Israel.....And Flotilla?

Now let's mesh everything what we've seen in then past few days:

1. Under the “Freedom Flotilla”, a ship, Mavi Marmara, containing humanitarian aid and lifeline supplies was attacked by a commando organized the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) at around 7 in the morning, Mecca time on the 31^st of May 2010. Among the 19 killed 9 of them was from Turkey. The rest were injured. (Why do I sound like a broadcaster. LOL)

2. A second ship a.k.a Rachel Corrie, although not so bloody as it's later sister was ordered to re-route to a port in Israel after Israel Forces came storming at the ship. Alhamdullillah, there weren't any causalities, just some panic I guess. The Malaysians on board was sent to Jordan to be brought back to their country.

Now from my point of view, the story is all so interesting, because there are many questions to be raised from both sides.

Lets see firstly on our side, the so called “good side”, “Islamic side” or “Defender of Humanitarian side”. Call it what you like, the things I want to talk about here might be a little uncomfortable if you've been the person who shed tears and sweat trying to fight for this thing, or you've to the demonstrations held here in Kuala Lumpur. (I went one myself, at the Wilayah Perseketuan Mosque)

Ok, so maybe you have to give some credit to the political guys (especially our prime minister) whom went to the demonstrations. They were all shouting God knows what things making us more feeble and anxious to get our swords and guns out and run to the nearest war. But, this is were things doesn't make up much. Like, ok, the PM is supporting us, finally he has some senses to the Islamic World (Hope he asks his wife to wear a Hijab “properly” if they ever wanted to visit the holy lands) but where is all the talk taking them? Like Puh-lease, I've seen them even more exited when it comes to elections.

Some of us expected more action from the government, considering the fact that they are the ones who are governing this country, the power is in there finger tips (they just sign papers and stuff) for example send military escorts. What is the use of us actually buying a submarine or an aircraft carrier if we don't want to use it? It's like all talk and no work.

Right now, it's not just about the Malaysia, whole other countries have gone mute about such decisions.

I don't know where Pakistan and Iran went with there so- called “Nuclear Power” or Turkey's trying to find Justice or even Egypt which just merely “Opens a border”.

Looking at things at the silver lining, maybe we should give them some time to adjust at this point, re-thinking there views, maybe putting on a kopiah next time you go into Parliament, they are just people.

On the other hand, you might be able to see things a lot more brighter than before. There is this so called rumor that Turkey is re-grouping the old Empire. There is a meeting of 8 Presidents from Eurasian and Middle East States last Monday, Iran, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey, Palestine are among the board that will be discussing on this issue of Israel invading International waters. Syria although not a member is invited as a guest.

One good news is to the fact that Turkey, under the leadership of Erdogan, is leaning more into an Islamist state. War between Turkey and Israel might be unavoidable. Let's just hope this time, Turkey won't be alone. The Islamic World is behind you..........

Are you Alim?

Even if I'm 17 that doesn't mean I'm young

Alhamdullillah, I'm learning in IIU Petaling Jaya Campus, taking Engineering.
Going into university, as I saw it, wasn't that much shocking than what I've heard of.
(Well, it was just.... the ta'aruf week)

And Insyaallah after a few years in IIU, I'll be flying to Saudi Arabia to continue my studying in Noetics and Nanotechnology (look up in a dictionary)

Life in university, does have it's ups and downs. There were pressures, even during the first days at IIU, some split decision moments, some bad days and sometimes great ones.

What I was most intrigued most in IIU wasn't the name of the university or it's system of conduct, it is it's society and environment.

Ok, you could say thath there is a mosque and mussolla very close by, everything is in walking distance. everyone smiles to each other and there is a huge line between the relationships of boys and girls. No comments there.

And yet, looking back, this time behind the scenes, we see that such things are actually a veil, or a hiding place for occult things.

I'm not trying to give a bad image to IIU, I live there right now, but I feel the need to watch over things so that they wouldn't go astray, especially when it's my home.

