Modern 'Muslim' Intellectuals

Modern 'Muslim' intellectuals almost do not exist. I have heard one PhD Muslim intellectual guy saying that ice cream was invented by the people of Saladdin. (It was possibly shaved ice from the mountains). But this was during a talk that had nothing to do with ice cream. The problem with the 'modern' Muslim intellectuals is that they feel they are duty bound, on account of their faith, to defend the stories they heard as children from the ostat and the madrassah people, as the absolute truth, written in stone. Even stories about Saladdin inventing ice cream.  So was it 'Islamic' ice cream as well?

Hence they deny their common sense and they deny the 'modern' education and schooling that they are so proud of. Many of them earned their PhD's from Western universities where research, criticism, being able to use logic, showing evidence and using the scientific method are the basic building blocks of intellectual development. But when it comes to Islam, all their "Western" learning and all their PhDs just fly out the window. They become no different from 'sekolah pondok' graduates except that they now have a Western or 'secular' PhD behind their name.  

But for the past few decades,  the "Muslim" intellectuals have had to adopt an even newer behavioural pattern.  They have had to bury their head in the sand - like the proverbial ostrich.  

This peculiar behaviour is now showing an increasing pattern among the 'Muslim' intellectuals and there is a good reason for it. The reason is the rise in modern Western scholarship about Islam. For the past 40 years (since the Oil Crisis of 1973) Islam has become a subject of much discussion and study in the West.  And since 9-11, 'Islam' related titles have also made it to the New York Times best seller lists.  That shows just how popular the subject of 'Islam' has become in the West. Books and writings about Islam are becoming quite the runaway train. Once again, the 'Muslims' particularly in the Islamic countries have little or no part in this. They just cannot keep up with the Western intellectual method. They cannot answer basic questions, they cannot rebut simple research discoveries, they cannot even provide proof for the things they have been screaming about for generations.

True to the robust Western intellectual method, Western scholars are focusing their microscopic scrutiny of Islam and Islamic history. They are studying it, asking all the "what, where, when, who, why, how" questions, criticising, researching, looking for evidence, proving or disproving and debating the subject of Islam with the pitbull type perseverance for which they are well known. Once they bite on a subject of interest, they will not give up until all their questions are answered. 

This is where the modern Muslim intellectual has to cut and run and bury their head in the sand.  They want to be like the sekolah pondok and the madrassah ostat who dismiss ALL Western scholarship on Islam with a simple 'Orientalist, Zionist, Jewish conspiracy, CIA, enemies of Islam, Christian plot'  type of answer.  We really cannot expect the ostat sekolah pondok, ostat madrassah or ostat Al Azhar to  say anything more intelligent than this. In most instances these are the limits of their training and their intellect. 

But surely the modern 'Muslim' intellectual who has his PhD and who populates the IKIMs, the IISTACs, the Universities and the various 'Islamic' institutions can do much better than that. The Western interest in Islam is only just starting to accelerate. Now is the time to answer the West - one by one. Blaming the 'Zionist conspiracy, Western conspiracy, Christian conspiracy' etc is just not an option anymore.

The traditional 'ostrich burying its head in the sand' version of the religion has solved this problem from a long time ago. They just do not interact with any views that are different from the tempurung under which they sit. To them whatever their tok guru, ostat or shaykh tells them is the absolute truth. Everything else is false. That is life under the tempurung.  Thus does satan keep the gullible locked up under the tempurung. 

But what about the modern Muslim intellectual? The Muslim intellectual with the PhD? They cannot hide under the tempurung - that spot is already taken by the ostat and the tok guru. I think many of them have opted to bury their head in the sand instead.  

Many have adopted an elegant silence towards the new Western scholarship on Islam that is being churned out by the truckload. Just bury your head in the sand and hopefully all these new questions the Western researchers are asking will somehow magically go away.

Or one fellow somewhere will give some simple, flimsy and stupid answer and the rest of the Muslim intellectuals will then echo that one fellow. 'Oh Professor Azami has already answered that point'. Sorry folks, Professsor Azami has not answered anything. 

Here is a list of names of older Western scholars (19th century and early 20th century) who have stirred up plenty of mud in Islamic history. First the names : 

1. Ernest Renan - 19th century German scholar
2. Julius Wellhausen - 19th century German scholar
3. Gustav Weil - 19th century German, "Muhammad the Prophet, His Life and Teachings"
4. William Muir - 19th century British scholar
5. Aloys Springer - 19th century Austrian scholar
6. Ignaz Goldziher - 19th century Hungarian scholar
7. Joseph Scaht - 20th century German scholar

How did the Muslim world react to their research and writings on Islam? Simple. In Malaysia some of their books are banned. Problem solved. Katak bawah tempurung sekali lagi.  

Instead of organising intellectual discussion of their works, reading and criticising their books intellectually we took the easier option - just crawl under the tempurung. Club of Doom. Now their books are available on the Internet, sometimes for free in PDF format. You can download into your I Phone, I Pad, Tablet or laptop. 

Then there is a new breed of modern Western scholar who studies Islam using the tools and scientific methods of modern historical study. Here are some names :

1. John Wansborough 1928 - 2002 American scholar
2. Patricia Crone - Denmark, 1945 - present, Oxford University scholar. 
3. Michael Cook - Scottish, 1940 - present, Princeton University
4. Ibn Warraq
5. Christopher Luxenberg
6. Gunter Luling
7. Volker Popp
8. Robert Spencer
9. Johannes Jansen 1942 - present, Netherlands.

