Across Nation, Mosque Projects Meet Opposition

Ny Times: “What’s different is the heat, the volume, the level of hostility,” said Ihsan Bagby, associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky. “It’s one thing to oppose a mosque because traffic might increase, but it’s different when you say these mosques are going to be nurturing terrorist bombers, that Islam is invading, that civilization is being undermined by Muslims.”

Islamophobia In Denmark (again)

After Copenhagen city council approved the building of Denmark's first mosque, extreme-right Danish People's Party launched a massive campaign against it, citing that the mosque will be funded by "terror funds".

Let's not forget their islamophobic stance when their daily printed a cartoon depicting our great prophet with a bomb in his turban.

Muslims account for 3.5% of the population in the country, with a strength of 200,000.

Here's an excerpt from the petition site to ban all mosque construction:

"Recep Tayyip Erdogan Prime Minister of Turkey publicly read an Islamic poem including the lines: “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…” The faithful?

That would be muslims then!

Well let’s blunt their bayonets and hammer their helmets. Sign the SIOE petition Stop all mosque building in Denmark http://www.petitiononline.com/stpmsqdn/petition.html "

Islam: Antara Nas Dan Pendapat Tokoh

For those who argued that we can't question ulama's decisions or opinions:

MStar:
"Sebagai muslim, kita berhak bertanya dan mencari yang lebih tepat sesuai dengan akal yang Allah kurniakan kepada kita. Kita hormati tokoh, tapi dalam masa yang sama kita tidak akan menggadaikan kebenaran. Kita patut bezakan antara nas Allah dan rasulNya, dengan pandangan tokoh yang mungkin betul, mungkin salah, mungkin patut disemak semula, mungkin juga melepasi batasan keperluan dan kemunasabah untuk umat.

Disebabkan tidak memahami hal inilah, umat Islam pening kepala dengan pandangan tokoh-tokoh agama hari ini yang bermacam-macam. Jika ulama itu berniaga, mungkin dipengaruhi urusan bisnes, yang politik mungkin dipengaruhi urusan politiknya. Begitulah seterusnya. Jalan keluar, kita menyemak alasan dan hujah setiap mereka dan bertanya: adakah ini daripada Allah dan rasulNya, atau tuan ‘rasa-rasa’ sahaja?!."

Muslims Banned from BEP gig: ST

KUALA LUMPUR - MUSLIMS in Malaysia have been barred from attending a concert by US hip hop band the Black Eyed Peas sponsored by Guinness which is owned by the world's biggest spirits group Diageo.

The move comes after a Malaysian Islamic court sentenced a 32-year Muslim woman to be caned after she was caught drinking beer in a hotel and at a time when an opposition Islamic party has moved against beer sales.

>> Only Muslims from Malaysia?

French pool bars Muslim woman for 'burquini' suit

PARIS -- A Muslim woman garbed in a head-to-toe swimsuit - dubbed a "burquini" - may have opened a new chapter in France's tussle between religious practices and its stern secular code.

Implications of Anwar Ibrahim’s promotion of a moderate and west-friendly Islam (part 2)

The state of the Islamic movement in Malaysia today is by and large a product of the 1998 saga. Anwar’s ordeal resulted in odd partnerships in the Malaysian opposition, with both Islamic and anti-Islamic elements joining forces to form a coalition to win elections. PAS felt it had no choice but to join the bandwagon, lest it be accused of not seizing the moment when many non-Muslims had turned to it for some form of leadership in their opposition to Mahathir. Similarly, outside Malaysia, human-rights organizations, religious figures, European leaders and the most hawkish of American personalities came to Anwar Ibrahim’s defence, partly because of his years of establishing a wide network of supporters.

Now as his judicial ordeal in Malaysia fades into the past, so does western criticism of Malaysia, a country whose economy offers great prospects of profit for western investment. This is partly because of the Malaysian government’s engaging public-relations experts not only for foreign-investment purposes, but also to present itself as a moderate Muslim country. Its support for the ‘war on terror’, offering logistical and moral support to Washington despite its loud anti-American noise, has also brought the Malaysian leadership back into the good books of American lobbyists, who in turn influence policies in Capital Hill.