Back in Maahad Hamidiah, we had this idea, that everyone is a hypocrite one way or the other, no matter how good that person is or how bad, there is always something we would over saw. that means, we don't trust looks. That's why one of BADAR's main job is to make sure that everyone has a good being in them.

I've seen people following Usrah and Muzzakarah Iman yet go out for smoking, and people whom are wise and intelligent yet not so active in such things. It's a dual world in Maahad.

So my adventure in IIU started when as usual, going to the mosque wearing a jubah and a serban as i did in Maahad. It was a habit of mine to do such things.

However, when I was in the mosque, there wasn't any other single being (except 2 others) whom was wearing an attire like mine. ok don't mind about that.

I did my prayers, then the surprising happened. Someone came to me and asked whether I was fro Darul Qur'an. Like Puh-lease

He said that I "looked" like someone "alim" wearing a serban and jubah. I replied to him that, no, I wasn't exactly from DQ, not a graduate there, once learned but didn't stayed. Only memorize quite a few verses of the Qur'an, and God knows how many I scored in my Arabics and Islamic Studies (not to mention I got a C+ in Shariah, and I was hoping to take a double degree in that). I'm not that "alim" compared to some of my friends, especially the KISASians in Islamic knowledge.

I explained to them that our outer looks doesn't signify anything to others. It is just a proclamation of what we believe in. like if somebody really loves the prophet then he would wear a jubah and a serban, but not vice verse.

I've been telling people, don't judge a book by it's cover (although I could get a lot of things about people by there body language).

To come to someone and ask them "Are you somebody Alim?" I feel that isn't that much of a significance in these times. It's base on the heart of a person, then showing it through his-self and his surroundings.

What is Alim these days? somebody with a high knowledge in Islam, yet still doesn't practice it?
Somebody who looks nice but in his heart (which we wouldn't know) is filled with emptiness and ignorance in religion? or is it just somebody whom as all people would see it, once learned at a religious institute i.e. KISAS, Maahad Hamidiah or Darul Qur'an?

Last question to be thought of: Are you somebody who is Alim?

New Face, New Step

Alhamdullillah, I finally was able to find a good substitute layout for the former layout I lost due to some technical reasons. I feared that my blog was marked spam several times that it might be deleted. So I change the layout and the web address.

the name of this blog is now Islamic Conscience, due to the fact I fell that there should be a small awareness in all of us, especially Muslims whom are reading this to understand that the truest and most notable enemy we would face is the devil inside of us.

I feel that there should be a need to tell everyone what is going on, I mean what is truly going on in the eyes of the victim of the situation.

I've been reading blogs and researching for my Islamic Metaphysics and the Islamic world, and this have brought me into finding some sites that have been accusing Islam with various accusations like not respecting human rights, violent, terrorist and etc, which I felt that we have been a religion of misunderstood, it seems that human instincts and egoism has suppress everything else including logic, truths, and reason.

There those blogs that I would respect due to the fact that they actually talk on Islam in a mannerly fashion and so, I wish discuss more with them, I feel that if there was any way to show back how beautiful Islam is, then I would take it.

Insyaallah, Akhuluqau lihaza wa astharfirullah.
May Peace be upon you all

Sex Scandals, Religious Leadership and Salvation

Sex scandals or more precisely the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests and other religious leaders have been in news for almost a decade thanks to daring statements by those who were the victims of people they trusted most in religious matters. Who knows how many more cases are still buried in the memories of millions of people all over the world? And who knows how many more religious leaders are still preaching with a lid on their boiling sinful cauldron?

But why do we have to point at the deviant behavior of Catholic priests. There are many others in every religious community who can be identified as deviants in matters pertaining to immoral sexual relations. A Hindu Sanayasi (someone who vows to renounce the world) is absconding after his deviant sexual act with multiple women. The video footage of a Jewish rabbi visiting a minor to indulge in a sexual act is still in the memory of the people and one can also find news about Imams in America accused of sexual misconduct. In fact, the history of religions is full with stories of sexual digressions in convents, ashrams, religious seminaries and schools. Achariya Rajnish in the 70's emerged as one of most popular religious voices only to be busted as a sexual perverts. David Koreish still lingers in the memories of people for his multiple marriages with minors.

