Muslim in Suffer

Bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem. Assalamu\’alaikum Warohmatullahi Wabarokatuh!

Archive for April 16th, 2008

Menyegarkan kembali pemikiran Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Nashr Hamid Abu Zaid al-Damanhuriy

I. Asal usul dan kelahiran
Dilahirkan pada 10 Juli 1943 di Kuhafah berhampiran dengan wilayah Tanta Mesir. Pernah diciduk oleh aparat keamanan Mesir saat berumur 12 tahun dikarenakan keterlibatannya dengan jama’ah Ikhwan al Muslimun yang diharamkan oleh Gamal Abdul Nashir bersama-sama para pemimpin gerakan ikhwan.
Pernah belajar di universitas Kairo fakultas bahasa Arab dan Adab dan diselesaikan pada tahun 1972, kemudian menyelesaikan program masternya pada tahun 1977 fakultas dirasat Islamiyah, dan mendapat gelar doktor tahun 1981. Selanjutnya menjadi tenaga pengajar pada universitas berkenaan sebagai guru pembantu tahun 1982 dan menjadi professor pembantu tahun 1987. Pada tahun 1995 mendapat gelar sebagai professor tetapi dikarenakan dakwaan murtad keatasnya maka dibatalkan gelar tersebut oleh majlis tertinggi universitas Kairo.
Kemurtadan dirinya dari Islam telah diumumkan pada mahkamah Mesir dan diceraikan dari isterinya doktor Ibtihal Yunis (dosen dalam Bahasa Arab pada univesitar Kairo) tahun 1995.
II. Pemikiran Liberal Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid
III. Celaan Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid terhadap para mufassir dan kitab-kitab tafsir
Pada mukaddimah kitab tafsirnya, pemikir liberal ini telah mencela para mufassirin dan kitab tafsir yang ditulis oleh para mufassirin mukhlisin, dia menyipatkan bahwa para mufassir itu telah memanjang-manjangkan dan mengada-ada dalam penafsiran al Quran yang tidak ada asas didalam al Quran.
Padahal sebagaimana kita ketahui para mufassirin didalam metodologi penulisan tafsir mereka tidak mengabaikan kaedah penafsiran al Quran bil ma’thur – yang merupakan penafsiran yang paling baik dari berbagai metodologi yang pernah ada – (tafsir al Quran dengan al al Quran, tafsir al Quran dengan hadis nabi, tafsir al Quran dengan perkataan para sahabat, tafsir al quran dengan perkataan para tabi’ien) seperti Iman al-Thabari, Al-Qurthubi, Ibu Katsir, Ibnu Hayyan, Tantawiy al-Jauhariy dan sebagainya. Jadi atas dasar apa pemikir liberal ini menuduh dan mencela sedemikian rupa keatas para mufassir yang telah lama diakui oleh dunia Islam akan keikhlasan, kekuatan serta kesahihan penafsiran mereka keatas al Quran?
IV. Metode penafsiran al Quran Nasr Abu Zaid
Metode penafsiran Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid merupakan metode penafsiran tematis, penafsiran ayat dengan ayat lain atau satu surat dengan surat lain yang memiliki kemiripan atau kesamaan makna, dengan mengemukakan dalil-dalil kawniyah (penciptaan) serta disiplin (sunnatullah) yang ada pada masyarakat, sebagai penguat dengan mengetepikan hadis nabi sebagai sumber kedua setelah al Quran dan sebagai mubayyin keatas mubayyan (al Quran). Surat al Nahl ayat ke 44.
Sebagai contoh Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid menafsirkan firman Allah swt surat al Nur ayat ke 63 :
﴿ ÝóáúíóÍúÐóÑö ÇáøóÐöíäó íõÎóÇáöÝõæäó Úóäú ÃóãúÑöåö Ãóä ÊõÕöíÈóåõãú ÝöÊúäóÉñ Ãóæú íõÕöíÈóåõãú ÚóÐóÇÈñ Ãóáöíãñ ﴾.
Artinya : Maka hendaklah orang-orang yang menyalahi perintah-Nya takut akan ditimpa cobaan atau ditimpa azab yang pedih.
Nasr berpendapat bahwa pelanggaran yang diharamkan oleh Allah swt yaitu pelanggaran dalam perkara yang bertentangan dengan perintah Allah swt saja, manakala pelanggaran yang didasarkan oleh pemikiran atau al ra’yu atau berbeda pendapat dengan nash-nash al Quran untuk kemaslahatan tidaklah termasuk kedalam kategori pelanggaran atau infraksi terhadap hukum-hukum Allah swt, bahkan ia merupakan sebuah hikmah.
&nbs yang tidak dimiliki oleh manusia yang lainnya seperti mukjizat atau perkara yang luar biasa yang tidak dapat dilakukan oleh manusia biasa dan ia tidak dapat juga dipelajari serta dijadikan satu pertunjukan pada masa-masa yang telah ditentukan atau kita sebut sebagai the show of miracle.
Namun demikian pemikir liberal ini tidak sepakat dan tidak sependapat dengan ijma atau konsesi ulama terhadap kebenaran mukjizat para nabi dan keberadaannya, ia bahkan menafikan serta mengingkarinya.
Dia berpendapat bahwa tidak ada keistimewaan antara para nabi dengan manusia biasa, bahkan mukjizat yang para nabi miliki itu bukan mukjizat, karena manusia biasa dapat mendatangkan seperti apa yang mereka datangkan.
VI. Beberapa contoh pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat
A. Pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat nabi Isa as
Nasr menafsirkan firman Allah swt pada surat al Maidah ayat ke 110 :
﴿ æóÅöÐú ÊóÎúáõÞõ ãöäó ÇáØøöíäö ßóåóíúÆóÉö ÇáØøóíúÑö ÈöÅöÐúäöí ÝóÊóäÝõÎõ ÝöíåóÇ ÝóÊóßõæäõ ØóíúÑðÇ ÈöÅöÐúäöí æóÊõÈúÑöìÁõ ÇáÃóßúãóåó æóÇáÃóÈúÑóÕó ÈöÅöÐúäöí æóÅöÐú ÊõÎúÑöÌõ ÇáúãóæÊóì ÈöÅöÐúäöí ﴾.
Artinya : Dan (ingatlah pula) diwaktu kamu membentuk dari tanah (suatu bentuk) yang berupa burung dengan ijin-Ku, kemudian kamu meniup kepadanya, lalu bentuk itu menjadi burung (yang sebenarnya) dengan seizin-Ku. dan (ingatlah) di waktu kamu menyembuhkan orang yang buta sejak dalam kandungan ibu dan orang yang berpenyakit sopak dengan seizin-Ku, dan (Ingatlah) di waktu kamu mengeluarkan orang mati dari kubur (menjadi hidup) dengan seizin-Ku “.
Nasr Abu Zaid mengatakan : “dari sini anda dapat mengerti bahwa Isa as telah diutus kepada Bani Israil untuk menyembuhkan jiwa-jiwa mereka dan menghidupkan hati-hati mereka. Dia (Isa as) juga hidup dan mati sebagaimana manusia biasa, maka tidak ada sesuatu apapun yang menjadikan dia sebagai seorang yang luar biasa dan tidak juga memiliki keistimewaan (mukjizat-pen)”.
Padahal menurut pemahaman para mufassirin ahlu sunnah wa al jama’ah keseluruhan diantaranya imam Fakhruddin al-Raziy (al-tafsir al Kabir), demikian juga Ismail bin Umar bin Katsir al Damsqiy Abu Al-Fida (tafsir Ibnu Katsir) dan lain-lain mufassririn al muhtadiin, mereka berpendapat bahwa nabi Isa as benar-benar telah menghidupkan orang yang sudah mati dan menyembuhkan orang yang sakit dengan izin Allah swt.
Sebagaimana diketahui bahwa setiap mukjizat para nabi itu diturunkan sesuai dengan keadaan masyarakat zamannya. Dizaman nabi Isa as, masyarakat pada masa itu dikenal sebagai masyarakat yang memiliki kehebatan dalam ilmu menangani penyakit atau ilmu kedokteran. Namun dalam kehidupan keagamaan, mereka sudah jauh terpesong dari ajaran taurat, sehingga diutuslah kepada mereka itu nabi Isa as untuk meluruskan mereka agar kembali kepada kehidupan yang beragama sesuai dengan ajaran Injil yang dibawa olehnya, dan dikuatkan pula dengan mukjizat untuk meyakinkan masyarakat akan kebenaran risalah yang dibawa.
Beliau dapat menyembuhkan peyakit sopak serta menghidupkan orang yang sudah mati, demikianlah mukjizat yang diberikan oleh Allah kepadanya. Kalaulah kemampuan nabi Isa as dalam merawat pesakit adalah setaraf dengan kemampuan manusia biasa pada waktu itu, maka sudahlah tentu beliau tidak dapat menarik perhatian kaumnya dan mereka tidak dapat mengakui kebenaran risalah yang dibawa olehnya.
Dalam hal ini akan terjadilah kesia-siaan keatas risalah serta dakwah yang ditaklifkan kepadanya, padahal Allah swt mengutus para nabi bukan untuk satu kesia-siaan, karena Allah swt terlepas dari sifat yang demikian. Apa yang Allah swt miliki adalah kebenaran, demikian pula apa-apa yang diciptakan olehNya bukanlah satu perkara bermain-main. Dengan alasan itu, setiap insan tidak akan terlepas dari pertanggung jawaban serta pertanyaan dan penghitungan amalan saat mereka menghadap sang Khalik di akherat kelak.
Mari kita renungkan wahai sahabat, bagaimana Allah al Khalik itu telah menjelaskan kepada kita dan menegur nurani kita akan kebenaran ini. Simaklah surat al Qiyamah ayat ke 36 :
﴿ ÃóíóÍúÓóÈõ ÇáúÅöäÓóÇäõ Ãóä íõÊúÑóßó ÓõÏðì
Artinya : Apakah manusia mengira, bahwa ia akan dibiarkan begitu saja (tanpa pertanggung jawaban)?”
Nasr Abu Zaid menafsirkan bahwa kalimat “al-hajar” pada ayat diatas boleh jadi hanyalah nama suatu tempat. Maka maksud ayat diatas ialah, bahwa Allah swt telah menunjukkan satu tempat yang keluar air padanya, dan nabi Musa as tidak disuruh untuk memukul sebuah batu yang kemudian keluar daripadanya dua belas mata air yang memancar.
Nasr Abu Zaid memahami perkataan “al-hajar” pada ayat tadi bukanlah sebuah batu seperti apa yang difahami oleh seluruh mufassirin dan orang-orang Arab serta mereka yang memahami Bahasa Arab. Tetapi perkataan “al-hajar” pada ayat tadi menurutnya adalah “mungkin” hanyalah nama sebuah tempat, padanya ada mata air yang memancar.
Intinya dia berusaha dengan sedaya upaya atau boleh dikatakan mati-matian untuk menafikan mukjizat yang diberikan kepada nabi Musa as.
Dimanakah letak ketidakjelasan kata-kata al Quran itu, manakala ia diturunkan dan dihidangkan kedalam bahasa sangat mudah untuk difahami oleh setiap insan yang berakal, walaupun setiap kata-katanya memiliki nilai sastra yang tiada bandingannya.
Allah swt al Khalik itu telah menjamin akan hal itu seperti yang telah tercetak dan tertera didalam surah Yusuf : 2, al Nahl : 103, al Syu’ara’ : 195, al Zumar : 28, Toha : 113, al Syura : 7, Fushilat : 3, al Ra’d : 37, al Zukhruf : 3, al Ahkaf : 12 dan al Qomar : 32 dan 40.
Tidaklah mereka yang berbuat demikian itu terhadap al-Quran, melainkan mereka orang-orang yang telah memandang rendah akan perkataan Allah atau firmanNya, mereka telah dengan sengaja mengunci mati pintu-pintu hati mereka untuk menolak kebenaran, sedangkan ia sadar bahwa apa yang disampaikan itu adalah kebenaran. Manakala hatinya sentiasa menyukai yang benar, mengatakan kebenaran dan bahwa setiap kebenaran itu sangat mudah difahami dan dapat diterima oleh hati-hati yang masih bersih. Bahkan hati yang dikatakan sudah gelap gulita-pun masih lagi mengatakan bahwa kebenaran itu sangat indah dan cemerlang sinarnya serta kejahatan itu sangat busuk dan berakibat yang sangat menyedihkan di dunia dan akherat kelak.
Merekalah orang-orang yang berpenyakit pada hatinya. Penyakit lemah iman, sehingga menimbulkan rasa dengki dan iri hati serta dendam terhadap ajaran Allah swt. Mari kita dengarkan Allah swt menggambarkan akan perihal mereka itu didalam surat al-Baqarah ayat ke 10:
Ýöí ÞõáõæÈöåöã ãøóÑóÖñ ÝóÒóÇÏóåõãõ Çááøåõ ãóÑóÖÇð æóáóåõã ÚóÐóÇÈñ Ãóáöíãñ ÈöãóÇ ßóÇäõæÇ íóßúÐöÈõæäó
Artinya: Dalam hati mereka ada penyakit lalu ditambah Allah penyakitnya; dan bagi mereka siksa yang pedih, disebabkan mereka berdusta”.
Walaupun hakikat ayat diatas merupakan sebuah permisalan yang digambarkaan oleh Allah swt terhadap sifat dan watak serta perangai munaafiqiin Arab dizaman nabi Muhammad saw, tetapi pada hakikatnya ada kesamaan dengan perangai, watak dan hati golongan manusia-manusia liberal yang ada pada zaman ini.
Hati mereka berpenyakit, penyakit lemah iman, penyakit yang hanya dimiliki oleh orang-orang yang dungu dan pandir. Mereka menghalalkan apa yang haram serta mengharamkan apa yang halal. Merekalah orang-orang munafik yang menunggangi agama Islam dan bertopeng kebebasan, yang intinya menginginkan kehancuran keatas sendi-sendi ajaran Islam yang pada akhirnya menghancurkan umatnya dari dalam seperti apa yang terjadi dengan mereka-mereka yang beragama Yahudi dan Kristen pada saat ini, yang hampir tidak dapat membedakan mana yang halal dan mana yang haram, mana baik mana buruk dalam urusan kehidupan beragama.
C. Pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat nabi Ibrahim as
Nasr telah menafsirkan firman Allah swt didalam al Quran surat al Anbiya ayat ke 69 :
﴿ ÞõáúäóÇ íóÇ äóÇÑõ ßõæäöí ÈóÑúÏðÇ æóÓóáóÇãðÇ Úóáóì ÅöÈúÑóÇåöíãó ﴾
Artinya : Kami berfirman: “Hai api menjadi dinginlah, dan menjadi keselamatanlah bagi Ibrahim”.
Nasr menjelaskan didalam tafsirnya (Al-Hidayah wa al-Irfan fi tafsir al-Quran bi al-Quran) bahwa nabi Ibrahim as tidaklah dibakar didalam api oleh kaumnya yang ingkar (sebagaimana yang difahami oleh para mufassirin-pen). Akan tetapi, Allah swt telah menyelamatkan nabi Ibrahim as dari bencana dibakar hidup-hidup dengan memerintahkannya untuk berhijrah kesuatu tempat, sehingga usaha kaumnya untuk membakar nabi Ibrahim as hidup-hidup telah menemui kegagalan.
Dimanakah letak kesia-siaan perkataan Allah swt didalam ayat diatas tadi? Manakala al-Quran tidak ada padanya satu kesilapan atau kesia-siaan dari sisi manapun jua adanya. Allah swt telah menegaskan akan perkara ini didalam surat Fushilat ayat ke 42 :
﴿ áóÇ íóÃúÊöíåö ÇáúÈóÇØöáõ ãöä Èóíúäö íóÏóíúåö æóáóÇ ãöäú ÎóáúÝöåö ÊóäÒöíáñ ãøöäú Íóßöíãò ÍóãöíÏò
Artinya: “Yang tidak datang kepadanya (Al Quran) kebatilan baik dari depan maupun dari belakangnya, yang diturunkan dari Rabb yang Maha Bijaksana lagi Maha Terpuji”.
Allah swt tidak hanya mengatakan al-Quran itu tidak ada kebatilan atau kesia-siapa pada setiap perkataan-perkataannya, susunannya ayat-ayatnya dan urutan surat-suratnya, akan tetapi demi kebenaran yang serta kesahihan yang ada padanya, Allah swt menambahkan dengan berita, bahwa al-Quran itu datang dari Allah swt yang Maha Bijaksana lagi Maha Terpuji pada akhir ayat tadi, untuk menguatkan akan betapa ia bebas dari segala perkara yang membingungkan ataupun kesilapan.
Oleh sebab apakah dinafikan serta disia-siakan kalimat “Yaa naaru kuuniiy bardan wa salaaman ‘alaa Ibrahiim??!!” Kalaulah bukan terbit dari kejahilan yang nyata ataupun kebenaran yang sengaja disembunyikan??!! Ataupun hati-hati yang berpenyakit.
Kita tidak memiliki pendapat yang lain dalam hal ini, melainkan apa yang telah dijelaskan pada pendirian kita seperti yang telah dijelas diatas tadi, bahwa tidak ada kesilapan perkata didalam al Quran dan tidaklah mereka mengingkari dan mentahrifkan al Quran melainkan mereka yang memiliki akidah mulhidun ataupun atheisme maupun munafiquun serta kedunguan yang nyata.
D. Pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat nabi Dawud as
Pemikir liberal ini Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid telah menafsirkan firman Allah dalam surat al Anbiya’ ayat ke 79 :
﴿ æóÓóÎøóÑúäóÇ ãóÚó ÏóÇæõæÏó ÇáúÌöÈóÇáó íõÓóÈøöÍúäó æóÇáØøóíúÑó æóßõäøóÇ ÝóÇÚöáöíäó ﴾
Artinya : menta’wilkan maksud ayat berkenaan sesuai dengan keinginanannya yang sesat, sehingga seakan-akan ayat-ayat suci itu benar-benar telah menguatkan pendapatnya yang terpesong itu. Inilah yang kita katakan sebagai ilmu hermeunetik didalam penafsiran kitab-kitab samawiy, dan tidak ada hermeunetik didalam al Qur’an karena tidak ada perkara yang diragui akan kebenaran al Qur’an itu. Karena hermeunetik itu sendiri lebih kepada satu sikap atau tindakan yang dibuat-buat dan sekali lagi ayat-ayat al-Quran tidak ada yang perlu untuk dibuat-buat dalam memahaminya.
Betapalah dirinya berusaha menutupi kebenaran al-Quran itu???!!! Betapalah dia berusaha menggelapkan ayat-ayat yang jelas dan terang itu???!!! Betapalah ia berusaha memadamkan cahaya kebenaran yang terlintas didalam hati dan fikirannya itu???!!!
﴿ íõÑöíÏõæäó Ãóä íõØúÝöÄõæÇú äõæÑó Çááøåö ÈöÃóÝúæóÇåöåöãú æóíóÃúÈóì Çááøåõ ÅöáÇøó Ãóä íõÊöãøó äõæÑóåõ æóáóæú ßóÑöåó ÇáúßóÇÝöÑõæäó
Artinya : Mereka berkehendak memadamkan cahaya (agama) Allah dengan mulut (ucapan- ucapan) mereka, dan Allah tidak menghendaki selain menyempurnakan cahayanya, walaupun orang-orang yang kafir tidak menyukai”. (Q.S. Al-Taubah:32)
Bila dicari hidayah itu tidaklah ia melainkan ada tersemai di jiwamu
Kejahilan diatas kejahilan menimpa menutupi kebenaran karena nafsu
Padahal janganlah kebathilan itu dikejar karena ia pasti akan membinasakan
E. Pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat nabi Sulaiman as
Nasr Abu Zaid terlah menafsirkan makna penguasaan Sulaiman as keatas angin sebagai mukjizat yang Allah swt berikan kepadanya. Firman Allah swt pada surat al-Anbiya ayat ke 81:
﴿ æóáöÓõáóíúãóÇäó ÇáÑøöíÍó ÚóÇÕöÝóÉð ÊóÌúÑöí ÈöÃóãúÑöåö Åöáóì ÇáúÃóÑúÖö ÇáøóÊöí ÈóÇÑóßúäóÇ ÝöíåóÇ ﴾
Artinya : “Dan (telah kami tundukkan) untuk Sulaiman angin yang sangat kencang tiupannya yang berhembus dengan perintahnya ke negeri yang kami Telah memberkatinya dan adalah kami Maha Mengetahui segala sesuatu”.
Dia menjelaskan lagi didalam kitabnya, maksud firman Allah yang berbunyi “Tajriy bi amrihi” yaitu: udara dikuasai dan dapat diarahkan oleh negara-negara maju seperti negara-negara Eropa dalam hal penggunaan telepon dan telegraph.
Pemahaman Nasr Abu Zaid dari tafsirannya diatas menggambarkan bahawa dizaman nabi Sulaiman as sudah ada telefon ataupun telegram dalam artian telefon sudah jauh sebelum manusia modern menemukan telefon. Ini satu kepandiran yang menjengkelkan dan pembohongan yang nyata!!!
Yang diinginkan oleh pemikir liberal ini tentulah mencari bukti kebenaran akan dakwaan yang dibuat olehnya bahwa tidak ada mukjizat yang dimiliki oleh para nabi, walaupun dengan mengorbankan kesahihan al-Quran dan pada dasarnya dia telah mengorbankan keimanan dan kehidupan akhiratnya.
F. Pengingkaran terhadap mukjizat Isra dan Mi’raj nabi Muhammad saw
Kalau pada perbincangan terdahulu kita menceritakan pengkingkaran Nasr terhadap para nabi-nabi sebelum datangnya Islam, maka disini kita juga akan memaparkan pendapat Nasr Abu Zaid mengenai mukjizat nabi akhir zaman yang telah membawa risalah penutup telah menafsirkan firman Allah swt pada surat al-Isra, ayat ke 1 :
﴿ ÓõÈúÍóÇäó ÇáøóÐöí ÃóÓúÑóì ÈöÚóÈúÏöåö áóíúáÇð ãøöäó ÇáúãóÓúÌöÏö ÇáúÍóÑóÇãö Åöáóì ÇáúãóÓúÌöÏö ÇáÃóÞúÕóì ÇáøóÐöí ÈóÇÑóßúäóÇ Íóæúáóåõ áöäõÑöíóåõ ãöäú ÂíóÇÊöäóÇ Åöäøóåõ åõæó ÇáÓøóãöíÚõ ÇáÈóÕöíÑõ ﴾
<>alias omong kosong.
VI. Ijtihad rusak Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid terhadap hukum Fiqh
Setelah kita segarkan pemikiran Nasr Abu Zaid mengenai pengingkarannya terhadap mukjizat yang merupakan sendi-sendi akidah umat Islam, maka berkeinginan pula saya untuk mengisahkan beberapa pandangan Nasr Abu Zaid mengenai ijtihadnya terhadap huku-hukum fiqh, yang merupakan aturan hidup yang wajib dijalankan oleh umat manusia untuk meraih kesejahteraan di dunia dan kejayaan di akhirat nanti.
A. Hudud mencuri
Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid menafsirkan surat al-Maidah ayat ke 38 :
﴿ æóÇáÓøóÇÑöÞõ æóÇáÓøóÇÑöÞóÉõ ÝóÇÞúØóÚõæÇú ÃóíúÏöíóåõãóÇ ﴾
Artinya : “Dan laki-laki yang mencuri dan perempuan yang mencuri, potonglah tangan keduanya”.
Nasr menafsirkankan bahwa maksud kalimat “al saariqu wa al saariqatu” yaitu mereka yang terbiasa mencuri, dalam artian kalau seseorang baru sekali mencuri atau dua kali, kemudian tidak mencuri lagi, maka dia tidak dikenakan hukum hudud atau potong tangan, karena kalau dikenakan juga maka akan menyebabkan kekurang upayaan keatasnya karena kehilangan tangan.
Tidak ada ayat yang mengecualikan dalam hal hudud itu, darimana datangnya pengertian hanya kalau satu atau dua kali tidak dikenakan hukum hudud.
Mungkin menurut Nasr disini bahwa sebagai ukuran maksimal seorang pencuri yang diwajibkan potong tangan yaitu jika dia telah mencuri lebih dari dua kali, ataupun perbuatan kriminal itu sudah menjadi satu kebiasaan baginya!!!
Athiyah Saqar didalam kitab “Fatawa al Al-Azhar” pada bab “Hadd al Sariqah” menjelaskan tidak semua yang mencuri itu akan dipotong tangan melainkan jika telah memenuhi syarat keatas pelaku dan syarat keatas barang yang dicuri seperti berikut:
a. syarat keatas pelaku
1. Baligh atau dewasa
2. Berakal
3. Merdeka
b. Syarat keatas barang yang dicuri
1. Berupa hak milik
2. Senilai dengan satu nisab wajib zakat yaitu 58 gram emas
3. Barang itu berada pada tempat yang terjaga
Dalam hal ini, pendapat Athiyah Saqar lebih layak untuk diterima, karena fatwanya tidak bertentangan dengan desiran hati nurani dan akal yang masih hidup.
Bahkan para sahabat dan semua penganut mazhab ahli sunnah wa al Jama’ah telah sepakat untuk tetap memotong tangan seorang pencuri, dengan tidak ditentukan berapa kalikah pencuri itu mencuri. Dijelaskan didalam kitab “Musykil al Athar li Athawiy, bab Laa Qishasha fi al Lathamah”, bahwa nabi Muhammad saw telah mengancam akan memotong tangan putrinya Fatimah radhiallau ‘anha jika beliau mencuri!!!. Rasulullah tidak mengecualikan berapa kali seorang pencuri itu mencuri baru boleh dikenakan hadd potong tangan.
Tergambarkan sudah bahwa apa yang dilakukan oleh para sahabat itu benar-benar merupakan satu pengaplikasian ataupun satu bayang-bayang ajaran Rasulullah saw sebagai seorang mufassir dan muwaddih keatas ayat-ayat Allah swt yang terukir didalam al-Quran yang mulia, dan Allah sendiri yang telah melantik beliau untuk menafsirkan ayat-ayatNya kepada para sahabat dan juga umat (Q.S. al-Nahl:44).
B. Hudud Zina
Setelah menyatakan bahwa pencuri yang wajib dikenakan hadd potong tangan itu hanyalah bagi mereka yang memiliki kebiasan mencuri atau mencuri sebagai profesi. Kemudian Nasr Abu Zaid menenggelamkan pemikirannya kedalam perkara lebih berbahaya lagi dan lebih besar pengaruh kerusakannya dimasyarakat yaitu membolehkan melakukan zina baik itu dilakukan oleh mereka yang masih membujang maupun yang sudah kawin (menyeleweng).
Nasr Abu Zaid telah menafsirkan firman Allah swt dalam surat al-Nur ayat ke 02 :
﴿ ÇáÒøóÇäöíóÉõ æóÇáÒøóÇäöí ÝóÇÌúáöÏõæÇ ßõáøó æóÇÍöÏò ãøöäúåõãóÇ ãöÆóÉó ÌóáúÏóÉò ﴾
Artinya : Perempuan yang berzina dan laki-laki yang berzina, maka deralah tiap-tiap seorang dari keduanya seratus dali dera”.