Anwar Ibrahim, the man whom Washington now apparently favours to lead this southeast Asian Muslim country, is now in the opposition even if he refuses to hold any party post. But the US and its western thinktanks are in no hurry: the present leadership is able to deliver, but for the ‘war on terror’ to generate tangible results it needs a man with the necessary combination of qualities: Islamist yet pro-western, and therefore easy to deal with – to succeed gradually in the top echelons of government.

The implications of all this on Muslims in Malaysia are already visible: western thinktanks and local NGOs funded by western interests are already engaging the opposition, particularly PAS, in various issues which do not concern ordinary Muslims directly. These include such things as “personal freedom”; some sections of an emerging class of secular elites have called for the powers of Islamic enforcement-officers (mild compared to their Middle Eastern counterparts) to be abolished. This non-issue came up when children and relatives of some politicians were arrested recently for consumption of liquor and other unIslamic behaviour at a discotheque in Kuala Lumpur. These groups have also tried to persuade the government to establish a so-called “inter-faith commission” so that all religions will be consulted on national policies.

The sudden rise of these ‘liberal’ demands has to do with the steady emergence of secular elites among the Malay Muslims, most of whom have ties with ‘royal families’ and powerful politicians in other countries, in much the same way as Pakistan’s disco-generation and Turkey’s secular elites have tried to justify their unIslamic lifestyles, while at the same time curtailing the Muslims’ freedom to choose their own destiny.

One thinktank, the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, based in Germany, which has been sponsoring political programmes for the opposition, has even prepared a platform for PAS, on one side of the fence, and several NGO representatives, on the other, to debate issues raised by these groups. Such marketing-style seminars and forums to ‘engage’, ‘tame’ and infiltrate the Islamic movement are common in many other Muslim countries, and are a clever distraction for the Islamic movement, to prevent activists’ attention from focusing on more urgent issues. One can argue that in Malaysia’s case, PAS needs to be ‘tamed’ because it is an integral part of the opposition and cannot be isolated, in preparation for Anwar’s return to government.

Anwar’s visits to several institutions in the West, such as to Oxford University and John Hopkins University, can also be read in the same way: a public-relations exercise to impress upon Washington that the Malaysian opposition is “friendly”. Speaking at John Hopkins in Washington early last month, Anwar hinted that some form of Western pressure should be applied in order to ease the opposition’s burden (remember that such pressure is already seen in places like Lebanon and Venezuela). Anwar expressed regret for Washington’s recent praise of the Malaysian government: “It is mockery even when Washington, for example, approves this sort of exercise [‘undemocratic’ practices] because it just portrays your utter ignorance or inconsistency in dealing with such countries,” he told the audience (italics added).

Anwar was also at pains to convince his American audience that PAS, his main ally in the opposition, would review its Islamic-state aspiration, adding that its agenda is not tenable in a multi-religious society such as Malaysia. “They have agreed to review this and I have told others that I can be convinced. But many non-Muslims, many liberal Muslims may not be convinced because they are thinking that while you say that now, you may hijack the agenda after the election... You cannot equate the Islamic party or judge them purely on the propaganda of the ruling party. They are not the Taliban. They take a more liberal view.”

Although it is not entirely true that PAS is reviewing its position on the Islamic state, it is a fact that it has failed to propagate it with wisdom. Since Mahathir rebuilt his image after 1998, PAS’s influence has steadily declined. This was made worse by the death of Fadzil Noor, whose leadership of PAS had ensured that the party kept its ideal intact yet worked with others to bring about reform and change. Many disgruntled leaders and others hitherto aligned with the ruling elite had joined PAS. A few of them have risen in the party to occupy key posts. These are businessmen and professionals who are well known among government circles. Yet their contribution to disseminating Islam – to lay the foundation of an Islamic state or do da’wah in a multireligious society like Malaysia – has been minimal. Much of the party’s resources have been geared towards winning elections, which it could not have managed anyway because of the strict campaigning and election rules.

The absence of a capable leadership in PAS is probably one reason why it has in effect left its direction to Anwar. PAS is now increasingly being sidelined in debates that affect Muslims in the country, and its leaders’ responses to the challenges being brought by the so-called ‘liberal’ camp have been dismal. Its arguments are almost all within a national political framework, such as the replies it gave when these ‘liberals’ questioned the enforcement of morality among Muslims. PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang merely warned them against transgressing the federal constitution and the powers of the sultans.

PAS’s survival as an Islamic movement to voice the ethos of Islam in Malaysia may be at stake, as it increasingly finds itself trapped in the system it chose to be in, and seeks to ‘re-brand’ itself. It seems that it now wants to survive as a ‘market-friendly’ political party, and do so by aligning itself with Anwar, who many expect will be the prime minister. This may well result in long-term (if not irreparable) damage to the Islamic movement, and risks turning the only Islamic movement in the country into a Turkish-type ‘Islamist’ political party that exists mostly in the ballot-box and for little else.

Implications of Anwar Ibrahim’s promotion of a moderate and west-friendly Islam

From chedet.com fan club FB group:

Since his release last year after spending six-years in a Malaysian prison, Anwar Ibrahim has become a darling of the West for his promotion of an understanding of Islam that is regarded as ‘moderate’ and West-friendly. ABDAR RAHMAN KOYA in Kuala Lumpur reports.

Anwar Ibrahim, the former deputy prime minister of Malaysia who was freed in September last year, is almost synonymous with contemporary Malaysian politics. He was once a student-leader, well known among Islamic circles throughout the world; his rise and fall have been followed closely by his friends and by activists. When he was dismissed, arrested, jailed and convicted on contrived charges, many Muslims in Malaysia and those concerned with the Islamic movement saw the process as the nature of secular politics. Even more, many in the global Islamic movement were not surprised by the drama that engulfed Malaysia’s political scene from September 1998, when he was dismissed, to his release from prison exactly six years later.

During these tumultuous times Anwar Ibrahim has emerged as an icon whose personal and political experience brought together all types of people – the Islamists, the ‘moderates’, and even some parties whose anti-Islamic agenda is difficult to conceal or deny. One fact has to be acknowledged: Anwar is politically very skillful, and quite capable of making a comeback. Whether this is because of his charisma and leadership, his political shrewdness, or even due to his attention-capturing oratory skills, is another matter. He is now increasingly hailed as a “moderate” in some western circles; his diary is filled with speaking engagements in academic and political institutions that are either in the West or funded by the West. Not surprisingly, “inter-civilisational dialogue”, the subject that has no risk attached for politicians seeking a good image among Western leaders, is one of his themes wherever he goes.

Probably as a result of this development, many in the Islamic movement have doubts about Anwar’s sincerity to the movement, despite his background as a ‘radical’ Islamic student leader whose impact on the Malaysian political scene has been immense in the country’s recent past. These doubts are valid, and his recent statements and actions have further fuelled these suspicions. His recruitment by Mahathir in 1981 for the latter’s “Islamization policy” earned him friends and foes: many saw in him a mastery of political skill, in other words a man for all seasons, wearing the right hat for every occasion. Considering that he was touted in the seventies as a “radical Muslim” leader, and his supporters once stormed the US embassy, Anwar Ibrahim’s plunge into a different mould of ‘Islamicity’ has been as dramatic as his rise in Mahathir’s cabinet. With such a history, it is difficult for the Islamic movement to ignore him, and even more difficult for the Islamic movement – or the ‘Islamists’, as the current parlance is – to not know him.

These days, Anwar Ibrahim is globetrotting, with most friends in high places (governments and thinktanks in various countries) welcoming him, despite the fact that he has no official post in Malaysia’s government at the moment. In the US he has delivered many lectures in his newfound capacity of spokesman for “inter-civilizational dialogue”. Immediately after his release he was greeted in Munich, Germany, where he was being treated for spinal injury, by none other than Paul Wolfowitz, the architect of the US war on Iraq. Thus began the repackaging of Anwar Ibrahim: he ceased to be the rousing leader that he had been until 1998, and has become someone whose friendship with western mentors – to whom many would-be leaders in southeast Asia link their political destiny – is invaluable to Westerners in their desperate search for “agents of change” in the Muslim world.

At the very least his image-building, from the way he dresses to the cautious statements he makes about the US and western hegemony, has earned him the status of a Western “darling”. In typical fashion, a variety of words is being used in western circles to describe him: he is a moderate, a thinker, a reformist; he is a liberal Islamist, an Islamic democrat; terms that Anwar himself might be uncomfortable with, but for whose use on him he has no one to blame but himself.

Who Anwar’s friends really are remains the biggest question since his release: such a question could be ignored in the spirit of international diplomatic realities when he was at the top echelon of government. But now that he has no political post, one is left wondering why he is meeting with people like Wolfowitz, and being welcomed at the Pentagon. Clearly, he is being groomed both in Washington and by western journalists as a “voice of moderate Islam”. On April 11, at a conference in Qatar, organised by the US-Islamic World Forum (a body funded by several American interests) Anwar Ibrahim said that he had “conceded” that the US attack on Iraq heralded a new beginning for the “voices of freedom”, and disagreed that it was a war against Iraqis or Muslims. As if that were not enough to please Uncle Sam, Anwar is on record as expressing support for Paul Wolfowitz’s nomination to head the World Bank, against which even the US’s European allies have protested. His various ‘self-critical’ statements, now fashionable among Muslim ‘moderates’, side by side with mild chiding of American policies, lend credence to the supposition that this is the man that the West is grooming to head one of the most vibrant Muslim governments in the world.

Dr Muzaffar Iqbal has best described this phenomenon: ‘moderate Muslims’ of the “self-critical type”, who, as he wrote, “repeat their favorite mantra: ‘we must stop blaming others for our misfortune, the problem lies within us.’ This is precisely the kind of ‘openness’ and ‘inward-looking approach’ desired by the US. These ‘Muslim intellectuals’ are the darlings of Washington because the Americans want us to believe that we are being bombed back into the stone age because of our own faults.” (See “The West’s intellectual agents in the Muslim world”, Crescent International, October 2004). Anwar Ibrahim now appears to be a leading “agent of change”, as far as the West permits: he is talking about democracy in the Muslim world but stops short of criticizing his friends in the Arab world, especially the Saudi ruling family, with whom he has enjoyed cordial relations since the days when the Saudis were campaigning in the Muslim world against the “Shi’ite” Revolution in Iran.

For the Malaysian opposition, particularly for the Islamic Party (PAS), which is aligned closely to the People’s Justice Party (Keadilan), led by Anwar’s wife, this stance chosen by the man whom they have endorsed openly as prime-ministerial material poses problems, with many leaders in the opposition (and even Anwar’s wife) choosing to brush it aside as Anwar’s “personal views”. The opposition is at a crossroads of a sort: Anwar is an asset because of his ability to bring in extra votes, but could become a liability because of his ties to western political interests, coupled with his pro-US opinions. For PAS, long seen as the flag-bearer of the Islamic movement in Malaysia, Anwar should have been no different from many ruling-party leaders campaigning to counter PAS by propagating “Islam Hadhari” (“progressive Islam”) – the political theme of prime minister Abdullah Badawi. Anwar is busy promoting “democracy and change” among Muslims, and thus jeopardising what remains of his Islamic credentials.

The implications of all this on Muslims in Malaysia are already visible: western thinktanks and local NGOs funded by western interests are already engaging the opposition, particularly PAS, in various issues which do not concern ordinary Muslims directly. These include such things as “personal freedom”; some sections of an emerging class of secular elites have called for the powers of Islamic enforcement-officers (mild compared to their Middle Eastern counterparts) to be abolished. This non-issue came up when children and relatives of some politicians were arrested recently for consumption of liquor and other unIslamic behaviour at a discotheque in Kuala Lumpur. These groups have also tried to persuade the government to establish a so-called “inter-faith commission” so that all religions will be consulted on national policies.

The sudden rise of these ‘liberal’ demands has to do with the steady emergence of secular elites among the Malay Muslims, most of whom have ties with ‘royal families’ and powerful politicians in other countries, in much the same way as Pakistan’s disco-generation and Turkey’s secular elites have tried to justify their unIslamic lifestyles, while at the same time curtailing the Muslims’ freedom to choose their own destiny.

Why are Jews so powerful?

Here's a good article about the backwardness of Muslims combined in this world. Despite the fact of having a strong 1-billion followers, the Muslims fall behind in every aspect of education, economic prowess and social standing. This is measured with number of universities in islamic countries, literacy rate, books produced, GDP, scientists, discoveries and other indicators. Despite the fact that most Islamic countries are laden with resources such as oil, we are still behind.

The first message from God to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was Iqra' (read), which clearly demonstrates the need for literacy and knowledge for greater purposes in life.

By: Dr Farrukh Saleem

The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance columnist

There are only 14 million Jews in the world; seven million in the Americas, five million in Asia, two million in Europe and 100,000 in Africa. For every single Jew in the world there are 100 Muslims. Yet, Jews are more than a hundred times more powerful than all the Muslims put together. Ever wondered why? Read more here.

Why are Muslims so powerless? There are an estimated 1,476,233,470 Muslims on the face of the planet: one billion in Asia, 400 million in Africa, 44 million in Europe and six million in the Americas. Every fifth human being is a Muslim; for every single Hindu there are two Muslims, for every Buddhist there are two Muslims and for every Jew, there are one hundred Muslims.

Ever wondered why Muslims are so powerless?

Here is why: There are 57 member-countries of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), and all of them put together have around 500 universities; one university for every three million Muslims. The United States has 5,758 universities and India has 8,407. In 2004, Shanghai
Jiao Tong University compiled an 'Academic Ranking of World Universities', and intriguingly, not one university from Muslim-majority states was in the top-500. As per data collected by the UNDP, literacy in the Christian world stands at nearly 90 per cent and 15 Christian-majority states have a literacy rate of 100 per cent.

A Muslim-majority state, as a sharp contrast, has an average literacy rate of around 40 per cent and there is no Muslim-majority state with a literacy rate of 100 per cent. Read more here.


Noble prize winners

ISA dan Pakatan Rakyat

KUALA LUMPUR, 14 Sept (Hrkh) - Tindakan kerajaan menahan tiga individu di bawah ISA, baru-baru ini dilihat sebagai langkah terdesak BN apabila parti itu menghadapi masalah dalaman, mahupun perselisihan sesama mereka.

"Kami berharap tindakan kerajaan ini bukan merupakan percubaan awal untuk menangkap lebih ramai ahli politik pembangkang dengan tujuan menggagalkan usaha Pakatan Rakyat membentuk kerajaan dalam masa terdekat," kata kenyataan itu.

> Saya pasti dengan penahanan Teresa Kok yang dituduh menghina Islam tidak akan menggagalkan usaha PR membentuk kerajaan dua hari lagi. Bukankah 30 orang MP nak melompat dua hari lagi? PAS juga tak konsisten. Mula2 menggunakan orang bukan Islam untuk bertanding atas tiket PAS. Sekarang membangkang penahanan ISA ini atas sebab BN ingin menakutkan parti pembangkang tetapi tidak menyebut pula bahawa apa yang Teresa Kok buat itu wajar atau tidak (atau pun Tan Seng Giaw di dalam blognya, kononnya azan terlalu bising di Kepong). Selepas itu membuat mesyuarat secara senyap dengan UMNO demi perpaduan orang Melayu. Tambahan lagi dikelar oleh rakan DAP kerana ingin menubuhkan negeri Islam di Kedah! Yang hairannya juga, sejak ahli2 Parlimen PR di Parlimen untuk beberapa bulan lamanya, tidak ada yang membentangkan usul untuk menghapuskan ISA kerana nak tak nak, ianya satu akta yang diluluskan di Parlimen. Mungkin saya ketinggalan atau mungkin mereka nak pakai ISA untuk menangkap orang2 BN pula setelah membentuk kerajaan baru dua hari lagi!

Dulu, YB Salahudin dan Dewan Pemuda PAS menggesa agar konsert Avril dibatalkan. Sebelum ini konsert Inul juga didesak dari pelbagai pihak untuk dibatalkan. YB Salahudin, yang telah berjaya mengumpulkan kononnya satu juta orang ramai untuk demonstrasi memang pakar berdemonstrasi dan berkonsert. Jika ini dianggap elemen2 yang merosakkan, maka YB perlu memboikot saluran MTV dan sebagainya. YB juga perlu mendesak semua hotel2 membatalkan pertunjukan 'live band' yang menampilkan artis2 yang memakan pakaian yang terdedah dan sebagainya.

Senator Dato' Zaid pula menggesa Tan Sri Muhyiddin supaya meletakkan jawatan sekiranya beliau tidak setuju dengan tarikh peralihan kuasa. Kenapa beliau tidak memberi ulasan mengenai kenyataan Timbalan Perdana Menteri? Beliau pula nak letak jawatan kerana tidak setuju dengan penggunaan ISA. Bila nak letak jawatan? Katanya, beliau juga 'bosan' kerana di Bahagian pun tak dapat pencalonan.

Tentang azan ini, dah lama dipertikaikan. Orang2 di Kepong, Kg Tunku dan tempat2 lain telah membuat petisyen untuk menghapuskan azan di kawasan mereka. Petikan dari blog Tan Seng Giaw:

"As with all Muslim suraus, the prayer room at Taman Aman Putra, has five muezzin's calls for prayers a day, 365 days a year. In our multireligious society, all people must accept religious practices and traditions of various religions, including the calls for prayers. Those who do night shifts and young children would appreciate if the volume of the early morning calls can be turned down".

"DAP National Deputy Chairman and MP for Kepong Dr Tan Seng Giaw urges the Malaysian Department for the Advancement of Islam (Jakim), Prime Minister's Department, to interpret the meaning of azan (a Muslim call for prayer by a muezzin) in the Koran.

A religious issue is often very sensitive, more so in a multi-religious society such as Malaysia. Hence, we have to handle it with extreme care.

On 27 September, 2005, I spoke in the House on the complaints by non-Muslims of azan being too loud especially the call at dawn. Then, some newspapers carried the news with titles such as 'People should not raise the azan issue' (Bertita Harian)."


> Yang hairannya orang Islam sekarang takut bersuara. Mana taknya, sehinggakan di persatuan2 alumni pun tak pertikaikan apabila membuat bar untuk minuman keras di bangunan alumni. Mungkin sebab orang2 Islam sekarang lebih liberal. YB Zulkifli yang menegakkan agamanya dikeji oleh rakan2 seperjuangan apabila Majlis Peguam mengadakan forum terbuka mengenai memeluk agama Islam. Ramai sangatkah orang2 di Malaysia yang bermasalah tentang penganutan Islam?

Kalau berlaku lagi insiden May 13, bukan kerana kerajaan yang menghasut, tetapi sememangnya masyarakat Malaysia sudak tidak bertoleransi.

Majlis Peguam dan Penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris (kemaskini 1)

kemaskini 1: "Ketika ribuan umat Islam bangkit mempertikaikan tindakan Majlis Peguam, menteri yang kononnya mahir dalam bidang undang-undang hilang entah ke mana, ini amat mengecewakan seluruh ahli UMNO dan orang Melayu.

Saya amat bersetuju jikalau Akta Hasutan diperkuatkuasakan dalam kes Majlis Peguam mengadakan forum "Memeluk Agama Islam" baru-baru ini. Memang diakui bahawa terdapat masalah apabila keluarga bukan Islam memeluki Islam dan ingin keluar. Ada juga masalah mengenai harta sepencarian dan juga suami yang memeluki Islam tanpa memberitahu isteri. Bukankah masalah2 ini boleh ditangani dengan perbincangan persendiririan dan tertutup? Apakah tujuan utama forum ini diuar-uarkan secara terbuka? Adakah ini masalah majoriti orang2 di Malaysia? Tak perlulah politikkan isu2 sebegini. Banyak lagi masalah yang perlu dibetulkan seperti inflasi dan sebagainya. Mungkin ada muslihat lain di sebalik forum ini, berikutan dengan kes VK Lingam dan Suruhanjaya yang akan ditubuhkan untuk memilih hakim2. Tuan2 dan puan2 fikirkanlah sendiri.

Hari ini juga TS Khalid Ibrahim, Menteri Besar Selangor mencadangkan supaya 10 peratus kerusi di UITM diberikan kepada orang2 Melayu. Saya rasa itu cadangan yang munasabah, tetapi pada masa yang sama orang2 Melayu juga perlu diberikan peluang yang sama di UNITAR dan sekolah2 lain yang didominasi oleh orang Cina. Jika kita bersedia untuk berintegrasi, kenapa kita masih mempunyai pelbagai sistem persekolahan? Jika orang2 bukan Melayu inginkan 'equality', maka kita perlu adil dari semua aspek. Semua pihak perlu bertolak ansur. Apa salahnya dibuat sekolah kebangsaan di seluruh negara? Kenapa orang2 Cina dan India marah apabila isu ini diutarakan?

Semalam Tun Dr Mahathir telah memberikan pendapat mengenai pengajaran Sains dan Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris dan juga serba sedikit mengenai sistem pertahanan kita. Sepatutnya jelas kepada orang2 Melayu dan Malaysia rata2 bahawa penguasaan bahasa Inggeris sangat penting dalam menimba ilmu. Ilmu2 kejuruteraan, kedoktoraan, teknologi dan sebagainya kebanyakkannya ditulis dalam bahasa Inggeris.

Sememangnya menjadi masalah kepada anak2 Melayu kita yang belajar diluar negara kerana tidak faham dengan terminologi2 dalam bahasa Inggeris. Seperti contoh pengamiran (integration) dalam Matematik. Ramai yang masih mendapati ianya sukar untuk mempelajari semula terminologi2 sebegini apabila belajar di universiti2 luar negara. Pengajaran Sains dan Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris di peringkat sekolah menengah bertujuan untuk mempercepatkan 'learning curve' anak2 kita supaya bahasa tidak menjadi penghalang di universiti. Bukannya anak2 kita tak pandai, tetapi lazimnya anak2 Melayu di luar negara ketinggalan kerana masa digunakan untuk mempelajari translasi.

Secara tidak langsung juga, kerana anak2 kita agak 'ketinggalan', mereka menjadi 'segan' dan 'terpencil' akibat kurang penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris. Mereka lebih gemar berinteraksi dengan orang2 Malaysia sahaja dan tidak bercampur dengan bangsa2 asing. Memang ada yang cekap dalam Bahasa Inggeris dan saya tidak khuatir dengan sebilangan kecil ini. Mereka tentunya akan berjaya bercampur. Tetapi golongan2 yang mempunyai sifat terpencil dan malu ini akan ketinggalan. Takut nak tanya soalan dalam kelas, takut disindir oleh kawan2 kerana 'broken english'. Anak2 muda dari Kelantan segan kerana ditertawakan kawan, kononnya pertuturan dalam Bahasa Inggeris mereka ada loghat Kelantan sedikit.