Many of these people have researched and raised interesting new questions about Islamic history.  Unfortunately some of them have received death threats. So to protect their own safety, they are forced to write using 'pseudonyms'. Ibn Warraq and Christopher Luxenberg are not their real names.

Now I will give you just three examples of how they think and research their subject.

Patricia Crone in her 1987 book "Meccan Trade and the Rise of islam"  establishes that historical records show that well into the time of the Prophet, Mecca was not a center of trade at all. Her view is that the numerous stories of Mecca as a center of trade came about later and were possibly embellished (added on). How do the Muslim scholars answer Patricia Crone? You cannot just call her a Zionist conspirator. 

Robert Spencer raises the issue of coins minted by the earliest Muslim caliphs. These coins are still found in the museums. In Syria, around 686 AD or 50 years after the Prophet, coins were minted which had a picture of a man on one side, the word 'muhammad' in arabic on the other side and the cross (sometimes found on both sides).  These are interesting observations. Why mint a coin with the cross and the word 'muhammad' on them? Robert Spencer suggests an answer. You can search Robert Spencer on Yahoo or Google.

Johannes Jansen a professor of Islamic Studies at Utrecht in the Netherlands has studied calendars and dates in Islamic history. 

Islamic history says that before 629 AD, the Arabs used the old lunar calendar which had 354 days, eleven days short of a 365 day solar year. To catch up with the solar year, every three years the Arabs added a month to their calendar. This was an Arab leap year. 

In 629 AD, just three years before the Prophet is said to have died, the Arabs dropped this practise of adding a month once every three years. The Arab calendar became what it is today, completely lunar and completely unable to tell the time of year. There were no more "leap years". No more adding an extra month every three years.

Considering that by 629 AD the Prophet had already been a Prophet for 19 years, the Prophet must have lived through six 'leap years" where an extra leap month was added to the calendar every third year. 

Now, written records of the Prophet's life first appeared about 200 years after his death, in the 9th century AD. Although they were written 200 years after the Prophet, there are supposedly detailed records of almost every day of the Prophet's life as a Prophet. And in the case of writers like Imam Tabari, who also wrote in the 9th century, almost every event he writes about (from 200 years earlier) is recorded with the day, month and year it happened. 

However there is absolutely no record about what happened to those six "leap months" from the 19 years of the Prophet's mission. Where did they go? 

Its like this folks - we have the leap year system too. Every four years the month of February has an extra day added, to make it 29 days. This is called a 'leap year'. This year 2012 is a "leap year" and February has 29 days this year.

Imagine now that PAS takes over Putrajaya and they make a fatwa that from 2013 onwards we will not have leap years anymore in Malaysia. No more February 29.  Ok fine.  Then PAS commissions a historian to rewrite the history of Malaysia from 1957 to 2012. But in their rewritten history book, they do not mention all the "February 29s" that existed in history from 1957 till 2012. (There must be about 13 of them). They completely leave it out. About thirteen February 29s have been wiped out from history. How can that be historically correct?

According to Prof Johannes Jansen, in the case of the Muslim chroniclers who wrote history 200 years after the Prophet died, they have wiped out at least six whole months from the Prophet's mission. 

Hence Prof Johannes Jansen of Utrecht University in the Netherlands holds the view that much of the history that was written 200 years after the Prophet's death was actually "invented".  People just sat at the table and wrote stuff that they heard so and so tell them from so and so who heard it from so and so and so on. They are not historically correct. 

The question is how do the modern Muslim intellectuals answer questions like this? By burying their head in the sand? Hello Mr Modern Muslim intellectual? What say you?

Well not all modern Muslim intellectuals have buried their head in the sand. One fellow, a professor of Law at the University of California has reacted to the modern historical approach with "fury". He calls this historical method 'bigotry". He has called some of these Western historians 'pitiful, inane and intellectual bores'.  That is his answer. Period. He has become quite a vicious 'katak bawah tempurung'. 

Sino-Japanese "Skirmish"

The two pictures above show Japanese and Taiwanese Coastguard vessels in a short skirmish in the East China Sea. This was the first time since World War 2 that Japanese and "Chinese" vessels exchanged "spouts of water" in anger.

Quite surprisingly, the Peoples' Republic of China (Mainland China) was also against the Japanese in this stand off.

I hope to write more about this soon. Be back on Sunday.  

"Confront Roots Of Muslim Rage"

First here is the news :

Obama Urges UN To Confront Roots Of Muslim Rage

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — President  Barack Obama told world leaders..to join in confronting the root causes of the rage across the Muslim world.

".. it is the obligation of all ..countries, to speak out forcefully against violence and extremism," Obama said to the United Nations General Assembly.

Obama addressing the UN General Assembly

First of all I agree that some Muslims (not all though, thank Allah) are prone to violence. You can read some of them here, marah macam nak mampus. 

Secondly Obama is not the right person to talk about violence or rage. The Americans have shed more human blood in their 236 years of existence (plus the Western countries) than Attila the Hun, Peter the Great, Oliver Cromwell, the Kings of England, the Roman Empire, Napoleon Bonaparte, the Persian Empire, the Japanese Empire and Pol Pot put together.  And they are still shedding human blood even as you are reading this. For the Americans democracy has become a blood sport. The shedding of human blood has become a cornerstone of their civilisational dialogue.   

Thirdly I think Obama is not speaking to the right audience when he asked world leaders at the United Nations to join him in confronting the roots of Muslim rage. I think he is missing the point and missing the target completely. 

There is a picture of the Bible up here. I am sure you are wondering why I put it there. What does the Christian Bible have to do with this topic of religious rage? 

