Getting kids to enjoy learning
April 30th, 2008 by Halimahton
Learning should be enjoyable.
Many people have asked us how it’s possible to get children to achieve so early. There’s been a lot of guessing and very few facts, simply because in the past I never liked to talk publicly about the way I brought up my children. I’ve always preferred doing practical things instead of talking, but in any case, I think it’s better if people know the facts, so from time to time I’ll write about various aspects of my teaching philosophy on this blog.
Since there is so much to write about, it would be impossible for me to cover everything here, but I hope and believe that people — especially fellow parents and teachers — will find this information useful. I’ll be writing and talking about my teaching style in more detail elsewhere; this first post just covers one small (albeit very important) aspect of my general approach to teaching.
Let’s now go back to what I said in the opening paragraph: learning should be enjoyable. I started teaching my children from birth, and if you spend time with babies it’s easy to see that they are incredibly curious and receptive to new information. In other words, they want to learn!
If you are able to spend some time with a baby (preferably one who likes you!), here’s something simple you can do to see this for yourself. Hold up a toy in front of him — almost any simple and colourful toy will do — at a distance of about 20cm from his face.
Pay close attention to the way he reacts: depending on his age, he will do anything from focusing on the toy and tracking it with his eyes and head to reaching out and grabbing it.
In fact, if he’s able to, he almost certainly will try to take the toy from you, after which he might manipulate it and study it from all angles, or shake it, or put the toy in his mouth, or drop it, and so on.
What’s the baby trying to do? He’s trying to learn about the toy, of course! He wants to know what it looks like, how it feels, how it tastes, and what happens when he shakes or drops it. The baby is also learning about himself; among other things, he’s figuring out how to coordinate his movements and he’s also developing his motor skills.
Clearly, then, babies are very curious about the world around them. This innate love of learning makes them easy to teach, not to mention extremely rapid learners! Because of this, I consider the first five years of a child’s life to be the most important as far as their education is concerned.
Aside from developing fundamental skills such as speaking, reading, and writing, the first five years are a great time for a child to acquire good learning habits such as a high attention span, a strong bond with their parents/teachers, and a simple enjoyment of learning (whether it be from books, things he’s playing with, conversations with other people, TV, the garden, or anywhere else).
This blog isn’t the right place to go into all these areas in detail (unless anyone wants to read 20,000-word posts!), but I do hope to at least be able to give people some of the general ideas.
Making learning fun for babies and toddlers
“Making” learning enjoyable for a child is easiest if you simply get him to maintain his natural love of learning from his earliest days as a baby. All you have to do is spot the times when he wants to learn (e.g. when he’s showing interest in a toy or person) and then come up with some fun learning activities for him.
Don’t forget that you’re trying to get him to retain his existing enjoyment of learning, so it’s important that he associates learning with positive experiences. Have a sense of fun/humour, and don’t worry about setting goals or targets for your baby; just enjoy the time you spend with your child and seeing him learn for what it is.
Try to keep your learning activities exciting or at least interesting; to do this, you might have to be a little creative in the way you introduce new things to your baby. For instance, simply speaking to him in a sing-song voice will help keep him amused and interested.
Patience is essential. Only teach your baby as long as he is interested in the learning activity, and if he seems to have completely lost interest (e.g. he is looking somewhere else) or is no longer alert, just stop! There’s always another day.
Let’s now talk about what not to do: it’s crucial that you don’t make learning dull, tedious, or overly repetitive for your child, as this will cause him to start associating learning with negative experiences from an early age. These negative associations tend to stick with children for a long time.
Essentially, all you have to do here is not suck all the fun out of learning. One simple thing you can do is to make sure that the learning activity is interesting and pleasant for you, as your child will very often feel the same way. In fact, you’ll often find that you naturally communicate your interest and excitement in the activity to your child.
Making learning fun for older children
Let’s now talk about the case of older children; in particular, children who, for one reason or another, seem to dislike their studies or learning in general. The trick here is to get to know your child well and figure out what will make learning fun for your child.
So what does make learning enjoyable for a child? It depends on the child’s personality, of course, but here are some of the more common possibilities:
The child likes the challenge and resulting sense of accomplishment that comes from learning new things
He enjoys spending time with and/or receiving attention from his parent/teacher/carer
He enjoys learning informally through hands-on activities (e.g. cake baking or upgrading a computer) and/or educational-but-informal discussions (e.g. “why do some people have curly or straight hair?” or “where does the picture on the TV come from?”)
Positive peer pressure: he likes to compete with other children and tries to outperform his peers
His studies are integrated with something he already enjoys (e.g. he can write essays about computer games or see how maths is used in football)
A parent/teacher/carer has made learning fun for him at an early age, and hence he’s come to associate learning with good feelings
He likes to show off!
Which of the above applies to your child? If you’re not sure, it’s a good idea to find out! Here are two examples to illustrate how you might use this knowledge to make learning enjoyable for your child.
Example: Focusing
Suppose your child has difficulty focusing on his schoolwork for very long, but is happy to play computer games for many hours every day. What you have to do here is figure out why he is willing to focus on computer games but not his studies.
If you’ve realised that the challenge-and-frequent- reward system in games keeps him interested for a long time, you could divide his work up into a series of small challenges and give him a reward after he overcomes each challenge. You could give him a sweet for each question he answers, or if he doesn’t even want to get started, reward or congratulate him for just writing his name down!
Alternately — or at the same time — you could offer to let him play games for as long as he likes provided that he finishes his work for the day. This will have the side benefit of helping him understand that doing his work now leads to rewards in the long term.
Depending on the kind of work he is doing, you could try to integrate his gaming hobby into his work. If he needs to write an essay, for instance, you can ask him to write about what he likes about his favourite games or to describe his favourite gaming characters.
If he doesn’t know why maths or physics are useful, you can help him find out how computer games are made so that he can see how these subjects are used by people who program games. Or he might just prefer to use computers in general, in which case you should let him do as much work as he can on his computer.
Example: Reading
If your child doesn’t like to read, there are many things you can do to encourage him. As always, your task is to use your understanding of your child to figure out what it is that might get him to like reading.
The easiest thing to do is to simply let him read about things that interest him. Since there is written material covering virtually every subject known to mankind, this should not be difficult!
Get him used to the idea of reading to find out more about the things he likes or is interested in. If he likes fast cars, ask him if he can find (via books or the Internet) the top speeds of the fastest cars, how cars are built for speed, and so on. You should also try to integrate reading into his daily life — if he’s going to the dentist for the first time, borrow a book on the subject so that he can find out what will happen during his visit!
Some children dislike reading because they can’t see how the text might be interesting or entertaining, especially if they’re reading a book that isn’t illustrated. If this is the case for your child, liven up his reading by acting out the book’s content with him. Be imaginative and read the book with a great deal of expressiveness; if he’s reading a story, make it seem like the story is actually happening in front of him. Over time, he’ll gradually start associating books with the excitement he gets from reading with you.
You might notice that your child likes to do the same things as his peers or the people around him in order to fit in. In this case, you could take him regularly to the children’s section of your local library — initially, he might not read anything, but if he sees that everyone around him is happily reading, he’ll be much more inclined to pick up a book for himself. Encourage him by showing him how to navigate the library to find books about things that interest him; at this stage, it doesn’t really matter what he reads, as long as he makes a start.
Bear in mind the fact that I haven’t covered everything in this example! There are lots of other possible reasons why a child might not like to read, such as being restless or having a low attention span; I’ve only discussed a few of the problems here. Likewise, there are many other potential remedies for reading problems that I haven’t been able to cover in this post.
Posted in Articles, Education & Learning
Saturday, May 31, 2008
The Racist Card
The Racist Card
By Dr Mahathir Mohammed
[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU DI BAWAH ARTIKEL INI]
It is strange that whenever people like Param Cumaraswamy accuse others of being racist they end up by exposing the racist in them. For them you are racist only if you talk about Malays and their need to catch up with other races. If you talk of the imagined plight of other races in Malaysia, and make ridiculous statements that the Tamil Indians in Malaysia are facing “ethnic cleansing” when you know that no such thing is happening, it is not racist.
It is only in Malaysia that people of immigrant origins, so identified by their insistence on being linked race-wise with their countries of origin, are actually accepted as citizens.
In other countries including the much-admired democracies of the West, citizens are not linked to or classified by their countries of origin. They speak the national language habitually, go to schools where the national language is the medium of instruction and adopt the culture of the indigenous people, or at least the people who originally founded these countries (the indigenous people having been systematically wiped out).
But in Malaysia although the national language is the language of the indigenous people, many Malaysian citizens cannot speak the language, much less use it habitually in their homes and with fellow citizens. Whenever some foreigner speak Bahasa Malaysia to them, they would reply in English. Foreigners cannot understand why they seem to downgrade their national language. And yet these citizens question why there is, for practical purpose, no Bangsa Malaysia.
Schools using languages of the countries of origin are not only permitted but are actually financed by the Government. Try and find such schools in South East Asia or in the so-called liberal developed countries where they claim there is no racial discrimination. There are actually more Indians in the United Kingdom than in Malaysia. But there is not a single school where the teaching medium is in any of the Indian languages.