Dia menyatakan seperti berikut, bahwa kalimat “al-zaaniyatu wa al-zaani” merupakan sifat yang dimiliki oleh seorang laki-laki ataupun perempuan dan perbuatan zina itu sudah menjadi satu kebiasan bagi mereka berdua, dengan demikian barulah mereka berhak untuk dicambuk (hadd zina).
Dengan pembolehan berzina oleh Nasr Abu Zaid, saya berpendapat bahwa dia dengan pernyataannya itu telah membolehkan juga bagi orang-orang yang berstatus suami isteri untuk berzina, dengan syarat perbuatan bejat itu bukanlah satu kebiasaan mereka.
Wahai mereka yang memiliki akal yang sehat dan nurani yang cerah secerah matahari, renungkan olehmu dengan jiwamu dengan pemikirnmu dan dengan akalmu betapa besar pintu kehancuran yang telah dibuka oleh manusia dajjal satu ini, dan betapa manusia satu ini telah mengahalalkan apa yang telah diharamkan oleh Allah dan rasul Nya??!!! Manusia satu ini telah menghalalkan sebuah dosa besar untuk peraktekkan!!! Betapalah manusia satu ini telah mendeklarasikan dirinya sebagai syaithan yang memberikan kesempatan kepada umat ini untuk berzina!!!
Dengarkan hatimu wahai saudara, selamilah jiwa murnimu wahai sahabat, kamu dapatkan dia sedang berkata-kata tentang kebenaran dan hak, kemudian saya bertanya kepadamu wahai saudaraku, dan kepadamu wahai sahabatku, juga kepadamu wahai adik-adik generasiku : “Relakah engkau, jika kedua orang tuamu, isteri-isterimu, suami-suamimu, anak-anakmu, saudara-saudaramu berzina walau hanya sekali??!!”. Tentulah hatimu akan merasa kesal dan sakit dengan perkara itu, karena demikianlah hatimu yang selalu menolak keburukan dan segala sikap yang tidak senonoh!!!
Saya mencurigai Nasr Abu Zaid memiliki agenda merusak umat ini dari dalam tubuh mereka, disebabkan karena kejahilan serta kedunguannya dan nafsu jahatnya ataupun karena sokongan para musuh-musuh Islam dengan memperalat dirinya dengan iming-imingan kedudukan dan kekayaan yang hanya bersifat sementara. Sementara setiap jiwa pasti akan mati dan akan mempertanggungjawabkan segala kerusakan yang telah disebarkan olehnya dimuka bumi ini???!!!.
Rasulullah saw bersabda : “Barang siapa yang mengajarkan satu kejahatan kemudian ianya menjadi ikutan orang-orang (bersamanya atau setelahnya-pen) maka baginya dosanya dan dosa orang-orang yang melakukannya (ajaran jahatnya-pen), tidak dikurangkan sedikitpun dosanya dari para pelakukanya. (H.R. Ibnu Majah). Adakah setiap insan mampu menanggung segala kepedihan hidup dialam kubur sebab dosa-dosanya itu, kalau ia dinampakkan? Jikalah sudah tidak mampu bertahan dengan akibat perbuatan dosa sendiri…maka bagaimana dengan dosa-dosa orang lain yang sentiasa datang dan menambah-nambah beban dosa diri sendiri yang sudah tidak dapat dipikul itu!!!
C. Bermadu
Nasr Zaid tidak membenarkan mereka yang mengingkan kawin melebihi satu orang isteri, dan ini jelas sangat bertentangan dengan ayat al-Quran dan sunnah rasulullah saw. Mari kita dengarkan pendapatnya mengenai al-Quran dalam surat al Nisa ayat ke 3 :
﴿ æóÅöäú ÎöÝúÊõãú ÃóáÇøó ÊõÞúÓöØõæÇú Ýöí ÇáúíóÊóÇãóì ÝóÇäßöÍõæÇú ãóÇ ØóÇÈó áóßõã ãøöäó ÇáäøöÓóÇÁ ãóËúäóì æóËõáÇóËó æóÑõÈóÇÚó ﴾.
Artinya : Dan jika kamu takut tidak akan dapat berlaku adil terhadap (hak-hak) perempuan yang yatim (bilamana kamu mengawininya), maka kawinilah wanita-wanita (lain) yang kamu senangi : dua, tiga atau empat”.
Nasr Abu Zaid menyatakan bahwa berpoligami tidak boleh dilakukan, melainkan dalam keadaan dua perkara. Pertama dalam keadaan darurat dan yang kedua hendaklah yang akan dijadikan madu itu mereka perempuan yang berstatus yatim piatu.
D. Memakan riba
Nasr Abu Zaid berpandangan bahwa umat Islam dibenarkan untuk memakan riba. Dia telah menafsirkan surat al-Baqarah ayat ke 279 :
﴿ ÝóÅöä áøóãú ÊóÝúÚóáõæÇú ÝóÃúÐóäõæÇú ÈöÍóÑúÈò ãøöäó Çááøåö æóÑóÓõæáöåö æóÅöä ÊõÈúÊõãú Ýóáóßõãú ÑõÄõæÓõ ÃóãúæóÇáößõãú áÇó ÊóÙúáöãõæäó æóáÇó ÊõÙúáóãõæäó ﴾
Artinya: Maka jika kamu tidak mengerjakan (meninggalkan sisa riba), maka ketahuilah, bahwa Allah dan rasul-Nya akan memerangimu. Dan jika kamu bertaubat (dari pengambilan riba), maka bagimu pokok hartamu; kamu tidak menganiaya dan tidak (pula) dianiaya.
Nasr Abu Zaid berpendapat bahwa riba yang diharamkan didalam Islam adalah riba yang disebabkan mendapatkan keuntungan yang terlalu berlebih-lebihan melebihi modal utama (dalam artian kalau tidak berlebih-lebihan tidak mengapa untuk memakan riba-pen).
Manakala rasulullah saw yang diutus sebagai pengejawentahan keatas ayat-ayat Allah swt (al-Quran) telah menjelaskan didalam hadis yang diriwayatkan oleh imamaa al-muhaddisiin Bukhariy dan Muslim akan haramnya memakan riba, tidak kira sedikit ataupun banyak. Walaupun ada ayat yang hampir menyerupai pendapat Nasr Abu Zaid agar tidak berlebih-lebihan dalam memakan harta riba seperti yang tertera didalam surat Ali Imran ayat ke 130 :
﴿ íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇú áÇó ÊóÃúßõáõæÇú ÇáÑøöÈóÇ ÃóÖúÚóÇÝðÇ ãøõÖóÇÚóÝóÉð æóÇÊøóÞõæÇú Çááøåó áóÚóáøóßõãú ÊõÝúáöÍõæäó
Artinya : Hai orang-orang yang beriman, janganlah kamu memakan riba dengan berlipat ganda, dan bertakwalah kamu kepada Allah supaya kamu mendapat keberuntungan.
Tetapi ayat tersebut telah dimansuhkan oleh ayat-ayat pengharaman memakan riba seperti para surat al-Baqarah ayat ke 275 – 276, kemudian bagi mereka yang masih memakan riba maka Allah swt dan rasulNya telah mengumumkan perang terhadap mereka seperti yang tertera didalam surat al-Baqarah ayat ke 278 – 279.
Benar, bahwa disana ada beberapa ulama yang berpendapat tidak mengapa untuk memakan riba, dengan mengemukan dalil-dalil ‘aqliy. Tetapi dalam urusan agama dan sudah jelas akan nash-nashnya, maka kita dalam mengambil sebuah hukum terhadap satu perkara, berpegang kepada prinsip yang disampaikan oleh Dr. Yusuf al-Qardhawiy bahwa setiap urusan yang berkaitan dengan urusan agama kita hanya berasaskan nash-nash al-Quran dan sunnah rasulullah saw. Perkataan ataupun pendapat manusia jika bertentangan dengan nash-nash mestilah ditinggalkan!!!
E. Zakat pertanian
Nasr menjelaskan dalam kitab tafsirnya keatas surat al-An’aam ayat ke 141:
﴿ æóÂÊõæÇú ÍóÞøóåõ íóæúãó ÍóÕóÇÏöåö ﴾
Artinya: dan tunaikanlah haknya di hari memetik hasilnya (dengan disedekahkan kepada fakir miskin”.
Menurutnya bahwa kadar zakat pertanian dapat ditentukan oleh seorang pemilik sesuai dengan keadaan semasa.
Para ulama mazahib al-Arba’ah bahwa zakat pertanian jika ianya disiram dengan air hujan maka kadarnya adalah 1/10, manakala jika tanaman itu disiram dengan menggunakan tenaganya ataupun dengan alat seperti mesin ataupun hewan, maka kadar zakatnya adalah 1/5. Pendapat ini selaras dengan hadis rasulullah saw yang diriwayatkan didalam kitab-kitab sahih, masanid dan sunan dari berbagai sanad. Pendapat untuk menentukan kadar zakat itu didasarkan keatas kehendak pribadi merupakan kesombongan dan tindakan kriminal keatas ketentuan Allah dan rasulNya.
F. Masharif zakat
Ketika Nasr membaca ayat ke 60 dari surat al-Taubah :
﴿ ÅöäøóãóÇ ÇáÕøóÏóÞóÇÊõ áöáúÝõÞóÑóÇÁ æóÇáúãóÓóÇßöíäö æóÇáúÚóÇãöáöíäó ÚóáóíúåóÇ æóÇáúãõÄóáøóÝóÉö ÞõáõæÈõåõãú æóÝöí ÇáÑøöÞóÇÈö æóÇáúÛóÇÑöãöíäó æóÝöí ÓóÈöíáö Çááøåö æóÇÈúäö ÇáÓøóÈöíáö ÝóÑöíÖóÉð ãøöäó Çááøåö æóÇááøåõ Úóáöíãñ Íóßöíãñ ﴾
Artinya : Sesungguhnya zakat-zakat itu, hanyalah untuk orang-orang fakir, orang-orang miskin, pengurus-pengurus zakat, para mu’allaf yang dibujuk hatinya, untuk (memerdekakan) budak, orang-orang yang berhutang, untuk jalan Allah dan untuk mereka yang sedang dalam perjalanan, sebagai suatu ketetapan yang diwajibkan Allah, dan Allah Maha Mengetahui lagi Maha Bijaksana”.
Nasr Abu Zaid merujukkan makna riqab pada ayat diatas adalah setiap muslim yang hidup pada zaman ini, oleh karena itu setiap muslim wajib untuk memerdekakan saudara-saudaranya dari perbudakan.
Disini kita tidak mengetahui secara terperinci apa yang dimaksudkan oleh Nasr dengan pernyataannya itu.
Bagaimana umat ini bisa dikatakan hidup didalam perbudakan? Kalaulah yang dimaksudkan adalah perbudakan hawa nafsu maka bukan zakat jawabannya dan jikalah ia merupakan perbudakan pemikiran, maka bukan pula zakat jawabannya, manakala kalau umat Islam ini menjadi budak kepada Barat, maka umat Islam tidak demikian keadaannya, akan tetapi budaya Barat telah menjajah pemikiran dan gaya hidup umat Islam hari ini, dan ini tidak dapat dikatakan satu perbudakan yang dimaksudkan didalam ayat tadi sehingga membolehkan diri mereka untuk menerima zakat.
G. Thalak (Perceraian)
Didalam perkara perceraian, Nasr Abu Zaid memiliki pandangan yang berbeda dengan pandangan-pandangan para ulama dan salaf shalih. Dia berpendapat bahwa perceraian tidak terjadi melainkan jika disebabkan perkara yang merosak tatanan keluarga dan hanya disebabkan oleh isteri.
Perkara thalak atau perceraian sudah semestinya sebagai satu musibah yang melanda sebuah keluarga, karena dengannya terlerailah ikatan perkawinan yang telah terjalin yang berakibatkan kepada bebanan jiwa yang akan diderita oleh setiap anggota keluarga bahkan masyarakat disekitarnya.
Islam tidak menggalakkan umatnya bercerai, bahkan ayat-ayat al-Quran berkali-kali mengingatkan umat ini agar senantiasa memperbaiki hubungan sesama suami isteri. Seperti yang dijelaskan pada surat al-Nisa’ ayat ke 19 :
﴿ íóÇ ÃóíøõåóÇ ÇáøóÐöíäó ÂãóäõæÇú áÇó íóÍöáøõ áóßõãú Ãóä ÊóÑöËõæÇú ÇáäøöÓóÇÁ ßóÑúåðÇ æóáÇó ÊóÚúÖõáõæåõäøó áöÊóÐúåóÈõæÇú ÈöÈóÚúÖö ãóÇ ÂÊóíúÊõãõæåõäøó ÅöáÇøó Ãóä íóÃúÊöíäó ÈöÝóÇÍöÔóÉò ãøõÈóíøöäóÉò æóÚóÇÔöÑõæåõäøó ÈöÇáúãóÚúÑõæÝö
Artinya : Hai orang-orang yang beriman, tidak halal bagi kamu mempusakai wanita dengan jalan paksa dan janganlah kamu menyusahkan mereka karena hendak mengambil kembali sebagian dari apa yang telah kamu berikan kepadanya, terkecuali bila mereka melakukan pekerjaan keji yang nyata. Dan bergaullah dengan mereka secara patut.
Demikian pula dalam mengekalkan hubungan mesra antara anggota keluarga, Allah swt mengajarkan kita untuk senantiasa berdoa seperti yang tertera didalam surat al-Furqan ayat ke 74. Ayat ini juga merupakan satu sindiran bagi umat Islam agar terus menjaga keharmonian hubungan antara anggota keluarga.
﴿ æóÇáøóÐöíäó íóÞõæáõæäó ÑóÈøóäóÇ åóÈú áóäóÇ ãöäú ÃóÒúæóÇÌöäóÇ æóÐõÑøöíøóÇÊöäóÇ ÞõÑøóÉó ÃóÚúíõäò æóÇÌúÚóáúäóÇ áöáúãõÊøóÞöíäó ÅöãóÇãðÇ
Artinya : Dan orang orang yang berkata: “Ya Tuhan kami, anugerahkanlah kepada kami isteri-isteri kami dan keturunan kami sebagai penyenang hati (kami), dan jadikanlah kami imam bagi orang-orang yang bertakwa”.
Pada surat Ali Imran ayat ke 14 pula, Allah swt telah menjelaskan bahwa pada hakikatnya menusia tidak menginginkan terjadinya perceraian bahkan berusaha untuk mengh dunia, dan di sisi Allah-lah tempat kembali yang baik (surga).
Namun demikian Islam juga mensyariatkan perceraian jika perkara yang menyedihkan itu perlu. Tidak kira apakah ia disebabkan oleh pihak suami ataupun pihak isteri, karena pada hakikatnya disyariatkan menikah itu agar manusia dapat menegakkan syariat Islam melalui institusi keluarga, namun jika isntitusi keluarga itu sudah tidak dapat lagi menegakkan cita-cita tadi disebabkan nyusuz atau perbuatan curang dari salah satu pihak dan tidak ada jalan yang terbaik melainkan cerai, maka disinilah perceraian disyariatkan.
Islam telah memberikan wewenang kepada pihak suami untuk menceraikan isterinya dengan melafaskan perkataan cerai kalau dia mampu berkata-kata dan dengan isyarat anggota tubuh ataupun tulisan kalau dia seorang yang bisu. Bagi pihak perempuan pula dia diberikan hak khul’ah melepaskan suami mereka yang curang dengan mengembalikan mahar yang telah diberikan oleh pihak suami kepadanya saat akad nikah dibacakan.
Jadi tidak benar kalau perceraian itu hanya dilakukan atas sebab kecurangan dari pihak isteri saja, bahkan perbuatan yang demikian itu merupakan satu penindasan keatas kaum wanita dan kezaliman yang nyata. Islam menentang pemahaman Barat yang beranggapan bahwa para wanita itu adalah budak yang bisa dilakukan dengan semena-mena dan sesuka hati. Islam juga menyanggahi pemahaman bahwa wanita itu adalah makhluk kelas dua. Islam menyatakan bahwa kaum wanita itu adalah saudara kepada laki-laki dan laki-laki merupakan saudara kepada kaum wanita. Islam telah memberikan kaum wanita kesetaraan derajat dengan kaum laki-laki dengan kadar kemampuan yang mereka miliki.
Islam telah memberikan laluan kepada kaum wanita untuk melepaskan suami-suami mereka yang bertindak curang dan keji. Demikianlah yang disepakati oleh seluruh ulama dan salaf salih.
VII. Penutup
Daripada ‘Aisyah ra bahwa rasulullah saw telah bersabda : “Barangsiapa yang mengada-ada dalam urusan kami (agama ini) dengan perkara yang bukan daripadanya, maka ia tidak dapat diterima atau ditolak”. (H.R. Ahmad pada musnadnya).
Disebutkan pada kitab Dalail al-Nubuwah li al-Baihaqiy bab Maa Jaa a Fi Na’yi al-Nabiy saw daripada Urwah bin Zubair ra bahwa Rasulullah saw bersabda : “Dengarlah wahai umat manusia akan perkataanku, maka sesungguhnya telah aku tinggalkan padamu satu perkara, yang selama kamu berpegang teguh kepadanya, sekali-kali kamu tidak akan tersesat selamanya, dua perkara yang sangat jelasnya: kitabullah (al-Quran) dan sunnah nabimu”.
Akhirnya cukuplah para ulama menghukum kafir dan murtad keatas Nasr Abu Zaid serta dihalalkan darahnya juga orang-orang yang bersamanya. Allah berfirman didalam surat al-Nisa ayat ke 65:
﴿ ÝóáÇó æóÑóÈøößó áÇó íõÄúãöäõæäó ÍóÊøóìó íõÍóßøöãõæßó ÝöíãóÇ ÔóÌóÑó Èóíúäóåõãú Ëõãøó áÇó íóÌöÏõæÇú Ýöí ÃóäÝõÓöåöãú ÍóÑóÌðÇ ãøöãøóÇ ÞóÖóíúÊó æóíõÓóáøöãõæÇú ÊóÓúáöíãðÇ
Artinya : Maka demi Tuhanmu, mereka (pada hakekatnya) tidak beriman hingga mereka menjadikan kamu hakim terhadap perkara yang mereka perselisihkan, kemudian mereka tidak merasa dalam hati mereka sesuatu keberatan terhadap putusan yang kamu berikan, dan mereka menerima dengan sepenuhnya”.
Betapa aneh dan dungunya mereka para pemikir liberal itu, walaupun mereka telah dengan suka rela membuang dan mengetepikan hadis rasulullah saw serta membusungkan dada dihadapan ayat-ayat Allah yang nyata. Tetapi jika dijatuhan keatas mereka dakwaan sebagai “MURTAD” dan “KAFIR” maka mereka dengan mata yang memerah, seraya berkata dengan marah-marah “KAMI TIDAK KAFIR!!!” kemudian mereka dengan grasa-grusu seperti orang yang sedang dikejar anjing gila bersegera mencari-cari hadis yang dapat menyelamatkan topeng mereka yang terbentang dengan kekafiran. Demikian hadis itu : Daripada Ibnu Umar ra beliau berkata, telah bersabda rasulullah saw : “Barangsiapa yang mengatakan kepada sudaranya hai kafir, maka salah satu dari mereka menanggung perkataannya itu”. (Bukhari, Muslim dan Ahmad)
Al-Ustaz al-Syaikh ‘Atiyyah Saqr menjelaskan pada kitab Fatawa al-Azhar bab Wa Man Lam Yahkum Bimaa Anzala Allah, bahwa hadis diatas dikenakan keatas mereka yang memanggil saudaranya dengan perkataan “kafir” dengan tidak ada alasan yang nyata yang menguatkan dakwaannya itu, akan tetapi jika ada alasan yang nyata yang menguatkan dakwaan itu, seperti mengingkari ataupun mempermainkan hukum-hukum Allah swt, maka merekalah yang dijatuhi hukum kafir atau murtad. Demikian yang disepakati oleh para mufassirin secara keseluruhan.
Kita ambil sebagai contoh seorang mukmin thaa’i, ‘aabid, shahaabiy, uulaa al-khilafah fi al-Islam Abu Bakr al-Shiddiq ra telah memerangi mereka yang enggan membayar zakat setelah kemangkatan nabi Muhammad saw. Ini adalah merupakan bukti jelas dan gambaran serta permisalan yang sangat nyata akan dakwaan kafir serta tindakan yang perlu diambil keatas mereka itu.
Kita berhak menghukum mereka yang membuat hukum sendiri yang bertentangan dengan ajaran-ajaran syari’at yang didasarkan keatas al-Quran dan al-sunnah serta mempermainkan hukum-hukum Allah dan rasulNya sebagai kafir. Karena demikianlah sikap orang-orang kafir terhadap kitab Allah dan sunnah rasulNYa, mentahrifkan ayat-ayatnya, memandang rendah kepadanya dan mempermainkan hukum-hukumnya, bahkan menginjak-nginjak kitabNya.
Begitu pula penjelasan Imam Ibnu Taimiyah pada kitabnya Majmu Fatawa Ibnu Taimiyyah bab al-Iman Qaul wa ‘Amal.
Pendapat mereka yang menyatakan bahwa hak mengkafirkan seseorang itu adalah hak prerogatif Allah, adalah merupakan hujjah yang dibuat-buat atau takalluf yang tidak dapat diterima oleh akal yang sehat, karena Allah swt tidak mungkin untuk turun kemuka bumi kemudian mengatakan demikian : “hai kamu sudah kafir, hai kamu melakukan kesalahan!!!”.
Apa mungkin kita mengharapkan Allah swt sendiri turun ke muka bumi untuk mengadili serta menentukan hukum keatas umat manusia seperti yang dimaksudkan oleh para pemikir liberal itu??? Mustahil demikian adanya dan mereka tahu itu!!!.
Allah swt telah menyempurnakan agama ini dengan diutus olehNya seorang nabi akhir zaman untuk mengaplikasikan hukum-hukumNya yang tertera sangat jelas didalam al-Quran, kemudian beliau Muhammad saw menafsirkannya secara qawliyah maupun fi’liyah bersama para sahabat yang diridhai Allah swt, dan membumikan ajaran-ajarannya seterusnya mengokohkannya. Maka cukuplah bagi kami untuk berpegang teguh kepada kedua tali yang kuat itu (al-Quran dan al-sunnah) sebagai panduan. Berdasarkan kedua tali ini pula kita dapat mengatakan dengan penuh kesungguhan serta keyakinan bahwa seseorang itu telah tersesat, kafir, murtad ataupun masih berada pada jalan akidah yang benar!!! Walaupun para pemikir liberal itu membenci.
Demikianlah apa yang dapat disampaikan oleh penulis pada kesempatan kali ini, penulis tidak bermaksud merendahkan siapapun dalam tulisan ini, melainkan mengajak para pembaca untuk menyegarkan kembali pemikiran-pemikiran yang dilontarkan oleh dedengkot pemikir liberal ini, agar kita dapat merenungkan baik atau buruknya dan kemudian dapat mengambil satu kesimpulan serta pelajaran.
Penulis berpesan kepada dirinya sendiri dan kepada para pembaca yang budiman, sudah semestinya bagi kita yang meyakini adanya hari kebangkitan dan kemudian pembalasan, untuk memperhatikan apa yang telah disumbangkan oleh dirinya untuk kehidupan akheratnya kelak. Karena bagi keyakinan orang-orang yang beriman, bahwa segala tindakan dan tingkahlaku pada kehidupan dunia ini ada kaitannya dengan kehidupan akherat kelak. Oleh karena demikian barangsiapa yang menanam padi dimuka bumi ini, maka padi juga yang dituai diakhirat kelak, namun sesiapa yang menebarkan buih di atas muka bumi ini, maka buih pula yang dia kaut diakherat nanti.
Disebutkan didalam Fihris al-Nasai kitab al-zakat bab al-tahriid ‘alaa al-shadaqah dan Fihris musnad Ahmad, Musnad al-Kuufiyiin dari hadis Jariir bin Abdullah daripada Rasulullah saw, bahwa Rasulullah saw telah bersabda : “Barang siapa yang mengajarkan satu kebaikan maka baginya pahalanya dan pahala orang-orang yang mengerjakannya, dan barangsiapa yang mengajarkan kejahatan (kebathilan-pent) maka baginya dosanya dan dosa orang-orang yang beramal dengannya”.
Allah berfirman didalam surat al-Ra’ad ayat ke 17 :
﴿ ÃóäÒóáó ãöäó ÇáÓøóãóÇÁ ãóÇÁ ÝóÓóÇáóÊú ÃóæúÏöíóÉñ ÈöÞóÏóÑöåóÇ ÝóÇÍúÊóãóáó ÇáÓøóíúáõ ÒóÈóÏðÇ ÑøóÇÈöíðÇ æóãöãøóÇ íõæÞöÏõæäó Úóáóíúåö Ýöí ÇáäøóÇÑö ÇÈúÊöÛóÇÁ ÍöáúíóÉò Ãóæú ãóÊóÇÚò ÒóÈóÏñ ãøöËúáõåõ ßóÐóáößó íóÖúÑöÈõ Çááøåõ ÇáúÍóÞøó æóÇáúÈóÇØöáó ÝóÃóãøóÇ ÇáÒøóÈóÏõ ÝóíóÐúåóÈõ ÌõÝóÇÁ æóÃóãøóÇ ãóÇ íóäÝóÚõ ÇáäøóÇÓó ÝóíóãúßõËõ Ýöí ÇáÃóÑúÖö ßóÐóáößó íóÖúÑöÈõ Çááøåõ ÇáÃóãúËóÇáó
Artinya : “Allah Telah menurunkan air (hujan) dari langit, Maka mengalirlah air di lembah-lembah menurut ukurannya, maka arus itu membawa buih yang mengambang. dan dari apa (logam) yang mereka lebur dalam api untuk membuat perhiasan atau alat-alat, ada (pula) buihnya seperti buih arus itu. Demikianlah Allah membuat perumpamaan (bagi) yang benar dan yang bathil. Adapun buih itu, akan hilang sebagai sesuatu yang tak ada harganya; adapun yang memberi manfaat kepada manusia, maka ia tetap di bumi. Demikianlah Allah membuat perumpamaan-perumpamaan”.
Maha benar Allah tatkala Dia berfirman :
﴿ Ýóãóä íõÑöÏö Çááøåõ Ãóä íóåúÏöíóåõ íóÔúÑóÍú ÕóÏúÑóåõ áöáÅöÓúáÇóãö æóãóä íõÑöÏú Ãóä íõÖöáøóåõ íóÌúÚóáú ÕóÏúÑóåõ ÖóíøöÞðÇ ÍóÑóÌðÇ ßóÃóäøóãóÇ íóÕøóÚøóÏõ Ýöí ÇáÓøóãóÇÁ ßóÐóáößó íóÌúÚóáõ Çááøåõ ÇáÑøöÌúÓó Úóáóì ÇáøóÐöíäó áÇó íõÄúãöäõæäó
Artinya : Barangsiapa yang Allah menghendaki akan memberikan kepadanya petunjuk, niscaya dia melapangkan dadanya untuk (memeluk agama) Islam. Dan barangsiapa yang dikehendaki Allah kesesatannya, niscaya Allah menjadikan dadanya sesak lagi sempit, seolah-olah ia sedang mendaki langit. Begitulah Allah menimpakan siksa kepada orang-orang yang tidak beriman”. (Q.S. Al-An’aam : 125)
Oleh karena yang demikian itu betapa banyak orang-orang menjadi terbuka hatinya untuk memeluk agama Islam kemudian mentaati segala syariatnya dengan penuh keinsafan serta kekhusyukan, hanya karena melihat betapa teraturnya tatanan alam semesta ataupun karena dia menilik anggota tubunya yang sempurna, namun berapa banyak pula dari mereka yang diberikan petunjuk yang nyata serta ilmu pengetahuan namun nafsunya juga yang dia junjung yang akhirnya menyebabkan jiwanya sempit dan nafasnya sesak untuk menerima kebenaran yang membayang-bayangi dirinya.
Marilah kita berdoa dengan doa Rasulullah saw daripada Anas ra beliau berkata: Bahwa Rasulullah saw banyak mengatakan “Wahai yang memutar balikkan hati, tetapkan hati ini keatas agamaMU”. (H.R. Jama’ah)
Al-Faqiir Ila Hidayat Rabbihi
Masyhuri Mas’ud
From: Masyhurim <huriquais@yahoo.com>

