berperang semasa kebangkitan rakyat di negara negara Arab. Ini merupakan kesempatan yang amat baik kepada kedua negara muflis itu mengambil peranan besar didalam usaha mengambil alih minyak di Libya tanpa bantahan dari masyarakat dunia dengan bantuan pakatan tentera NATO yang dibiayai oleh mereka.

Sekiranya mereka berjaya, maka negara muflis ini akan hidup semula. Dan Cina akan menjadi negara status quo.

Soalan saya, adakah mereka ini kumpulan anak bini suku kaum Dajjal yang akan memporakperandakan negara negara orang lain, terutama negara Islam, selepas Iraq dan Afghanistan,  demi survival negara mereka?. Mengapa ketua-ketua Pas berdiam diri dalam hal ini. Terutama Nik Aziz. Adakah beliau juga peminat tegar New World Order dengan menyokong saudara Annuar?.

Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

Yes, the West always lead. Almost.

What’s that? “kerepok lekor?” ,  Erk!.

Failed Leadership.

Mat Ell # eekaawordpresscom

The Middle East’s oldest dictatorship – by Al Jazeera (English)

As the conventional wisdom goes – especially in the West – Israel is the “only democracy” in the Middle East. And that is so, particularly for its Jewish citizens. However Israel has been anything but democratic for the indigenous people of the land, the Palestinian Arabs.

By nature and precedence, foreign military occupation is temporary. Colonialism on the other hand, and more precisely civilian colonisation, is a socio-political system of ruling over another people.

Since its inception at the end of the 19th century, Zionism preached self-determination for the Jewish people in “their” homeland. In reality, Israel has directly or indirectly driven Palestinians out of their homeland, confiscated their properties, rejected their right to return to their homeland despite UN resolutions, and occupied and colonised the rest of their homeland for the last four decades.

Throughout, Israeli military and security services ruled over another people against their will. They oppressed, tortured, exploited and robbed the Palestinians of their land, water and most importantly, their freedom. There has been more political prisoners in Israeli jails than any of its neighbours.

In denial over their predicament, Israeli leaders have taken shelter in the illusion of surplus morality.

This was best expressed by late Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, who warned the Arabs: “We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours.”

A wild illustration of Israeli chutzpah.

Occupation as colonial dictatorship

Unlike other colonial powers and dictatorships in recent memory, Israel took all, but gave nothing in return. The settlements, the bypass roads and the industrial zones it built, are exclusively for Jews.

Israel and its various Zionist organisations have built over 600 towns, villages and other form of settlements for the Jews, but none for the Palestinians – not even those it considers part of its own citizens, who make up almost one-fifth of its population.

And much like other dictatorships, it’s in denial over the damage it has caused to the people under its rule, and delusional over occupation it deems necessary, benevolent, or even divinely promised.

No other dictatorship in the region has been as indifferent and destructive for so long over those it ruled, as the Zionist regime has been in Palestine.

It didn’t hesitate to use lethal, excessive force time and again against those under its occupation. The most recent war crimes have been documented and detailed in various UN reports, including that of Judge Goldstone regarding the 2008/9 war on Gaza, which added or changed little in regards to the reality on the ground.

Like other dictatorships it boasts of sacrificing for peace,  demonises its detractors and oppositions, and justifies any wrong-doing on the basis of national security, order and stability.

Although it preached democracy, Israeli leaders long preferred to deal with autocrats, not only in the Arab world but also in the greater Middle East, as well as in Asia and Africa.

Israeli leadership has lobbied for the Mubarak regime in its last days and reportedly its leaders voiced support for assisting Gaddafi.

The illusion of separation

In spite of the six-decade record of Israel’s joint history with the Palestinians, its leadership and supporters still maintain that Israel is nothing like its neighbours; that it’s a democratic oasis in a sea of totalitarianism; that when it fought its neighbours and ruled over them, it did so against its will.

But regardless of the motivation and justification for the post-1948 or post-1967 wars, the resulting reality can’t be ignored. Indeed, it is politically and academically dishonest and counterproductive to speak of Palestinians and Israelis as two separate social and political landscapes.

Any attempt to understand the nature and the political, economic and social – even religious – evolution of the Israeli state in separation from its colonial dictatorship over another people would be futile at best. In reality, misleading and destructive.

The same goes for the Palestinians. Their national and political evolution over the last century, and to a greater extent of the last six decades, is intertwined with that of Zionism and Israeli dictatorship.

Today, the maximum distance between any Israeli and Palestinian is less than nine miles.

Where is the Palestinian revolution?

It was no coincidence then, that the “Palestinian revolution” emerged following Israel’s 1967 war and occupation, when it defeated its neighbours’ post colonial leaders and their national projects, be it pan-Arab nationalism, Baathism, etc.

As Israel allied itself with the colonial and imperial powers of the time – France, Britain and the United States – the Palestinian revolution – as the Palestinian liberation movement was depicted at the time – was inspired by similar anti-colonial struggles, such as the Algerian FLN against the French colonial dictatorship of their country.

But Cold War polarisation, Arab divisions and its own mistakes and blunders led to the disintegration of the ‘Palestinian revolution’. With the advent of the post-Cold War Peace Process in 1991, the Palestinian liberation movement was finally reduced to spearheading accommodation with Israel’s colonialism.

The domestication of the Palestinian liberation movement by the Peace Process soon led to national divisions leading to armed conflict between the Islamist and secular currents under Hamas and Fatah.