Labels do not make a person good or bad, actions do. To be known as a religious person or leaders does not mean that the person is also religious in one's actual life and follows the divine commandments in all of its aspects.

Ironically, almost every religious community promotes a theology that places emphasis on labels and symbols. Some describe their religious leaders infallible, others as holy and still others as pious and paragon of virtues. There are several sociological and psychological reasons for this deviant behavior. However, one dominant factor is the kind of theology that is accepted by many without looking at its ramifications.

Many Christians, for instance, believe that salvation comes only through accepting Jesus as the savior. In that theology, a person of Hitler's criminal nature, would also qualify for the divine grace as long as he accepts Jesus as the Lord. Many Hindus believe that the reincarnation of human soul wipes off its sinful nature by changing forms and shapes as it ultimately joins the divine soul. Many Jews believe that because of their special relation with God, they would never be subject to any accountability for their deviant behavior in the life hereafter. Many Muslims believe that because of their faith only they would eventually qualify for heaven after being accounted for their sins no matter how great.

Obviously, when religious leadership or anyone that believes the divine would judge them on their belief and not on their actions, it is difficult to acknowledge sins and their consequences in one's life.

The Quran emphatically challenges this notion of divine grace and mercy. Every action causes its consequences is the unchangeable divine principle. The Quran makes it known that even the minutest good or bad deed would have consequences to be borne by their performers. (Quran 10:61 - 21:47 - 34:3) Thus, labels alone would not be able to save a person. The actions would ultimately determine the fate of each and every human beings.

The Quran calls for a responsible behavior based on commitment to divine values from every human being. Quran 103:1-3)

What we see in the sexual deviation of religious leadership is a behavior that is challenging the notion of divine superiority. What is even worse is the attitude to hide these issues and not take a principled stand as a community or an organization. What is ironic is that only secular institutions have adopted a clear policy on child abuse and applied strict laws to deal with the situation.

It was the responsibility of those who claim that they were under the guidance of the divine to take a lead in ensuring that their presence in synagogues, churches, mosques, temples and other religious institutions would not be a source of concern for children, weaker sections of the society or the vulnerable ones.

What needs to be acknowledged is the fact that no one is infallible with the exception of those who were entrusted to communicate the divine message to human beings. Even the highest of religious authority is capable of committing acts of deviation from a religious perspective. Additionally, one has to recognize the fact that actions would always cause consequences. Without acknowledging this fundamental human reality, the Catholic Church or for that matter any other religious hierarchy would not be able to overcome its own deviations.

Islamophobia..... As if

9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says

slamophobia is prejudice or discrimination against Islam or Muslims.^[1] The term seems to date back to the late 1980s,^[2] but came into common usage after the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.^[3] In 1997, the British Runnymede Trust defined Islamophobia as the "dread or hatred of Islam and therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims," stating that it also refers to the practice of discriminating against Muslims by excluding them from the economic, social, and public life of the nation. It includes the perception that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West and is a violent political ideology rather than a religion.^[4] Professor Anne Sophie Roald writes that steps were taken toward official acceptance of the term in January 2001 at the "Stockholm International Forum on Combating Intolerance", where Islamophobia was recognized as a form of intolerance alongside Xenophobia and Antisemitism.^[5]

Sources have suggested an increasing trend in Islamophobia, some of which attribute it to the September 11 attacks,^[6] while others associate it with the increased presence of Muslims in the Western world.^[7] In May 2002 the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), a European Union watchdog, released a report entitled "Summary report on Islamophobia in the EU after 11 September 2001", which described an increase in Islamophobia-related incidents in European member states post-9/11.^[8] Although the term is widely recognized and used, it has not been without controversy