Subject: [anggotaicmi] Menyegarkan kembali pemikiran Nasr Hamid Abu Zaid

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

Virus Liberal di UIN Malang

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Virus Liberal di UIN Malang

Senin, 14 April 2008

Banyak mahasiwa di kampus-kampus IAIN/UIN begitu “resah” melihat perkembangan pemikiran dosen-dosennya. Baca Catatan Akhir Pekan [CAP] Adian Husaini ke-231

Oleh: Adian Husaini

Pada hari Ahad, 6 April 2008, dalam sebuah acara Lembaga Dakwah Kampus di Malang, Jawa Timur, sejumlah mahasiswa UIN dan STAIN dari beberapa kampus mengajukan pertanyaan kepada saya, bagaimana cara menghadapi dosen-dosen yang mengajarkan paham liberalisme. Ada yang menyatakan, bahwa di kampusnya, posisinya terjepit, karena tidak mudah untuk mengkritik dosen-dosen yang dalam mengajar jutsru menanamkan keragu-raguan terhadap Islam.

Pertanyaan semacam itu sudah berulangkali dilontarkan para mahasiswa dalam berbagai kesempatan. Dan itu tidaklah aneh. Sebab, kampus-kampus saat ini memegang prinsip kebebasan berpendapat. Di kampus itu dijamin kebebasan berpendapat. Dosen berpikiran sesat atau tidak, itu bukan urusan pimpinan kampus. Tapi, dianggap urusan individu masing-masing. Ada yang beralasan, bahwa keragaman pemikiran dalam kampus adalah bagian dari kekayaan dan kebebasan akademis.

Dalam pandangan Islam, tentu saja, pola pikir semacam itu tidak benar. Sebab, dalam Islam ada kewajiban melakukan amar ma’ruf nahi munkar. Kemunkaran yang berat dalam Islam adalah kemunkaran ilmu. Dosen yang mengajarkan paham Pluralisme Agama, misalnya, jelas-jelas telah melakukan tindakan munkar, yang tidak kalah destruktifnya dibandingkan dengan dosen yang menilep uang kampus.

Akibat diterapkannya asas kebebasan itulah, maka banyak mahasiswa menjadi korban. Mereka harus berjuang sendiri menyaring, mana pemikiran dosen yang keliru dan mana pemikiran yang benar. Biasanya, karena kebingungan dan tidak dapat menemukan jawaban, yang terjadi adalah sikap bingung dan apatis. Setiap hari belajar Islam, tetapi dirinya tidak kunjung mendapatkan ilmu yang meyakinkan dan menenangkan hati. Yang seringkali terjadi justru keragu-raguan, skeptis, kebingungan, dan keresahan.

Kebingunan dan skeptisisme adalah buah dari penanaman paham relativisme kebenaran yang diajarkan kepada para mahasiswa. Virus ini sudah begitu luas menyebar. Seringkali orang yang mengidapnya tidak sadar. Bahkan, banyak yang bangga mengidapnya; bangga karena tidak lagi meyakini Islam sebagai suatu kebenaran. Virus ini memang tidak menyerang tubuh manusia, yang diserang adalah pikiran.

Pengidap virus liberal ini biasanya sangat membanggakan akalnya dan mengecam orang Islam yang menjadikan wahyu sebagai pegangan kebenaran. Akal, kata mereka, lebih penting daripada wahyu. Mereka berpikir secara dikotomis, bahwa akal dan wahyu adalah dua entitas yang bertentangan. Jika akal bertentangan dengan wahyu, kata mereka, maka tinggalkan wahyu, dan gunakan akal. Karena mereka merelatifkan semua pemikiran yang merupakan produk akal manusia, maka jadilah mereka manusia-manusia relativis, yang tidak mengakui bahwa manusia bisa mencapai kebenaran yang hakiki yang meyakinkan (’ilm).