Separated by hundreds of checkpoints, ‘security’ walls and fences, and policed by British/American trained Palestinian forces under the supervision of Israel military and security services, Palestinians today live under multiple levels of military dictatorship and police state.

Alas, the Hamas-controlled, Israeli-choked mini entity in the Gaza Strip doesn’t look much different in reality.

Instead of pursuing their struggle for liberation from dictatorship, ‘Palestine Liberation movement’ and PLO leadership in the West Bank are suppressing Palestinian eagerness to join the Arab revolution‘s struggle to bring down the – in this case, colonial – regime.

For two decades, the PLO leadership has looked for salvation in Washington, and when that has proved a pipe-dream, it has decided to go to the UN for a recognition of a Palestinian state.

Come September, the PLO leadership will realise that the end result will, at best, be a state on paper, and its true realisation requiring more of the same diplomacy with Israel. All that assuming Washington wouldn’t veto such a draft resolution.

But regardless of the diplomatic acrobatics, at the end of the day, peace is possible between Palestinians and Israelis on the basis of one state, or two independent states divided by the 1967 borders.

It’s however not tenable nor moral, let alone revolutionary, for the Palestinians to be forced into accommodation or peace with Israel’s occupation or its colonial dictatorship.

Source:  Al Jazeera English
Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

Yes to nfz – kemana Islam?

Lihat begitu "confidence" kaum kuasa besar dengan rias rupa mereka bersetuju untuk menghantar tentera berperang dan menghancurkan umat Islam yang kecewa dengan pegangan agama mereka sendiri (dlm segi pemerintahan negara) dengan alasan untuk menjaga kemusnahan manusia yang tertindas. Tetapi siapa kah mereka yang tertindas itu?Kaum fasik atau siapa?

Dua negara kuasa besar kafir harbi “say Yes kepada “nfz”. “Kuasa Syurga” PAS kata apa, sembahyang hajat?

Menentang – kebanyakan mereka menentang kerana keputusan ini diambil diatas sifat “pemberontak Libya” yang belum jelas, samar dan tidak menentu dan keputusan untuk mencampuri dengan menghantar tentera akan mengeruhkan rantau itu dengan bencana perang yang lebih besar.

Brazil – ada hubungan dengan Libya

India tiada kuasa Veto di Majlis Keselamatan PBB

China – tidak suka campur tangan

Germany – tidak mahu campur tangan tentera.

Russia – tidak berminat langsung.

Komen: Apa yang sedang berlaku di Timur Tengah adalah hasil dari kenaikan harga barang-barang makanan dan kelembatan ekonomi dunia yang disebabkan oleh kejahatan manusia fasik dalam sistem kewangan dunia yang merudum berpunca dari mereka ini di Amerika dan benua Eropah. Walaupun dunia Arab kaya dengan minyak, harta itu telah pun dipegang oleh manusia seluruh dunia secara pukal dan sekarang pegangan kepada harta yang mustahak kepada ekonomi dunia untuk menjana kenaikan ekonomi itu harus dipegang secara mutlak.

Orang Islam masih berkhayal dengan pegangan kuasa minyak sedangkan kuasa politik mereka tidak lah kemana apatah lagi kekuatan kuasa tentera. Mari kita lihat bagaimana agama Islam yang agung yang di anuti oleh mereka di Libya itu dapat memberi harapan kepada umat Islam diseluruh dunia dengan apa yang akan berlaku di sana didalam masa terdekat ini.

Agama agung memerlukan para pemimpin agung dan dimana kah mereka ini?. Dari peristiwa disini dan seterusnya kepada mereka yang benar-benar beriman, akan tahu serba sedikit manusia yang serba “secretive” iaitu kaum “Dajjal” dan “Yakjub dan Makjub”, sebagai kaum pemusnah manusia di akhir zaman. Belajarlah.

Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

Islam berputar-putar, masuk longkang kerana duit.

King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz. (2002 photo)

King Abdullah - Hi, what do you want? (Image via Wikipedia)

Tentera Saudi Arabia masuk Bahrain - "Lu nak main gua ke? , pancung pun tak takut, apa macam dengan roket dan bom atom mahu ke? kepala hotak engkau Shiah!!!" - Raja Sunni.

"Ini 1,000 orang tentera terlatih, aku boleh hantar 200,000 engkau orang hendak ker,degil macam kaum kafir musyrikin lu orang" - Islam baru.

Bahrain : Tentera Saudi masuk Bahrain

Sungguh pun Saudi Arabia telah memberangsangkan ekonomi mereka dengan memberi hadiah berbillion-billion ringgit kepada rakyat mereka baru-baru ini, pegerakkan anti-kerajaan di Saudi Arabia masih hidup. Diketuai oleh kumpulan Shiah yang hidup tertekan dibahagian timur berdekatan dengan Bahrain, kerajaan telah mengunakan kekuatan tentera menghalang mereka dari merusuh.

"Saya telah berikan nasi kepada awak semua 41 tahun, hendak lawan saya" -jenis Islam baru melawan ketua kerana duit dan harta - Libya.

Seperti yang dijangka kerajaan Saudi telah masuk campur didalam urusan mengekang pengaruh gerakan Shiah di Bahrain dengan menghantar tentera mereka ke negara itu atas arahan Raja Sunni Bahrain yang mempunyai hubungan kekeluargaan dengan Raja Saudi Arabia.