People like Param would not notice all these. Instead he sees the effort to bring up the indigenous people to the level of the non-indigenous people as racist. Arrogantly he seems to want the indigenous people become the deprived in their own country.
I admit that I spoke on “Ketuanan Melayu” in Johor. The Malay intellectuals have been talking about this for a long time. There was no suggestion about them being racist or that they should be detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
I spoke on this issue critically as I consider that claiming to be masters when you are not is ridiculous. How can the Malay driver driving a car belonging to someone else regard himself as the “Tuan” and the owner of the car as inferior to him? Actually it is the owner and his employer who is the “Tuan”.
In my speech my advise to the Malays is to acquire knowledge and skills and use them to enrich themselves for only then can they be regarded by their servants and employees as “Tuan”.
Is this seditious or near seditious? Is speaking about Malays and their needs seditious?
On the other hand let us consider the Hindraf memorandum to the British. Most people including Indians have not read it. To gain the support of the Tamil Indians, Hindraf demands that the British compensate every Tamil Indian in Malaysia one million pounds sterling (about RM 7 million). That should tempt even middle-class Indians. Surely Indian workers would fall for it.
The Hindraf memorandum also contains the following extracts which are obviously racist;
1) “Commonwealth ethnic Indian peace loving subjects in Malaysia persecuted by Government backed Islamic extremist violent armed terrorist who launched a pre-dawn violent armed attack and destroyed the Kg Jawa Mariamman Hindu temple at 4.00am this morning (15.11.07)”.
2) “Appeal for United Kingdom to move emergency United Nations Resolution condemning “Ethnic Cleansing” in Malaysia”.
I will not quote other highly inflammatory remarks found in the Hindraf memorandum. However I would like to mention the threat made by Hindraf in its conclusion;
“We fear that the peace loving Indian community of Tamil origin having been pushed to the corner and the persecution getting worse by the day may be forced into terrorism in a matter of time as what has happened to the Sri Lankan Tamils”.
Is Hindraf planning to make Malaysia a Southeast Asian Sri Lanka?
I don’t believe the majority of the Tamils in Malaysia would agree with the picture painted by Hindraf. Unfortunately, like the Malays, few of them read the actual memorandum. And so they support Hindraf blindly.
But if you read what I have quoted would you not conclude that Hindraf and Param Cumaraswamy, who objected to their detention under the ISA as racist especially as his desire to have me detained under the Act for telling the Malays to realise that they are not “Tuan” when they have to clean the shoes of others. If they want to be “Tuan”, then they must acquire the skills and knowledge to succeed in life. And when they succeed they would be highly regarded whether they are called “Tuan” or not.
It seems that according to Param Cumaraswamy talking about Malays is seditious.
Who is racist; Param Cumaraswamy or Dr Mahathir?
I am not going to call for his detention.
He should as a lawyer who understands the law, decide whether he is a racist and should be detained or not.
*************
[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU]
Perkauman Sebagai Modal
Adalah agak menghairankan apabila orang seperti Param Cumaraswamy menuduh orang lain bersifat perkauman kata-kata mereka mendedahkan sifat perkauman mereka sendiri. Bagi mereka, seseorang itu “racist” (bersifat perkauman) cuma apabila bercakap mengenai bangsa Melayu dan keperluan mereka untuk berusaha mengejar pencapaian bangsa lain.
Tetapi, jika mereka bercakap mengenai masalah kaum lain yang tidak berasas dan tidak benar seperti membuat kenyataan karut bahawa kaum India Tamil di Malaysia menghadapi “penghapusan etnik” yang masyarakat tahu ianya tidak terjadi, ini tidak dianggap bersifat perkauman.
Cuma di Malaysia sahaja orang daripada kaum pendatang, atas kehendak mereka sendiri dikenali dan dikaitkan dengan negara asal mereka, telah diterima sebagai warga negara.
Di negara-negara lain, termasuklah di negara Barat yang demokrasi mereka begitu dikagumi, warga negaranya tidak dikaitkan mahupun diklasifikasikan mengikut negara asal mereka. Mereka juga selalu menggunakan bahasa kebangsaan, negara berkenaan, bersekolah dimana bahasa kebangsaan menjadi bahasa pengantar dan menerima adat resam bangsa pribumi ataupun bangsa yang mula-mula menubuhkan negara itu (apabila bangsa pribumi telah dihapuskan secara terancang).
Tetapi di Malaysia walaupun bahasa kebangsaan adalah bahasa pribumi, ramai rakyat Malaysia yang tidak boleh bertutur bahasa tersebut, malahan secara lazimnya tidak menggunakan bahasa itu di rumah mahupun dengan rakyat Malaysia yang lain. Apabila orang asing bercakap dalam Bahasa Malaysia mereka akan menjawab dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Orang asing tidak mengerti mengapa mereka kelihatan merendah-rendahkan bahasa kebangsaan mereka sendiri. Di dalam masa yang sama mereka ini menyoal mengapa tiada Bangsa Malaysia.
Sekolah-sekolah yang menggunakan bahasa negara asal mereka bukan sahaja dibenarkan malahan dibiayai oleh Kerajaan. Cuba cari sekolah sebegini di Asia Tenggara ataupun di negara-negara maju yang dianggap liberal dan didakwa tidak berlaku diskriminasi kaum. Sebenarnya terdapat lebih ramai orang keturunan India di United Kingdom daripada di Malaysia. Tetapi tidak ada sebuah sekolah pun yang mengguna bahasa-bahasa India sebagai bahasa pengantar di United Kingdom.
Orang seperti Param tidak akan nampak semua ini. Sebaliknya dia melihat sebarang usaha untuk meningkatkan keupayaan rakyat pribumi supaya setanding dengan rakyat bukan pribumi sebagai bersifat perkauman. Dengan bongkak dia seolah-olah mahu melihat rakyat pribumi semuanya mengemis didalam negara mereka sendiri.
Saya mengaku saya bercakap mengenai Ketuanan Melayu semasa di Johor. Sebelum itu, cendekiawan-cendekiawan Melayu telah begitu lama bercakap mengenainya. Tidak pernah ada pandangan bahawa mereka itu bersifat perkauman ataupun ada cadangan supaya mereka ditahan dibawah Akta Dalam Negeri (ISA – Internal Security Act).
Saya bercakap mengenai isu itu secara kritis kerana saya menganggap mendakwa diri kita sebagai tuan bila kita bukan tuan adalah aneh. Bagaimanakah boleh seorang pemandu Melayu yang memandu kereta kepunyaan orang lain menganggap dirinya “Tuan” dan pemilik kereta itu berkedudukan lebih rendah daripada dirinya? “Tuan” yang sebenarnya adalah pemilik kereta dan orang yang membayar gajinya.
Di dalam ucapan saya, saya menasihatkan orang Melayu supaya menimba ilmu dan kemahiran supaya boleh digunakan untuk mencari kekayaan bagi diri mereka kerana cuma dengan cara demikian sahaja mereka akan dianggap “Tuan” oleh orang suruhan dan pekerja mereka.
Adakah ini hasutan ataupun menghasut? Adakah membicarakan mengenai bangsa Melayu dan kepentingan mereka menjadi satu hasutan?
Sebaliknya, cuba kita teliti memorandum Hindraf kepada pihak British. Ramai termasuk kaum India tidak membacanya. Untuk mendapatkan sokongan kaum India Tamil, Hindraf mendesak pihak British supaya membayar gantirugi 1 juta pound sterling (lebih kurang RM 7 juta) kepada setiap orang kaum India Tamil yang terdapat di Malaysia. Ini sudah pasti berupaya mempengaruhi bukan sahaja mereka yang berpendapatan rendah tetapi juga golongan pertengahan dari keturunan Tamil India. Sudah pasti golongan pekerja kaum India terpengaruh.
Terdapat juga didalam memorandum Hindraf sedutan-sedutan seperti berikut yang jelas bersifat perkauman:
1) “Kaum India Komanwel yang merupakan rakyat yang mencintai keamanan di Malaysia ditindas oleh Kerajaan yang didokong oleh pengganas bersenjata kelompok ekstremis Islam telah dengan ganasnya melancarkan satu serangan bersenjata sebelum subuh dan memusnahkan Tokong Hindu Mariamman di Kampung Jawa pada pukul 4 pagi ini (15.11.07)”.
2) “Memohon kepada United Kingdom untuk membentangkan satu resolusi tergempar Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu mengutuk “Penghapusan Etnik” di Malaysia”.
Saya tidak mahu menambah lagi lain-lain kenyataan yang begitu mengapi-ngapikan perasaan perkauman yang terdapat didalam memorandum Hindraf tersebut.
Walau bagaimanapun, saya ingin menyebut mengenai ugutan yang dibuat oleh Hindraf didalam kesimpulannya;
“Kami risau kaum India berketurunan Tamil yang cintakan keamanan setelah dipinggirkan dan ditindas, semakin hari semakin teruk, akan pada satu ketika, secara terpaksa mengambil langkah keganasan sebagaimana yang terjadi kepada kaum Tamil di Sri Lanka.”
Adakah Hindraf bercadang menjadikan Malaysia sebagai Sri Lanka di Asia Tenggara?
Saya tidak percaya majoriti orang Tamil di Malaysia bersetuju dengan gambaran yang dibuat oleh Hindraf. Malangnya, seperti orang Melayu, cuma beberapa orang sahaja yang membaca memorandum yang sebenarnya. Jadi mereka menyokong Hindraf secara membuta-tuli.
Tetapi jika anda membaca apa yang telah saya nyatakan tidakkah anda akan membuat satu kesimpulan bahawa Hindraf dan Param Cumaraswamy, yang membantah penahanan mereka dibawah ISA bersifat perkauman, terutama di atas kehendaknya supaya saya ditahan dibawah Akta itu kerana menyatakan kepada orang Melayu supaya menyedari yang mereka bukan “Tuan” apabila mereka terpaksa mencuci kasut orang lain. Jika mereka ingin menjadi “Tuan”, mereka mesti menimba ilmu dan kecekapan untuk berjaya didalam kehidupan. Dan apabila mereka berjaya martabat mereka akan meningkat samada mereka dipanggil “Tuan” ataupun tidak.
Nampak jelas menurut Param Cumaswamy , bercakap mengenai orang Melayu adalah satu hasutan yang berbau perkauman.
Jadi siapa yang bersifat perkauman; Param Cumaraswamy atau Dr Mahathir?
Saya tidak akan meminta supaya dia ditahan.
Sebagai seorang peguam yang memahami undang-undang, dia perlu menilai dirinya samada dia seorang yang bersifat perkauman dan perlu ditahan atau tidak.
By Dr Mahathir Mohammed
[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU DI BAWAH ARTIKEL INI]
It is strange that whenever people like Param Cumaraswamy accuse others of being racist they end up by exposing the racist in them. For them you are racist only if you talk about Malays and their need to catch up with other races. If you talk of the imagined plight of other races in Malaysia, and make ridiculous statements that the Tamil Indians in Malaysia are facing “ethnic cleansing” when you know that no such thing is happening, it is not racist.
It is only in Malaysia that people of immigrant origins, so identified by their insistence on being linked race-wise with their countries of origin, are actually accepted as citizens.
In other countries including the much-admired democracies of the West, citizens are not linked to or classified by their countries of origin. They speak the national language habitually, go to schools where the national language is the medium of instruction and adopt the culture of the indigenous people, or at least the people who originally founded these countries (the indigenous people having been systematically wiped out).
But in Malaysia although the national language is the language of the indigenous people, many Malaysian citizens cannot speak the language, much less use it habitually in their homes and with fellow citizens. Whenever some foreigner speak Bahasa Malaysia to them, they would reply in English. Foreigners cannot understand why they seem to downgrade their national language. And yet these citizens question why there is, for practical purpose, no Bangsa Malaysia.
Schools using languages of the countries of origin are not only permitted but are actually financed by the Government. Try and find such schools in South East Asia or in the so-called liberal developed countries where they claim there is no racial discrimination. There are actually more Indians in the United Kingdom than in Malaysia. But there is not a single school where the teaching medium is in any of the Indian languages.
People like Param would not notice all these. Instead he sees the effort to bring up the indigenous people to the level of the non-indigenous people as racist. Arrogantly he seems to want the indigenous people become the deprived in their own country.
I admit that I spoke on “Ketuanan Melayu” in Johor. The Malay intellectuals have been talking about this for a long time. There was no suggestion about them being racist or that they should be detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
I spoke on this issue critically as I consider that claiming to be masters when you are not is ridiculous. How can the Malay driver driving a car belonging to someone else regard himself as the “Tuan” and the owner of the car as inferior to him? Actually it is the owner and his employer who is the “Tuan”.
In my speech my advise to the Malays is to acquire knowledge and skills and use them to enrich themselves for only then can they be regarded by their servants and employees as “Tuan”.
Is this seditious or near seditious? Is speaking about Malays and their needs seditious?
On the other hand let us consider the Hindraf memorandum to the British. Most people including Indians have not read it. To gain the support of the Tamil Indians, Hindraf demands that the British compensate every Tamil Indian in Malaysia one million pounds sterling (about RM 7 million). That should tempt even middle-class Indians. Surely Indian workers would fall for it.
The Hindraf memorandum also contains the following extracts which are obviously racist;
1) “Commonwealth ethnic Indian peace loving subjects in Malaysia persecuted by Government backed Islamic extremist violent armed terrorist who launched a pre-dawn violent armed attack and destroyed the Kg Jawa Mariamman Hindu temple at 4.00am this morning (15.11.07)”.
2) “Appeal for United Kingdom to move emergency United Nations Resolution condemning “Ethnic Cleansing” in Malaysia”.
I will not quote other highly inflammatory remarks found in the Hindraf memorandum. However I would like to mention the threat made by Hindraf in its conclusion;
“We fear that the peace loving Indian community of Tamil origin having been pushed to the corner and the persecution getting worse by the day may be forced into terrorism in a matter of time as what has happened to the Sri Lankan Tamils”.
Is Hindraf planning to make Malaysia a Southeast Asian Sri Lanka?
I don’t believe the majority of the Tamils in Malaysia would agree with the picture painted by Hindraf. Unfortunately, like the Malays, few of them read the actual memorandum. And so they support Hindraf blindly.
But if you read what I have quoted would you not conclude that Hindraf and Param Cumaraswamy, who objected to their detention under the ISA as racist especially as his desire to have me detained under the Act for telling the Malays to realise that they are not “Tuan” when they have to clean the shoes of others. If they want to be “Tuan”, then they must acquire the skills and knowledge to succeed in life. And when they succeed they would be highly regarded whether they are called “Tuan” or not.
It seems that according to Param Cumaraswamy talking about Malays is seditious.
Who is racist; Param Cumaraswamy or Dr Mahathir?
I am not going to call for his detention.
He should as a lawyer who understands the law, decide whether he is a racist and should be detained or not.
*************
[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU]
Perkauman Sebagai Modal
Adalah agak menghairankan apabila orang seperti Param Cumaraswamy menuduh orang lain bersifat perkauman kata-kata mereka mendedahkan sifat perkauman mereka sendiri. Bagi mereka, seseorang itu “racist” (bersifat perkauman) cuma apabila bercakap mengenai bangsa Melayu dan keperluan mereka untuk berusaha mengejar pencapaian bangsa lain.
Tetapi, jika mereka bercakap mengenai masalah kaum lain yang tidak berasas dan tidak benar seperti membuat kenyataan karut bahawa kaum India Tamil di Malaysia menghadapi “penghapusan etnik” yang masyarakat tahu ianya tidak terjadi, ini tidak dianggap bersifat perkauman.
Cuma di Malaysia sahaja orang daripada kaum pendatang, atas kehendak mereka sendiri dikenali dan dikaitkan dengan negara asal mereka, telah diterima sebagai warga negara.
Di negara-negara lain, termasuklah di negara Barat yang demokrasi mereka begitu dikagumi, warga negaranya tidak dikaitkan mahupun diklasifikasikan mengikut negara asal mereka. Mereka juga selalu menggunakan bahasa kebangsaan, negara berkenaan, bersekolah dimana bahasa kebangsaan menjadi bahasa pengantar dan menerima adat resam bangsa pribumi ataupun bangsa yang mula-mula menubuhkan negara itu (apabila bangsa pribumi telah dihapuskan secara terancang).
Tetapi di Malaysia walaupun bahasa kebangsaan adalah bahasa pribumi, ramai rakyat Malaysia yang tidak boleh bertutur bahasa tersebut, malahan secara lazimnya tidak menggunakan bahasa itu di rumah mahupun dengan rakyat Malaysia yang lain. Apabila orang asing bercakap dalam Bahasa Malaysia mereka akan menjawab dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Orang asing tidak mengerti mengapa mereka kelihatan merendah-rendahkan bahasa kebangsaan mereka sendiri. Di dalam masa yang sama mereka ini menyoal mengapa tiada Bangsa Malaysia.
Sekolah-sekolah yang menggunakan bahasa negara asal mereka bukan sahaja dibenarkan malahan dibiayai oleh Kerajaan. Cuba cari sekolah sebegini di Asia Tenggara ataupun di negara-negara maju yang dianggap liberal dan didakwa tidak berlaku diskriminasi kaum. Sebenarnya terdapat lebih ramai orang keturunan India di United Kingdom daripada di Malaysia. Tetapi tidak ada sebuah sekolah pun yang mengguna bahasa-bahasa India sebagai bahasa pengantar di United Kingdom.
Orang seperti Param tidak akan nampak semua ini. Sebaliknya dia melihat sebarang usaha untuk meningkatkan keupayaan rakyat pribumi supaya setanding dengan rakyat bukan pribumi sebagai bersifat perkauman. Dengan bongkak dia seolah-olah mahu melihat rakyat pribumi semuanya mengemis didalam negara mereka sendiri.
Saya mengaku saya bercakap mengenai Ketuanan Melayu semasa di Johor. Sebelum itu, cendekiawan-cendekiawan Melayu telah begitu lama bercakap mengenainya. Tidak pernah ada pandangan bahawa mereka itu bersifat perkauman ataupun ada cadangan supaya mereka ditahan dibawah Akta Dalam Negeri (ISA – Internal Security Act).
Saya bercakap mengenai isu itu secara kritis kerana saya menganggap mendakwa diri kita sebagai tuan bila kita bukan tuan adalah aneh. Bagaimanakah boleh seorang pemandu Melayu yang memandu kereta kepunyaan orang lain menganggap dirinya “Tuan” dan pemilik kereta itu berkedudukan lebih rendah daripada dirinya? “Tuan” yang sebenarnya adalah pemilik kereta dan orang yang membayar gajinya.
Di dalam ucapan saya, saya menasihatkan orang Melayu supaya menimba ilmu dan kemahiran supaya boleh digunakan untuk mencari kekayaan bagi diri mereka kerana cuma dengan cara demikian sahaja mereka akan dianggap “Tuan” oleh orang suruhan dan pekerja mereka.
Adakah ini hasutan ataupun menghasut? Adakah membicarakan mengenai bangsa Melayu dan kepentingan mereka menjadi satu hasutan?
Sebaliknya, cuba kita teliti memorandum Hindraf kepada pihak British. Ramai termasuk kaum India tidak membacanya. Untuk mendapatkan sokongan kaum India Tamil, Hindraf mendesak pihak British supaya membayar gantirugi 1 juta pound sterling (lebih kurang RM 7 juta) kepada setiap orang kaum India Tamil yang terdapat di Malaysia. Ini sudah pasti berupaya mempengaruhi bukan sahaja mereka yang berpendapatan rendah tetapi juga golongan pertengahan dari keturunan Tamil India. Sudah pasti golongan pekerja kaum India terpengaruh.
Terdapat juga didalam memorandum Hindraf sedutan-sedutan seperti berikut yang jelas bersifat perkauman:
1) “Kaum India Komanwel yang merupakan rakyat yang mencintai keamanan di Malaysia ditindas oleh Kerajaan yang didokong oleh pengganas bersenjata kelompok ekstremis Islam telah dengan ganasnya melancarkan satu serangan bersenjata sebelum subuh dan memusnahkan Tokong Hindu Mariamman di Kampung Jawa pada pukul 4 pagi ini (15.11.07)”.
2) “Memohon kepada United Kingdom untuk membentangkan satu resolusi tergempar Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu mengutuk “Penghapusan Etnik” di Malaysia”.
Saya tidak mahu menambah lagi lain-lain kenyataan yang begitu mengapi-ngapikan perasaan perkauman yang terdapat didalam memorandum Hindraf tersebut.
Walau bagaimanapun, saya ingin menyebut mengenai ugutan yang dibuat oleh Hindraf didalam kesimpulannya;
“Kami risau kaum India berketurunan Tamil yang cintakan keamanan setelah dipinggirkan dan ditindas, semakin hari semakin teruk, akan pada satu ketika, secara terpaksa mengambil langkah keganasan sebagaimana yang terjadi kepada kaum Tamil di Sri Lanka.”
Adakah Hindraf bercadang menjadikan Malaysia sebagai Sri Lanka di Asia Tenggara?
Saya tidak percaya majoriti orang Tamil di Malaysia bersetuju dengan gambaran yang dibuat oleh Hindraf. Malangnya, seperti orang Melayu, cuma beberapa orang sahaja yang membaca memorandum yang sebenarnya. Jadi mereka menyokong Hindraf secara membuta-tuli.
Tetapi jika anda membaca apa yang telah saya nyatakan tidakkah anda akan membuat satu kesimpulan bahawa Hindraf dan Param Cumaraswamy, yang membantah penahanan mereka dibawah ISA bersifat perkauman, terutama di atas kehendaknya supaya saya ditahan dibawah Akta itu kerana menyatakan kepada orang Melayu supaya menyedari yang mereka bukan “Tuan” apabila mereka terpaksa mencuci kasut orang lain. Jika mereka ingin menjadi “Tuan”, mereka mesti menimba ilmu dan kecekapan untuk berjaya didalam kehidupan. Dan apabila mereka berjaya martabat mereka akan meningkat samada mereka dipanggil “Tuan” ataupun tidak.
Nampak jelas menurut Param Cumaswamy , bercakap mengenai orang Melayu adalah satu hasutan yang berbau perkauman.
Jadi siapa yang bersifat perkauman; Param Cumaraswamy atau Dr Mahathir?
Saya tidak akan meminta supaya dia ditahan.
Sebagai seorang peguam yang memahami undang-undang, dia perlu menilai dirinya samada dia seorang yang bersifat perkauman dan perlu ditahan atau tidak.
The Great Oil Swindle
The Great Oil Swindle
How much did the Fed really know?
By Mike Whitney
30/05/08 "ICH" -- - The Commodity Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC) is investigating trading in oil futures to determine whether the surge in prices to record levels is the result of manipulation or fraud. They might want to take a look at wheat, rice and corn futures while they're at it. The whole thing is a hoax cooked up by the investment banks and hedge funds who are trying to dig their way out of the trillion dollar mortgage-backed securities (MBS) mess that they created by turning garbage loans into securities. That scam blew up in their face last August and left them scrounging for handouts from the Federal Reserve. Now the billions of dollars they're getting from the Fed is being diverted into commodities which is destabilizing the world economy; driving gas prices to the moon and triggering food riots across the planet.
For months we've been told that the soaring price of oil has been the result of Peak Oil, fighting in Iraq, attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria, labor problems in Norway, and (the all-time favorite)growth in China. It's all baloney. Just like Goldman Sachs prediction of $200 per barrel oil is baloney. If oil is about to skyrocket then why has G-Sax kept a neutral rating on some of its oil holdings like Exxon Mobile? Could it be that they know that oil is just another mega-inflated equity bubble---like housing, corporate bonds and dot.com stocks—that is about to crash to earth as soon as the big players grab a parachute?
There are three things that are driving up the price of oil: the falling dollar, speculation and buying on margin.
The dollar is tanking because of the Federal Reserve's low interest monetary policies have kept interest rates below the rate of inflation for most of the last decade. Add that to the $700 billion current account deficit and a National Debt that has increased from $5.8 trillion when Bush first took office to over $9 trillion today and it's a wonder the dollar hasn't gone “Poof” already.
According to a January 4 editorial in the Wall Street Journal: “If the dollar had remained 'as good as gold' since 2001, oil today would be selling at about $30 per barrel, not $99. (today $126 per barrel) The decline of the dollar against gold and oil suggests a US monetary that is supplying too many dollars.” Wall Street Journal 1-4-08
The price of oil has more than quadrupled since 2001, from roughly $30 per barrel to $126, WITHOUT ANY DISRUPTIONS TO SUPPLY. There's no shortage; it's just gibberish.
As far as “buying on margin” consider this summary from author William Engdahl:
“A conservative calculation is that at least 60% of today’s $128 per barrel price of crude oil comes from unregulated futures speculation by hedge funds, banks and financial groups using the London ICE Futures and New York NYMEX futures exchanges and uncontrolled inter-bank or Over-The-Counter trading to avoid scrutiny. US margin rules of the government’s Commodity Futures Trading Commission allow speculators to buy a crude oil futures contract on the Nymex, by having to pay only 6% of the value of the contract. At today's price of $128 per barrel, that means a futures trader only has to put up about $8 for every barrel. He borrows the other $120. This extreme “leverage” of 16 to 1 helps drive prices to wildly unrealistic levels and offset bank losses in sub-prime and other disasters at the expense of the overall population.”
So the investment banks and their trading partners at the hedge funds can game the system for a mere 8 bucks per barrel or 16 to 1 leverage. Not bad, eh?
Is it possible that gambling on oil futures might be a temptation for banks that are already underwater from a trillion dollars worth of mortgage-related deals that have “gone south” leaving the banking system essentially bankrupt?
And if the banks and hedgies are not playing this game, then where is the money coming from? I have compiled charts and graphs that show that nearly two-thirds of the big investment banks' revenue came from the securitization of commercial and residential real estate loans. That market is frozen. Besides, this is not just a matter of “loan delinquencies” or MBS that have to be written off. The banks are "revenue starved". How are they filling the coffers? They're either neck-deep in interest rate swaps, derivatives trading, or gaming the futures market. Which is it?
Of course, there is one other possibility, but if that possibility turned out to be right than it would cast doubt on the legitimacy of the entire financial system. In fact, it would prove that the system is being rigged from the top-down by our friends at the Banking Politburo, the Federal Reserve. Here goes:
What if the investment banks are trading their worthless MBS and CDOs at the Fed's auction facilities and using the money ($400 billion) to drive up the price of raw materials like rice, corn, wheat, and oil?
Could it be? Could the Fed really be looking the other way so it can bail out its banking buddies while they drive prices skyward?
If it is true; (and I suspect it is) it hasn't done much good. As the Associated Press reported yesterday:
“The Federal Reserve announced Thursday that it will make a fresh batch of short-term cash loans available to squeezed banks as part of an ongoing effort to ease stressed credit markets. The Fed said it will conduct three auctions in June, with each one making $75 billion available in short-term cash loans. Banks can bid for a slice of the available funds. It would mark the latest round in a program that the Fed launched in December to help banks overcome credit problems so they will keep lending to customers.”
Another $225 billion for the bankers and not a dime for the struggling homeowner! The Fed is bankrupting the country with their permanent rotating loans to keep reckless speculators from going under. So much for moral hazard.
As far as speculation, there is ample evidence that the system is being manipulated. According to MarketWatch:
“Speculative activity in commodity markets has grown "enormously" over the past several years, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said in a news release. It pointed out that in five years, from 2003 to 2008, investment in the index funds tied to commodities has grown by 20-fold -- to $260 billion from $13 billion.”
And here's a revealing clip from the testimony of Michael W. Masters of Masters Capital Management, LLC, who addressed the issue of “Commodities Speculation” before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs this week:
“Today, Index Speculators are pouring billions of dollars into the commodities futures
markets, speculating that commodity prices will increase. ...In the popular press the explanation given most often for rising oil prices is the increased demand for oil from China. According to the DOE, annual Chinese demand for petroleum has increased over the last five years from 1.88 billion barrels to 2.8 billion barrels, an increase of 920 million barrels.8 Over the same five-year period, Index Speculatorsʼ demand for petroleum futures has increased by 848 million barrels. THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM INDEX SPECULATORS IS ALMOST EQUAL TO THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM CHINA.
Index Speculators have now stockpiled, via the futures market, the equivalent of 1.1 billion barrels of petroleum, effectively adding eight times as much oil to their own stockpile as the United States has added to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the last five years.
Today, in many commodities futures markets, they are the single largest force.15 The huge growth in their demand has gone virtually undetected by classically-trained economists who almost never analyze demand in futures markets.
As money pours into the markets, two things happen concurrently: the markets expand and prices rise. One particularly troubling aspect of Index Speculator demand is that it actually increases the more prices increase. This explains the accelerating rate at which commodity futures prices (and actual commodity prices) are increasing. The CFTC has taken deliberate steps to allow CERTAIN SPECULATORS VIRTUALLY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE COMMODITIES FUTURES MARKETS. The CFTC has granted Wall Street banks an exemption from speculative position limits when these banks hedge over-the-counter swaps transactions. This has effectively opened a loophole for unlimited speculation. When Index Speculators enter into commodity index swaps, which 85-90% of them do, they face no speculative position limits.... The result is a gross distortion in data that effectively hides the full impact of Index Speculation.” (Thanks to Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis; the one “indispensable” financial blog on the Internet)
Masters adds that the CFTC is pressing to make “Index Speculators exempt from all position limits” so they can make “unlimited” bets on the futures which are wreaking havoc on the global economy and pushing millions towards starvation. Of course, these things pale in comparison to the higher priority of fatting the bottom line of the parasitic investor class.
Brimming oil tankers are presently sitting off the coasts of Iran and Louisiana. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been filled. Demand is flat. The world's biggest consumer of energy (guess who?) is cutting back . As CNN reports:
“At a time when gas prices are at an all-time high, Americans have curtailed their driving at a historic rate. The Department of Transportation said figures from March show the steepest decrease in driving ever recorded. Compared with March a year earlier, Americans drove an estimated 4.3 percent less -- that's 11 billion fewer miles, the DOT's Federal Highway Administration said Monday, calling it "the sharpest yearly drop for any month in FHWA history." (CNN)
The great oil crunch is another fabricated crisis; another "smoke and mirrors" fiasco; another Enron-type shell-game engineered by banksters and hedge fund managers. Once again, the bloody footprints can be traced right back to the front door of the Federal Reserve. Don't expect help from the regulators either; they've all been replaced with business reps like Harvey Pitt or Hank Paulson. The only time anyone in the Bush administration finds their conscience is when they're offered a multi-million dollar “tell all” book deal.
Can you hear me, Scotty?
How much did the Fed really know?
By Mike Whitney
30/05/08 "ICH" -- - The Commodity Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC) is investigating trading in oil futures to determine whether the surge in prices to record levels is the result of manipulation or fraud. They might want to take a look at wheat, rice and corn futures while they're at it. The whole thing is a hoax cooked up by the investment banks and hedge funds who are trying to dig their way out of the trillion dollar mortgage-backed securities (MBS) mess that they created by turning garbage loans into securities. That scam blew up in their face last August and left them scrounging for handouts from the Federal Reserve. Now the billions of dollars they're getting from the Fed is being diverted into commodities which is destabilizing the world economy; driving gas prices to the moon and triggering food riots across the planet.
For months we've been told that the soaring price of oil has been the result of Peak Oil, fighting in Iraq, attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria, labor problems in Norway, and (the all-time favorite)growth in China. It's all baloney. Just like Goldman Sachs prediction of $200 per barrel oil is baloney. If oil is about to skyrocket then why has G-Sax kept a neutral rating on some of its oil holdings like Exxon Mobile? Could it be that they know that oil is just another mega-inflated equity bubble---like housing, corporate bonds and dot.com stocks—that is about to crash to earth as soon as the big players grab a parachute?
There are three things that are driving up the price of oil: the falling dollar, speculation and buying on margin.
The dollar is tanking because of the Federal Reserve's low interest monetary policies have kept interest rates below the rate of inflation for most of the last decade. Add that to the $700 billion current account deficit and a National Debt that has increased from $5.8 trillion when Bush first took office to over $9 trillion today and it's a wonder the dollar hasn't gone “Poof” already.
According to a January 4 editorial in the Wall Street Journal: “If the dollar had remained 'as good as gold' since 2001, oil today would be selling at about $30 per barrel, not $99. (today $126 per barrel) The decline of the dollar against gold and oil suggests a US monetary that is supplying too many dollars.” Wall Street Journal 1-4-08
The price of oil has more than quadrupled since 2001, from roughly $30 per barrel to $126, WITHOUT ANY DISRUPTIONS TO SUPPLY. There's no shortage; it's just gibberish.
As far as “buying on margin” consider this summary from author William Engdahl:
“A conservative calculation is that at least 60% of today’s $128 per barrel price of crude oil comes from unregulated futures speculation by hedge funds, banks and financial groups using the London ICE Futures and New York NYMEX futures exchanges and uncontrolled inter-bank or Over-The-Counter trading to avoid scrutiny. US margin rules of the government’s Commodity Futures Trading Commission allow speculators to buy a crude oil futures contract on the Nymex, by having to pay only 6% of the value of the contract. At today's price of $128 per barrel, that means a futures trader only has to put up about $8 for every barrel. He borrows the other $120. This extreme “leverage” of 16 to 1 helps drive prices to wildly unrealistic levels and offset bank losses in sub-prime and other disasters at the expense of the overall population.”
So the investment banks and their trading partners at the hedge funds can game the system for a mere 8 bucks per barrel or 16 to 1 leverage. Not bad, eh?
Is it possible that gambling on oil futures might be a temptation for banks that are already underwater from a trillion dollars worth of mortgage-related deals that have “gone south” leaving the banking system essentially bankrupt?
And if the banks and hedgies are not playing this game, then where is the money coming from? I have compiled charts and graphs that show that nearly two-thirds of the big investment banks' revenue came from the securitization of commercial and residential real estate loans. That market is frozen. Besides, this is not just a matter of “loan delinquencies” or MBS that have to be written off. The banks are "revenue starved". How are they filling the coffers? They're either neck-deep in interest rate swaps, derivatives trading, or gaming the futures market. Which is it?
Of course, there is one other possibility, but if that possibility turned out to be right than it would cast doubt on the legitimacy of the entire financial system. In fact, it would prove that the system is being rigged from the top-down by our friends at the Banking Politburo, the Federal Reserve. Here goes:
What if the investment banks are trading their worthless MBS and CDOs at the Fed's auction facilities and using the money ($400 billion) to drive up the price of raw materials like rice, corn, wheat, and oil?
Could it be? Could the Fed really be looking the other way so it can bail out its banking buddies while they drive prices skyward?
If it is true; (and I suspect it is) it hasn't done much good. As the Associated Press reported yesterday:
“The Federal Reserve announced Thursday that it will make a fresh batch of short-term cash loans available to squeezed banks as part of an ongoing effort to ease stressed credit markets. The Fed said it will conduct three auctions in June, with each one making $75 billion available in short-term cash loans. Banks can bid for a slice of the available funds. It would mark the latest round in a program that the Fed launched in December to help banks overcome credit problems so they will keep lending to customers.”
Another $225 billion for the bankers and not a dime for the struggling homeowner! The Fed is bankrupting the country with their permanent rotating loans to keep reckless speculators from going under. So much for moral hazard.
As far as speculation, there is ample evidence that the system is being manipulated. According to MarketWatch:
“Speculative activity in commodity markets has grown "enormously" over the past several years, the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said in a news release. It pointed out that in five years, from 2003 to 2008, investment in the index funds tied to commodities has grown by 20-fold -- to $260 billion from $13 billion.”
And here's a revealing clip from the testimony of Michael W. Masters of Masters Capital Management, LLC, who addressed the issue of “Commodities Speculation” before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs this week:
“Today, Index Speculators are pouring billions of dollars into the commodities futures
markets, speculating that commodity prices will increase. ...In the popular press the explanation given most often for rising oil prices is the increased demand for oil from China. According to the DOE, annual Chinese demand for petroleum has increased over the last five years from 1.88 billion barrels to 2.8 billion barrels, an increase of 920 million barrels.8 Over the same five-year period, Index Speculatorsʼ demand for petroleum futures has increased by 848 million barrels. THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM INDEX SPECULATORS IS ALMOST EQUAL TO THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM CHINA.
Index Speculators have now stockpiled, via the futures market, the equivalent of 1.1 billion barrels of petroleum, effectively adding eight times as much oil to their own stockpile as the United States has added to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the last five years.
Today, in many commodities futures markets, they are the single largest force.15 The huge growth in their demand has gone virtually undetected by classically-trained economists who almost never analyze demand in futures markets.
As money pours into the markets, two things happen concurrently: the markets expand and prices rise. One particularly troubling aspect of Index Speculator demand is that it actually increases the more prices increase. This explains the accelerating rate at which commodity futures prices (and actual commodity prices) are increasing. The CFTC has taken deliberate steps to allow CERTAIN SPECULATORS VIRTUALLY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE COMMODITIES FUTURES MARKETS. The CFTC has granted Wall Street banks an exemption from speculative position limits when these banks hedge over-the-counter swaps transactions. This has effectively opened a loophole for unlimited speculation. When Index Speculators enter into commodity index swaps, which 85-90% of them do, they face no speculative position limits.... The result is a gross distortion in data that effectively hides the full impact of Index Speculation.” (Thanks to Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis; the one “indispensable” financial blog on the Internet)
Masters adds that the CFTC is pressing to make “Index Speculators exempt from all position limits” so they can make “unlimited” bets on the futures which are wreaking havoc on the global economy and pushing millions towards starvation. Of course, these things pale in comparison to the higher priority of fatting the bottom line of the parasitic investor class.
Brimming oil tankers are presently sitting off the coasts of Iran and Louisiana. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been filled. Demand is flat. The world's biggest consumer of energy (guess who?) is cutting back . As CNN reports:
“At a time when gas prices are at an all-time high, Americans have curtailed their driving at a historic rate. The Department of Transportation said figures from March show the steepest decrease in driving ever recorded. Compared with March a year earlier, Americans drove an estimated 4.3 percent less -- that's 11 billion fewer miles, the DOT's Federal Highway Administration said Monday, calling it "the sharpest yearly drop for any month in FHWA history." (CNN)
The great oil crunch is another fabricated crisis; another "smoke and mirrors" fiasco; another Enron-type shell-game engineered by banksters and hedge fund managers. Once again, the bloody footprints can be traced right back to the front door of the Federal Reserve. Don't expect help from the regulators either; they've all been replaced with business reps like Harvey Pitt or Hank Paulson. The only time anyone in the Bush administration finds their conscience is when they're offered a multi-million dollar “tell all” book deal.
Can you hear me, Scotty?
Friday, May 30, 2008
The Sword of Allah
The Sword Of Allah At Yarmuk
A.I. Akram (Lieutenant-General)
Article ID: 1206 5268 Reads
"Did you not see us victorious upon the Yarmuk,
The way we prevailed in the campaigns of 'Iraq ?
The virgin cities we conquered, as well as
The Yellow Meadow, on our galloping steeds.
We conquered before that Busra, which was
Impenetrable even to the flying crows.
We killed those who stood against us
With flashing swords, and we have their spoils.
We killed the Romans until they were reduced
Upon the Yarmuk, to emaciated leaves.
We smashed their army as they rushed headlong
To the Neck-Breaker, with our sharp steel.
By morning they tumbled into it, reaching
The mysterious matter that defies the senses."
[Al-Qa'qa' bin Amr, commander in Khalid's army] 1.
At dawn the Muslim corps lined up for prayers under their respective commanders. As soon as the prayers were over, every man rushed to his assigned place. By sunrise both armies stood in battle order, facing each other across the centre of the Plain of Yarmuk, a little less than a mile apart.
There was no movement and little noise in the two armies. The soldiers knew that this was a fight to the finish, that one of the two armies would lie shattered on the battlefield before the fight was over. The Muslims gazed in wonder at the splendid formations of the Roman legions with banners flying and crosses raised above the heads of the soldiery. The Romans looked with something less than awe at the Muslim army deployed to their front. Their confidence rested on their great numbers, but during the past two years the performance of the Muslims in Syria had instilled a good deal of respect in the hearts of the Romans. There was a look of caution in Roman eyes. Thus an hour passed during which no one stirred and the soldiers awaited the start of a battle which, according to the chroniclers, "began with sparks of fire and ended with a raging conflagration", and of which "each day was more violent than the day before." 2.
Then a Roman general by the name of George emerged from the Roman centre and rode towards the Muslims. Halting a short distance from the Muslim centre, he raised his voice and asked for Khalid. From the Muslim side Khalid rode out, delighted at the thought that the battle would begin with himself fighting a duel. He would set the pace for the rest of the battle.
As Khalid drew near, the Roman made no move to draw his sword, but continued to look intently at Khalid. The Muslim advanced until the necks of the horses crossed, and still George did not draw his sword. Then he spoke, in Arabic:
"O Khalid, tell me the truth and do not deceive me, for the free do not lie and the noble do not deceive. Is it true that Allah sent a sword from heaven to your Prophet ? … and that he gave it to you ? … and that never have you drawn it but your enemies have been defeated?"
"No!" replied Khalid.
"Then why are you known as the Sword of Allah?"
Here Khalid told George the story of how he received the title of Sword of Allah from the Holy Prophet. George pondered this a while, then with a pensive look in his eyes, asked, "Tell me, to what do you call me?"
"To bear witness", Khalid replied, "that there is no Allah but Allah and Muhammad is His Slave and Messenger; and to believe in what he has brought from Allah."
"If I do not agree?"
"Then the Jizya, and you shall be under our protection."
"If I still do not agree?"
"Then the sword!"George considered the words of Khalid for a few moments, then asked, "What is the position of one who enters your faith today?"
"In our faith there is only one position. All are equal."
"Then I accept your faith!" 3
To the astonishment of the two armies, which knew nothing of what had passed between the two generals, Khalid turned his horse and Muslim and Roman rode slowly to the Muslim army. On arrival at the Muslim centre George repeated after Khalid:
"There is no Allah but Allah; Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah!"
(A few hours later the newly-converted George would fight heroically for the faith which he had just embraced and would die in battle.) On the auspicious note of this conversion began the Battle of Yarmuk.
1. Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah, Dar Abi Hayyan, Cairo, 1st ed. 1416/1996, Vol. 7 P. 20.2. Waqidi: p. 1333. Tabari: Vol. 2, p. 595
Read the whole story of Khalid Bin al Waleed and the early Muslim Conquests at http://www.swordofallah.com/ (Yahudi have hijacked the site. Go here instead http://www.imaanstar.com/khalid.php)
The Sword of Islam
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH MOST GRACIOUS MOST MERCIFUL
THE SWORD OF ISLAM
The Sunnah Islamic Page
Contact Us
P.O.Box: 28774 Safat
State Of Kuwait
Print The Book
The first few who embraced the "new" religion in Makkah in the Arabian Peninsula at the hands of the Prophet, were his wife Khadijah, his servant Zaid and his eleven year old cousin Ali. Among the ones who later joined this faith were the honest merchant, Abu Bakr; the iron man of Arabia, Umar the Great; the shy businessman, Uthman; the Prophet's brave uncle Hamza and a slave of a pagan, Bilal. They simply couldn't resist the MAGIC SWORD of a humble and lonely Prophet? The negligible minority of the believers in this new Faith was soon exiled from Makkah and they arrived in the city called Yathreb which later became known as MADINAH. The Muslim emigrants to Madinah brought their SWORD with them. The SWORD continued to work and its magnetic force continued to "pull" people towards it until the whole of Arabia joined the Faith. Compared to the population of the rest of the world at that time, the Arabs constituted a tiny minority. A fraction of this minority decided to take the SWORD beyond the boundaries of the Arabian desert to the mighty Mediterranean, the coast of Malabar and the far away East Indies Islands. People after people continued surrendering to this SWORD and joining the Faith.
So sharp was the edge of the SWORD! It simply conquered the hearts; bodies yielded automatically. It is the SWORD OF TRUTH, whose mere shine eliminates falsehood just like light wipes away darkness.
HAS THE SWORD GONE BLUNT? NO, FAR FROM IT.
It Continues to pierce the hearts of countless men and women today - in spite of the relentless efforts by persons with vested interests who like darkness to prevail, so that they may rob people of their good things. Read below the impressions of some who were recently conquered by the same SWORD. They are from different countries, speak different languages and have different backgrounds. Their present addresses are also given. Perhaps you may like to ask them how it feels to be struck by the SWORD OF TRUTH.
1. LEOPOLD WEISS (now Mohammed Asad): Austrian statesman, journalist, former foreign correspondent for the Frankfurter Zeitung; author of Islam at Cross Roads and Road to Mecca and translator of the Qur'an. He embraced Islam in 1926.
"Islam appears to me like a perfect work of Architecture. All its parts are harmoniously conceived to complement and support each other. Nothing is superfluous and nothing lacking, with the result of an absolute balance and solid composure."
2. AHMED HOLT: British Civil Contractor, traveler in search of the Divine truth, spent much of his time in research and comparative study of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He embraced Islam in 1975.
"The SWORD OF ISLAM is not the sword of steel. I know this by experience, because the sword of Islam struck deep into my own heart. It didn't bring death, but it brought a new life; it brought an awareness and it brought an awakening as to who am I and what am I and for what am I here?"
3. BOGDAN KOPANSKI (now Bogdan Ataullah Kopanski):originally Polish, now American; Ph.D. in history and politics, had a very interesting journey to Islam and faced severe hardships; was imprisoned twice by the Polish communist regime (1968, 1981-82). He embraced Islam in 1974.
"When I was 12 years old I rejected illogical and contradictory faith of the Church. Two years later in 1962 I was fascinated by the victorious struggle of the Algerian Muslim mujahideen against French colonialism. It was the first arrow of Islam...The high school and earliest days of my education in the University, I was a typical example of the 'rebel generation' of Reds...My way to the Truth of Al-Qur'an was slow and unpaved... In 1974 I visited Turkey, I wrote my M.A. dissertation about Sultan and Caliph Suleiman Kanuni's policy towards the Polish Kingdom. There I was hit by the most beautiful voice of mankind, Adhan, the call to prayer. My hair stood up. An unknown, powerful force led me to an old masjid in Istanbul. There, old, smiling, Turkish bearded men taught me Wuzu, ablution. I confessed to tears, Shahada, and I prayed my first Salah Maghrib...I swept out the rubbish ideologies...The first time in my life, my mind was relaxed and I felt the pleasure of Allah's love in my heart. I was a Muslim..."
4-VENGATACHALAM ADIYAR (now Abdullah Adiyar): Indian, noted Tamil writer and journalist; worked as a news editor inn Dr. M. Karunanidhi's daily Murasoli for 17 years; assisted
3 former Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu. Received Kalaimamani Award (Big Gem of Arts) from Tamil Nadu Government in 1982. He embraced Islam in 1987.
"In Islam I found suitable replies to nagging queries arising n my mind with regard to the theory of creation, status of woman, creation of universe, etc. The life history of the holy Prophet attracted me very much and made easy for me to compare with other world leaders and their philosophies."
5. HERBERT HOBOHM (now Aman Hobohm): German diplomat, missionary and social worker. An intellectual who has been serving the German diplomatic missions in various parts of the world. Presently working as Cultural Attache in German Embassy in Riyadh. He embraced Islam in 1941.
"I have lived under different systems of life and have had the opportunity of studying various ideologies, but have come to the conclusion that none is as perfect as Islam. None of the systems has got a complete code of a noble life, Only Islam has it' and that is why good men embrace it. Islam is not theoretical; it is practical. It means complete submission to the will of God."
6. CAT STEVENS (now Yusuf Islam): British; formerly a Christian and a world famous pop singer. He embraced Islam in 1973.
"It will be wrong to judge Islam in the light of the behavior of some bad Muslims who are always shown on the media. It is like judging a car as a bad one if the driver if the car is drunk and he bangs it into the wall. Islam guides all human beings in daily life - in it's spiritual, mental and physical dimensions. But we must find the sources of these instruction, the Qur'an and the example of the Prophet. then we can see the ideal of Islam."
7. MARGARET MARCUS (now Maryam Jamilah): American; formerly a Jews, essayist and author of many books. She embraced Islam in 1962.
"The authority of Islamic Morals and Laws proceeds from Almighty God. Pleasure and happiness in Islam are but the natural byproducts of emotional satisfaction in one's duties conscientiously performed for the pleasure of God to achieve salvation. In Islam duties are always stressed above rights. Only in Islam was my quest for absolute values satisfied. Only in Islam did I at last find all that was true, good, beautiful and which gives meaning and direction to human life and death.
8. M. HOFFMAN (now Murad Hoffman): Ph.D. in law (Harvard); German social scientist and diplomat; presently German Ambassador in Algeria. He embraced Islam in 1980.
"For some time now, striving for more and more precision and brevity, I have tried to put on paper in a systematic way, all philosophical truths, which in my view, can be ascertained beyond reasonable doubt. In the course of this effort it dawned on me that the typical attitude of an agnostic is not an intelligent one; that man simply cannot escape a decision to believe; that the createdness of what exists around us is obvious; that Islam undoubtedly finds itself in the greatest harmony with overall reality. Thus I realize, not without shock, that step by step, in spite of myself and almost unconsciously, n feeling and thinking I have grown into a Muslim. Only one last step remained to be taken: to formalize my conversion. As of today I am a Muslim. I have arrived."
9. CASSIUS CLAY (now Muhammad Ali): American; three times World Heavyweight Champion, formerly a Christian. He embraced Islam in 1965.
"I have had many nice moments in my life. But the feelings I had while standing on Mount Arafat on the day of Hajj ( Muslims' pilgrimage), was the most unique. I felt exalted by the indescribable spiritual atmosphere there as over a million and a half pilgrims invoked God to forgive them of their sins and bestow on them His choicest blessings. It was an exhilarating experience to see to people belonging to different colors, races and nationalities, kings, heads of states and ordinary men from very poor countries all clad in two simple white sheets praying to God without any sense of either pride or inferiority. It was a practical manifestation of the concept of equality in Islam."
(Speaking to the daily "Al-Madinah" Jeddah, 15 July, 1989)
These were the impressions of a few persons who had themselves been struck by the SWORD OF TRUTH, that is, the Message of Islam.
AS FOR THE PROPAGANDA THAT IT WAS THE SWORD OF STEEL, THAT IS, FORCE, WHICH WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN THE UNIVERSAL EXPANSION OF ISLAM, WE GIVE BELOW QUOTATIONS FROM THE WRITING OF SOME OF THE PROMINENT NON-MUSLIM SCHOLARS AND LEADERS REFUTING THIS BASELESS ACCUSATION.
1. M. K. GANDHI: "...I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission. These, and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble." YOUNG INDIA, 1924
2. EDWARD GIBBON: "The greatest success of Mohammed's life was effected by sheer moral force without the stroke of a sword." HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRE, London, 1870
3. A. S. TRITTON: "The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false." ISLAM, London, 1951, p. 21
4. DE LACY O'LEARY: "History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslim, sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated." ISLAM AT CROSSROADS, London, 1923, p. 8
5. K. S. RAMAKRISHNA RAO: "My problem to write this monograph is easier because we are not generally fed now on that (distorted) kind of history and much time need not be spent on pointing out our misrepresentations of Islam. The theory of Islam and sword, for instance, is not heard now in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam, there is no compulsion in religion, is well known." MOHAMMED THE PROPHET OF ISLAM, Riyadh, 1989, p. 4
6. JAMES A. MICHENER: "No other religion in history spread so rapidly as Islam...The West has widely believed that this surge of religion was made possible by the sword. But no modern scholar accepts that idea, and the Qur'an is explicit in support of the freedom of conscience." ISLAM - THE MISUNDERSTOOD RELIGION, READERS' DIGEST (American Edition) May 1955
7. LAWRENCE E. BROWNE: "Incidentally these well-established facts dispose of the idea so widely fostered in Christian writings that the Muslims, wherever they went, forced people to accept Islam at the point of the sword." THE PROSPECTS OR ISLAM, London, 1944.
IF YOU TOO POSSESS A SOFT TENDER HEART AND AN OPEN MIND, DO WRITE TO US FOR SOME BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE WAY OF LIFE CALLED "ISLAM". DO NOT BELIEVE THE HEARSAY AND LEARN FORM THE DIRECT SOURCES. WE ARE READY TO HELP - Email Us
THE SWORD OF ISLAM
The Sunnah Islamic Page
Contact Us
P.O.Box: 28774 Safat
State Of Kuwait
Print The Book
The first few who embraced the "new" religion in Makkah in the Arabian Peninsula at the hands of the Prophet, were his wife Khadijah, his servant Zaid and his eleven year old cousin Ali. Among the ones who later joined this faith were the honest merchant, Abu Bakr; the iron man of Arabia, Umar the Great; the shy businessman, Uthman; the Prophet's brave uncle Hamza and a slave of a pagan, Bilal. They simply couldn't resist the MAGIC SWORD of a humble and lonely Prophet? The negligible minority of the believers in this new Faith was soon exiled from Makkah and they arrived in the city called Yathreb which later became known as MADINAH. The Muslim emigrants to Madinah brought their SWORD with them. The SWORD continued to work and its magnetic force continued to "pull" people towards it until the whole of Arabia joined the Faith. Compared to the population of the rest of the world at that time, the Arabs constituted a tiny minority. A fraction of this minority decided to take the SWORD beyond the boundaries of the Arabian desert to the mighty Mediterranean, the coast of Malabar and the far away East Indies Islands. People after people continued surrendering to this SWORD and joining the Faith.