Islamophobic acts

Belgium

• In January 2006 the Dutch parliament voted in favor of a proposal to ban the burqa in public, leading to accusations of Islamophobia.^[85] Filip Dewinter, the leader of Vlaams Belang bloc has said his party is "Islamophobic." He said: "Yes, we are afraid of Islam. The Islamisation of Europe is a frightening thing."^[86]

Canada

• Halima Mautbur, from the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations called an attack on a hijabi Muslim woman "an Islamophobic incident".^[87]
• On January 04 2010, in Hamilton city of Ontario, Canada the largest mosque of the city on Stone Church Road was firebombed^[88]. Hamilton police’s hate crime unit and chief arson investigator discovered "evidence of vandalism at the property as well as an incendiary device"^[89]. Attackers had used a large rock, lighter and Molotov cocktail^[90].

Denmark

• Doudou Diène in a report prepared by the UN Commission on Human Rights released on March 7, 2006 mentioned the publishing of the cartoons at the heart of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy regarding, "The development of Islamophobia or any racism and racial discrimination ..."^[91]

France

A protester at a counter-demonstration against the September 15, 2007 anti-war protest in Washington, D.C.

• The desecration of 148 French Muslim graves near Arras. A pig's head was hung from a headstone and profanities insulting Islam and Muslims were daubed on some graves.^[92]
• Dalil Boubakeur, a director of a Paris mosque described the vandalism on a Mosque in Paris, France as Islamophobic.^[93]
• On December 13 2009, The Mosque of Castres in southern France, was vandalized in the night^[94]. Swastika in black paint, "Sieg Heil" in German, "France to the French" in French, and "White Power" in English were scrawled on the mosque^[95]. Additionally, a pig feet was hung on the mosque.^[96].

The Mosque of Castres after vandal attack.

• Destruction and vandalism of Muslim graves in France were seen as Islamophobic by a report of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia ^[97].
• French town accuses a popular fast-food chain Quick of discrimination because it only serves burgers prepared according to Islamic dietary law ^[98].

Germany

• On July 1 2009, Marwa El-Sherbini was stabbed to death in a courtroom in Dresden, Germany. She had just given evidence against her attacker who had used racist insults against her because she wore an islamic headscarf.

Spain

• Giles Tremlett of The Guardian referred to the burning of a Muslim Sanctuary in the Spanish city of Ceuta, as an instance of Islamophobia.^[99]

United Kingdom

• Vandalism of Muslim Graves in Charlton cemetery in Plumstead, London.^[100]
• In 2005, The Guardian commissioned an ICM poll which indicated an increase in Islamophobic incidents, particularly after the London bombings in July 2005.^[101][102] Another survey of Muslims, this by the Open Society Institute, found that of those polled 32% believed they had suffered religious discrimination at airports, and 80% said they had experienced Islamophobia.^[103][104]
• On the 26 August 2007 fans of the English football club Newcastle United directed Islamophobic chants at Egyptian Middlesbrough F.C. striker Mido. An FA investigation was launched^[105] He revealed his anger at The FA's investigation, believing that they would make no difference to any future abuse.^[106] Two men were eventually arrested over the chanting and were due to appear at Teesside Magistrates Court.^[107]
• On July 6 2009, the Glasgow branch of Islamic Relief was badly damaged by a fire which police said was started deliberately, and which members of the Muslim community of Scotland allege were Islamophobic.^[108]