"Gua pun nak kaya juga" - Islam baru.

Kejatuhan Bahrain ketangan pengaruh Shiah membahayakan kedudukan Saudi Arabia, dan bahaya kepada punca minyak dunia, Amerika dan pastinya yahudi.

Saya mahu minyak ini, buat apa berikan kepada Gaddafi?

Muaamar Gaddafi telah dikejam hebat oleh barat kerana membelasah para perusuh anti kerajaan yang terdiri dari pemberontak bersenjata berat, berkemungkinan didalangi oleh barat atau pro yahudi. Di Libya berbagai usaha barat telah dilihat sebagai tanda protes cara Gaddafi menghadapi rusuhan di negara itu.

Di Bahrain, dunia diam sepi. Dan Raja Sunni akan menyembelih gerakan Shiah tanpa ada apa-apa tentangan. Iran musuh barat dan juga musuh kepada pembaharuan sistem pemerintahan Islam di Timur Tengah.

Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

Libya terkini : kekuatan senjata

Su-22 in flight, near Gniezno, Poland.

Sukhoi S-22 (Image via Wikipedia)

Libya terkini: Kekuatan tentera Libya dan tentera Pemberontak

Beberapa hari dari Ahad, pertempuran hebat berlaku di Libya setelah Col Gaddafi cuba mendapatkan kembali kawasan yang di ambilalih oleh pemberontak.

Mari kita lihat kekuatan senjata yang diambil dari data lama diantara kedua belah pihak yang bertelingkah.

Tentera pemberontak.

Para pemberontak memiliki kereta kebal buatan Russia T55.

Pelancar roket – Jenis Type 63 107 mm pelancar roket mengandungi 12 tube diatur dengan 3 barisan. Buatan Korea Utara atau China. Boleh melancar roket ke jarak 8 km.

D ShK 12.7 heavy machinegun

Senjata Anti-pesawat – ZPU-2 and ZPU-4

Recoilless Rifle

Wire-guided anti-tank missile

Light Machine Gun

Technical – Digunakan diatas pick up.

RPG

Tentera gaddafi

Jet pejuang – Sukhoi SU-22, 45 units,

Kereta kebal – T55, T62, T72.

Helikopter tempur – Mi-25/Mi-35, Mil-24 helicopter gunship.

Self-propelled howitzer – 155 mm Palmaria Nato Standard -160 units

BMPinfantry combat vehicle – 1000 units

Navy – Combat vessels 17, Patrol craft 10, landing craft 4.

Shukoi

\

Berita terkini akan disiarkan disesi petang.

Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

punca berita: BBC.

Modern human and political slaveries

2009 National NOW Conference Workshop: Islamic...

In the west new human slavery is a big business many of the victims are from poor countries of North Africa and Asia.

Human trafficking is booming in the Middle East where the rich people “buy” or “trade” people for a lot of reasons, one is for domestic help and the other is for sex slavery. There are cases of similar activities in other the eastern Europe and America. Malaysia too is a transit point for the human trafficking from Asia to the destination countries.

It is a new slavery in the society of today. Becoming a rich nation brings people of that nation to untoward behavior although some of the states mentioned earlier have the followers of the great religion of Islam. Why are these people do such a thing?

I like to ask people here to reason out why Muslims in great cities of the Middle East, which doomed with nasty demonstrations lately become part of the problem in the human trafficking.

Are we too, in a lesser extent abusing human in promoting Islam? So much so, poor people being exploited for political abuses, for votes and for everything else. They have become modern-day slavery  in the political abuses. But, in return nothing is coming from them to help these people out of the doldrums.

Eekaa #eekaawordpresscom

Fighting rages in Libya’s east – Africa – Al Jazeera English

Fighting rages in Libya’s east – Africa – Al Jazeera English.

Sekurang kurangnya 30 orang awam terbunuh setelah tentera pro Gaddafi mencuba mengambil balik bandar Az Zawiyah, dekat Tropoli , setelah berharihari cuba menyekat kemaraan mereka untuk mengulingkan Gaddafi.

Berita Selanjut nya di atas.

Sinbab #eekaawordpresscom

Next Islamic powerhouse is Indonesia

The Iranian Revolution (Also known as the Isla...

Image via Wikipedia

My view on similarities and dissimilarities

Tough thoughts!. Although whims and fancies from the religious leaders of this country have been focused on happenings in the Middle East no real similarity there that can justify claim that we are going on a similar path.

The governments in the Middle East although submit to the religions and that of Islam do not believe in democracy. Most of the governments are ruled by a single party while the oppositions though permitted in the ruling of the country are dehumanized and penalized.

Tell me which country which doesn’t do that. Iran, the country that started the Islamic revolution thirty years ago suppresses the oppositions to even exist.

Today Iran faces another protest by the opposition rally without its leaders who had been denied for anti-government rally. They, together with wives and family members are believed to be in jail.

Today the American and the Western powers are contemplating to take over Libya another troubled country due to its own people’s disenchantment or disillusionment to overthrow own leaders whom they hate.

Hating and the throwing own leaders without proper discussions and submissions to a democratic form of government are a risky business for the country may be colonized by external powers that may use the situation for their own benefits.

That is exactly what is happening in case the external forces are used to liberate Libya from its present form of government.