Paham yang mendewakan akal semacam ini sudah lama ditanamkan di Perguruan Tinggi Islam. Pelopornya adalah Prof. Harun Nasution. Seperti dikatakan sendiri oleh Harun Nasution, bahwa misi dia dalam melakukan pembaruan pemikiran dan kurikulum di IAIN adalah mengembangkan paham Mu’tazilah di IAIN. Dalam buku ”Refleksi Pembaharuan Pemikiran Islam: 70 Tahun Harun Nasution”, Harun Nasution mengatakan:

”Sejak awal di McGill, aku sudah melihat pemikiran Muktazilah maju sekali. Kaum Muktazilah-lah yang bisa mengadakan satu gerakan pemikiran dan peradaban Islam. Selanjutnya malah mendirikan universitas di Eropa. Ini yang membuatku berfikir: kalau Islam zaman dulu begitu, mengapa Islam sekarang tidak. Sebaiknya Islam zaman sekarang lebih didorong lagi ke sana.

Sejak itu harapanku cuma satu: pemikiran Asy’ariyah mesti diganti dengan pemikiran-pemikiran Muktazilah, pemikiran para filosof atau pemikiran rasional. Atau dalam istilah sekarang, metodologi rasional Muktazilah. Sebaliknya, metodologi tradisional Asy’ariyah harus diganti.”

Sejak awal tahun 1970-an sebenarnya sudah banyak yang memberikan kritik terhadap pemikiran Harun Nasution. Salah satu kritik yang serius diberikan oleh senior Harun Nasution di McGill, yaitu Prof. Dr. HM Rasjidi. Tetapi, kritik Rasjidi dianggap angin lalu. Proyek ’Muktazilahisasi’ IAIN pun sebenarnya hanya batu pijakan untuk melakukan Westernisasi IAIN, sebab pemikiran yang dikembangkan kemudian, bukanlah benar-benar pemikiran Muktazilah, tetapi pemikiran Islam ala Barat.

Karena itulah, kini, dengan mudah kita bisa mengamati, luasnya peredaran virus lieral ini. Virus! Sekecil apa pun dia, tetaplah virus. Dia mempunyai daya yang merusak seluruh jasad. Virus pemikiran ini pun tidak berbeda hakekatnya dengan virus penyakit yang mempunyai daya rusak yang tinggi terhadap jasad. Jika pikiran seseorang sudah dirusak oleh virus liberal, maka dia pun otomatis akan menjadi penyebar virus yang sama ke pada orang lain.

Saat berada di Kota Malang, 6 April 2008 itu, saya menemukan sebuah buku berjudul ”Intelektualisme Islam: Melacak Akar-akar Integrasi Ilmu dan Agama– Seri Ensiklopedia Islam dan Sains,” terbitan Lembaga Kajian Al-Qur’an dan Sains (LKQS) Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Malang, 2006. Inilah salah satu lembaga yang diandalkan oleh UIN Malang untuk mengeluarkan konsep-konsep yang Qur’ani.

Kita berharap, mudah-mudahan UIN Malang benar-benar menjadi kampus Islam yang serius dalam menegakkan konsep keilmuan Islam dan menerapkannya dalam kehidupa akademis di kampusnya. Kita berharap, dari kampus-kampus Islam akan lahir cendekiawan-cendekiawan Muslim yang mumpuni keilmuannya dan memiliki keyakinan dan komitmen yang kuat dalam perjuangan menegakkan kebenaran.

Untuk meraih cita-cita itu, maka para dosen dan khususnya pimpinan kampus Islam perlu sangat serius dalam merumuskan konsep keilmuan Islam dan menerapkannya dalam kehidupan sehari-hari di kampusnya. Sebagai layaknya seorang yang menanam padi, maka petani bukan hanya harus rajin memupuk dan merawat tanamannya, tetapi pada saat yang sama, juga harus menjaga tanamannya dari serangan hama yang merusak tanaman. Adalah aneh, jika ada petani yang rajin memupuk padinya, tetapi membiarkan saja tanamannya dimangsa tikus, ulat tanaman, atau jenis-jenis hama lainnya. Virus-virus liberal yang bergentayangan di dunia kampus dan masyarakat saat ini tak ubahnya seperti hama yang menggerogoti tanaman.

Jika kita telaah buku ”Intelektualisme Islam” terbitan UIN Malang ini, kita mendapati pemikiran yang kontradiktif. Banyak pemikiran yang baik, tetapi sekaligus juga pemikiran yang merusak. Antara obat dan racun dipadukan menjadi satu. Salah satu artikel yang berisi racun pemikiran berjudul, ”Pengembangan Ilmu Agama Islam Berbasis Integrasi”, ditulis oleh seorang dosen UIN Malang yang menyelesaikan pendidikan S-1 dan S-2 di UIN Yogyakarta.

Mengikuti garis pemikiran Harun Nasution, dosen UIN Malang ini juga memuji habis-habisan paham Muktazilah dan mencaci maki paham Ahlu Sunnah dan para tokohnya. Simaklah kutipan dari artikel tersebut:

“Matinya filsafat di dalam tradisi pemikiran Islam menunjukkan, secara implisit, hilangnya otoritas kelompok muktazilah dalam mengendalikan pemerintahan, karena ia satu-satunya aliran yang mengagungkan akal. Mereka digantikan oleh kelompok sunni yang lebih menjunjung tinggi wahyu dari pada akal. Watak pemikiran sunni yang anti akal, pada giliran selanjutnya, menjelma ke dalam bentuk propaganda “anti-filsafat” dan “filsafat bertentangan dengan agama. Maka tidak heran jika kemudian muncul tokoh semisal sang hujjah al-Islam, Imam al-Ghazali, seorang tokoh besar dari kalangan sunni, sangat anti filsafat, meskipun sebelumnya ia termasuk pecinta filsafat. Bukunya Tahafut al-Falasifah” merupakan bukti sejarah atas ketidaksenangannya terhadap filsafat

Propaganda seperti itu semakin mendapat justifikasi di tangan seorang ahli fiqih yang juga tokoh sunni, Imam Syafi’i, dengan kitabnya “ar-Risalah”. Sejak saat itu, terjadi penyeragaman pemikiran keagamaan. Lewat karya itu, nalar agama diresmikan. Ketika kita bicara tentang Islam dan bagaimana cara untuk menyelesaikan persoalan yang muncul di muka bumi, maka semua jawabannya ada di dalam Al-Qur’an, sebuah ortodoksi keagamaan yang dipaksakan.” (hal. 279-280).

Begitulah pendapat seorang dosen UIN Malang tentang Muktazilah dan Ahlu Sunnah. Kita mungkin bertanya, virus apa yang menjangkiti dosen UIN Malang itu, sampai begitu rupa menjadi pemuja Muktazilah dan menistakan Ahlu Sunnah? Padahal, dia adalah alumnus pesantren Ihyaul Ulum Dukun Gresik, — satu pesantren NU yang tentunya berpaham Ahlu Sunnah, dan bukan Muktazilah. Kita bisa menebak, si dosen ini terjangkit virus liberal semacam ini di tempat dia menimba ilmu, yaitu di UIN Yogya.

Jika kita mau menggunakan akal kita sedikit saja, maka kita dengan mudah dapat menemukan bahwa pemikiran dosen UIN Malang tersebut tentang Muktazilah dan Ahlu Sunnah adalah ”asbun”. Menyebut bahwa watak pemikiran sunni adalah ”anti akal” adalah sangat keterlaluan. Jawaban-jawaban kaum Sunni terhadap pemikiran-pemikiran Muktazilah adalah jawaban-jawaban yang menggunakan akal, dan bukan menggunakan ”dengkul”.

Peneliti INSISTS, Henri Shalahuddin MA — yang menulis skripsi (di ISID Gontor) tentang Muktazilah dan tesis Masternya (di IIUM) tentang al-Ghazali — telah menerbitkan sejumlah makalahnya tentang kekeliruan pemikiran Harun Nasution dalam soal Muktazilah dan Ahlu Sunnah. Misalnya, dalam permasalahan tentang rasionalitas baik dan buruk (al-Husnu wa l-qubhu aqliyani) yang menjadi perdebatan antara Mu’tazilah dan Asy’ariyah. Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (w. 606 H) menyatakan, bahwa perbedaan antara Muktazilah dan Ahlu Sunnah bukan pada soal “kemampuan akal”, apakah ia dapat mengetahui baik atau buruknya suatu perbuatan. Sebab keduanya sepakat bahwa akal manusia dapat mengetahuinya. Namun yang menjadi perdebatan adalah apakah suatu perbuatan yang berhak mendapatkan pahala atau siksa kelak di Akhirat, ditetapkan oleh akal atau wahyu?

Tokoh-tokoh Mu’tazilah, seperti Abu l-Hudzail al-‘Allaf, Ibrahim al-Nazhzham dan al-Qadhi ‘Abd al-Jabbar berpendapat bahwa sebelum datangnya wahyu, manusia tetap wajib mengerjakan perbuatan baik dan menjauhi hal-hal buruk, sesuai dengan kemampuan akalnya. Sedangkan menurut Imam Asy’ari, pahala dan siksa hanya bisa ditetapkan dengan wahyu. Beliau mengutip ayat Al-Quran, antara lain: “…dan Kami tidak akan meng’azab sebelum Kami mengutus seorang rasul” (QS. Isra’: 15).

Jadi, dalam menjawab argumementasi Muktazilah, Asy’ari juga menggunakan akal. Tetapi, akal yang tidak lepas begitu saja dari wahyu. Dalam kajiannya terhadap pemikiran Harun tentang Muktazilah, Henri Shalahuddin menyimpulkan:

“Klaim Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution tentang rasionalisme Mu’tazilah dengan menafikan sisi rasionalitas paham Asy’ariyah, tidaklah tepat. Golongan Mu’tazilah yang diklaim paham yang paling rasional oleh Harun, sejatinya tidaklah demikian. Bahkan, Mu’tazilah seringkali membebani akal melebihi kapasitasnya, sehingga berlaku arogan di depan Sang Khalik. Seperti mewajibkan Tuhan mengutus Rasul, memberikan pahala atau siksa sesuai amal perbuatan manusia, membuat “kebijakan sendiri” kategori masuk surga atau neraka dan sebagainya.”

Tentang kedudukan akal dan wahyu, dalam kitabnya, “al-Iqtishad fi l-I’tiqad”, al-Ghazali membuat gambaran yang indah:

“Perumpamaan akal adalah laksana penglihatan yang sehat dan tidak cacat. Sedangkan perumpamaan Al-Qur’an adalah seperti matahari yang cahayanya tersebar merata, hingga memberi kemudahan bagi para pencari petunjuk. Amatlah bodoh jika seseorang mengabaikan salah satunya. Orang yang menolak akal dan merasa cukup dengan petunjuk Al-Qur’an, seperti orang yang mencari cahaya matahari tapi memejamkan matanya. Maka orang ini tidak ada bedanya dengan orang buta. Akal bersama wahyu adalah cahaya di atas cahaya. Sedangkan orang yang memperhatikan pada salah satunya saja dengan mata sebelah (picak, red), niscaya akan terperdaya”.

Menistakan kemampuan dan peran kaum sunni dalam membangun peradaban Islam juga sangat a-historis. Kaum sunni telah terbukti dalam sejarah mampu mewujudkan peradaban Islam yang hebat. Yang membawa Islam ke berbagai pelosok dunia, termasuk ke wilayah Nusantara adalah kaum Sunni, bukan kaum Muktazilah. Karena itu, adalah berlebihan dan tidak beradab terlalu mudah mencaci maki kaum Sunni dan tokoh-tokohnya seperti Imam al-Ghazali, Imam al-Syafii, dan sebagainya. Sebagai gantinya, seperti kita baca dalam artikelnya, dosen UIN Malang ini pun akhirnya taklid buta pada tokoh-tokoh liberal seperti Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd dan Mohammed Arkoun.

Sebagai pengidap virus liberal, dosen semacam ini juga aktif menyebarkan virusnya, baik melalui pengajaran maupun tulisan. Sebagai salah satu kampus yang membawa nama Islam, seyogyanya UIN Malang juga peduli dengan virus-virus liberal yang merusak pemikiran mahasiswanya. Kita sebenarnya kasihan dengan dosen muda semacam ini. Pintar tapi keliru. Tapi, kita tahu, dia pun sebenarnya juga merupakan korban virus, yang mungkin tidak dia sadari. Kita juga kasihan kepada mahasiswanya. Belum jadi apa-apa nanti sudah rajin memaki-maki para ulama yang alim, shalih, begitu besar jasanya terhadap Islam.

Sebagai bagian dari umat Islam, kita wajib mengingatkan mereka. Mudah-mudahan pimpinan kampus UIN Malang mau peduli dengan masalah pemikiran semacam ini. Kita semua akan bertanggung jawab di hadapan Allah, kelak di Hari Kiamat. [Depok, 4 Rabiulakhir 1429 H/11 April 2008/www.hidayatullah.com]

Catatan Akhir Pekan [CAP] Adian Husaini adalah hasil kerjasama antara Radio Dakta 107 FM dan www.hidayatullah.com

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Ahmadiyah : Pelecehan Al-Qur’an, pembajakannya, dan penjajaan keyakinan kemusyrikannya

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

PELECEHAN TERHADAP KITAB SUCI AL QUR’AN DAN
NABI MUHAMMAD Shallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam
DALAM KITAB SUCI AHMADIYAH “TADZKIRAH”

1. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan beberapa potongan ayat berikut:

اِنَّآاَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِى لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami yang telah menurunkannya (Al-Qur’an) pada malam kemuliaan”. (Q.S. Al-Qadr: 1).

… وَبِالْحَقِّ أَنْزَلْنَاهُ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَلَ…

Artinya:
Dan kami turunkan (Al-Quran itu) dengan sebenar-benarnya dan (Al-Quran itu) telah turun dengan (membawa) kebenaran”. (Q.S. Al-Isra’ : 105)

…قَالُوْا هَذَا مَاوَعَدَنَا اللهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ وَصَدَقَ اللهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ…

Artinya :
Mereka berkata: Inilah yang dijanjikan Allah dan Rasul-Nya kepada kita, dan benarlah Allah dan Rasul-Nya”. (Q.S. Al-Ahzab : 22)

…وَكَانَ اَمْرُ اللهِ مَفْعُوْلاً

Artinya:
Dan ketetapan Allah pasti berlaku”. (Q.S. An-Nisa: 47)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, potongan ayat-ayat tersebut dirangkaikan dengan beberapa perubahan, dan disebutkan beberapa kali dengan redaksi yang berbeda, yaitu:

اِنَّآاَنْزَلْنَاهُ قَرِيْبًامِّنَ الْقَادِيَانِ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَّلْنَاهُ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَّلَ صَدَقَ اللهُ وَرَسُوْلُهُ وَكَانَ اَمْرُ اللهِ مَفْعُوْلاً

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami telah menurun-kannya (Tadzkirah) dekat Qadian dan dengan sebenarnya kami menurunkannya dan dengan sebenarnya telah turun. Maha Benar Allah dan Rasul-Nya dan ketetapan Allah pasti berlaku”.

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 74-75, 360, dan 367)

اِنَّآاَنْزَلْنَاهُ قَرِيْبًامِّنَ الْقَادِيَانِ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَّلْنَاهُ وَبِالْحَقِّ نَزَّلَ وَكَانَ اَمْرُ اللهِ مَفْعُوْلاً

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami telah menurun-kannya (Tadzkirah) dekat Qadian dan dengan sebenarnya kami menurunkannya dan dengan sebenarnya telah turun. Dan ketetapan Allah pasti berlaku”.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 275)

2. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan beberapa potongan ayat berikut:

اِنَّآاَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِى لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami yang telah menurunkannya (Al-Qur’an) pada malam kemuliaan”. (Q.S. Al-Qadr: 1).

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, ayat tersebut ditulis dengan penambahan, yaitu:

اِنَّا اَنْزَلْنَاهُ فِىْ لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ اِنَّا كُنَّا مُنْزِلِيْنَ

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami menurunkannya (Tadzkirah ini) pada malam Lailatul Qadar, sesungguhnya Kami benar-benar menurunkannya.”
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 569)

3. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan potongan ayat berikut:

وَ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ فِى رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَى عَبْدِنَا فَاْتُوْا بِسُوْرَةٍ مِّنْ مِّثْلِهِ

Artinya:
Dan jika kamu dalam keraguan tentang Al Qur’an yang Kami wahyukan kepada hamba Kami, buatlah satu surat yang semisal Al Qur’an itu.
(QS. Al Baqarah: 23)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, potongan ayat tersebut dirubah dan disebutkan beberapa kali dengan redaksi yang berbeda, yaitu:

وَاِنْ كُنْتُمْ فِى رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا فَاْتُوْا بِاَيَةٍ مِّنْ مِّثْلِهِ

Artinya:
Dan jika kamu dalam keraguan tentang apa yang telah Kami turunkan, maka buatlah satu ayat yang semisal dengannya.

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 798)

اِنْ كُنْتُمْ فِى رَيْبٍ مِمَّآ اَيَّدْنَا عَبْدَنَا فَاْتُوْا بِكِتَابٍ مِنْ مِثْلِهِ

Artinya:
Jika kamu dalam keraguan tentang apa yang telah Kami kuatkan kepada hamba Kami, maka buatlah satu kitab yang semisal dengannya.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 251)

4. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan ayat mengenai fungsi kerasulan Muhammad shallallhu ‘alaihi wasallam, yaitu:

وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلاَّ رَحْمَةً لِلْعَالَمِيْنَ

Artinya:
Dan tiadalah Kami mengutus kamu (Muhammad), melainkan untuk (menjadi) rahmat bagi semesta alam”. (QS. Al Anbiya’: 107)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, terdapat ayat buatan Mirza Ghulam Ahmad tentang kerasulannya, yaitu:

اِنَّا اَرْسَلْنَا اَحْمَدَ اِلَى قَوْمِهِ فَاَعْرَضُوْا وَقَالُوْا كَذَّابٌ أَشِرٌ

Artinya:
Sesungguhnya Kami mengutus Ahmad kepada kaumnya, akan tetapi mereka berpaling dan mereka berkata: seorang yang amat pendusta lagi sombong.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 375 dan 391)

5. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan ayat berikut:

قُلْ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ الله وَ يَغْفِرْلَكُمْ ُذنُوْبَكُمْ وَاللهُ غَفُوْرٌ رَّحِيْمٌ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Muhammad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah mengasihi dan mengampuni dosa-dosamu. Allah Maha Pengampun lagi Maha Penyayang”. (Q.S. Ali Imran: 31)

Ayat Al Qur’an yang ditujukan kepada Nabi Muhammad shallallhu ‘alaihi wasallam hanya disebutkan satu kali, sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah ayat yang ditujukan kepada Nabi Mirza Ghulam Ahmad disebutkan beberapa kali, sehingga ayat-ayat tersebut seolah-olah berebut pengaruh antara Nabi Muhammad shallallhu ‘alaihi wasallam dengan Nabi Mirza Ghulam Ahmad dari India. Ayat-ayat tentang Mirza Ghulam Ahmad diantaranya:

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu.”

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 46)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ

Artinya:

Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu.”

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 61)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ وَيَجْعَلْ لَّكُمْ نُوْرًا وَّيَجْعَلْ لَّكُمْ فُرْقَانًا وَّيَجْعَلْكُمْ مِّنَ الْمَنْصُوْرِيْنَ

Artinya:

Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu, dan memberikan kepadamu cahaya dan furqan, dan menjadikan kamu termasuk orang-orang yang diselamatkan.

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 218)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْ نِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ وَ يَغْفِرْلَكُمْ ذُ نُوْبَكُمْ وَ يَرْحَمْ عَلَيْكُمْ وَهُوَ اَرْحَمُ الرَّاحِمِيْنَ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah mengasihimu dan meng-ampuni dosa-dosamu dan mem-berikan rahmat kepadamu dan Dia Maha Penyayang diantara para penyayang.

