Wednesday, August 10, 2011


Long before the emerging movement of Zionism, has emerged since the early teachings of illuminism. Illuminism doctrine is one of the teachings of the Jews, one of which was returned to the home country. Magnitude of world domination plan received support under the heel and the support of international Zionism. So back to the teachings plastinus, who teaches a small goal, not a great plan. That's the big plan now has been reached. 

Hence phrases like "Israel is like a small America, Israel and America's great" and the phrase "the Israel of America and Israel is a small America" ​​in harmony with international Zionism plan that makes this world as a stage play. Where the play and the director are the Jews. Thus, the international Zionism movement has existed since 1779, almost simultaneously with an independent American and French revolutions as well.

Actually, if people Hitler killed the Jews, not because of wrong or not because of ethnic hatred. But they already know the secret Jews who wanted to rule the world. Opinion that history so far has been reversed by the Zionists themselves. The Jews continue to propagate that the Nazis have a hatred against ethnic Jews.

Which is not as simple as that propaganda but the truth is Jews. Because in fact, Hitler was not a Zionist. Hitler himself on one side to the supremacy of the people (Aryan) was superior. And this attitude is in conflict with Jewish interests who also want to rule the world and will become the nation's most superior in the world.

Yes, indeed they have the advantage. And Koran itself says that Jews exaggeration of other nations. but because they disobeyed God's law, then they are condemned. We do not deny that Jews were in the beginning God was glorified. However, his arrogance is his fate to be humiliated by God periphery discourse, discourse than, or are there other factors? Actually a lot of factors in the formation of opinion. We all know the news agencies controlled by international Zionism. Automatic all the news about the Islamic world Zionist controlled media networks. And the media following it. The second is a system of brain washing, brainwashing. This happened to the Muslims, where over liberalism of thought, conducted by experts who are educated secular Zionism, it is doubtful approach religion with skepticism.
This way of thinking is very dangerous when it comes to the basics of Islam. The study offered scientific experts that fostered secular Zionism are people first have to hesitate in reviewing the science first. When it comes to other approaches that are not related to Islamic scholarship that comes revelation, there may be no problem. But if it was beaten flat against the Islamic sciences Tawheed-essential-it is dangerous. They always use a method they developed; must first doubt everything. It's actually damage the faith and among the most fundamental in Islam.

Monday, August 1, 2011

Middle East; the human tragedy

Middle East region, until now, kept churning. Every day, mankind witnessed conflict and even the human tragedy. Conflicts occur between the internal area and external causes. Situations and circumstances in the Middle East not only be a test of the UN presence, but also, for humanity as a whole. Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory, the last few days, which took the lives of innocent civilians is a clear evidence. It is estimated that casualties in the thousands of people.

Israel, a country formed by Britain with about 7 (seven) million, no doubt, is one of the main sources of conflict. No less, the government of Indonesia also assess the actions of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon had violated the provisions of international law including the law of war prohibits making civilians the target. However, with the support of the United States and its allies, Israel is free to carry out the actions and desires. Casualties on the civilian side does make the Israeli government expressed sorrow. But, of course, just crocodile tears.

Again, signaled America's political run double standard look. Americans reject UN resolution on a ceasefire in the UN Security Council meeting. Rejection of the United States and Israel on a cease-fire efforts make a world of frustration and can only bite the finger. The world could do nothing but criticize and upset. Increasingly formed the perception that the United States being partisan in the Middle East conflict and run a double standard in pushing democratization and human rights protection in the world, as in the case of Iraq and prisoner abuse at Guantanamo (Reuters, 08/02/06).

Support all-out United States to Israel, Lutfi Assyaukani (Kompas, 08/02/06), motivated by several things: first, because of strategic reasons, and second, for moral reasons. Both of these reasons in recent years began to be questioned, including from among observers and academics in America itself.

For America, the strategic reasons linked to the role of Israel to stem the Soviet influence into the Arab world, as a military base, and to reduce terrorism. And the moral reasons that Israel is a weak state, democratic state, Jews are a nation that had suffered, and the citizens of Israel are citizens of pacifists and morally better than the Arabs, Israel is more reasonable therefore be assisted and supported rather than the Arabs . These two reasons, both strategic and moral reasons, review Lutfi (Kompas, 08/02/06), can no longer be maintained.

Suit against a variety of reasons relied upon American politics in the Middle East, should encourage and open the eyes of Americans to want to change the foreign policy that has been executed. America as the sole superpower of the world with all the power he has is one of the key factors for conflict resolution. Ironically, rather than as a mediator, Americans are more influenced by the Jewish lobbies. Jewish lobbies become a barrier to the desire to realize peace in the Middle East.