Here the oppositions are the king on the road. From day one since 2008, the oppositions hold certain states in Malaysia for which leaders of the oppositions are at mercy of the voters. They have to proof their worthy in ruling for the good of the country, otherwise, off they go next general election.

This is what happening in Malaysia. The oppositions are stronger than their counterparts in the Middle Eastern countries. No one is stop to vote for any party.

The form of a party for both opposition and that of ruling party in a question whether these parties observed Islamic principle is an issue here that creates hot debates and political whirlpool since 2008 general election.

This issue is a real political issue in a country where Muslim forms a majority. It will affect Indonesia, the next generator of real Islamic political powerhouse over the next century. Let us see how they do it.

Eekaa #eekaaworpresscom

My Terror in Bahrain

Pandangan dan pengalaman dua penduduk luar di Bahrain mengenai protess anti-kerajaan.  Disini.

Semalam ketua pembangkang Hassan Meshaima, Shiah, telah kembali ke Bahrain dengan sambutan himpunan besar pengikut Shiah itu di Manama.

Mat Ell #eekaawordpresscom.

Demostrasi kecil di Qatif, Saudi

Kingdom Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Taken by...

Kingdom Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (Image via Wikipedia)

Memohon kerajaan Arab Saudi membebaskan tahanan Shiah di Qatif, Saudi Arabia. (Gambar - IranNews)

 

Penganut amalan “Shiah” di Saudi Arabia yang mengamal Islam mengikut fahaman “Shiah” dan berlawanan dengan amalan Wahhabis telah mengadakan demostrasi pada hari Khamis lepas di Qatif dikawasan timur berdekatan dengan Bahrain, selepas kerajaan Bahrain membebaskan tahanan politik di Bahrain.

Mereka meminta kerajaan Arab Saudi juga membebaskan semua tahanan Shiah di Saudi Arabia, sambil membawa gambar-gambar tahanan kaum mereka yang telah ditahan begitu lama tanpa pembicaraan di jalan-jalan utama di Qatif.

Ramai penganalis politik menyatakan kebimbangan mereka jikalau perkembangan itu merebak keseluruh kawasan minoriti penduduk Shiah di kawasan timur bersebelahan kawasan minyak Saudi Arabia.

Pihak berkuasa di Saudi Arabia mengamal fahaman Wahhabi dan telah mengunakan cara mereka menekan kehidupan beragama kumpulan “Shiah” dimana amalan-amalan mereka disekat dan ditentang dari dilakukan dimasjid-masjid di Saudi Arabia, juga segala adat-adat kumpulan itu akan diambil tindakan ketat dan mereka akan ditangkap untuk satu jangka yang panjang.

Pada tahun 2009, demostrasi telah diadakan di Awwamiya setelah pihak kerajaan Saudi mengempur tindakan amalan penganut “Shiah” diketuai oleh Aimr al-Nimr.

Tidak ada banyak berita ini dikeluarkan oleh barat. Mereka difahamkan tidak mahu melihat Saudi Arabia dikuasai oleh kumpulan revolusi dan para ulama atau pengaruh Iran.

Usaha Raja Saudi memberi insentif kepada rakyat msikin dan berpendapatan rendah semalam tidak menambat hati kumpulan minoriti Shiah yang telah hidup tertekan kerana amalan budaya dan adat resam mereka  disekat. Mereka adalah kaum minoriti di Saudi.

Berita dari Iran-News.

Antara Dunia dan Syurga: Saudi Arabia era Globalisasi

THERE ARE two key elements that define Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the world: Islam and oil. To put that another way, we might say the kingdom has one foot in heaven and one beneath the earth and can’t quite decide where it really belongs.

Saudi Arabia is the world’s largest oil producer and the largest exporter. It also possesses somewhere between a fifth and a quarter of known oil reserves. On the religious front, it’s the birthplace of Islam and the centre of the Muslim world: Mecca is the city that Muslims turn their faces towards whenever they pray, no matter where they are. King Abdullah is a religious leader as well as a temporal ruler and, according to protocol, his religious title – Guardian of the Two Holy Shrines – takes precedence over his royal title.

The interesting part of this is that both oil and Islam are prime examples of globalisation – a process that generates a good deal of hostility in the Arab countries, as it does elsewhere.

Globalisation – by which I mean the world becoming more connected and countries more inter-dependent – tends to be thought of as spreading western influence but Saudi Arabia is itself a major player in globalisation and also one of the driving forces.

Its role in this stretches well beyond oil exports themselves because the revenue from oil is then recycled to buy goods and services from abroad – the huge al-Yamamah arms contracts with Britain, for example, and the employment of vast numbers of foreign workers inside the kingdom. A portion of this money is also invested abroad, both privately and governmentally. Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth funds, amounting to well over $400 billion, are thought to be the world’s third largest (after the Emirates and Norway).

Alongside its oil exports, Saudi Arabia is also a major exporter of religion. This is less easily quantified than oil but it has been important since the early 1980s. It was triggered partly by Saudi fears about the spread of Shia Islam as a result of the Iranian revolution and partly by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which, among other things, led to the creation of large numbers of Saudi-influenced madrasas in Pakistan.

As part of that proselytising, vast quantities of Saudi religious literature became available, either cheaply or free of charge, to Muslims around the world – including those in Britain. This was not simply a matter of promoting Islam in general but, much more specifically, Wahhabi ideas – the strict and ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam that dominates in the kingdom. Apart from the fact that Saudis had the oil-generated wealth to fund their missionary work, non-Saudi Muslims were generally receptive to it. The kingdom, after all, was the Prophet’s homeland, and so Saudi – i.e. Wahhabi – ideas and practices were often perceived as the most “correct” or authentic.