Well, I am OutSyed The Box. I am always going off on a tangent.  You may or may not agree with me - that is your right. Please also respect my right to say what I want to say ok? If you insist that I must speak like you, then stop singing in the shower and start speaking to your mirror ok. You'll be home soon enough, padded walls and all.

Ok, lets look at this 'rage' thing. 

Example No.1 : some Muslims are ready to kill  if they are not allowed to kill apostates. I am referring to the punishment for apostasy under the hudud laws. Some Muslims say that the apostates must be killed. If you disagree with them, they may kill you as well.  

In the Quran there is no such thing. In the Quran there is not even a hint of any type of punishment for apostates at all - other than Allah will not forgive them or show them the way.  

On the other hand it is the Bible that says kill the apostates and kill the blasphemer. Here is the Bible :

Deuteronomy 13:6-10  "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God.."

"Put them to death, show no pity, stone them to death" - what terrible rage. Not too long ago the Christians use to burn "heretics" over the fire. Joan of Arc was one of them.

Fortunately today's Christians and Bible believers do not do this anymore. So maybe the Christians can help Obama explain to the Muslims why they have stopped following these Biblical teachings about killing the apostates.  Surely it is beliefs like these that also cause so much rage in the Muslim world. Obama says he wants to confront it. Ok - go and confront it. But please ask the Bible people to explain to the Muslims how they got over this rage as well. 

Here is Example No. 2. The Muslims, especially those who became sesat in Europe, America and Australia, have recently expressed a lot of rage over the hijab - the head covering for women. In France they even rioted over the hijab. Again there is absolutely no such thing as a "hijab head cover" for women mentioned anywhere in the Quran. None at all. Zero. Zilch. The Quran simply does not mention anything about this.  

However the Bible does mention the headcover for women. Here is the Bible again :


1st Corinthians 11: 5 - 6  ".. her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head."

This is the Biblical commandment for women to cover their head. Hence Megan Fox can look like this : 

in the movies.

Example 3 :  The Muslims can also get into a rage if you tell them to stop believing in the old  tales written by their old scholars.  In fact the entire Muslim world is fighting each other and fighting everyone else over endless arguments  about what their own tok guru has said or written down versus what the other fellow's tok guru has said or wrote down. A classic case is the growing worldwide animosity  between the Salafis and the Sunnis.  

Here is an example of what one of their old scholars have written down. This is from the famous Tafseer Ibnu Katheer. 

"A beast will emerge from the earth...its head is like the head of a bull, its eyes are like the eyes of a pig, its ears are like the ears of the elephant, its horns are like the horns of a stag, its neck is like the neck of an ostrich, its chest is like the chest of a lion, its colour is like the colour of a tiger...bla bla bla"

Suffice to say, if we can catch this beast and put it in the Taiping Zoo then the zoo wont need to exhibit any other animal. An entire range of animal species will be represented by just this one beast from Ibnu Katheer. Anyway there are no such fancy beasts in the Quran. Yet some Muslims can get into a rage "defending" stories like this. 

Of course there are similar beasts in the Bible. This time in the Book of Revelation :

Revelation 13 : 1-2  ".. a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. 2 The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. .."

Another 'multi-tasking' creature from the Bible.  I dont know if Christians still believe in these type of stories but I dont think the modern Christians will go to war with their neighbours if their neighbours do not believe in such fantastic beasts.  Unfortunately quite a few Muslims will fly off into a rage if you tell them these stories are improbable.  So this is where Obama may stand a better chance if he asks the Christians to explain how they stopped flying into a rage when people refused to believe these strange Biblical creatures.   

Example 4 : The Hebrews were particular about men wearing beards. They were very particular about the levites ie a holy man or priest.  A levite had to wear a beard, a jubah and a turban or serban. Here is the Bible again :

Exodus 28 : 3-4 "...so he may serve me as priest. These are the garments they are to make: a breastpiece, an ephod, a robe, a woven tunic, a turban and a sash. They are to make these sacred garments for your brother Aaron and his sons, so they may serve me as priests..."

So the Christian holy men were prone to wearing beards, turbans, robes and stuff. There is no such thing  mentioned in the Quran.  However people like the Taliban once made it official  policy that all men must wear a beard that was at least a fist long. Here is a picture that gives you an idea :

Any man who did not wear a beard in Taliban Afghanistan was beaten up and even thrown in jail. This happened a lot to the Hazaras in Afghanistan. The Hazaras are a Mongoloid people and have very little facial hair.  So here is another thing that can send some Muslims into  a rage that is found in the Bible but NOT in the Quran.  I dont think the United Nations can help Obama here. A better bet would be to ask the Christians to explain beards, robes and turbans from the Bible and why they dont follow those teachings anymore.

Example 5 : Aqeedah is a very, very big word among many Muslims. Nothing can get them into arguments, disagreements and flying off into a rage more easily than talking about 'aqeedah'.  All the "holier than thou" fighting between Muslims is because of "aqeedah".  Their common arguments : the  'aqeedah' of the Shias is different - they are deviant. The 'aqeedah' of the Salafis, Sunnis, Sufis, Alawites, Tablighis etc is different - they are deviant. The 'aqeedah' of this or that tareqat is different - they are deviant.  I think the arguments over whose 'aqeedah' is wrong or right have caused more rage and anger among Muslims than anything else.

This word 'aqeedah' is not found in the Quran. Neither is the concept of 'aqeedah as binding faith' mentioned anywhere in the Quran.   This exact word 'aqeedah' is also a Jewish word and is found in the Hebrew language Bible.  And in the Hebrew Bible, aqeedah refers to the concept of 'binding faith'. The following is taken from a Christian Bible-study website :

"Last week, pastor Wu had us read from Genesis 21, the familiar story of Abraham and Ishmael and also Isaac. This week, we will read from Genesis 22, a more familiar passage; one that in Hebrew is called “aqeedah” – taken from Genesis 22:9’s aqad, or bind. This is the story about the sacrifice that God asked Abraham to make, the sacrifice of Isaac..."

This refers to the  Hebrew "Aqeedat Yitzhak" or 'binding of Isaac' ie when Abraham obeyed the command to sacrifice his son Isaac. It was a test of Abraham and Isaac's 'binding faith' or 'aqeedah'.  The concept of 'aqeedah' as binding faith is found in the Bible.  But there is no mention of this word 'aqeedah' - particularly referring to faith - anywhere in the Quran.

So again, Obama will stand a better chance getting the Christians to explain how they  overcame their rage and anger over their differences in the Biblical 'aqeedah'.  

There are dozens of examples of things that are NOT FOUND IN THE QURAN but which are found in the Bible. But it will be too long to write them all here. Let me quote a last  example. 

Example 6. This is the punishment of stoning to death for adultery. Again there is no such thing as the Muslims stoning anyone to death for anything at all  in the Quran.  You just cannot find it in the Quran. The hudud guys want to stone people to death. Stoning adulterers to death is found written in the Bible. Here it is :

Deuteronomy 22 : 23 - 24  If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.

As you know, even right now as we speak, the hudud guys in PAS are in quite a rage over Karpal Singh's insistence that he will resist the implementation of PAS' hudud.  These are the type of things that can cause all that anger. As you can see, it is NOT from the Quran. You can find it in the Bible. 

So it is better for the Christians to explain why they have stopped stoning the adulterers to death.  Why not the Christians open a new 'Interfaith Dialogue' with the Muslims -  "Why we dont follow all the Biblical teachings anymore" or "Why we dont get angry over the Biblical teachings" or something like that. 

Obama wants to get to the root of the Muslim rage. This is just one suggestion.

Hisham Wake Up - Go Grab Fara

Folks, did you know that the munafik Americans have a law which labels foreign NGOs as 'Foreign Agents' ? And do you know when they passed this Law?  74 years ago in 1938 !

Here is an article "Transparency of NGOs" written by one Asif Ezdi,  a former member of the Pakistan Foreign Service. The article appeared on July 30, 2012 in The News of Pakistan.   I have truncated and edited the article for brevity. You can click here for the full report.

• March (2011), a US court sentenced Ghulam Nabi Fai, of the Washington-based Kashmiri American Council (an NGO), to two years’ imprisonment, for receiving money from the Pakistani government for his lobbying effort. 
• KAC is an (NGO) which seeks to .. raise awareness about human rights violations by India in Occupied Kashmir.
• the United States’ Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), requires all those who receive money from a foreign entity to register themselves as “foreign agents.” 
• The purpose of FARA is to ensure that the US government and people “are informed of the source of information (propaganda) and the identity of persons attempting to influence US public opinion, policy, and laws.” 
• FARA was passed by the US Congress in 1938 
• Russia this month passed its law on “foreign agents” modelled on the US legislation. 
• Russian law requires foreign-funded NGOs involved in political activities to tag all the material published by them in the media and on the Internet with the label “foreign agent,” a term which carries the connotation of unpatriotic behaviour. These NGOs will also have to submit detailed annual financial statements and issue biannual reports on their activities.
• 
  
• US State Department says the new Russian law designed to intimidate civil society activists and organisations that raise their voice for human rights 
• complained that the Russian law  misrepresents (NGOs)  as foreign agents simply because they accept foreign funds. 
• 
  
• foreign-financed NGOs in many countries often promote paymasters’ own agenda. 
• foreign-funded NGOs do not always act from altruistic motives 
• 
  
• Against this background, Washington’s strictures on Russia’s new law on foreign agents smack both of arrogance and of hypocrisy. 
• Washington hypocritical because US has similar law against foreign-aided civil society groups. 
•  
• public interest demands that the people of Pakistan should be informed of the funding sources, management and activities of foreign-aided NGOs.
• 
  
• there are (NGOs) that do not inspire confidence. When questions are raised about their funding and external links, there is no satisfactory means of ascertaining the truth.
• 
  
• We also have the law on political parties which prohibits them from receiving foreign funding and obliges them to disclose their sources of income. 
• 
  
• NGOs remains opaque. Many of them engaged in political activities are provided money by foreign governments and other foreign official and non-official benefactors, hidden from public view.
• 
  
• FARA was passed in the US seven decades ago in order to inform the American government and the public on the identity of persons who are behind propaganda conducted by foreign-aided NGOs. Russia has passed similar legislation. 
• 
  
• Most other states of the world also have laws which require NGOs to disclose the foreign sources of their income. But Pakistan has none. 
• 
  
• It is one of a small number of countries in which foreign governments, and entities set up by them, freely but secretly dispense largesse through local NGOs to gain influence and support their propaganda effort.
• 
  
• It is time Pakistan also adopted measures to ensure transparency on the activities, funding and management of NGOs receiving money, directly or indirectly, from foreign sources. Islamabad is teeming with them. 

Folks, nothing new here? The Americans are munafiks. They passed their FARA Act 74 years ago in 1938.  It was the Americans, and NOT Vladimir Putin, who labelled foreign NGOs as "foreign agents".

Not only that but just last year the Americans have jailed a Kashmiri human rights NGO guy operating in Washington for receiving money from a foreign government.

But isnt that what the Suarams and Msiakini's also do here. They get their money from the National Endowment for Democracy and the other American organisations. The NED in turn  get their funding from the CIA, the US State Department and such. Its the same thing. Even George Soros gets money indirectly from the US Government. They are all "agents".

So Hishamuddin please wake up. Dah pi brain scan ke bro? Amacam MRI semua OK? I say Hisham,  America has a 74 year old law against foreign funded NGOs. The Russians have just enacted their Law in 2012.  Pakistan also wants to make Laws to monitor the foreign NGOs.

So can Malaysia also have the same Law as the United States of Americky and Russia?   

We need a FARA too. Tak payah pikir panjang - just photocopy the American Law, tukar nama sikit (katakanlah  "Akta Pendaftaran Agen Asing"  or APA) and get it passed in Parliament.

We cannot have the CIA, the MI6, the NSA, the Stiftungs and all the other satans freely funding their treachorous and traitorous activities in Malaysia through their "agents" of choice.  

Wake up Hishamuddin. Do your job. Turn on your photo copy machine.

p.s. turn on the lights as well.

Budget : "Ye Shall Not Burden The People"

I hope its not too late to comment on the Budget but I just have a very short message. Do not burden the people, the man in the street with any extra taxes, duties or restrictions. Go the other way. Reduce taxes, duties and remove restrictions so that the ordinary man in the street has more cash in his pocket or he can save more on expenses.

Given a choice, let the corporate sector (private and listed companies) and the GLCs bear any extra burdens (to increase Government revenue).

No new taxes of any kind at all. Period. 

Ease up on taxes, duties and other restrictions for the automobile industry - with the aim of reducing car prices in Gerik, Hutan Melintang, Penampang, Lubok Antu and everywhere else. Please bear in mind that the vast majority of 28 million Malaysians do not live inside the Klang Valley only.  

To get the maximum out of Government spending always keep an eye on trickle down effects and multiplier effects. Spending one Ringgit on a road or hospital will cause greater multipliers in the economy than buying a tank. 

To avoid burdening the people always keep an eye on the negative side effects of Government cuts, extra taxes and any new restrictions. If you impose RPGT it will have negative impacts on the housing, construction, cement, steel and other industries. Plus it will increase on loan defaults, at least for a time. Why? Because it takes money out of peoples' hands.

The bottom line philosophy should be : do not burden the ordinary man in the street with any new taxes or restrictions. Ease up so that more cash stays or flows into the pockets of the citizen.

Selamat pagi semua.

Liaoning "16" - 25 September, 2012

China's first aircraft carrier, which was renovated from an old aircraft carrier that China bought from Ukraine in 1998, is seen docked at Dalian Port, in Dalian, Liaoning province in this September 22, 2012 file photo. China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, officially entered naval ranks on September 25, 2012 the country's Ministry of Defence announced, in a move that it said would help project maritime power and defend Chinese territory.

TOKYO/BEIJING (Reuters) - China sent its first aircraft carrier into formal service on Tuesday amid a tense maritime dispute with Japan in a show of force that could worry its neighbors.

China's Ministry of Defense said the newly named Liaoning aircraft carrier would "raise the overall operational strength of the Chinese navy" and help Beijing to "effectively protect national sovereignty, security and development interests".

In fact, the aircraft carrier, refitted from a ship bought from Ukraine, will have a limited role, mostly for training and testing ahead of the possible launch of China's first domestically built carriers after 2015, analysts say.

China cast the formal handing over of the carrier to its navy -- attended by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao -- as a triumphant show of national strength at a time of tensions with Japan over islands claimed by both sides.

"The smooth commissioning of the first aircraft carrier has important and profound meaning for modernizing our navy and for enhancing national defensive power and the country's overall strength," Xinhua news agency cited Wen as saying at the commissioning ceremony in the northern port of Dalian.

Dr Mahathir And "Hadith"

I wish to thank my brother in law for sending in this comment from yesterday's Sun newspaper reporting what Tun Dr Mahathir said about the Quran and the hadith. This is what Tun Dr. Mahathir said :

• "Muslim leaders tend to adopt the most severe punishment for crime, including implementation of hudud, in a bid to appear more islamic than others'.  He also said 'I find that we now give less credence to what is found in the Quran, but more to what is taught to us in the sunnah and hadith which is optional. Islam in essence advocates justice rather than mere punishment'..(The Sun, page 2, 24 Sept 2012)
• "we now give less credence to what is found in the Quran"
• "the sunnah and hadith which is optional"

In my humble opinion many "muslims" today are actually anti-Quran. The religious freaks among them are definitely anti-Quran. Quote a verse from the Quran and they get angry at you. Can you imagine that? They call themselves "muslims" but they get angry at their own Quran.  Kepala hotak terpesong macam ini, setan pun kalah.

Well, I really learn a lot from some of the comments that are sent in to my Blog. I wish to thank all those commenters.   I wish to thank one of my readers for sending me the link to Dr Qamar Zaman's Blog  Aastana  which you can access here.  This is a Blog site that discusses the Quran and Islam.  Dr Qamar Zaman is a Pakistani. 

Another of my Blog readers  has sent a comment about "Low Order Thinking" (LOT) and "High Order Thinking" (HOT).  Thank you again. The reader said that many of the comments that come in (from "muslim" readers, especially about Islam) is of the Low Order Thinking type. 

I delete many of these comments because they are too silly. (Sometimes I do let one or two thru just to show you how dumb they are). It is embarrasing to me that in our country there are people who have such Low Order Thinking especially about religious issues.  To make it worse, their comments are laced with rude or crude language.  It will lower the status of my Blog if I allow each and every one of these comments through. Plus also, the orang bukan Islam who  read my Blog akan lagi ketawakan orang Islam - nampak sangat kebodohan orang Islam. 

Try to understand ok. If you write a letter even to a crappy newspaper like the Harakah, the Editor will not publish each and every letter that you write. They will remove those letters that they deem are not suitable or which are too stupid. Even Harakah kena jaga standard kan?   

Folks, my Blog is certainly NOT a Harakah ok.  You want to kahwin empat bini, kahwin Siam,   kahwin lari, kahwin anak murid, kahwin janda, beli ubat kuat lelaki,  beli kacip Fatimah, baca doa budak dunggu jadi pandai, beli kismis ajaib, kismis tawaf and other such doodoos then please go and read Harakah. 

But this is OutSyed The Box. Saya pun kena jaga standard lah. Here I often like to challenge  the norm and challenge what is considered "orthodox" thinking. The language of choice here is English - a language I am very comfortable with and also because the most number of intellectual reference materials are in English.  Imagine if I wrote in Arabic, fa-lan yafhum.  

If you want to exchange useful information, you want to discuss something new, you want to learn something new, then  you are welcome here.  But if you want to repeat what you learnt in sekolah rendah ke, madrasah kat kampong ke, what your tok guru taught you, what your ostat taught you, then you can go and visit other Blogs. Or go and read the Harakah.  Dont waste time here ok.  

Everyday we can learn something new.  I would like to draw your attention again to Dr Qamar Zaman's  Aastana Blog.  This is the type of writing that challenges your mind.  Dr Qamar Zaman explains long held beliefs in the light of the Quran.  They are radically different from the traditional understanding.  Here are some of Dr Qamar Zaman's online PDF books that are available at his Blog. You can click on the following titles for the direct link :

1.  Truth About Salat

2.  Truth About Malaika

3.  Truth About Hadith

4.  Truth About Soum 

I have read some of what he has written. You can read it and make up your own minds.  It is more important to see how a person argues their points and what proofs they present. Is there substance or not?

You cannot expect your ostat kampong or tok guru to discuss these things in such a logical manner. Those folks are brain dead - please accept my condolences. They will just scream and shout macam kera gila.  What is important is how a person presents his ideas or views, what proofs he provides to explain what he says.  And whether he presents his proofs in a logical manner. That is very important.

Then the people (that is you) can read, understand, rebut, reply, agree, disagree etc.  Compare what sort of proofs you can provide or whether you have any proofs at all for what you say. "My grandfather told me so" or "my ostat told me so" or "my tok guru told me so" is not good enough ok.  Kena pakai otak lebih sikit.  I dont know if this is asking too much. Fuse short circuit nanti, otak boleh blackout.  Shouting at the top of your voice, screaming worse than monkeys etc is just that - it makes you worse than monkeys.

Anyway if you are interested, you can check out the Aastana Blog. 

NGOs As Foreign Agents - Hishamuddin Wake Up.

First the news. 

• Putin signs law branding NGOs 'foreign agents'
• bill passed by parliament brands NGOs receive funding abroad as "foreign agents".
• Putin "signed the federal law on regulating (NGOs) who carry out role of foreign agent"
• requires NGOs receive foreign funding to register with authorities as foreign agents.
• to allow checks of their income, accounting and management structure 
• make public their sources of income and management.
• "foreign agent" does carry negative connotations of unpatriotic behaviour.
• "Materials published by the NGO in the media and on the Internet should be accompanied by a note that these materials have been published or distributed by an NGO carrying out the role of a foreign agent," 
• broadly applies to any foreign-funded NGO engaged in political activity in Russia 

Firstly congratulations to President Putin. He is doing what is good for the Russian people. 

Secondly to all you genocidal and murderous racists out there, before you start championing the West, please explain why none of you demonstrate in the street asking the US and the West to stop bombing Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan? Or why dont you protest against the threat by Israel and the US to bomb Iran? Is it because only Muslims are going to be bombed? 

Or why is it that you cannot make any statements condemning the atrocities against the Muslim Rohingyas in Myanmar? Are you that bloody racist? What a heartless and murderous bunch of savages we have in this country. 

And the people who are bombing and maiming these countries are none other than the so called democratic and freedom loving West. What a bunch of munafiks.

Then they want to fund the NGOs, the SUARAMS, the M'siakini and other such riff raff to fight for freedom and democracy? Pi dah mabuk.  They want to bring down the Syrian Government, they bombed Libya to get rid of Ghaddafi, they got rid of Hosni Mubarak because they want to promote freedom and democracy?  What a bunch of munafiks?

Ok folks, the time has come. Now its time to ask the soalan cepu mas. Munafiks listen up ok. If the US and Europe want to promote real democracy how come they have not taken out Saudi Arabia? The most oppressive, racist, religiously maniacal society in the Middle East is Saudi Arabia. Why not the Americans and the West bomb Saudi Arabia and get rid of the Saudi monarchy like they bombed Libya and got rid of Ghaddafi?

Soalan cepu mas nombor dua : there was an Arab Spring in Bahrain last year as well. Then the Saudi Arabian Army crossed the causeway and shot and killed hundreds of Bahrainis and put down the Arab Spring in Bahrain. None of you munafiks complained. So munafiks - can you explain?