So sharp was the edge of the SWORD! It simply conquered the hearts; bodies yielded automatically. It is the SWORD OF TRUTH, whose mere shine eliminates falsehood just like light wipes away darkness.
HAS THE SWORD GONE BLUNT? NO, FAR FROM IT.
It Continues to pierce the hearts of countless men and women today - in spite of the relentless efforts by persons with vested interests who like darkness to prevail, so that they may rob people of their good things. Read below the impressions of some who were recently conquered by the same SWORD. They are from different countries, speak different languages and have different backgrounds. Their present addresses are also given. Perhaps you may like to ask them how it feels to be struck by the SWORD OF TRUTH.
1. LEOPOLD WEISS (now Mohammed Asad): Austrian statesman, journalist, former foreign correspondent for the Frankfurter Zeitung; author of Islam at Cross Roads and Road to Mecca and translator of the Qur'an. He embraced Islam in 1926.
"Islam appears to me like a perfect work of Architecture. All its parts are harmoniously conceived to complement and support each other. Nothing is superfluous and nothing lacking, with the result of an absolute balance and solid composure."
2. AHMED HOLT: British Civil Contractor, traveler in search of the Divine truth, spent much of his time in research and comparative study of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He embraced Islam in 1975.
"The SWORD OF ISLAM is not the sword of steel. I know this by experience, because the sword of Islam struck deep into my own heart. It didn't bring death, but it brought a new life; it brought an awareness and it brought an awakening as to who am I and what am I and for what am I here?"
3. BOGDAN KOPANSKI (now Bogdan Ataullah Kopanski):originally Polish, now American; Ph.D. in history and politics, had a very interesting journey to Islam and faced severe hardships; was imprisoned twice by the Polish communist regime (1968, 1981-82). He embraced Islam in 1974.
"When I was 12 years old I rejected illogical and contradictory faith of the Church. Two years later in 1962 I was fascinated by the victorious struggle of the Algerian Muslim mujahideen against French colonialism. It was the first arrow of Islam...The high school and earliest days of my education in the University, I was a typical example of the 'rebel generation' of Reds...My way to the Truth of Al-Qur'an was slow and unpaved... In 1974 I visited Turkey, I wrote my M.A. dissertation about Sultan and Caliph Suleiman Kanuni's policy towards the Polish Kingdom. There I was hit by the most beautiful voice of mankind, Adhan, the call to prayer. My hair stood up. An unknown, powerful force led me to an old masjid in Istanbul. There, old, smiling, Turkish bearded men taught me Wuzu, ablution. I confessed to tears, Shahada, and I prayed my first Salah Maghrib...I swept out the rubbish ideologies...The first time in my life, my mind was relaxed and I felt the pleasure of Allah's love in my heart. I was a Muslim..."
4-VENGATACHALAM ADIYAR (now Abdullah Adiyar): Indian, noted Tamil writer and journalist; worked as a news editor inn Dr. M. Karunanidhi's daily Murasoli for 17 years; assisted
3 former Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu. Received Kalaimamani Award (Big Gem of Arts) from Tamil Nadu Government in 1982. He embraced Islam in 1987.
"In Islam I found suitable replies to nagging queries arising n my mind with regard to the theory of creation, status of woman, creation of universe, etc. The life history of the holy Prophet attracted me very much and made easy for me to compare with other world leaders and their philosophies."
5. HERBERT HOBOHM (now Aman Hobohm): German diplomat, missionary and social worker. An intellectual who has been serving the German diplomatic missions in various parts of the world. Presently working as Cultural Attache in German Embassy in Riyadh. He embraced Islam in 1941.
"I have lived under different systems of life and have had the opportunity of studying various ideologies, but have come to the conclusion that none is as perfect as Islam. None of the systems has got a complete code of a noble life, Only Islam has it' and that is why good men embrace it. Islam is not theoretical; it is practical. It means complete submission to the will of God."
6. CAT STEVENS (now Yusuf Islam): British; formerly a Christian and a world famous pop singer. He embraced Islam in 1973.
"It will be wrong to judge Islam in the light of the behavior of some bad Muslims who are always shown on the media. It is like judging a car as a bad one if the driver if the car is drunk and he bangs it into the wall. Islam guides all human beings in daily life - in it's spiritual, mental and physical dimensions. But we must find the sources of these instruction, the Qur'an and the example of the Prophet. then we can see the ideal of Islam."
7. MARGARET MARCUS (now Maryam Jamilah): American; formerly a Jews, essayist and author of many books. She embraced Islam in 1962.
"The authority of Islamic Morals and Laws proceeds from Almighty God. Pleasure and happiness in Islam are but the natural byproducts of emotional satisfaction in one's duties conscientiously performed for the pleasure of God to achieve salvation. In Islam duties are always stressed above rights. Only in Islam was my quest for absolute values satisfied. Only in Islam did I at last find all that was true, good, beautiful and which gives meaning and direction to human life and death.
8. M. HOFFMAN (now Murad Hoffman): Ph.D. in law (Harvard); German social scientist and diplomat; presently German Ambassador in Algeria. He embraced Islam in 1980.
"For some time now, striving for more and more precision and brevity, I have tried to put on paper in a systematic way, all philosophical truths, which in my view, can be ascertained beyond reasonable doubt. In the course of this effort it dawned on me that the typical attitude of an agnostic is not an intelligent one; that man simply cannot escape a decision to believe; that the createdness of what exists around us is obvious; that Islam undoubtedly finds itself in the greatest harmony with overall reality. Thus I realize, not without shock, that step by step, in spite of myself and almost unconsciously, n feeling and thinking I have grown into a Muslim. Only one last step remained to be taken: to formalize my conversion. As of today I am a Muslim. I have arrived."
9. CASSIUS CLAY (now Muhammad Ali): American; three times World Heavyweight Champion, formerly a Christian. He embraced Islam in 1965.
"I have had many nice moments in my life. But the feelings I had while standing on Mount Arafat on the day of Hajj ( Muslims' pilgrimage), was the most unique. I felt exalted by the indescribable spiritual atmosphere there as over a million and a half pilgrims invoked God to forgive them of their sins and bestow on them His choicest blessings. It was an exhilarating experience to see to people belonging to different colors, races and nationalities, kings, heads of states and ordinary men from very poor countries all clad in two simple white sheets praying to God without any sense of either pride or inferiority. It was a practical manifestation of the concept of equality in Islam."
(Speaking to the daily "Al-Madinah" Jeddah, 15 July, 1989)
These were the impressions of a few persons who had themselves been struck by the SWORD OF TRUTH, that is, the Message of Islam.
AS FOR THE PROPAGANDA THAT IT WAS THE SWORD OF STEEL, THAT IS, FORCE, WHICH WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN THE UNIVERSAL EXPANSION OF ISLAM, WE GIVE BELOW QUOTATIONS FROM THE WRITING OF SOME OF THE PROMINENT NON-MUSLIM SCHOLARS AND LEADERS REFUTING THIS BASELESS ACCUSATION.
1. M. K. GANDHI: "...I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission. These, and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble." YOUNG INDIA, 1924
2. EDWARD GIBBON: "The greatest success of Mohammed's life was effected by sheer moral force without the stroke of a sword." HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRE, London, 1870
3. A. S. TRITTON: "The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false." ISLAM, London, 1951, p. 21
4. DE LACY O'LEARY: "History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslim, sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated." ISLAM AT CROSSROADS, London, 1923, p. 8
5. K. S. RAMAKRISHNA RAO: "My problem to write this monograph is easier because we are not generally fed now on that (distorted) kind of history and much time need not be spent on pointing out our misrepresentations of Islam. The theory of Islam and sword, for instance, is not heard now in any quarter worth the name. The principle of Islam, there is no compulsion in religion, is well known." MOHAMMED THE PROPHET OF ISLAM, Riyadh, 1989, p. 4
6. JAMES A. MICHENER: "No other religion in history spread so rapidly as Islam...The West has widely believed that this surge of religion was made possible by the sword. But no modern scholar accepts that idea, and the Qur'an is explicit in support of the freedom of conscience." ISLAM - THE MISUNDERSTOOD RELIGION, READERS' DIGEST (American Edition) May 1955
7. LAWRENCE E. BROWNE: "Incidentally these well-established facts dispose of the idea so widely fostered in Christian writings that the Muslims, wherever they went, forced people to accept Islam at the point of the sword." THE PROSPECTS OR ISLAM, London, 1944.
IF YOU TOO POSSESS A SOFT TENDER HEART AND AN OPEN MIND, DO WRITE TO US FOR SOME BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE WAY OF LIFE CALLED "ISLAM". DO NOT BELIEVE THE HEARSAY AND LEARN FORM THE DIRECT SOURCES. WE ARE READY TO HELP - Email Us
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