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 221)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ وَقُلْ يَااَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اِنِّى رَسُوْلُ اللهِ اِلَيْكُمْ جَمِيْعًا اَىْ مُرْسَلٌ مِّنَ اللهِ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu – dan katakanlah: “Hai manusia sesungguhnya aku adalah utusan Allah kepadamu semua – yaitu sebagai orang yang diutus oleh Allah”.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 352)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 368)

قُلْ اِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّوْنَ اللهَ فَاتَّبِعُوْنِىْ يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللهُ

Artinya:
Katakanlah (wahai Ahmad): Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah akan mengasihimu.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 467)

6. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan ayat berikut:

… فَاجْعَلْ أَفْئِدَةً مِّنَ النَّاسِ تَهْوِىْ اِلَيْهِمْ …

…Maka jadikanlah hati sebagian manusia cenderung kepada mereka…” (QS. Ibrahim: 37)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, potongan ayat tersebut dirubah dan ditambahi, yaitu:

وَاجْعَلْ اَفْئِدَةً كَثِيْرَةً مِّنَ النَّاسِ تَهْوِىْ اِلَىَّ

Artinya:
Buatlah hati banyak orang cenderung kepadaku
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 776)

1. Dalam Tadzkirah juga banyak ayat-ayat yang merupakan buatan Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sendiri, diantaranya:

اَنْتَ مِنِّىْ وَاَناَ مِنْكَ

Artinya:
Kamu berasal dari-Ku dan Aku darimu.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 774)

وَضَعْنَا النَّاسَ تَحْتَ اَقْدَامِكَ

Artinya:
Kami menempatkan manusia berada dibawah kedua telapak kakimu.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 744)

اَنْتَ مِنِّىْ وَاَناَ مِنْكَ
ظُهُوْرُكَ ظُهُوْرِىْ

Artinya:
Kamu berasal dari-Ku dan Aku darimu.
Punggungmu adalah punggung-Ku

(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 704)

رَحِمَكَ اللهُ

اِنَّكَ اَنْتَ اْلاَعْلَى

Artinya:
Allah mengasihimu.
Sesungguhnya kamu adalah yang tertinggi
.”
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 693)

7. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan ayat berikut:

… وَآتَاكُمْ مَالَمْ يُؤْتِ اَحَدًا مِّنَ الْعَالَمِيْنَ.

Artinya:
… dan diberikan-Nya kepadamu apa yang belum pernah diberikan-Nya kepada seorangpun diantara umat-umat yang lain.” (QS. Al Maidah: 20)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, potongan ayat tersebut dirubah dan ditambahi, yaitu:

اَلْحَمْدُ ِللهِ الَّذِىْ اَذْهَبَ عَنِّى الْحَزَنَ وَآتَانِىْ مَالَمْ يُؤْتَ اَحَدٌ مِّنَ الْعَالَمِيْنَ

Artinya:
Segala puji bagi Allah Dzat Yang telah menghilangkan dariku kesedihan dan telah memberikan kepadaku apa yang tidak pernah Dia berikan kepada seorangpun di alam ini.
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 664)

8. Dalam Al Qur’an disebutkan ayat berikut:

أَفَلاَ يَتَدَبَّرُوْنَ الْقُرْآنَ وَلَوْكَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ غَيْرِ اللهِ لَوَجَدُوْا فِيْهِ اخْتِلاَفًا كَثِيْرًا

Artinya:
Maka apakah mereka tidak memperhatikan Al Qur’an? Kalau kiranya Al Qur’an itu bukan dari sisi Allah, tentulah mereka mendapat pertentangan yang banyak didalamnya.” (QS. An Nisa’: 82)

Sedangkan dalam Tadzkirah, ayat tersebut dipenggal dan dirubah, yaitu:

قُلْ اِنْ كَانَ مِنْ عِنْدِ غَيْرِ اللهِ لَوَجَدُوْا فِيْهِ اخْتِلاَفًا كَثِيْرًا

Artinya:
Katakanlah: kalau kiranya bukan dari sisi Allah, tentulah mereka mendapati pertentangan yang banyak di dalamnya.”
(Tadzkirah 1969 halaman 663)

PERIHAL WAHYU YANG MERUPAKAN BAJAKAN
DARI AL QUR’AN


Dalam Buku Suatu Tanggapan Benarkah Ahmadiyah Sesat?, terbitan Pedoman Besar Gerakan Ahmadiyah Indonesia (PB GAI), Yogyakarta, Agustus 2002, halaman 13 disebutkan:
“… Apakah wahyunya merupakan potongan-potongan Alqur’an atau bukan potongan Alqur’an, bukan urusan Mirza Ghulam Ahmad tetapi urusan Allah subhanahu wata’ala.!

TANGGAPAN AKHIR LPPI

Perilaku dusta yang amat keji seperti ini telah dijelaskan dalam Al Qur’an, yaitu ancaman bagi orang yang mengaku menerima wahyu dan menulis kitab dengan tangannya sendiri, kemudian dikatakannya dari Allah subhanahu wata’ala, serta merubah dan membajak wahyu Allah yang telah diturunkan kepada Rasul-Nya. Allah berfirman:

{مِنَ الَّذِيْنَ هَادُوْا يُحَرِّفُوْنَ الْكَلِمَ عَنْ مَّوَاضِعِهِ وَ يَقُوْلُوْنَ سَمِعْنَا وَعَصَيْنَا وَاسْمَعْ غَيْرَ مُسْمَعٍ …}

Artinya:
Yaitu orang-orang Yahudi, mereka merubah perkataan dari tempat-tempatnya. Mereka berkata: “Kami mendengar”, tetapi kami tidak mau menurutinya. Dan (mereka mengatakan pula): “Dengarlah” sedang kamu sebenarnya tidak mendengar apa-apa…” (QS. An Nisa’: 46)

{فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِمْ مِيْثَاقَهُمْ لَعَنَّاهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا قُلُوْبُهُمْ قَاسِيَةً يُحَرِّفُوْنَ الْكَلِمَ عَنْ مَّوَاضِعِهِ وَنَسُوْا حَظًّا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُوْا بِهِ…}

Artinya:
(Tetapi) karena mereka melanggar janjinya, Kami kutuk mereka, dan Kami jadikan hati mereka keras membatu. Mereka suka merubah perkataan (Allah) dari tempat-tempatnya, dan mereka (sengaja) melupakan sebagian dari apa yang mereka telah diperingatkan dengannya…” (QS. Al Maidah: 13)

{فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِيْنَ يَكْتُبُوْنَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيْهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُوْلُوْنَ هذَا مِنْ عِنْدِ اللهِ لِيَشْتَرُوْا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيْلاً فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُمْ مِمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيْهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُمْ مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُوْنَ}

Artinya:
Maka kecelakaan yang besarlah bagi orang-orang yang menulis Al Kitab dengan tangan mereka sendiri, lalu dikatakannya: “Ini dari Allah”, (dengan maksud) untuk memperoleh keuntungan yang sedikit dengan perbuatan itu. Maka kecelakaan yang besarlah bagi mereka, akibat dari apa yang ditulis oleh tangan mereka sendiri, dan kecelakaan yang besarlah bagi mereka, akibat dari apa yang mereka kerjakan.” (QS. Al Baqarah: 79).

(M Amin Djamaluddin –LPPI—Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengkajian Islam/ Hartono Ahmad Jaiz).

source: http://www.nahimunkar.com/?p=37#more-37

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

FW: Great news

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

From: gulam asif <gasifsamdani@hotmail.com>
Subject: [AhleSunnah] FW: Great news


Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008
> Subject: Fwd: FW: Great news
>
> DEAR ALL
> ASSALAMU ALAIKUM W R W B
> THE FLWG IS FOR YOUR INFO AND GUIDANCE.
> THANKS
>

>
> Great news
>———–

> Hope you all know about the Denmark newspaper who made fun upon our
> loving Prophet and till now they never regret… let us make them regret
> for all time…
>
> The Denmark ambassador, prime minister and Denmark channel they all
> try to do something just to stop the boycott made by Muslims last
> month, by which their losses has reached to 2 billion Euro. If we
> continue to boycott Denmark products after 7 months it could reach
> around 40 billion Euro’s destruction.
>
> Dear brothers, please spread the news to all your friends you know in
> order to rise up our spirit and warning Denmark and other hostile
> nations towards Islam, we Muslim are united and not easy to break
> against any one who think to harm or insult Almighty’s messenger peace
> be upon him.
>
> Believers do not let this message stop in your PC.
>
>
.

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Muslims demonized

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Muslims demonized

Calgary Herald
Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Re: “No stake for the witch hunt,” Editorial, April 12.

Instead of condemning the Ontario Human Rights Commission for criticizing Maclean’s, you should commend it for having the courage to state, “Freedom of expression should be exercised through responsible reporting and not used as a guise to target vulnerable groups and to further increase their marginalization or stigmatization in society.”

Despite the personal attacks I’m sure they saw coming, the commissioners expressed “serious concerns about the content of a number of articles concerning Muslims that have been published by Maclean’s magazine and other media outlets.”

Between January 2005 and July 2007, Maclean’s published a series of articles culminating in one by Mark Steyn that alleged Muslims were a threat to western civilization because we were breeding too rapidly. Then, the Western Standard blog carried a discussion on whether we should be forcibly converted, deported or killed.

Muslims have been your neighbours, quietly contributing to making Canada the envy of the world, for more than a century. Glib populist Islamophobia obviously sells books and magazines — and puts money into the pockets of men like Steyn — but when it’s based on the ravings of obscure Norwegian radical clerics whom few Canadians have heard of, it grossly misrepresents who we are. When it incites hatred, it’s hard to ignore.

It is also a gross misrepresentation to claim the Canadian Islamic Congress’s dispute with Maclean’s is anti-free-speech. Steyn can say what he likes about Canada’s Muslims, but wouldn’t it be useful to hear from people who know what they’re talking about, too?

David Liepert,

Calgary

David Liepert is spokesman for the Muslim Council of Calgary.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/letters/story.html?id=128416d2-1e7f-4a22-8cb6-5b65e2e990f8

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Terrorism : We wildly overestimate the risk of being a victim, says Dan Gardner …

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Terrorism : We wildly overestimate the risk of being a victim, says Dan Gardner …

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=26bcdab2-cd25-4396-b21d-5e7cfc4d9f51

Chris Cobb
The Ottawa Citizen
Sunday, April 13, 2008

Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear

By Dan Gardner

McClelland & Stewart,

Common sense isn’t so common anymore.

It has been suffocated by irrational fear, which in turn has been enthusiastically stoked white-hot by the profiteering fear industry, which has been aided and abetted by opportunistic politicians, gullible, lazy media and other leaders of public opinion who should know better.

That’s a rough sketch of Dan Gardner’s book Risk, an overdue rational

antidote to those of us who fear becoming a victim of the next terrorist attack, a fiery plane crash or some exotic killer disease.

And there are some sobering passages, too, for the new generation of “helicopter parents” who hover over their children, watching and organizing their every move, lest a pedophile or some other predator is lurking.

We’re afraid, very afraid, says Ottawa Citizen columnist Gardner, but our fear is invariably completely misplaced or way out of proportion.

On the subject of terrorism, Gardner cites a U.S. study that compared travel and fatality patterns for the five years before the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington to those between 2001-02.

It found that 1,595 road deaths were attributable to people shifting to travelling by car because of fear of flying in that immediate post-9/11 period — six times the number aboard the three doomed airplanes and a little more than half of the total 9/11 death toll.

Politicians and media, says Gardner, have distorted and inflated the terrorist threat to score political favour and pander to audiences.

On the subject of children and abduction by strangers, Gardner quotes statistics from Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom.

The statistics from all three countries tell pretty much the same story. Over two years from 2000-2001, the RCMP database reported that the stranger abductions in Canada — the definition included neighbours and friends of parents — numbered five. There was just one abduction by an actual stranger.

“There are roughly 2.9-million children aged 14 or younger in Canada,” writes Gardner, a father of two. “Thus the annual risk to one of those children is 1 in 5.8 million.”

Similar ratios apply in the United States where the risk of stranger abduction is 1 in 655,555.

The chance of a U.S. child drowning in a swimming pool, he notes, is 1 in 245,614, or two-and-a-half times greater than stranger abduction. In 2003, 2,408 U.S. children 14 and younger died in car crashes, making the probability of a child dying in a traffic accident 1 in 29,070. So a child is 26 times more likely to die in a car accident than be abducted by a stranger.

The point, says Gardner, is that few people consider the risk of driving with a child and even fewer are fearful of it. And it certainly isn’t the material of the hysterical fear-mongering news coverage that invariably greets cases of child abduction.

Why human beings allow common sense to give way to irrational fear is not totally understood. But Gardner began his research with a crash course in Cognitive Psychology 101, a branch of psychology that focuses on how people understand, diagnose and solve problems and how behaviour is affected by external appeals to the thought process. Marketers, advertising executives, political operatives and perhaps even terrorist masterminds, have a grasp of it.

It is, argues Gardner, a constant struggle between Mind and Gut.

Terrorism generates disproportionate fear, he says.

“Terrorism is vivid, violent, unjust and potentially catastrophic,” he writes. “It presses all Gut’s buttons. … But people are not slaves of their unconscious minds. They also have conscious minds that can overrule or at least modify their feelings. If, after the Sept. 11 attacks, President George Bush had loudly and repeatedly insisted that flying is safer than driving, even factoring in the risk of terrorism, and underscored the point by getting on a commercial jet himself, it wouldn’t have convinced everyone to ignore their jitters and return to the airports. But it would have got the media talking about risk and statistics, and a significant proportion of those who had switched from flying to driving would have realized it was foolish to do so and switched back. Lives would have been saved.”

Our current climate of fear is also expensive in direct and indirect ways, Gardner argues. Counter-terrorism (homeland security) spending in the U.S. last year was $58.3 billion, not including the astronomical cost of wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.

“If Iraq were included under the rubric of ‘fighting terrorism’ — as the White House has always insisted it should be — total counter-terrorist spending would soar.”

Security screening at airports, border crossings and ports is also costly — according to one study, cumulative half-hour delays at airports alone cost the U.S. economy $15 billion a year.

It’s money that could be better spent, Gardner argues, where risk is demonstrably higher — on eradicating economy-crippling malaria in developing countries or providing health insurance to the millions of Americans who have none.

“Unfortunately,” Gardner writes, “terrorism spending has never been subjected to a cost-benefit analysis. The risk of terrorism is certainly real and while the risk of catastrophic terrorism is much lower than it is commonly portrayed, it too is real. So there’s no question that substantial spending would be justified under a cost-benefit analysis. But it’s much harder to believe that the scale of current spending would stand up.”

But such things as airport screenings will meet a limit, Gardner predicted in an interview last week.

“Here’s my prediction,” he said. “There will be a plot where terrorists will attempt to smuggle explosives in assholes and vaginas. What are they (security) going to do then?”

Risk, which Gardner researched and wrote over seven months (“I would have liked five years,” he said) has received glowing reviews in Britain. It will be published in the United States with the amended title The Science of Fear and with Gardner’s full name Daniel on the cover. (It’s plain “Dan” elsewhere)

“I’m not quite sure why,” he laughed. “I guess Daniel sounds more authoritative.”

He isn’t sure whether the book’s admonishments will have any effect, but he does have hopes.

“I hope people begin examining their own decisions,” he said. “Stop and think. That’s what we all need to do.”

What Was Said

Tibor Fischer, writing in the Sunday Telegraph:

Gardner deftly points out that since 9/11 al-Qaeda hasn’t so much as broken wind in the U.S. He identifies the real terror of 9/11 as not so much the hijacking and crashing of passenger planes into offices, but the brutal message: we will do anything we can, pay any price, to kill as many of you as possible. This, according to Gardner, is not as terrifying as it first seems. His reasoning is well thought out. Israel, Gardner argues, has been the No. 1 target of left-wing and Muslim fanatics for decades, Muslim fanatics who have “enjoyed the sponsorship of Middle Eastern states — and yet Israel has never suffered an attack by terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction. This is a pretty strong indication that getting and using such weapons isn’t quite as easy as some would have us think.”

Rafael Behr, writing in the London Observer:

Gardner is forensic in his dissection of bogus claims in advertising and politics, just as he is lucid about the science explaining why they work. His chapters on the risk of being a victim of crime or terrorism provoke a peculiar mix of comfort and despair. It is heartening that the danger is slight; it’s unsettling how skewed our political system and consumer culture are towards convincing us of the opposite.

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Israel: 20 Questions Media Interviewers Fail to Ask

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Israel: 20 Questions Media Interviewers Fail to Ask

By Stuart Littlewood in London, UK

The abysmal performance of western TV and radio interviewers when dealing with issues surrounding Israel is not only embarrassing but a blot on the escutcheon of journalism.

Have the nation’s truth-seekers fallen under some wicked spell? Are their researchers on strike? Did somebody nobble the programme editors?

While we wait with mounting frustration for our broadcasters to get their act together, here are 20 simple questions the BBC and others seem anxious not to ask……

On Rockets and Sieges

(1) The numbers of home-made Qassam rockets launched at Israel are diligently counted and quoted, but how many sophisticated munitions have Israel’s F-16s, helicopter gun-ships, armed drones, tanks, occupation troops and navy patrol boats fired into the crowded humanity that packs the Gaza Strip? We are never told.

(2) Why should we believe the claim that the siege of Gaza is about rockets “raining down” on Sderot? Palestinians in the West Bank don’t fire rockets yet the Israelis are still in occupation after 40 years, still stealing their land and water, and now dumping their toxic waste there.

(3) Israelis say that if the rockets stop, things will be OK…. Does that mean Gaza will be able to trade freely with the outside world like any other country, and people will be able to come and go freely? Will you and I be able to visit Gaza without Israeli hindrance?

On the Collective Punishment of Gazans

(4) Why can’t Gaza’s 3,000 licensed fishermen put to sea and earn their living without being harassed and fired on? What is the status of Palestinian territorial waters under international law? Why are half the hospitals’ dialysis machines out of action and the chronically sick dying in agony for want of proper medication?

(5) Which parts of the Declaration of Human Rights and Geneva Conventions don’t Israelis understand?

On the War on Christianity

(6) Israelis use ‘administrative’ controls to disrupt the life and work of the Christian Church in the Holy Land. No Muslim or Palestinian Christian living outside Jerusalem is allowed to visit the Holy Places in the Old City without special permission. Christian priests, many of whom are Jordanian, cannot go home to see their families because Israel’s new visa policy would prevent them returning to their parishes. The Catholic priest in Gaza has been trapped there for 9 years knowing that if he visits his folks the Israelis won’t allow him back into the Strip. “We seek a life of freedom—a life different from the life of dogs we are currently forced to live,” he says. What should be our response to attempts by Israel to paralyse the Church?

(7) Is it not shameful that our elected politicians, who are mostly Christian themselves, show so little concern? Is it not doubly shameful how the leaders of western Christendom seem oblivious to the Israeli government’s war against Christian communities? Beware those pseudo-Christians in high places, who talk the talk but won’t walk the walk. How many top brass have visited Gaza to show solidarity with the flock? At the present rate there will soon be no Christians left in the place where Christianity began, and churchmen will wake up one morning to find the Holy Land, from which their whole power and purpose are derived, stolen from under their noses.

On Illegal Settlements

(8) Israel has expropriated agricultural land and key water resources in the Palestinian West Bank for its own use. More than 38% of the territory now consists of Israeli settlements, outposts, military bases and closed military areas, Israeli-declared nature reserves or other infrastructure that’s off-limits to Palestinians. Jews-only highways linking settlements to Israel, and the 580 checkpoints and roadblocks, have fragmented Palestinian communities, blocked access to their lands and severely restricted movement. How can this be right?

(9) The freezing and dismantling of Israeli settlements are a cornerstone of major peace initiatives. The most recent, the Quartet’s 2003 ‘roadmap’ endorsed by the UN Security Council, is perfectly clear on the question of illegal settlements. Israel is under an obligation to….

a) immediately dismantle settlement outposts erected since March 2001,
b) freeze all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements) consistent with the Mitchell Report,
c) take “no actions undermining trust, including confiscation and/or demolition of Palestinian homes and property”.

Why have none of these obligations been met?