Why is the Arab Spring only allowed in non-US friendly countries but not in US-friendly countries? This is ok behaviour? Munafiks, over to you.

The same munafiks are here running the so called NGOs and websites which kononnya call for democracy. Pi dah mabuk.

How come you dont ask for Lim Kit Siang to resign? He has been heading the DAP for 44 years. How come you dont complain that his son has now taken over the party?  Is dynastic democracy allowed in your books?  

Munafiks, here is another soalan cepu mas. How come throughout the time of the dictator Mahathir Mohamed's 22 years as paramount ruler of Malaysia, his son was not allowed to even become Ketua Cawangan UMNO Kampong Seluar Terbakar? Can you explain that? And horror of horrors, Dr Mahathir retired from office nine years ago. Retired!!! Is that acceptable behaviour for a dictator? What about Kit Siang's 44 years on the throne in the DAP?  

And you keep quiet when Tokoh Liwat Negara, Pencipta Politik Wang and Bapa Rasuah Malaysia's wife is president and daughter is also a shooting star? His dearly beloved is No. 2. Everything is a family affair. Their party election was fully rigged. Rigged to the hilt. Tipu punya elections.  Munafiks - where is the democracy?

I agree with Putin that these NGOs and terrorist fronts should be labelled "foreign agents". They must be told to carry these words "Foreign Agents" on their letterheads. Especially those who receive funding from overseas or from foreign countries or foreign organisations inside the country. I agree that these NGOs and those who receive funds from abroad should :

• register with authorities as foreign agents.
• allow checks of their income, accounting and management structure 
• make public their sources of income and management.
• "materials published by them in the media and on the Internet should be accompanied by a note that these materials have been published or distributed by an NGO carrying out the role of a foreign agent,

I think this is a great idea that has now been made into Law by the Russian people. We really have to protect ourselves from these murderous types. 

Updated : Solution Looking For A Problem

Every religious group pushes their own agenda. There is one German Muslim scholar  by the name of  Muhammad Svend Kalisch at the University of Heidelberg in Germany. Kalisch is a German born, home grown scholar who became a Muslim at the age of 16.  A tenured Professor at Heidelberg, Muhammad Svend Kalisch created an  earthquake about four  years ago by claiming that most likely  there is no historical evidence for the existence of the Prophet.  (I believe he has since amended or changed that claim). Kalisch was using the modern academic methods of historical research when he made his statement. 

However it also came to the fore that Kalisch's religious indoctrination was of the Shia background where they downplay the role of the Prophet and play up the role of Ali the Prophet's son in law. So there is always some vested interest behind each religious grouping.  

Yesterday I attended a book launching by Abdal Hakim Murad (born Timothy John Winter), the English Muslim scholar of Sufism from Cambridge University. The title of the book was 'Commentary on the Eleventh Contentions'. It was a classic Sufi book - you cannot even understand the title. 

Even the grammar was off, 'Eleventh' is singular whereas 'Contentions' is plural. I always thought singular follows singular and plural follows plural : one cat jumps, many cats jump, one whale swims, many whales swim.  

The content was also not easily understandable. The author Abdal Hakim Murad aka Timothy John Winter did give a speech introducing his book. I think the crowd, a mixed group of locals and Middle Easterners resident here, was not  able to follow what Murad was saying.  At times I thought dia sendiri tak faham apa dia cakap. 

He spoke of things like fragmented aphorisms, ethnos (ethnicity) and Hebrew scriptural words like Edom - much of which I think went past the crowd.  At question time, people asked more simple questions about the Arab Spring and the hijab. 

I was invited to the event by a Sufi friend who was behind putting yesterday's program together. Once I saw the people in attendance, things sort of fell into place.  It was a gathering of like minded Sufi folks. There was a hugely overweight Arab guy also present in his robes, beard and turban - obviously the Sufi shaykh - all the locals were kissing his hand loudly, including my friend.  I think quite a few germs were spread throughout Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

The Sufis have a history as reactionaries who rebelled against the overbearing authority of the old caliphs and the religious authorities. To break the stranglehold of the religious orthodoxy (aka the jabatan agama gangsters of old) the Sufis developed their own "direct communion" philosophies. They said that they did not need the religious orthodoxy and could access "God" directly. 

My friends and I once met Sufis in Penang who claimed that by chanting some prayers they could see "God" in a piece of table top glass. Their "God" was at their beck and call. The reader may want to recall my earlier blog about "Delusion and Faith.'

Hence today's Sufis are quite against the Salafis. Abdal Hakim Murad terms the Salafis "Arab nationalists"  who are trying to impose an Arab style religion on the whole world. He also lumped together the Sunnis and the Salafis under the heading of "traditional Islam", implying the Sunnis are not too far from the Salafis either.    

The Sufis believe that through their elders or Shaykhs, they have seen the light. Their Shaykhs  are enlightened. They have seen the solution. Since they have seen the solution, they go around looking for problems. Isnt that just neat?  But this is religious indoctrination in general. Every religion feels that they have seen the light and they have the solution.

This is so different from the Quran and Science which study problems, seek to understand problems and then try to work out a solution. There are no ready made, permanent solutions in Science and the Quan.  One must apply the mind to seek solutions. It will be quite arrogant to insist that 'We already have the solution, now show me your problem'.

Among the Sufis there is always a covert dislike for the orthodoxy. I can fully appreciate and agree with them here. Hence Abdal Hakim Murad quoted the example of a chair being thrown against a window.  He said if there was sufficient force, the chair would break the window. Plain and simple. Murad then said that Sunnis, on the other hand, would say that Allah broke the window - through the action  of the chair. You know, silly arguments like that.  (In the meantime the 350 millionth Toyota has rolled off the Toyota assembly plant)

Coming back to the crowd - there were corporate personalities present including people I knew from my banking days. In the 90s I knew of corporate people who belonged to a tareqat or sufi group. They would  rush to entertain their Shaykh (who came from Tukey, Lebanon or someplace). Once a year, they would retreat to Switzerland or somewhere in Europe to spend a night with their Shaykh under the same roof. They believed that  by doing so they would gain 'magical powers' or blessings. It was said that the Shaykh would be consulted even before public listing exercises.  This was during the roaring 90s. And here is the catch folks : no money no religion. They would have to pay big time for the privilege of spending a night under the same roof with their shaykh.  Big money. 

Likewise the oversized Shaykh guy yesterday was driven off in a Toyota Harrier. That must cost plenty moolas. Also the Shaykh guy's tremendous girth would cost plenty moolas as well.  Plenty falafel and kous-kous to fill up that tank.

And I dont think the cost of Abdal Hakim Murad's trip here would have been covered by the sales of his un-understandable book. They were selling it for RM30.00 a piece and I doubt they sold more than 20 books yesterday.  

So what gives?

I think Murad was brought in as a marketing tool to win over new members. A Mat Salleh masuk Islam, Cambridge University scholar and author of un-understandable Sufi books would be just the right tool to awe the local kampong boys to join the hood.   

You got money? Who your daddy? No money no religion.

Update : Here is a YouTube sent by a reader (thanks bro) showing some Sufis doing the breakdance. Watch the guy kissing the feet and hands of his Shaykh.

Anwar & Nurul : Dumb & Dumber

Folks, if the Pakatan Riot comes to power they are going to be more corrupt than the BN. You can rest assured. 

The following report is from The Star while all the pictures except one, are from the Blog Stop The Lies. These are pictures of the Rear Admiral and his fingering buddies jetting around in a private jet. Travelling in style. Here are the pictures :

Why did Captain Dirk take the attendant into the Captain's Quarters? Because he wanted to boldly venture where no man (or sunlight) had ever been before.

More flight attendants on  Flight AI 666 headed for oblivion 

First of all to all the dunggu Pakatan supporters, if any of you have contributed your time, energy, support or money then know ye that this is how they are abusing it - by flying around in private jets. Someone has to pay for all these. There are no such things as free lunches anywhere in the world.  Do read on. Here is the report from The Star :

• Photographs of Anwar Ibrahim and Pakatan on private jet caused stir 
• pictures, originally tweeted by Tian Chua on Sept 15
• aircraft may have been registered to a United States bank.
• portray themselves as prudent and travel only on low-cost airline AirAsia.
• ironic that Opposition, who accused Government of wasteful, used private jet 
• Anwar tweeted “A friend arranged for a private jet.”
• Nurul Izzah tweeted: “jet trip loaned by a friend? Ain't ours, ain't public funds.”
• Tian Chua said  cheaper and time saving to charter jet than fly commercial.

Firstly Tian Chua is the one who leaked these pictures. Secondly Tian Chua is making contradicting statements. He is saying the chartered jet is cheaper than flying commercial. So it was not free. But Anwar and Nurul say someone loaned the jet for free. 'Aint ours, aint public funds'.   

Tian Chua, Anwar and Nurul should sit down and share notes and not contradict each other in public.

But look at their hypocrisy. Its ok if they do it. They have made accusing the Gomen of wastage and extravagance their bread and butter staple. But here they are jetting around in a private jet. No one in Government, not even the PM, flies in a private jet. The PM and DPM fly in Air Force planes which has been the norm since Merdeka.  

Nurul Izzah says, 'aint ours, aint public funds'.  Is that so? Isnt there another name for that? Does the word 'corruption' ring a bell? Or as Papa Jahat would say 'kerrrrrrupshen'. Maybe the child was dropped on her head too when she was a baby.  Its bad enough that Papa Jahat is so dumb. Sekarang anak pun dah jadi dumber.

I mean if a BN politician was flown around in a private jet which "aint ours, aint public funds" for political campaigning purposes isnt that what you Pakatan morons would be screaming at the top of your lungs?  Kerrrrrrrupshen !!  You will accuse them of cronyism, corruption and a dozen other things.

Plus you would demand to know who was sponsoring the jet plane. So please tell us now. Whose plane was that? Who paid for it? Some crony must have paid for the plane. What is the crony's name? Why did the crony sponsor a private jet? Apa kontrak dia dapat? What project has the crony got from you? 

It took Suaram and Malaysiakini months to finally confess that they are funded by foreign agents. They have been receiving money from the neo-con Jewish funder George Soros, the CIA linked National Endowment for Democracy  and other equally unsavoury foreign agents. 

This knowledge has come about after much public scrutiny and public criticism against Suaram and Malaysiakini for keeping mum and not divulging information to the public in a timely fashion. They were not being transparent at all.

So now the Pakatan must not try to cover up or hide the information from the public. 

Who paid for the private jet?
Was it a foreign agent?
Was it a local Malaysian crony?
Why did the foreign agent or local crony fund a private jet?
What contracts or projects has the local crony got from the Pakatan morons?

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Businessmen do not fund private jets for free. Mesti ada udang di sebalik batu. These are the same questions the Pakatan morons would ask of the BN. So please answer these questions asap. Do not hide information from the public.