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Middle East region conflict

Ongoing conflict in the Middle East region, according to Nourouzzaman Shiddieqy (1996), is associated with a map of the region Arab countries today, which is made by the Western colonizers, especially Britain and France before and after World War I. The invaders, in this case the UK, according to Nourouzzaman, is clever in dividing up the territory. He was always preparing a "time bomb" in the form of territory that would become prickly dispute between the countries that formed. See for example: Kashmir (India and Pakistan dispute), land disputes between Palestinians and Israelis, and between Iraq and Kuwait.

Thus, the problems that occurred in various parts of the Arab in essence, from the beginning, is indeed related to the wider interests of the region itself. This means the world to be responsible not only for moral reasons, but also, for reasons of politics and history and humanity. Moreover, if indeed there is a desire to build a new world order that is more peaceful, humane and equitable.

Azyumardi Azra (2002), argues that the involvement of external parties (international force) in the realization of peace becomes a very crucial factor. International powers, especially the United States and other Western countries, should be more fair to the Palestinians (and the Arab world in general [sic.]; Not applying double standards and different treatment to both sides. In addition, international forces are also should do the pressures on both sides to mutually recognize the existence of each one in turn to peaceful coexistence.

Correspondingly, the UN Security Council must also be reformed, the most important issues concerning the membership and veto power; increasing role of international institutions, especially the OIC, and no less important, internal communication and cooperation the Arab region itself. Why is this important area of ​​internal scope? I remember when writing a thesis about thinking Munawir Sjadzali. In one of his books, he revealed once quipped by Arab journalists, why a Muslim-majority Indonesia can not establish an Islamic state. By pack Munawir, answered diplomatically, "I also wonder why the Middle East that still incest both Arabs, but the conflict constantly!

Tuesday, August 10, 2010


Lately, in Indonesia and the world at large, the term "terror and terrorism" is often associated with Islam as a religion. At the very least, the term associated with people using the name of Islam. In this case, the public is already familiar with these names; for local-regional level, for example, there is the name of Abu Bakar Bashir, Omar al-Farouk, Imam Samudera, and Amrozy; at international level, there is the name of Osama bin Laden network al-Qaeda. Although, they mentioned his name, until now, until this writing, has not been proven involvement in various acts of terror and terrorism. These circumstances led to the negative image of Islam and Muslims. The presumption that could soon emerge in the minds of those who do not understand Islam, Islam teaches terrorism.

One of the teachings of Islam which is often viewed as the source of growth and proliferation of terrorism is jihad. The term jihad itself, for the West, contains a negative image and stigma. Jihad in their view is identical to the holy war (holy war). In fact, this is the doctrine of jihad, according to them, which has given rise to fundamentalism, radicalism, and terrorism everywhere. For the West, the term "jihad" as if it has become a kind of "ghost" is scary. Why not, the actions of suicide bombers (suicide bomb) targeting Western interests there and seen born of the spirit of jihad. The spirit of jihad like this, making Islam teaches its adherents feared because of brave friends with the highest uncertainty, death.

Western view of the doctrine of jihad is, perhaps, can not be fully blamed. Moreover, if, Islamic history characterized by war and the spirit of territorial expansion retrospect. Errors of the West, presumably, too reduce the teaching of jihad as holy war in the context of Christian Europe, as the war against the infidel. Because, historically, wars are generally made on the basis of politics and as a defensive action against attack from outside. In addition, the war is only one implementation of jihad. Jihad in the form of this is done with regard to the battle against the infidels and enemies of Islam, as well as in ancient Roman tradition and concept of the crusade (crusade), is seen as a war of justice (justum bellum) and the piety of war (bellum pium).

 "911Tragedy"; attacks on the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and the Bali bombings, the U.S. would reinforce the view of the international terrorism network. These events are mapped the world into two groups: supporters or opponents of terrorism. President Bush even delivered his threat, "if you're not with us, you're against us". Ironically, acts of terrorism associated with Islam and Muslims. Muslims as a "defendant". Granted, the culprit is people who are Muslims, but clearly, such a terrorist act can not be viewed in line with Islamic teachings. When such acts are performed, then the actual people who do it are not Muslims practice their faith.

What exactly is meant terror and terrorism, and what to do with jihad? Terror and terrorism are very difficult to define. One of the main reasons for the difficulty in defining it, because he is a difficult moral issue. The sense of terror and terrorism, generally, lies in the moral justification that defines it, the subjective nature of terrorism itself, and its use is almost entirely a connotative. Terrorism itself can be done with a variety of motivations: for reasons of religion, ideology, fighting for freedom, liberating themselves from injustice, and therefore, the existence of particular interest.

Terror contain the relationship between the four strategic elements, between perpetrators, victims, spectators, and the target. Terror is the use of "violence" as a means of communication between the perpetrator and target of target in public. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) United States, terrorism is an act of unlawful violence or crimes against persons or actions to intimidate or coerce a government, civilian and other public constituents; with the aim of achieving certain social and political targets.