(10) A year ago the General Assembly reaffirmed that Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, “are illegal and an obstacle to peace” and demanded “the immediate and complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities”. Why is Israel still stealing Palestinian land for more illegal construction? By vowing to press ahead with settlement building, Israel’s prime minister Olmert again signals contempt for international law and world opinion… further proof (if ever it were needed) that Israel isn’t interested in peace.

On the Evil of the Wall

(11) In 2004 the International Court of Justice, sitting at the request of the UN General Assembly, concluded that the route chosen for the Separation Wall “gives expression in loco to the illegal measures taken by Israel with regard to Jerusalem and the settlements”. The ICJ ruled the Wall illegal and declared that it should be dismantled where it encroaches onto Palestinian land. Why hasn’t this been done? Why is Israel still building it? If Israelis feel a wall is necessary for security reasons why don’t they build one on their own territory?

On House Demolitions and the Right of Return

(12) In 1948 the newly established state of Israel began demolishing the homes of Palestinian refugees to prevent their return. More than 125,000 houses were systematically destroyed. Since 1967, 18,000 more have been demolished, making another 100,000 Palestinians homeless. Demolishing homes is a deliberate Israeli strategy to inflict collective punishment and break the Palestinians’ will to resist the occupation; to achieve a silent ethnic transfer; and to ensure that Israel’s control of the Occupied Territories and their resources becomes permanent. Apart from the fact that these acts breach every rule in the book, every convention and every declaration governing civilised conduct, how would the Israelis like it if they were the victims?

(13) Why can any Jew from anywhere in the world, who has never before lived in Israel and whose ancestors have never lived in Israel, go and live in Israel – or ‘squat’ in an illegal outpost in Palestine with Israel’s blessing – while Palestinians who can prove title to their former houses may not?

On Imprisonment

(14) Nearly 10,000 Palestinians, including women and children, have been abducted and languish in Israeli prisons, many without charge or trial. 30+ Palestinian parliamentarians, democratically elected, are also imprisoned. What civilised country would do this?

On Ethnic Cleansing

(15) The ethnic cleansing of Palestine, begun in the months before and after the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, is still going on in and around Jerusalem and in Gaza. Israel’s Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger argues for an ethnic cleansing programme to transfer Gazans out and dump them in the Sinai desert. Haaretz reports that he wants Britain, the EU and the US to assist in the construction of a Palestinian state in the middle of nowhere. “They will have a nice country, and we, the Jews, shall have our country and we shall live in peace.” This leading advocate of ethnic cleansing says Muslims should recognize that “our land is the Holy Land and Jerusalem belongs to us”. Do we in Britain wish to associate with people who hold such views?

On Terror

(16) Since the land occupied by Israel was taken by terrorist means, employing gangs such as the one that blew up the British mandate government in the King David Hotel in 1946 killing 90, by what moral yardstick do British and other western leaders ‘do business’ with the Israeli Government but not with Palestine’s democratically elected Hamas leadership?

(17) Remembering that most Israeli prime ministers have been responsible for authorising war crimes against the Palestinian people, why are the words ‘terrorist’, ‘militant’ and ‘extremist’ applied only to Palestinians? They fit successive Israeli governments like a glove, and given Israel’s lawless and inhuman conduct in Palestine and Lebanon, which has outraged world opinion, why isn’t it branded a terrorist state?

On Our (Uncritical) Support

(18) For decades Occupied Palestine has received British and European aid. If Palestinians had been left in peace, free to trade and develop in the normal way, there would no need for aid. In effect British and EU taxpayers are subsidising Israel’s illegal occupation and the economic strangulation it imposes. Why should we think this acceptable and continue to pick up the tab?

(19) Why is there such strong support for Israel at the heart of British government? Why have so many MPs and MEPs allowed themselves to be drawn into the ‘Friends of Israel’ web? How can supposedly bright people with information at their fingertips still be ignorant of Israel’s apartheid practices, wholesale land thefts, careless slaughter of children and other atrocities? Can we take it that they approve of the slow genocide inflicted on defenceless civilians, the middle-of-the-night snatch squads, the house demolitions, the torture and assassinations, and the crushing of Christian and Muslim communities? Is it not foolish and insulting for them to claim we share Israel’s beliefs and values, and should even share foreign policy? A well-respected Jewish MP recently called the Israeli government “a gang of amoral thugs”. Isn’t that about right?

On the Two-State Solution

(20) Israel and friends are pushing for a two-state solution… eventually, when it suits them and their land grab is complete. To warped minds this will give the racist regime and its supremacist ideals some kind of seal of approval. By that time the shrunken and shredded remnants of Palestine will have become a permanently impoverished and ghettoized mini-state, trashed and raped of its resources, traumatised, subservient, easy to control and never capable of prospering. Israel’s scheming allies, who include western governments (though not western peoples), go along with this grubby plan. Can someone please explain why we, the citizens of a Christian democracy once mandated with responsibility for Palestine’s future wellbeing, would wish to soil our hands with it? The ethical choice, surely, is a single state with Jews living alongside their Arab neighbours as equal citizens and sharing the land within a common legal and democratic framework. That, after all, was the original intention, and the developments of the last 60 years are a gross perversion and betrayal. Only the Palestinians themselves have had the courage to resist it.

When the Day of Reckoning comes to the Middle East – and engulfs the meddlesome West – much of the blame will rest squarely on the lack of journalistic rigour here and in the US, which has allowed a delinquent political élite to work their evil too long.

-Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. For further information please visit www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk

If you like this article, please consider making a contribution to the Palestine Chronicle.

source: http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=13642

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Swiss Asked (very politely) US Jewish group to F-ck off!

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Swiss Asked (very politely) US Jewish group to F-ck off!


by Stephanie Nebehay – Reuters

Global Research, April 8, 2008

GENEVA, April 8 (Reuters) – Switzerland rejected accusations on Tuesday by the U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League (ADL) that it could be financing terrorism after a Swiss company clinched a multi-billion euro (dollar) deal to buy natural gas from Iran.

The Swiss Foreign Ministry reiterated that the purchase did not violate U.N. Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme or U.S. domestic law.

The American Jewish group’s full-page advertisement — which follows a complaint lodged by Israel with Switzerland over the deal — appeared on Tuesday in newspapers under the banner “Guess who is the world’s newest financier of terrorism? SWITZERLAND”.

“The reproaches in this advertisement do not correspond to the facts,” Swiss Foreign Ministry spokesman Lars Knuchel said.

The ad — which ran in the International Herald Tribune, the leading Swiss financial daily Neue Zuercher Zeitung and Geneva daily Le Temps — said the deal’s “likely result” was Hamas and Hezbollah “may get tens of thousands of additional missiles”.

Both Hezbollah, the Shi’ite Muslim movement in Lebanon, and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas which seized control of the Gaza Strip last year, are pro-Iranian parties.

U.S. President George W. Bush has accused Shi’ite Muslim Iran of being “the world’s leading state sponsor of terror” and of undermining peace by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas.

The United States has led international efforts to penalise Iran for failing to allay suspicions that it is seeking nuclear weapons and has been urging other countries to cut trade ties.

The ad said that the contract, signed during a Tehran visit last month by Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey, would enable Iran to accelerate and complete its nuclear programme.

“Terrorist cells in Europe, the Middle East and around the globe will have access to new weapons and support,” it said. “When you finance a terrorist state, you finance terrorism.”

The Swiss energy group Elektrizitaetsgesellschaft Laufenburg (EGL) has said its 25-year deal with the National Iranian Gas Export Company was worth between 10 billion euros ($15.73 billion) and 22 billion euros, depending on several factors such as the price of oil.

Calmy-Rey, whose neutral country has worked in the past to find a compromise in the nuclear row, said in Tehran that the deal was important in the long term for both parties.

“This business transaction between the EGL and NIGEC is fully in line with the U.N. sanctions against Iran as well as with the U.S. Iranian Sanctions Act,” Knuchel said on Tuesday.

Asked whether the deal might jeopardise neutral Switzerland’s role in handling U.S. interests in Iran, as it has done since the 1979 revolution, he said a State Department spokesman had said last week there was no change in U.S. policy.

The Swiss foreign ministry also pointed out that other powers including the European Union (EU), China and Japan were doing business with the Islamic Republic. (Editing by Jonathan Lynn and Charles Dick)

Global Research Articles by Stephanie Nebehay

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8609

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Five Years on : Your Rightful Concern for Dharfur : What About Iraq and Palestine?

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

An Open Letter to the Leader of the Liberal Democrats
Five Years on : Your Rightful Concern for Dharfur : What About Iraq and Palestine?

Felicity Arbuthnot
iraqi-pal-children.jpg

April 13, 2008

Mr Nick Clegg,
Leader of the Liberal Democrats,
Houses of Parliament,
London SW1A OAA.
Dear Mr Clegg,
Re: Dharfur.

In your appeal for Dharfur (attached below) you write:

‘In Sudan, every one of those 1800 days that has passed has been the same: fear, hunger, and suffering. There are children, now of school age, who have known nothing but the life of a refugee.’

You request that Gordon Brown pressure China, in this Olympic year, over its role in Dharfur. Strange that no such request is made that he pressure the United States, murderously backing the Ethiopian troops and as ever, providing lethal weaponry where ever possibility of a lucrative contract floats past.
Odd that you are not pressurising Mr Brown for children who have been enduring: ‘fear, hunger and suffering’, with the UK being co-partner in crime with the United States for seventeen years. The children of Iraq. They were dying at an average of six thousand children a month for many years before the invasion, of ’embargo related causes’. Not Saddam related, EMBARGO related, the United Nation’s own words in their Reports. They are now terrified, traumatised and dying for ‘liberation’ (actually, a war of agression, Nuremberg’s ‘supreme international crime’) in orders of magnitude more. It is five years since the beginning of Dharfur’s suffering you rightly point out. It is five years since the further ceaseless, dementia-inducing terror has been unleashed on the people, the children, of Iraq.

What of the children of Palestine? Sixty years of their ‘fear, hunger and suffering’. The 132nd victim of the current illegal siege of Gaza has just died for want of medicine. A victim too young to even to know he was dying because he was Palestinian – or that he was a Palestinian.

I take it, that your concern for humanity will thus lead to your voicing your concerns equally over these shameful stains of enormity on Britain and America and that, you will, of course be boycotting Israel’s sixtieth birthday bash and asking Mr Brown to pressure Israel for this disgrace in Palestine and to publicly, loudly and ceaselessly also pressure America and move heaven and earth to demand an immediate end to both these silent genocides. Actually, sixty years of Palestine and seventeen years of Iraq, amount to a holocaust, or is there only one of those which can shock the world and be annually commemorated?
You are today, speaking at a rally outside the Sudanese Embassy, you state. Can it be taken that you will, as a matter of urgency and anniversaries, you will also be speaking outside the Israeli and American Embassies?

Oh and when you are in touch with Prime Minister Brown on these matters, please also remind him that in the light of the above, he looks pretty foolish telling Mr Mugabe that the world is ‘losing patience’ with him, or indeed telling China to brush up on human rights.People and glass houses come to mind.

Please also remind him of something I know is close to his heart. Cystic Fibrosis. Three babies are in danger of dying in Gaza, for need of treatment in Israel for this condition, one he will definately relate to and a situation he will surely be shocked by, since his young son, sadly, suffers from the same condition. Israel has refused treatment, in scrupulous violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

I note on your appeal one can now join the Liberal Democrats for a cut price offer of £10.00 per annum. The greatest inducement the Lib Dems could offer would be the serious addressing of our part in human rights violations and that of our ally the United States, as outlined above.

Then those who rise a little earlier in the morning that Ms Lumley and Mr Speight and Ms Farrow, might take your party more seriously.
Oh yes and five years ago, whilst we were, as you point out: ‘scrapping Concord’, there should have been a note in your 2003 diary, that we were also ‘scrapping’ Iraq.

Yours sincerely,
Felicity Arbuthnot.

Attached, Mr Clegg’s Letter:

Nick Clegg – Liberal Democrats wrote:

Think back to 13 April 2003. Five years ago. British Airways had just announced it was scrapping Concorde. We were all of us getting on quietly with our lives. And in Sudan, millions of lives were beginning to be torn apart.

In Sudan, every one of those 1800 days that has passed has been the same: fear, hunger, and suffering. There are children, now of school age, who have known nothing but the life of a refugee.

This must end. We must focus the world’s attention on Darfur and end this crisis. That’s why today I’m speaking at a rally, outside the Sudanese Embassy, to call for concerted international action.

The peacekeepers on the ground are struggling against impossible odds. The peace-keeping mission needs to be fully deployed – there are only 9,000 on the ground so far. And they need backup, especially helicopter and air support – and we must get it for them.

Sudan’s closest allies – especially China – must also put pressure Khartoum for peace. Instead of facing this way and that on the Olympics, unsure of whether he can say boo to China or not, Gordon Brown must take a strong stand. He must use the year of the Olympics to speak out about China’s role in Darfur and persuade them to change. And he must not attend any more of the ceremonies associated with the Games. His decision to attend the closing ceremony but not the opening one is the worst kind of compromise.
Today, thanks to protests marking the fifth anniversary of the conflict the eyes of the world are on Sudan. Make your voice heard, too. Because if we keep campaigning, keep protesting, the international community will relent and we will secure peace. You can find out more about the global protests taking place today at www.globefordarfur.org
Best wishes,

Leader of the Liberal Democrats

Nick Clegg MP

source : http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m43026&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

ABC: BUSH Says He APPROVED TORTURE. What About SEXUAL Torture?

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

ABC: BUSH Says He APPROVED TORTURE. What About SEXUAL Torture?

Troutfishing, Daily Kos
12bush_torture78.jpg

April 12, 2008

Fri Apr 11, 2008 at 04:21:15 PM PDT

A Friday ABC interview confirms: Bush “approved” of the torture techniques ABC’s Wednesday story detailed. But ABC fails to mention even more severe torture techniques that were implemented by Don Rumsfeld and Stephen Cambone – did George W. Bush give Rumsfeld the authority to implement what became known as “Copper Green” ?

Did George Bush sign an NSC document authorizing sexual torture methods, then delegate to Rumsfeld authority to implement those sex-torture methods ?

That’s the real question, this new ABC story is only the prologue…

ABC news has developed a new component of the torture story almost in perfect sync with my Thursday post on torture which stressed that because Bush is head, as president, of the National Security Council, of course he would have known of the overall gist of the “NSC Principals” White House meetings on torture policy because, regardless of whether Bush sat in on all meetings or not, all major NSC decisions and policy formulations have go to Bush’s desk for final approval, his signature. Bush is, indeed the “decider”

Once again, ABC News has pushed the White House torture program scandal further along and once again the story is embedded in a false frame.

And, the techniques discussed by Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Powell, Rice and Ashcroft were not the worst of the torture techniques in question. ABC’s story discussed on level of torture severity but there was another level expressed through a secret program implemented by Don Rumsfeld and his operative Stephen Cambone: “Copper Green”. That program resulted in, as After Downing Street details, child rape.

So here’s the REAL question ABC’s story fails to confront and which was raised almost four years ago in the New Yorker by Sy Hersh’s may 15, 2004 story “The Gray Zone” : Did George W. Bush delegate authority to Rumsfeld to implement a second, even more severe torture regime ?

Did George W. Bush delegate to Donald Rumsfeld the authority to implement psycho-sexual torture at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere ?

As Sy Hersh’s story described:

The roots of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists but in a decision, approved last year by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, to expand a highly secret operation, which had been focussed on the hunt for Al Qaeda, to the interrogation of prisoners in Iraq. Rumsfeld’s decision embittered the American intelligence community, damaged the effectiveness of élite combat units, and hurt America’s prospects in the war on terror.

According to interviews with several past and present American intelligence officials, the Pentagon’s operation, known inside the intelligence community by several code words, including Copper Green, encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in an effort to generate more intelligence about the growing insurgency in Iraq. A senior C.I.A. official, in confirming the details of this account last week, said that the operation stemmed from Rumsfeld’s long-standing desire to wrest control of America’s clandestine and paramilitary operations from the C.I.A.

In the March 2008 edition of Vanity Fair, in a story titled The Green Light, Philippe Sands lays out a very similar groundwork, and if George W. Bush is not directly implicated let me say this – I know of no major media publication in America that has, so far, run that charge up the flagpole. As Sands writes:

“The Bush administration has always taken refuge behind a “trickle up” explanation: that is, the decision was generated by military commanders and interrogators on the ground. This explanation is false. The origins lie in actions taken at the very highest levels of the administration”

ABC’s team, Jan Crawford Greenberg, Howard L. Rosenberg and Ariane de Vogue, landed an exclusive interview with president George W. Bush, who seemed unperturbed and unrepentant about the torture program he had ultimately spawned. The story breaks little ground, past details revealed last Wednesday by ABC, except to make crystal clear the fact that George W. Bush “approved” of torture methods prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.

The ABC story byline is in itself misleading:

“President says he knew his senior advisors approved tough interrogation methods.”

Actually, Bush is head of the NSC – so, he didn’t merely “approve” the torture methods in the sense of “condoning” them. In this case “approval” meant that Bush put pen to paper and signed an NSC document authorizing the torture methods that the NSC “Principals” had hashed out. Then, Bush would have delegated authority to Rumnsfeld, Rice and whomever else to implement the torture policy.

But, that’s misleading and, furthermore, we need to consider the obvious question of why Bush granted ABC the interview in the first place. Maybe the intent is to downplay the story and held defuse the issue. The Friday release of this certain lends support to that hypothesis.

Here’s the core of ABC’s new break:

“Well, we started to connect the dots, in order to protect the American people.” Bush told ABC New s White House correspondent Martha Raddatz. “And, yes, I’m aware our national security team met on this issue. And I approved.”

As first reported by ABC News on Wednesday, the most senior Bush administration officials repeatedly discussed and approved specific details of exactly how high-value al Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the Central Intelligence Agency.

The high-level discussions about these “enhanced interrogation techniques” were so detailed, these sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed – down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic.

These top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top al Qaeda suspects – whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding, sources told ABC news.

The advisers were members of the National Security Council’s Principals Committee, a select group of senior officials who met frequently to advise President Bush on issues of national security policy.

At the time, the Principals Committee included Vice President Cheney, former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

None of this should be surprising for anyone who read my Thursday post; of course Bush knew about the torture meetings – he signed off on the policy the NSC “Principals” devised.

But, this is just the outer layer of the mystery. There’s another circle of hell we have yet to penetrate.

That concerns the possibility that waterboarding and the “enhanced” techniques to come out of the NSC “Principals” meetings, which George W. Bush would have signed off on, were not the worst of the torture policies to emerge from the White House.

As the counter-insurgency began to evolve in Iraq, torture methods were ramped up yet farther, and that second wave of torture methods produced the atrocities so horribly depicted in the Abu Ghraib material, images (and video), much of which has yet to come to light.

Did Bush sign off on THAT ?

Below – the excellent Jonathan Turley lays it out, on Countdown.

On Countdown last night, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley emphasized that there was a torture program and that it was authorized “AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL”.

Turley said, about the “NSC Principals Committee” that discussed torture at a grotesquely specific level of detail, “this is like a meeting of the badda bing club”.

Turley stated, bluntly,”This was a torture program… and it goes right to the President’s desk.

But Turley went even further than that:

Olberman: You said it goes to president Bush’s desk here… Is it the smoking gun that president Bush authorized torture by the United States of America ?”

Turley: “We really don’t have much of a question about the president’s role here. He’s never denied that he was fully informed of these measures. He in fact, early on in his presidency, he seemed to brag that they were using harsh and tough methods. And I don’t think there’s any doubt that he was aware of this. The only doubt is simply whether anybody cares enough to do something about it.”

That’s exactly what Valtin and buhdydharma ask:

RESOURCES:

An extensive torture timeline, courtesy of the Cooperative Research Commons

A deep history of psychological torture techniques, courtesy of dKos member Valtin

Torture is wrong & it doesn’t work, says interrogation expert.