United States of America

• Zohreh Assemi, an Iranian American Muslim owner of a nail salon in Locust Valley, New York, was robbed, beaten, and called a "terrorist" in September 2007 in what authorities call a bias crime.^[109] Assemi was kicked, sliced with a boxcutter, and had her hand smashed with a hammer. The perpatrators, who forcibly removed $2,000 from the salon and scrawled anti-Muslim slurs on the mirrors, also told Assemi to "get out of town" and that her kind were not "welcomed" in the area. The attack followed two weeks of phone calls in whic Iranian-American Zohreh Assemi was called a "terrorist" and told to "get out of town," friends and family said.^[109]
• Bollywood superstar Shahrukh Khan was detained in Newark Airport in the USA and was questioned for about two hours because of his common Muslim surname Khan,^[110] before the Indian mission intervened and secured his release. The actor was heading towards Chicago to participate in the Indian Independence Day celebrations. "It is a Muslim name and I think the name is common on their checklist," he told Indian television channels over telephone.^[111][112]

THIS IS IMPORTANT!!!

So the question is........... what are we going to do about it, considering the fact that France in the next 5 to 10 years will be an Islamic Major country with am estimate of 5 Muslims being born everyday there, here you have the president of France arguing the ban of the"hijab" as if it is a violation to woman's rights.

Well you tell them this, if anyone asked you why in the world in Islam asks there women to wear hijab and close there bodies and so forth, say to them that

Islam is a beautiful religion, that in a sense it protects beauty......

Not to mention that the in Malaysia (FYI Malaysia is a majority Muslim country but not really an Islamic nation) everyday there are cases of sexually abuse towards women, I don't see anyone doing anything about it, why they even discourage women to wear it (look at the politicians wife, duh)

The main point here is actually, the problem is not because we did something to them that made them afraid of us, it was we who are afraid of Islam. We're afraid to follow the prophet, to act righteously and to do what Allah told us to, and in a set back we didn't just made ourselves afraid, we made the world afraid of Islam.

Try to think about it, if we weren't afraid to go out wearing a jubah in public with a serban on our heads, rather than the books and text books and novels, we bring in our hands the Qur'an, Sahih Bukhari and other such like.

We have to realize that we create our own world. If we fear it, we make our world afraid of it.
Only when we are not afraid to step in the light then shall we be able to see what greatness there is.

CHANGE YOURSELF, YOU CHANGE THE WORLD
IF YOU FEAR ISLAM, THEN YOU MAKE THE WORLD FEAR IT,
BECAUSE YOU ARE THE WORLD............

Israel, Palestine: Talking of Failure

From the TIME magazine

They won't be talking directly to each other, but at least the leaders of Israel and Palestine have a common objective in the "proximity talks" the Obama Administration is launching this week. Unfortunately, that shared goal is not to reach a final agreement on a two-state solution to their conflict — both sides know better than to expect that U.S. special envoy Senator George Mitchell's shuttling between Jerusalem and Ramallah will be able to bridge the chasm between their demands. Instead, the mutual goal in the latest round of talks is to avoid being blamed for their failure.

The very fact that two decades after the start of the Oslo peace process, the two sides are no longer even negotiating directly but instead communicating via the Americans is a clear sign of just how grim the prospects have become for achieving peace through bilateral talks. Both sides, in fact, are showing up for the U.S.'s latest version of a peace process largely to prove a point. For the Palestinians and their Arab backers, who have given the latest round of talks just four months to produce results (a deadline not endorsed by the Obama Administration), their purpose is to demonstrate to the U.S. that no credible peace agreement can be achieved with the hawkish government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that creating a viable independent Palestinian state requires that the Americans press the Israelis to do things they're not going to do voluntarily. Setting conditions and deadlines is a way for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to offset the domestic political damage he suffers from participating in endless rounds of fruitless negotiations. Abbas was helped by the fact that the new talks were endorsed by the Arab League last week, but the tone of its statement is telling: "Despite the lack of conviction in the seriousness of the Israeli side," said Arab League Secretary Amr Moussa, his committee agreed to back the talks "as a last attempt and to facilitate the U.S. role." (See pictures of 60 years of Israel.)

The Israelis, for their part, need to demonstrate good faith and position themselves to blame the Palestinians, as they have done up to now, for the absence of a peace deal. And Israeli officials make no bones about the fact that they need to go through the motions in order to pursue their own priority: resuming talks, a senior Israeli official told the daily Yediot Ahronot, "would create an atmosphere in the Arab world and the international community that would allow the world to focus on the real threat — Iran."