Although this kind of activity began to be viewed more critically after the events of 9/11, its effects can be seen in many places. On the streets of Cairo, for instance, increasing numbers of men display Saudi-influenced religiosity with ankle-length robes and beards measured by the size of their fist, while some of the women dress in what other Egyptians jokingly refer to as “Ninja” outfits. These, it has to be said, are a tiny minority in Egypt but their presence is very noticeable. In Yemen, too, the early 1990s saw the arrival of what can only be described as Saudi missionaries who, among other things, lectured Yemeni worshippers on the “correct” way to pray. While some Yemenis accepted their teaching, others strongly resented it.

Foreign workers in the kingdom are also targets for proselytising – even the Chinese. China‘s relationship with Saudi Arabia is now very important. It is on the point of overtaking the United States as the kingdom’s biggest oil purchaser and it is also increasingly involved in the Saudi economy.

Among other things, China won a lucrative contract for building the Mashair railway (also known as the Mecca Metro). This new line, which links Mecca with the holy sites, opened in time to ferry pilgrims for the 2010 hajj. However, there was a religious complication in allowing the Chinese to build it because Mecca is out of bounds to non-Muslims. The Saudis resolved this in a way that was little short of miraculous, though the lucrative nature of the contract undoubtedly helped too.

According to a newspaper report at the time, the Chinese workers were given books explaining Islam in their own language and within 24 hours they had all allegedly seen the light. More than 600 of them converted to Islam en masse at a ceremony witnessed by a Saudi official, and the delighted official described these conversions as a “direct response to critics of the government for contracting [a] Chinese company”.

In Saudi Arabia’s case, globalisation gives rise to a fascinating paradox because, alongside its international role as a major player in that process, domestically there is also a strong current of isolationism and cultural protectionism. This is all about preserving what are imagined to be the kingdom’s unchanging religious and social traditions. I say “imagined” because some of the practices are not as ancient as people suppose. For example, the rules on gender segregation as decreed by many of the religious figures go a lot further than they did in the Prophet’s time, and some of the supposedly “national” traditions are alien to large parts of the country, since they originated from Riyadh.

The Saudis have done quite a successful job in propagating the image of a monolithic and devout national culture, though the reality is sometimes rather different.

Saudi cultural protectionism takes various forms. Internally, we see the religious police enforcing dress codes, checking that people pray at the appointed times, and so on The kingdom also goes to extraordinary lengths to fend off “undesirable” influences from outside. The adverts for whisky and pictures of inappropriately dressed women in imported newspapers are laboriously blotted out by hand, while an elaborate system of internet censorship blocks access to websites showing pornography and sexually explicit material or sites deemed to encourage gambling, drug use or conversion to Christianity.

This is rather different from the kind of censorship practised, say, in Syria which is aimed primarily at stifling political dissent. In Saudi Arabia, its main purpose is to shield people from moral harm in a very paternalistic way. This doesn’t say much for the Saudis’ confidence in their own system, since it implies that once people are exposed to alternatives they may rapidly abandon it (and they may be correct in that assumption).

While it might have been possible in the past to maintain an effective barrier against external influences, in an age of air travel, satellite television, the internet and so on, that is becoming impossible, and it is leading to pressure for change. Eventually something will have to give, and the question is whether that will happen in a gradual, evolutionary way or explode into some sort of social and cultural crisis.

Before moving on to look at that in more detail, it’s worth considering how Saudi Arabia’s effort to protect its “distinctive” social system plays out on the global stage.

One potential flashpoint is in the field of human rights. In its latest annual report, Human Rights Watch said the Saudi authorities “continue to systematically suppress or fail to protect the rights of nine million Saudi women and girls, eight million foreign workers, and some two million Shia citizens. Each year thousands of people receive unfair trials or are subject to arbitrary detention. Curbs on freedom of association, expression, and movement, as well as a pervasive lack of official accountability, remain serious concerns.”

Internationally, the general approach to Saudi human rights abuses is not to rock the boat too much. Western governments do criticise but not to the extent of jeopardising their business and political relationship, and the Saudis generally reciprocate by avoiding confrontations.

While large numbers of foreigners from poorer and less important countries are executed – African drug smugglers, for example – westerners are spared. A group of Britons were sentenced to death in 2002 but eventually released and sent home. The Lebanese come somewhere in between. In 2008, a TV fortune-teller from Lebanon was arrested during a pilgrimage to the kingdom and sentenced to death for “sorcery” but his execution seems to have been postponed indefinitely as a result of the negative publicity.

The Saudi authorities are certainly concerned about the kingdom’s image and often back down when individual cases are highlighted in the media – especially the foreign media. In 2007, a woman who had been sentenced to 200 lashes after being gang-raped at knifepoint was granted a royal pardon. Royal pardons are not unusual in the most controversial and high-profile cases but they do nothing to change the legal system that gives rise to these sentences in the first place.

In their defence, Saudi officials point out that they are taking steps towards reform but argue that Saudi society (or at least significant portions of it) is extremely conservative and resistant to change. The result, as Human Rights Watch noted, is that the reforms so far are mostly marginal or symbolic.

Last year, in the midst of some heated public debate about “mingling” of the sexes, the king and crown prince posed for a photograph with a large group of women. This was clearly a deliberate and important signal from the king. But the fact that in Saudi terms it was such a big deal shows just how far the kingdom still has to go.

Nevertheless, gender segregation is turning into a major social battleground and the arguments of the traditionalists are being challenged within the kingdom as never before. Discussions about the exact circumstances in which men and women can interact with each other get extremely complex and, to outsiders, often seem utterly bizarre. By opposing the employment of female cashiers in supermarkets, for instance, traditionalists claim they are resisting western culture – while apparently unaware that supermarkets themselves are a western invention and completely foreign to Arab culture.

There is also a good deal of hypocrisy in the gender debate. A video clip posted on the internet shows Sheikh Muhammad al-Nujaimi at a conference in Kuwait, laughing and joking with a woman who is not even wearing hijab. Sheikh Nujaimi, who is chairman of the interior ministry’s religious advisers, had previously asserted that gender segregation in schools is one of the “pillars” of the Saudi state and that female students must wear “proper” hijab. He had also supported a fatwa calling for opponents of gender segregation to be put to death if they refused to change their views. Embarrassed by the video, Nujaimi at first claimed it had been faked. Eventually he admitted that he had mingled with the opposite sex, but said he had done it for all the right reasons: “to prevent vice and help those misguided women find the righteous path”.

Failing to meet human rights standards in your own country is one thing, but obstructing progressive measures towards human rights in other countries is something else. That, in effect, is what Saudi Arabia has been doing, sometimes in collaboration with religious conservatives from the United States.

One early example was what religious activists refer to as “The Istanbul Miracle”. It happened at a UN conference in Turkey in 1996. Richard Wilkins (who later became head of the Mormons’ World Family Policy Center) was there and described how he helped to initiate the miracle. He wrote:

The Istanbul conference was convened in large measure by a worldwide, well-organised and well-funded coalition of governments, politicians, academicians and non-governmental organisations that were eager to redefine marriage and family life. Natural marriage, based on the union of a man and a woman, was described by professors, politicians and pundits as an institution that oppressed and demeaned women. The constant claim was that “various forms of the family exist”, and all “various forms” were entitled to “legal support”. The “form” most often discussed by those in charge of the conference was a relationship between two individuals of the same gender.

Wilkins challenged all this with a speech on traditional family values which also castigated sex education in schools. Afterwards, he was then approached by the ambassador from Saudi Arabia who embraced him warmly. Wilkins then gave the Saudi ambassador a list of suggested changes to the draft agenda, and the Istanbul Miracle happened.

Wilkins continues his account: “Thirty-six hours later, the heads of the Arab delegations in Istanbul issued a joint statement, announcing … that [their] members would not sign the Habitat agenda unless (and until) certain important changes were made”. As a result, the draft was altered to define marriage as a relationship between husband and wife, and mentions of the word “abortion” were replaced with the phrase “reproductive health”.

It was a similar story in 2003 when the UN Commission on Human Rights got around to discussing gay rights for the first time in its history. Brazil put forward a resolution expressing “deep concern at the occurrence of violations of human rights in the world against persons on the grounds of their sexual orientation”. Acting on behalf of the Islamic Conference Organisation, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Malaysia and Pakistan organised a filibuster which resulted in the proposal being dropped.

It may come as a surprise to find that Saudi Arabia is itself a party to four of the most important international human rights treaties: the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (known as CEDAW for short), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Torture and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Considering that Saudi Arabia operates what is probably the world’s most comprehensive system of discrimination against women, that torture and degrading punishments are prominent features of the justice system, and that child marriages and racial discrimination are widespread, we might wonder why it bothers signing up to these conventions at all.

There seem to be two reasons. One is that they bestow an aura of respectability without necessarily incurring any serious obligations regarding compliance. The other is that membership of these conventions provides opportunities to undermine them, thus weakening their impact worldwide.

UN conventions can easily be circumvented by countries registering their “reservations” and in some cases these reservations can be so sweeping as to negate the essential substance of the agreement. In theory, reservations that are “incompatible with the object and purpose” of a UN convention are not allowed but in practice they can be difficult to prevent. Reservations can only be blocked if a very large number of other countries object to them – which is often impossible to achieve.

Taking CEDAW (the convention on discrimination against women) as an example, the kingdom rationalises its seemingly irreconcilable position, after a fashion, by saying it does not consider itself bound by any part of the convention that conflicts with “the norms of Islamic law”. Among the 17 other Arab countries that are parties to CEDAW, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Syria and the UAE have also lodged reservations based on Islamic law.

Citing “Islamic law” in the context of international treaties is especially problematic because no one can be really sure what it means. The sharia is not formally codified, there are various methods of interpretation and scholars can sometimes reach wildly differing conclusions. As Denmark noted in its objection to Saudi Arabia’s reservations, the references to the provisions of Islamic law were “of unlimited scope and undefined character”.

The key point, though, is that religious principles are a convenient vehicle for excusing all manner of abuse. In reality, the abuses usually have more to do with local customs and practices than religious doctrine but invoking religion removes any need to account for them or try to justify them.

The overall effect of dragging Islamic law into human rights debates is to provide an excuse for lower standards rather than trying to raise them, as Ann Elizabeth Mayer demonstrates in her book, Islam and Human Rights – Tradition and Politics. “Distinctive Islamic criteria have consistently been used to cut back on the rights and freedoms guaranteed by international law, as if the latter were deemed excessive,” she writes. “The literature arguing that Muslims may have human rights, but only according to Islamic principles, provides the theoretical rationales for many recent government policies that have been harmful for rights.”

This leads to one of the core issues in the globalisation debate: arguments about universality versus cultural relativism – though in the case of Saudi Arabia this is something of a red herring.

With all their bluster about “the norms of Islamic law”, it might be imagined that Saudi Arabia and other predominantly Muslim countries stand firmly and consistently on the side of cultural relativism. On the whole, though, they don’t – except when it suits them. To some extent they do accept the principle of universalism – but again, only when it suits them. Through their membership of the UN and other bodies, they are willing participants in a system of international law and they are also among the first to complain about human rights abuses and infringements of international law where Israel is concerned.

In partially exempting themselves from international standards, they are not so much arguing for cultural relativism as for a form of cultural selectivity. It’s a selective defence against whatever forms of external influence are regarded as unwelcome.

And what they are actually seeking to protect is not the sum-total of authentic local tradition but an imagined, officially-approved version of it which in some cases has to be imposed on reluctant citizens. The Islamic “norms” that Saudi Arabia waves in international forums are not those of the country as a whole but those that happen to have become dominant.

If they really believed in cultural relativism as a principle they would surely also have to apply it internally by insisting on respect for the different norms and traditions of whatever distinctive religious, ethnic or regional groups may be found within their own borders. Mostly they do not.

I alluded earlier to the way globalisation contributes to pressure for change inside the kingdom, so let’s look at some of the possible crunch points.

Politically, the Saudi system is modelled on traditional concepts of the Arab family and the king is a kind of father figure: in principle, if not reality, he is wise and benevolent, he commands respect, he dispenses largesse and arbitrates between the conflicting demands of his sometimes bickering children.

This results in a form of government that is highly personalised: appointments depend more on who people are and their relationships with others than on ability. That inevitably leads to high levels of incompetence, which is one reason why chains of command are kept short, with little delegation of responsibility.

There is also a lot of discretion in the exercise of power: laws and regulations may be enforced selectively or waived according to circumstances and the people affected by them. There is minimal transparency and almost no accountability.

Taken together, the personalisation of government, the discretionary use of power and the lack of transparency and accountability lead to widespread corruption, cronyism and nepotism.

One way to describe this is as a “patrimonial” or “neopatrimonial” system – a politicised form of patriarchy. The term “patrimonial” was first used by Max Weber, the German sociologist, in connection with a style of government found in early-modern Europe. Essentially, it is a system where “the mechanics of the household are the model for political administration”8. For “household” in this context, picture a rather grand ancestral home with plenty of land, servants, gardeners, gamekeepers, etc; imagine how the lord of the household would have run it – then apply that to the running of a country.

In this kind of system, ordinary people are treated more or less like children, or at least as obedient cap-doffing servants. There is little or no scope for them to become engaged as active citizens. In fact, active citizenship is strongly discouraged and tends to be regarded as subversive.

As far as the Saudi monarchy’s claim to legitimacy is concerned, it is based mainly on religious credentials: a pact with the Wahhabi scholars. Oil wealth also bolsters the monarchy’s position. The lines between state wealth and royal wealth are blurred and the money can be used to buy off discontent. Also, without the need for high taxation, demands for accountability are minimised.

Religious teaching plays an extraordinarily important part in decision-making. Almost everything has to be justified in terms of religion: is it Islamically acceptable? This constant reference to religious doctrine slows the pace of change and inhibits innovation and progress. Way back, theologians resisted the introduction of bicycles. It was the same with radio in the 1950s, with television in the 1960s and, more recently, camera phones.

It’s obviously very frustrating for anyone who is trying to introduce something new to have to keep looking over their shoulder and wondering how theologians and other conservative elements might react. And often, just when it seems that things are moving forward, something happens to push them back.

One progressive cultural development was the Jeddah Film Festival, which ran successfully from 2006 to 2008. Then, a few hours before the 2009 festival was due to open, the authorities suddenly cancelled it. No real explanation was given, except that the festival supposedly “lacked preparation”.

Last November, a cinema opened in Dammam – the first since they were all closed down in the 1970s and 1980s. To allay the fears of religious conservatives, the owners of the new cinema announced that it would specialise in cartoons and “action” films – the type least likely to be accused of corrupting people’s morals. But apparently even that went too far and a few days later the owners issued a rather surreal statement denying – despite the sign outside – that it was actually a cinema. In fact, they said, it was a “projection auditorium” for the “intellectual development of children”.

To summarise the situation, Saudi Arabia has an archaic system of government which is heavily manipulated by archaic interpretations of religion. The religious problem lies not so much in Islam itself as in the way Islam is invoked by the so-called traditionalists to justify practices that cannot be justified by other means.

To this we should add one further very important crunch point, which concerns equality. The concept of equal rights doesn’t really exist in Saudi society. Nor does the idea that diversity, far from being abhorrent, can actually be of value. Discrimination based on gender, faith, nationality, ancestry, social status and culture is pervasive and institutionalised. There was a court case recently involving a woman from Madina whose father had refused her permission to marry – on the grounds that her proposed husband was a foreigner from a neighbouring Arab country. Even though the man actually belonged to the same tribe, the judge accepted the father’s arguments.

Criticising from outside, and especially from the west, often leads to accusations of cultural imperialism and brings the response that the Saudis are entitled to their own system. But it seems to me that the issue, ultimately, is not one of differing ideologies or differing cultures, but of practicalities. It’s a question of what works and what doesn’t.

Large parts of the Saudi system are not working at present and as time goes on, without very drastic changes, it will work less and less.

Patrimonial government may work in a small tribal society but it’s not a realistic proposition in a modern, complex country of 28 million or more people. There has to be delegation of responsibilities, with agreed procedures that people follow. There has to be transparency and accountability – otherwise, when things go wrong, there is no mechanism for putting them right and preventing a recurrence in the future.

In a global marketplace, Saudi Arabia’s distinctive social/political and religious system also comes at a very high cost. So far, the cost has been masked to a large extent by reliance on oil, but that won’t always be the case.

In the non-oil sphere, the kingdom is basically choosing to operate with one hand tied behind its back. By excluding vast numbers of women from its productive capacity, it is depriving itself of a resource that other countries use. By doing business on the basis of “commissions” paid privately to people of influence and by appointing people to jobs on the basis of birthright or connections, it is choosing to be uncompetitive in global terms.

Pressure for change is certainly growing, though not in an organised way. At present it’s more a case of individuals fighting their own personal battles – from women trying to assert their rights through the courts to kids in the shopping malls wearing low-slung jeans.

The once-feared religious police – the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice – currently seem to be in retreat, though their abolition is not yet on the cards. Amid widespread public criticism there have been moves to curb their excesses and last year saw a 20% drop in the number of cases they handled (though that still left more than 16,000 cases involving Saudi citizens and almost 40,000 involving foreigners).

These changing attitudes are another consequence of globalisation – the globalisation of ideas. Saudis are increasingly aware of the way things work in other countries; they make comparisons with the rights and freedoms that others have – and which they lack.

One significant straw in the wind came at the end of 2009 when floods in Jeddah killed more than 100 people. Not so long ago such events might have been accepted with a sense of fatalism as God’s punishment for the city’s sins. But not on this occasion. The tragedy appeared to be the result of money allocated for drainage works having been diverted elsewhere, and housing construction having been permitted on what was basically a dried-up river bed.

Some of the local media pursued the issue relentlessly (at least by Saudi standards) and were outspoken in their calls for accountability. This was something new, and the king responded, after a fashion, by ordering an investigation. Welcoming the announcement, the editor of Arab news wrote that for once officials “might actually be held responsible for not having done what they were well-paid for many years to do”.

“To ordinary citizens,” he continued, “to the families of those who died in the waters, to the sick and the orphans, the announcement was like a balm. King Abdullah has added two words to the Saudi vocabulary – transparency and accountability. They must be taken seriously by all officials.”

King Abdullah also seems responsive, up to a point, to calls for change in the religious area. He has given a few gentle nudges regarding the status of women, he has cracked down on unauthorised fatwas and he has been trying to reform the sharia-based legal system. But these are very small steps indeed, considering what needs to be done.

However, given his own need for religious legitimacy, it could be politically dangerous for the king to push harder or faster – even if he wanted to (which in itself is debatable). Meanwhile, the current pace of change is unlikely to be enough to contain the pressure that is building up and eventually we can expect it to reach some kind of crunch point.

We have seen what happened in Tunisia and Egypt, but it seems to me that the issue in Saudi Arabia is rather different. The coming struggle will be more about tradition versus modernity, about the character of Saudi society and the role of religion, than about political leadership. It will be about the system as a whole, rather than the regime. That makes it much more difficult to predict what form the struggle will take or how it might ultimately be resolved.

Popular frustrations can be contained for years but, as in Tunisia and Egypt, there’s always a risk that the dam will suddenly burst. All it takes is sufficient numbers of people to decide that they have simply had enough.

Brian Whitaker.

Raja Abdullah bagi duit RM32.66 billion dan RM1, 221.02 million infra hingga 2014.

"Hello, Hello, Ayatollah, aku dapat RM32.66 Billion, Raja Abdullah bagi, hang bila nak bagi pada Mat Ell tomyam tu? Bini aku happy menjak hari ini, kira Okay lah tu. Nak tanya sikit itu geng 20 juta member protes pro kerajaan untuk hang tu, berapa Dollar habis? 10 Dollar seorang ? Oh pandai hang, baru Dollar 200 juta, otak geliga! Okay la ya, aku nak call Haji Hadi, PAS, nak beritahu, bab macam ini bab apa? Rasuah pilihan raya ke sedekah amal jariah!. Apa Ayatolah? Tak boleh pakai? Nik Aziz?, Sama? Okay lah, aku tak payah call. Bye"

"Kasut anak, susu anak, cermin mata Piah, bayar saman ekor, baju aku sepuluh pasang, coli, berus gigi, karpet bilik depan, ubat sakit gigi, lesen memandu, hutang Kak Som, pergi umrah, buka bank akaun, jubah laki 6 pasang, mesin basuh, handfon Limah, handfon Joe, Ipad, hutang streamyx, pisang emas dua tandan sedekah masjid, sejadah lima, ala, apa lagi ekk, huh duit tuition dan duit bas lupa pulak!!!"

Revolusi Jasmine menusuk hati sanubari Raja Saudi, King Abdullah, 87 tahun dan beliau bersedekah kepada fakir miskin.

Mat Ell #eekaawordpresscom