Here’s where the Bush Adm. torture program led, as described by Physicians For Human Rights:

The 135-page report, Break Them Down: Systematic Use of Psychological Torture by US Forces , by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR),is the first comprehensive review of the use of psychological torture by US forces. The report also examines the devastating health consequences of psychological coercion and explains how a regime of psychological torture was put into place in the US “war on terror.”

“What the now infamous images from Abu Ghraib do not show is that psychological torture has been at the center of treatment and interrogation of detainees,” said Leonard Rubenstein, PHR’s Executive Director. “The Bush Administration decided to ‘take the gloves off’ in interrogations and ‘break’ prisoners.”

Techniques of psychological torture used have included sensory deprivation, isolation, sleep deprivation, forced nudity, the use of military working dogs to instill fear, cultural and sexual humiliation, mock executions, and the threat of violence or death toward detainees or their loved ones. A source familiar with conditions at Guantánamo told PHR that deprivation of sensory stimulation and over-stimulation led to self-harm and suicide attempts.

source: http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m43003&hd=&size=1&l=e

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Notes from the Iraqi Resistance…

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Notes from the Iraqi Resistance…

By: Layla Anwar on: 13.04.2008

Article image

This post is a transcript of the interview with M.Al-Shammari,(head of the Islamic Army of Iraq/IAI) aired on Al-Jazeerah on the 9th of April 2008, an interview conducted by Ahmad Mansour.

M.Al-Shammari replies and comments are in Italics. IAI is ONE faction of the Iraqi Resistance(IR).
I have tried regrouping his replies under headings to simplify it for the reader.Please do remember that this a transcript from hand written notes.

1) Words of Introduction by Al-Shammari – in response to a question re.the surge and the IR.

Petraeus did not make any progress in Iraq. This is nothing but another lie in the series of lies started by Bush with his WMD’s. There is no progress.

The Resistance has not changed its strategy which is the end of the occupation. Petraeus alleged that the attacks are down by 60% when 2007 was the year that witnessed the highest rate of attacks.
The Resistance did change its tactics but not its strategy. The Americans are desperate for some calm before the November elections, but the Resistance will decide when to implement an upsurge in its attacks against the occupier, maybe during certain “crucial moments” but this is up to the Resistance to decide when and how. As I said, there is a change of tactics but not of strategy.

2) What about the “drop” in the IR attacks ?

What looks like a current “drop” is not a weakness. We are a realist/pragmatic movement. There have been changes in the Iraqi political scene, namely Al-Qaeda, the Sahwa and the sectarian Shiite militias and we adapt accordingly. There have been many attempt to “purify” the Resistance by the occupiers and others…
So, no, we did not dissolve or dilute, either against Al-Qaeda or the sectarian Shiite Militias.
In fact the Americans by backing the sectarian Shiite militias wanted just that, to weaken us. Remember that we are facing a dual occupation, we’ve said in the past and we repeat it again, a dual occupation by the US and Iran.

3) On Sectarianism.

a) You have been accused of Sunni Sectarianism, what do you have to say to that?

The IR protected Shiites in many areas from their own death squads. The IR has condemned and condemns attacks on civilians, we do not blow up markets filled with innocent lives. This is a propaganda tactic by the occupier to discredit us. Suicide bombings against Iraqi civilians, beheadings, car bombs and the rest are all the work of the Occupation, the mercenaries, the Mossad, the Iranian militias and its sectarian squads. On many occasions, cars have been stopped at checkpoints only to find out that during their search they (US forces and militias) have planted bombs in them without the car owner’s knowledge.

The IR does not do such things. We need the Iraqi people, all of the Iraqi people, it is from them that we draw force and support, how can we target them ? We are a Resistance movement against the Occupation (both American and Iranian) not against the Iraqi people. We need our people. How can we kill our own people ?

The sectarian parties and militias backed by Iran and the US started the sectarian and civil war. We do not blame the Shias but the parties and the militias who are totally bought by Iran and who managed to co-opt some of the Iraqi Arab Shiites to their side. A good number of Arab shias are aware of that, and a number of Shia tribes in the South have spoken out against the Iranian influence and we have contact with them and encourage them. They reject these militias and the Iranian influence. Leaders of these sectarian Shiite parties and their religious representatives terrorize the Shias, by calling them “Kafirs” (disbelievers) if they don’t follow such and such party or militia…

Our theological differences with Shiism can be resolved through discussion, we are not anti-Shiism. We are anti sectarian Shiite parties and militias who are supported by Iran.

Our program is the liberation of ALL Iraqis and Iraq from the Occupation. We are not here to liberate Sunnis alone. Ours was never a Sunni program alone. We do not follow such sectarian thinking.

Had Sunnis been sectarian, then historically, during the Abbassid, Ummayad and Ottoman eras (eras of Sunni rule) the Sunnis would have wiped out all other sects, including the Shias, but that has evidently not been the case. Our stand is for the Islamic Umma not for the Sunni sect. We defend the whole of Iraq not just the Sunnis.

b) But the Resistance is nonetheless majority Sunni, and stayed Sunni, has it not ?

The Iraqi Resistance is majority Sunni by default. The U.S. is the one who brought the sectarian Shiite parties and militias when it invaded and occupied. And they were/are backed by Iran. The Marjaiya (Shiite theological council) backed these parties and militias. The U.S is the one who brought the division of Iraq into sects and ethnicities. Arabs – Sunnis and Shiites, and Kurds. The Americans in yet another lie, said that Sunni represent only 20% of the Iraqi population, when in fact the Arab Sunnis represented 43% of the population and with the Kurds (who are majority Sunni), they add up to 55% of the Iraqi population. Hence their logic was/is, since Sunnis are such a minority, they really don’t count much in the “democratic process” being a negligible portion, hence Federalism/Partition is a viable option. And in Iraq, Federalism means Partition.

4) On Al-Qaeda and the Sahwa (Awakening Council)

Bush spoke of the Sunni intifada against Al-Qaeda through the Sahwa. What is the influence/role of the Sahwa on the Iraqi Resistance ?

There are s five types of Sahwa members.

– Some are paid allies of the Americans (sell outs) and are working for them.
– Others have joined because they have been without income and have been unemployed for many years and that was one of the American tactics
– Others realized that Iran had a full grip over the sectarian militias and that they posed the most immediate threat after all the sectarian cleansing that took place.
– some are just financial opportunist
– some as a reaction to the works of Al-Qaeda.

But a good deal of those who joined the Sahwa are realizing that their true interests lie with the Resistance and many have backtracked and left the Sahwa. And we are a pragmatic movement, and we realize that the Sahwa is also due to the works of Al-Qaeda. Moreover, the Sunnis have been targets for the US forces, the AQ and the sectarian government and its militias.

With Al-Qaeda, we’ve had conflict and clashes. Their hidden strategy of targeting our mosques, academics, markets, civilians, and ex-army officers who fought against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war– raised many questions and as to what their hidden agenda is.

Furthermore their “takfeeree”(accusing someone of being an unbeliever) program for both Sunnis and Shiites was unacceptable to us. They managed to cause a split within the Sunnis and this makes us doubt their intentions. They even targeted our own Resistance fighters. Our policy is not to directly fight them but we will defend ourselves against any of their attacks and we pray that they be guided to the right path and cease their hostilities. The latest Bin Laden message had in fact a negative impact. Our differences with AQ are not political, but IDEOLOGICAL.

5) On Muqtada Al-Sadr.

The latest events in Basra with the Mahdi resistance fighters . Do you consider this Shia resistance rising along the same path as your Resistance ? Are they anti Maliki and anti-Occupation?

In the very beginning when Muqtada Al-Sadr in 2004 in Nejaf, was fighting the occupation, we welcomed him and encouraged him, until, the men (within his army) who fought the occupation were liquidated one by one and Muqtada and his men were co-opted by Iran…

We consider the Mahdi Army one of the worst militias, responsible for a lot of the sectarian cleansing that took place.

In fact, Muqtada and his men voted for Al-Maliki, and have been engaged in the political process for over 5 years now, is it now that they remembered the occupation and the resistance, after 5 years ?

Sadr’s conflict with Maliki and the Badr Brigades is over the provincial elections and who controls the resources (oil)

If Muqtada Al-Sadr wants to be part of the Resistance, he needs to DESIST and stop displacing and exiling Iraqis, he needs to stop burning mosques and engaging in sectarian cleansing, which he has not stopped doing till this day…

6) On Maliki’s “government” and Iran.

We do not recognize this puppet government issued from the occupation and we don’t deal with it. The Maliki government is overtly pro-American and covertly pro-Iran. Hence Ahmadinejad’s visit to Iraq was no surprise to us. We have said it before and will repeat it, this is a dual occupation (American-Iranian).

There is an imperial convergence of interests between Iran and the US in Iraq and in Afghanistan. There is an Iranian imperialist design under the American imperialist design.

Iran opportunistically used its geographical proximity and its religious influence over the Shiites of Iraq to fulfill its imperialistic project – that of occupying Iraq. Iran in 8 years of war did not manage to secure anything in Iraq, but under the American banner it managed to achieve what it could not achieve in 8 years of bloody war.
The real victor in Iraq is Iran. Iran is after all a neighbor.

– When the axis of Evil welcomes the Great Satan and there has been 4 rounds of talks between the US and Iran what does that mean ?

As I said, there is a convergence of interests between the US and Iran, in their imperialist designs in Iraq (and Afghanistan). Inside of Iraq, Iran and the US are Muta’a partners (temporary marriage) and outside of Iraq there is a cold war going on between them. We don’t know how long this Muta’a marriage will last in Iraq, maybe they will turn it into an American civil marriage.

Iran has occupied Iraq and has helped the U.S occupation. Iran’s interests in Iraq are not just strategic but they also derive from greed. We all know the tactics of “taqiya” (dissimulation)and Maliki is serving both. It is in the interest of Iran not to have any form of stability in Iraq. The US and Iran are only fighting on who will get the bigger share of the cake.

– But Iran offered to pay 1 billion dollars for the reconstruction of Baghdad.

We don’t need nor want Iran’s money and contribution. We are against ALL occupation. Iranian or American.

7) On the Arab Countries’ role

The Arabs by falling under the American hegemony have allowed Iran’s influence to extend to the Gulf. The Arab countries have left Iraq to herself and forgot about their own Arab interests and submitted to Americans interests instead.
The Iraqi Resistance has a 14 point political program and its different factions even though may disagree on tactics, agree on the overall strategy.
The IAI has already visited Egypt, and we are establishing contacts with other Arab countries. I think they are seriously considering the points we have raised here…

8) On the future of the Occupation, Iraq and the US.

Iraq lives in a total daily chaos. Those who died, died because of the American/Iranian occupation. The occupation has created chaos –- political, economic and social chaos. It has torn apart the Iraqi social fabric.

The US is not serious about negotiating with the IR. We are open to negotiations and a withdrawal of the US troops.

But Bush is aiming for a definitive “victory” in Iraq before his end of term.

After 5 years, Bush is still hoping for a total victory. That is why he is pushing the Maliki government to sign a long term bilateral treaty with Iraq which will ensure both Federalism/Partition, oil, and a long term US presence.

For us Victory means totally Victory – the End of the Occupation(s)

http://arabwomannews.blogspot.com/2008/04/notes-from-iraqi-resistance.html

source:http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/161731

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Blair’s govt found to be acting illegally on foreign policy – this time by their own judges!

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

Blair’s govt found to be acting illegally on foreign policy – this time by their own judges!

(Update2: Goldsmith defends decision, on grounds of “National Security”)

By: BBC/Reuters/stоpwar on: 14.04.2008

Article image

The High Court has ruled that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) acted unlawfully by dropping a corruption inquiry into a £43bn Saudi arms deal.

In a hard-hitting ruling, two High Court judges described the SFO’s decision as an “outrage”.

Defence firm BAE was accused of making illegal payments to Saudi officials to secure contracts, but the firm maintains that it acted lawfully.

The SFO said national security would have been undermined by the inquiry.

The legal challenge had been made by Corner House and the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT).

‘Failure of government’

In handing down the decision on Thursday, one of the judges, Lord Justice Moses, told the High Court that the SFO and the government had given into “blatant threats” that Saudi co-operation in the fight against terror would end unless the probe into corruption was halted.

He added that the SFO had failed to assure them that everything had been done to meet the rule of law.

“No one, whether within this country or outside, is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice,” he said.

“It is the failure of government and the defendant to bear that essential principle in mind that justifies the intervention of this court.”

CAAT had argued that the SFO’s decision to drop the probe was illegal under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD’s) Anti-Bribery Convention.

“We are delighted,” said CAAT’s Symon Hill after the decision.

Saudi Arabia is said to have threatened to cancel last year’s Eurofighter order

“It has been clear from the start that the dropping of the investigation was about neither national security nor jobs. It was due to the influence of BAE and Saudi princes over the UK government.”

Susan Hawley of Corner House said: “This is a great day for British justice. The judges have stood up for the right of independent prosecutors not to be subjected to political pressure.”

Following the judgement, BAE said: “The case was between two campaign groups and the director of the SFO. It concerned the legality of a decision made by the director of the SFO.

“BAE Systems played no part in that decision.”

For its part, the Serious Fraud Office said it had no further comment, but was “carefully” considering the implications of the judgement.

‘Damage’

The SFO’s inquiry was into the al-Yamamah deal with Saudi Arabia, which was first signed in 1985 but ran into the 1990s.

Under the agreement, BAE sold Saudi Arabia Tornado and Hawk jets and other assorted weapons. The deal also included long-running maintenance and training contracts.

In December 2006, the then Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, announced that the SFO was suspending its inquiry.

Lord Goldsmith said its continuation would have caused “serious damage” to UK-Saudi relations and, in turn, threatened national security.

Saudi Arabia is also reported to have threatened to cancel last year’s deal to buy 72 Eurofighter Typhoon jets from BAE Systems.

Worth an initial £4.4bn, contracts for maintenance and training are expected to take the final bill to £20bn.

BAE argued that the SFO probe could “jeopardise” both this deal and “seriously affect” relations with the Saudi kingdom.

Details of the alleged bribes to Saudi officials were revealed in June of last year in an investigation by the BBC’s Panorama programme.

It said that up to £120m a year was sent by BAE Systems from the UK into two Saudi embassy accounts in Washington.

Panorama established that these accounts were actually a conduit to Saudi Prince Bandar for his role in securing the al-Yamamah deal, something he has strongly denied.

The OECD said last month that it was launching its own investigation into the decision to drop the SFO inquiry.

The judges in London did not rule that the case would be reopened, but have said they would listen to further arguments.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7339231.stm


LONDON (Reuters) – A corruption investigation into arms deals with Saudi Arabia should not have been halted, a London court said on Thursday in a ruling that sharply criticized the British and Saudi governments.

Two judges said the director of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) had capitulated to threats from the Saudi royal family over arms deals with Europe’s biggest defense company, BAE Systems Plc.

“No one, whether within this country or outside, is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice,” one of the judges, Lord Justice Moses, told the High Court in London, calling the decision a failure of government.

“The law is powerless to resist the specific and, as it turns out, successful attempt by a foreign government to pervert the course of justice in the United Kingdom,” Moses said.

Two anti-arms trade campaigners had said there was “very large scale bribery” of senior Saudi Arabian officials by the arms manufacturer over the state-to-state Al Yamamah deal and said the probe was halted after the threats.

“That threat was intended to prevent the (SFO) director from pursuing the course of investigation he had chosen to adopt. It achieved its purpose,” Moses said.

Saudi envoys in London had no immediate comment.

Critics have attacked former Prime Minister Tony Blair for saying it was right to halt the investigation, arguing it would damage Britain’s national security.

Arms sales to Saudi Arabia under the Al Yamamah pact dating back to the 1980s represent the biggest export deals in Britain and their cancellation would threaten thousands of jobs.

The judges allowed the challenge to the SFO decision by anti-arms campaigners, the Corner House Research Group and the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), to go ahead last November.

“This was the most extreme example so far of the levels to which the government will go to promote the interests of BAE regardless of the public interest,” a CAAT spokesman told reporters after the judgment.

AIRCRAFT DEAL THREATENED

The groups had argued the SFO abandoned its investigation in December 2006 following Saudi threats to cancel a proposed order for Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft and to withdraw security and intelligence cooperation.

“The SFO are carefully considering the implications of the judgment and the way forward,” an SFO spokeswoman said after the highly critical ruling.

A BAE spokeswoman said: “The case was between two campaign groups and the director of the SFO. It concerned the legality of a decision made by the director of the SFO. BAE Systems played no part in that decision.”

Britain and Saudi Arabia, who have been signing arms deals since the 1960s, announced a 4.43 billion pound contract for 72 Eurofighter jets in September last year, fending off French and U.S. rivals.

The Al Yamamah deals were first signed in the 1980s after extensive lobbying by former prime minister Margaret Thatcher and have been worth an estimated $86 billion.

(Additional reporting by Avril Ormsby; Editing by Jon Boyle)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/10/AR2008041000697.html?hpid=moreheadlines

source: http://www.iraq-war.ru/article/161456

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

U.S. May Not Release Guantanamo Prisoners: Even If Found Innocent of Charges Against Them

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

U.S. May Not Release Guantanamo Prisoners: Even If Found Innocent of Charges Against Them

Global Research, April 12, 2008

Even if a Guantanamo prisoner is acquitted on all counts at his trial, the Pentagon may still not release him on grounds he might return to the battlefield, according to an article in the April 14th issue of The New Yorker.

The magazine’s Jeffrey Toobin quotes Brig. General Thomas Hartmann, legal adviser to the Pentagon’s Office of Military Commissions, as saying, “What’s unusual about what we’re doing is that we’re having the commissions before the end of the war. The Nuremberg trials (of accused Nazi war criminals) were after World War Two, so there was no possibility of the defendants going back to the battlefield.”

But, Hartmann continued, “We still have that problem. We are trying these alleged war criminals during the war. So, in order to protect our troops in the field, in general we are not going to release anyone who poses a danger until the war is over.”

By this reasoning, Toobin writes, “even those Guantanamo detainees who are acquitted of the charges against them are analogous to Nazi war criminals.”

Curiously, hundreds of Guantanamo prisoners — once depicted by former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as “the worst of a very bad lot” — have already been released. This raises the suspicion they were innocent victims of dragnet arrests or sold to the U.S. by Afghan bounty hunters to enlarge the picture of thousands of Islamist terrorists seething to attack America. As historian James Carroll put it in “House of War”(Houghton Mifflin), the jails of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are “emblems of a new system of legally dubious incarceration that involved more than eleven thousand detainees held in mostly secret (black site) locations around the world…”

As Clive Stafford Smith, a detainees’ lawyer, told The New Yorker: “Now that it’s clear that Guantanamo is such an embarrassment, they are just shipping as many of them (captives) out the door as they can, and just keeping enough of them to save face. It’s a political process that has little to do with terrorism.”

Only one prisoner since Gitmo first opened on January 11, 2002 — ex-kangaroo skinner David Hicks—has been actually brought to trial. He plea-bargained a nine-month term which he served out in his native Australia and is now free.

About 275 prisoners remain in Gitmo, down from an estimated peak of 680 from 43 countries. According to Toobin, about 60 have been approved for transfer, if countries can be found to take them, and Hartmann anticipates there is sufficient evidence to bring commission trials against only 80. “In sum,” Toobin writes, “there are more than 130 detainees for whom Administration officials acknowledge they have no plan, except indefinite detention without trial.” Toobin’s article is titled “Camp Justice.”

After years of delay, a trial was actually scheduled to open May 5th against Omar Ahmed Khadr, a Canadian who was 15 years of age when detained on charges of hurling a hand grenade that killed an American GI. According to The New York Times of April 12, military judge Col. Peter Brownback III, pushed back his trial date and instead set May 8th to hear more lawyers’ arguments on pre-trial issues. Khadr’s lead lawyer, Navy Lt. Comdr. William Kuebler, is quoted as saying, “I don’t believe anyone can get an acquittal at Guantanamo Bay.” He said some witnesses to the firefight say the U.S. soldier may have been killed by friendly fire — a charge Khadr’s prosecutor claims will be disproved.