Netanyahu, after taking office, came around to talking of a two-state solution, which he had previously rejected, but at the same time he defined Palestinian statehood in terms too limited to be acceptable to the Palestinian leadership. Netanyahu had publicly opposed the offers made to the Palestinians by previous Israeli governments, and his government made clear last week that new talks would not begin from understandings reached with any of his predecessors but would instead start from scratch — a position vehemently rejected by the Palestinians. Of course, none of those previous offers had been accepted by the Palestinian leadership; it's hard to see how offering less than the proposals previously rejected by Abbas, as Netanyahu appears set to do, is going to break the deadlock. But Netanyahu will argue that Israel is willing to talk directly and without conditions and to use the Palestinians' refusal to do so as a basis to blame them for the stalemate. (See pictures of heartbreak in the Middle East.)

While in theory a peace process might require that the protagonists make tough choices, the "proximity" process being initiated by the Obama Administration will, in fact, land the tough choices on the desk in the Oval Office. Four months or more from now, it will probably become clear that the gap between Israel and Palestine is unlikely to be bridged by simply talking. And then the question will be, Is the U.S. willing to force the issue by putting on the table its own views of an acceptable settlement and beginning to press both sides toward accepting it? (See pictures of Obama's trips overseas.)

Even as Senator Mitchell shuttles between them, both sides appear set to escalate their confrontation on the ground, in growing battles over expanded Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and elsewhere and over the status of various sites considered holy by both Jews and Muslims. Last Friday's confrontations between Israeli police and stone-throwing Palestinian youths in Jerusalem may be a portent that the latest round of peace talks could, in fact, be starting under the cloud of a looming intifadeh.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1970563,00.html#ixzz0hsmSOKJG

They Just Don't Get It...Or Do They?

To follow up on my West Bank column, we have two brilliant examples today of Israeli efforts to illegally extend its control into Palestinian areas under the guise of high-mindedness. First, there's Ethan Bronner's report about the Israeli mayor of Jerusalem's plans to clear a Palestinian neighborhood in East Jerusalem. The intent sounds benign: the mayor wants to create a new tourist area near the Old City that will "look like Tuscany" and provide housing for Palestinians in new buildings fitted out with shops and cafes. Sounds great, except for this: The Israeli mayor of (West) Jerusalem has no standing to determine what happens in (East) Jerusalem, which--the rest of the world believes--should be the capital of Palestine. This is an act of arrogance and annexation.

And then there's the Orthodox Union, which is protesting the U.S. State Department's criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu's plan to spruce up some historic sites--revered by Jews and Muslims--on the West Bank as "provocative." Again, note the reasonable tone:

"It is not 'provocative' to invest in and rehabilitate holy/historic sites - that are open to both Jews and Muslims. Nothing PM Netanyahu has proposed precludes a peace agreement.
It is provocative for the Palestinians to assert that there is no Jewish connection to these sites and for them to use this as yet another false basis for refusal to engage in peace negotiations."

The Orthodox Union is right about one thing: The Palestinian assumption that there is no Jewish connection to historic sites that are clearly Jewish is obnoxious. (Indeed, the Palestinian paranoia about archeological efforts to investigate the Temple Mount area in recent years was also an effort to provoke anger among Palestine's infuriated young men.) But the fact remains: Netanyahu has no standing to unilaterally "improve" any historic site on Palestinian lands. It seems to me a deliberate attempt to provoke a violent reaction on the West Bank, an attempt to destroy the improvements that Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is attempting there. And again, as I said yesterday: If Natanyahu is so concerned about these sites, he should appoint a tri-partite commission, including Jews, Christians and Muslims, to select the sites that need restoration and issue the necessary contracts to improve them.

Taken from http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/02/26/they-just-dont-get-it/