Yet what does it matter? Even if proved innocent before his all-military panel, Khadr could be held as long as the occupant of the White House says the War on Terror continues! For many in the Middle East and elsewhere, the legalized duplicity shaping up at Gitmo won’t just give America one black eye but two, plus a broken nose, a fat lip, and a mouthful of loose teeth — as George Bush whacks away at the Statue of Liberty with his war club.

Sherwood Ross is a Miami, Fl.-based writer and public relations consultant that may be reached at sherwoodr1@yahoo.com Ross has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News and contributed a weekly “Workplace” column to Reuters America for 10 years.

source: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8664

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Torture Drawings the Pentagon Doesn’t Want You to See

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

The Torture Drawings the Pentagon Doesn’t Want You to See

Drawings by journalist Sami Al-Haj depicting torture at Gitmo have been censored.

By Andy Worthington, AlterNet. Posted April 11, 2008.

Sami al-Haj is a journalist, but one unlike any other. For over six years since December 15, 2001 — when he was seized by Pakistani soldiers on the Afghan border while on assignment as a cameraman for the Qatar-based broadcaster al-Jazeera — he has been in a disturbing but unique position: a trained journalist held as an “enemy combatant” on the frontline of the Bush administration’s “War on Terror,” first in Afghanistan, and then in Guantánamo.

The outline of Sami’s story should be familiar to readers; last summer AlterNet published a detailed article by Rachel Morris: “Prisoner 345: An Arab Journalist’s Five Years in Guantánamo,” which made clear how Sami was seized because of the erroneous claim that he had interviewed Osama bin Laden, and the disturbing fact that his many interrogations in Guantánamo have focused solely on the administration’s attempts to turn him into an informant against al-Jazeera, to “prove” a connection between the broadcaster and Osama bin Laden that does not exist. As his lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith of the legal action charity Reprieve, noted bluntly and accurately in his book Eight O’Clock Ferry to the Windward Side: Seeking Justice in Guantánamo Bay, “Sami was a prisoner in the Bush Administration’s assault on al-Jazeera.”

Less well known is Sami’s frontline reportage from within Guantánamo. Stafford Smith recalls that when he asked Sami for information, he “would assemble important facts on almost any topic in the prison relying on the incredible prisoner bush telegraph.” These have included reports on the religious abuse — primarily of the Qu’ran — that preceded a series of hunger strikes and suicide attempts, and a pioneering assessment of the number of prisoners who were under 18 at the time of their capture.

Since January 7, 2007 (the fifth anniversary of his detention without trial by the US), Sami has been on a hunger strike. Although he is strapped into a restraint chair twice a day and force-fed against his will and despite the fact that he is “very thin” and “[h]is memory is disintegrating,” according to Stafford Smith, Sami continues to seek ways to publicize the plight of his fellow prisoners. During the most recent visit from his lawyers in February — with Cori Crider of Reprieve — he produced a number of morbid, and almost hallucinatory sketches illustrating his take on conditions in Guantánamo, which he described as “Sketches of My Nightmare.”

Fearing that they would be banned by the military censors, Crider asked him to describe each sketch in detail and when, as anticipated, the pictures were duly banned but the notes cleared, Reprieve asked political cartoonist Lewis Peake to create original works based on Sami’s descriptions.

“The first sketch is just a skeleton in the torture chair,” Sami explained. “My picture reflects my nightmares of what I must look like, with my head double-strapped down, a tube in my nose, a black mask over my mouth, strapped into the torture chair with no eyes and only giant cheekbones, my teeth jutting out — my ribs showing in every detail, every rib, every joint. The tube goes up to a bag at the top of the drawing. On the right there is another skeleton sitting shackled to another chair. They are sitting like we do in interrogations, with hands shackled, feet shackled to the floor, just waiting. In between I draw the flag of Guantánamo — JTF-GTMO — but instead of the normal insignia, there is a skull and crossbones, the real symbol of what is happening here.”

In recently declassified testimony, Sami described more of his recent experiences of the force-feeding process:

source: http://www.alternet.org/rights/81406/

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

Posted by musliminsuffer on April 16, 2008

bismi-lLahi-rRahmani-rRahiem
In the Name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

=== News Update ===

THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

President Bush has not fired any of the architects of the Iraq war. In fact, a review of the key planners of the conflict reveals that they have been rewarded — not blamed — for their incompetence.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ

Role In Going To War: Wolfowitz said the U.S. would be greeted as liberators, that Iraqi oil money would pay for the reconstruction, and that Gen. Eric Shinseki’s estimate that several hundred thousand troops would be needed was “wildly off the mark.” [Washington Post, 12/8/05; Wolfowitz, 3/27/03]

Where He Is Now: Bush promoted Wolfowitz to head the World Bank in March 2005. Two years into his five-year term, Wolfowitz was rebuked by the World Bank investigative committee for engineering an unethical pay and promotion package for his girlfriend and, after repeated calls for his resignation, stepped down on May 17, 2007. Wolfowitz is now a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-wing think tank that “has the President’s ear” on national security issues. [Washington Post, 3/17/05, 5/18/07; Financial Times, 6/28/07]

Key Quote: “The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason [for going to war].” [USA Today, 5/30/03]

DOUGLAS FEITH

Role In Going To War: As Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, Feith spearheaded two secretive groups at the Pentagon — the Counter Terrorism Evaluation Group and the Office of Special Plans — that were instrumental in drawing up documents that explained the supposed ties between Saddam and al Qaeda. The groups were “created in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz and his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believed to be true.” Colin Powell referred to Feith’s operation as the Gestapo. In Bob Woodward’s Plan of Attack, former CentCom Commander Gen. Tommy Franks called Feith the “f***ing stupidest guy on the face of the earth.” [LAT, 1/27/05; NYT, 4/28/04; New Yorker, 5/12/03; Plan of Attack, p.281]

Where He Is Now: Feith voluntarily resigned from the Defense Department shortly after Bush’s reelection. He is currently writing a memoir of his Pentagon work and teaching a course at Georgetown University “on the Bush Administration’s strategy behind the war on terrorism.” The Defense Department’s Inspector General found that Feith’s secretive groups at the Pentagon “developed, produced, and then disseminated” deceptive intelligence that contradicted “the consensus of the Intelligence Community.” These groups are still under investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee. [Washington Post, 1/27/05;Georgetown press release, 5/1/06; NYT, 2/9/07]

Key Quote: “I am not asserting to you that I know that the answer is — we did it right. What I am saying is it’s an extremely complex judgment to know whether the course that we chose with its pros and cons was more sensible.” [Washington Post, 7/13/05]

WILLIAM LUTI

luti1.jpg

Role In Going To War: Luti worked under Douglas Feith, overseeing the Office of Special Plans, a Pentagon intelligence shop used to produce intelligence supporting the Bush administration’s claims about the threat represented by Saddam Hussein. [LA Weekly, 2/19/04, New Yorker, 5/12/03]

Where He Is Now: In May 2005, Luti was promoted to Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Defense Policy and Strategy for the National Security Council. [White House 5/3/05]

Key Quotes: A Pentagon official on Luti: “It’s very difficult to inform people who already know it all.”;”Basically, he [Luti] didn’t like other people’s information if it didn’t agree with his opinion,” a former DIA analyst agreed. [Washington Post, 10/22/03]

STEPHEN HADLEY

Role In Going To War: As then-Deputy National Security Advisor, Hadley disregarded memos from the CIA and a personal phone call from Director George Tenet warning that references to Iraq’s pursuit of uranium be dropped from Bush’s speeches. The false information ended up in Bush’s 2003 State of the Union address. [Washington Post, 7/23/03]

Where He Is Now: On January 26, 2005, Stephen Hadley was promoted to National Security Advisor. [White House bio]

Key Quote: “I should have recalled at the time of the State of the Union speech that there was controversy associated with the uranium issue. … And it is now clear to me that I failed in that responsibility in connection with the inclusion of these 16 words in the speech that he gave on the 28th of January.” [Hadley, 7/22/03]

RICHARD PERLE

Role In Going To War: Richard Perle, the so-called “Prince of Darkness,” was the chairman of Defense Policy Board during the run-up to the Iraq war. He suggested Iraq had a hand in 9-11. In 1996, he authored “Clean Break,” a paper that was co-signed by Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, and others that argued for regime change in Iraq. Shortly after the war began, Perle resigned from the Board because he came under fire for having relationships with businesses that stood to profit from the war. [Guardian, 9/3/02, 3/28/03; AFP, 8/9/02]

Where He Is Now: Currently, Perle is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute where he specializes in national security and defense issues. He has been investigated for ethical violations concerning war profiteering and other conflicts of interest. [Washington Post, 9/1/04]

Key Quote: “And a year from now, I’ll be very surprised if there is not some grand square in Baghdad that is named after President Bush. There is no doubt that, with the exception of a very small number of people close to a vicious regime, the people of Iraq have been liberated and they understand that they’ve been liberated. And it is getting easier every day for Iraqis to express that sense of liberation.” [Perle, 9/22/03]

ELLIOT ABRAMS

Role In Going To War: Abrams was one of the defendants in the Iran-Contra Affair, and he pled guilty to two misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress. He was appointed Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs during Bush’s first term, where he served as Bush’s chief advisor on the Middle East. His name surfaced as part of the investigation into who leaked the name of a undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. [Washington Post, 5/27/03, 2/3/05]

Where He Is Now: Abrams was promoted to deputy national security adviser in February of 2005. In that position, he has led a smear campaign to attack Speaker Nancy Pelosi for visiting Syria. [Slate, 2/17/05; IPS, 4/9/07; Washington Post, 2/15/07]

Key Quote: “We recognize that military action in Iraq, if necessary, will have adverse humanitarian consequences. We have been planning over the last several months, across all relevant agencies, to limit any such consequences and provide relief quickly.” [CNN, 2/25/03]

SCOOTER LIBBY

libby

Role In Going To War: As Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, Libby repeatedly pressured CIA analysts to report that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and links to al Qaeda. He also provided classified government information to New York Times reporter Judith Miller that formed the basis of a series of articles highlighting Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction that were later entirely discredited. Along with Hannah, Libby was a principal author of the discredited draft UN presentation. [Washington Post, 6/5/03; National Journal, 4/6/06; FAIR, 3/19/07; NYT, 10/30/05]

Where He Is Now: On June 5, 2007, Libby was sentenced to 2.5 years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for perjury and obstruction of justice for his role in the CIA leak case. On July 2, 2007, Bush commuted Libby’s prison sentence, ensuring he would serve no time in jail. [NYT, 6/5/07; Bush, 7/2/07]

Key Quote: “I’m a great fan of the Vice President,” Libby told Larry King in 2002. “I think he’s one of the smartest, most honorable people I’ve ever met.” [Time, 10/28/05]

JOHN HANNAH

johnhannahpiccropped2.jpg

Role In Going To War: As deputy national security advisor to Vice President Cheney, Hannah served as the conduit between Ahmad Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress and the Bush administration, passing along false information about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction that the administration relied upon to justify the invasion. Hannah was also a principal author of the draft speech making the administration’s case for war to the UN. Then-Secretary of State Colin Powell and CIA director George Tenet rejected most of the content of the speech as exaggerated and unwarranted. [Newsweek, 12/15/06; NYT, 10/30/05]

Where He Is Now: On October 31, 2005, Cheney promoted Hannah to be his national security adviser, a position previously held by Scooter Libby. [CNN, 10/31/05]

Key Quote: Reprising his role in misleading the country to war with Iraq, Hannah has told a U.S. ambassador that 2007 is “the year of Iran” and that a U.S. attack is “a real possibility.” [Washington Post, 2/11/07]

DAVID WURMSER

Role In Going To War: At the time of the war, Wurmser was a special assistant to John Bolton in the State Department. Wurmser has long advocated the belief that both Syria and Iraq represented threats to the stability of the Middle East. In early 2001, Wurmser had issued a call for air strikes against Iraq and Syria. Along with Perle, he is considered a main author of “Clean Break.” [Asia Times, 4/17/03; Guardian, 9/3/02]

Where He Is Now: In 2003 Wurmser was promoted to Principal Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs; he was in charge of coordinating Middle East strategy. His name has been associated with the Plame Affair and with an FBI investigation into the passing of classified information to Chalabi and AIPAC. In August 2007 Wurmser left the Office of the Vice President to start a private consulting business. [Raw Story, 10/19/05; Washington Post, 9/4/04; Huffington Post, 7/24/07]

Key Quote: “Syria, Iran, Iraq, the PLO and Sudan are playing a skillful game, but have consistently worked to undermine US interests and influence in the region for years, and certainly will continue to do so now, even if they momentarily, out of fear, seem more forthcoming.” [Washington Post, 9/24/01]

ANDREW NATSIOS

Role In Going To War: Shortly after the invasion of Iraq, Andrew Natsios, then the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, went on Nightline and claimed that the U.S. contribution to the rebuilding of Iraq would be just $1.7 billion. When it became quickly apparent that Natsios’ prediction would fall woefully short of reality, the government came under fire for scrubbing his comments from the USAID Web site. [Washington Post, 12/18/03; ABC News, 4/23/03]

Where He Is Now: Natsios stepped down as the head of USAID in January and was teaching at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh’s School of Foreign Service as a Distinguished Professor in the Practice of Diplomacy and Advisor on International Development. In September 2006, Bush appointed him Special Envoy for Darfur. [AP, 2/20/06; Georgetown, 12/2/05; Washington Post, 9/19/06]

Key Quote: “[T]he American part of this will be $1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this.” [Nightline, 4/23/03]

DAN BARTLETT

bartlett

Role In Going To War: Dan Bartlett was the White House Communications Director at the time of the war and was a mouthpiece in hyping the Iraq threat. Bartlett was also a regular participant in the weekly meetings of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). The main purpose of the group was the systematic coordination of the “marketing” of going to war with Iraq as well as selling the war here at home. [Washington Post, 8/10/03]

Where He Is Now: Bartlett was promoted to Counselor to the President on January 5, 2005, and was responsible for the formulation of policy and implementation of the President’s agenda. He announced his resignation on June 1, 2007 to pursue his “prospects in the private sector.” [Washington Post, 6/2/07]

Key Quote: “Most people would argue we are part of the solution in Iraq, not part of the problem.” [CNN, 10/23/06]

MITCH DANIELS

Role In Going To War: Mitch Daniels was the director of the Office of Management and Budget from January 2001 through June of 2003. In this capacity, he was responsible for releasing the initial budget estimates for the Iraq War which he pegged at $50 to $60 billion. The estimated cost of the war, including the full economic ramifications, is approaching $1 trillion. [MSNBC, 3/17/06]

Where He Is Now: In 2004, Daniels was elected Governor of Indiana. In June 2007, Daniels announced that he was running for re-election. [USA Today, 11/3/04; ABC 6/16/07]

Key Quote: Mitch Daniels had said the war would be an “affordable endeavor” and rejected an estimate by the chief White House economic adviser that the war would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion as “very, very high.” [Christian Science Monitor, 1/10/06]

GEORGE TENET

Role In Going To War: As CIA Director, Tenet was responsible for gathering information on Iraq and the potential threat posted by Saddam Hussein. According to author Bob Woodward, Tenet told President Bush before the war that there was a “slam dunk case” that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. Tenet remained publicly silent while the Bush administration made pre-war statements on Iraq’s supposed nuclear program and ties to al Qaeda that were contrary to the CIA’s judgments. Tenet issued a statement in July 2003, drafted by Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, taking responsibility for Bush’s false statements in his State of the Union address. [CNN, 4/19/04; NYT, 7/22/05]

Where He Is Now: Tenet voluntarily resigned from the administration on June 3, 2004. He was later awarded a Presidential Medal of Freedom. He released a memoir in April 2007 critical of many in the Bush administration for their roles in the Iraq war and currently teaches at Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh’s School of Foreign Service. [Washington Post, 6/3/04; CBS, 4/29/07]

Key Quote: “It’s a slam dunk case.” [CNN, 4/19/04]

COLIN POWELL

Role In Going To War: Despite stating in Feb. 2001 that Saddam had not developed “any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction,” Powell made the case in front of the United Nations for a United States-led invasion of Iraq, stating that, “There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction.” [Powell, 2/5/03; Powell, 2/24/01]

Where He Is Now: Shortly after Bush won reelection in 2004, Powell resigned from the administration. Powell now sits on numerous corporate boards. He succeeded Henry Kissinger in May 2006 as Chairman of the Eisenhower Fellowship Program at the City College of New York. In September 2005, Powell said of his U.N. speech that it was a “blot” on his record. He went on to say, “It will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It’s painful now.” [ABC News, 9/9/05]

Key Quote:
“‘You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people,’ he told the president. ‘You will own all their hopes, aspirations, and problems. You’ll own it all.’ Privately, Powell and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage called this the Pottery Barn rule: You break it, you own it.” [Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack]

DONALD RUMSFELD

Role In Going To War: Prior to the war, Rumsfeld repeatedly suggested the war in Iraq would be short and swift. He said, “The Gulf War in the 1990s lasted five days on the ground. I can’t tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn’t going to last any longer than that.” He also said, “It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.” [Rumsfeld, 11/14/02; USA Today, 4/1/03]

Where He Is Now: After repeated calls for his resignation, Donald Rumsfeld finally stepped down on November 8, 2006, one day after the 2006 midterm elections. Rumsfeld is now “working on setting up a new foundation…to promote continued U.S. engagement in world affairs in furtherance of U.S. security interests” so that he can “remain engaged in public policy issues.” He is also shopping a memoir, in the hopes of receiving “a large cash advance.” [AP, 11/8/06; Reuters, 3/19/06; Washington Times, 5/18/07; NY Sun, 6/27/07]

Key Quote: “You go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” [CNN, 12/9/04]

CONDOLEEZZA RICE

Role In Going To War: As National Security Adviser, Rice disregarded at least two CIA memos and a personal phone call from Director George Tenet stating that the evidence behind Iraq’s supposed uranium acquisition was weak. She urged the necessity of war because “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” [Washington Post, 7/27/03; CNN, 9/8/02]

Where She Is Now: In December of 2004, Condoleezza Rice was promoted to Secretary of State. [ABC News, 11/16/04]

Key Quote: “We did not know at the time — maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency — but no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery. Of course it was information that was mistaken.” [Meet the Press, 6/8/03]

DICK CHENEY

Role In Going To War: Among a host of false pre-war statements, Cheney claimed that Iraq may have had a role in 9/11, stating that it was “pretty well confirmed” that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence officials. Cheney also claimed that Saddam was “in fact reconstituting his nuclear program” and that the U.S. would be “greeted as liberators.” [Meet the Press, 12/9/01, 3/16/03]

Where He Is Now: Cheney earned another four years in power when Bush won re-election in 2004. Despite some conservatives calling for him to be replaced, Cheney has said, “I’ve now been elected to a second term; I’ll serve out my term.” Cheney continues to advocate for preemptive military intervention, recently delivering threats toward Iran in a speech aboard an aircraft carrier off Iran’s coast. [CBS Face the Nation, 3/19/06; NYT, 5/11/07]

Key Quote: “I think they’re in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency.” [Larry King Live, 6/20/05]

GEORGE W. BUSH

Role In Going To War: Emphasizing Saddam Hussein’s supposed stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, supposed ties to al Qaeda, and supposed nuclear weapons program, Bush built public support for — and subsequently ordered — an invasion of Iraq. [State of the Union, 1/28/03]

Where He Is Now: In November 2004, Bush won re-election. Since that time, popular support for the war and the President have reached a low point — nearing the levels of Richard Nixon during Watergate. [Chicago Sun-Times, 6/19/07]

Key Quote: “Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” [Bush, 10/7/02]

source: http://thinkprogress.org/the-architects-where-are-they-now/

===

-muslim voice-
______________________________________
BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »