Thursday, October 26, 2006

Act of Terrorism in Fremont

"Religious hate seen as motive in killing: Fremont slaying: Muslim leaders and relatives of Afghan American mother shot at point-blank range say only motive they can imagine for anyone wanting her dead was the garment of her faith, her head scarf"

A mother of 6 children was gundown at her head was she was going to pick up her 2 children. She typically drove to pick up two of her daughters from Glenmoor Elementary School, but left home on foot Thursday because of engine trouble. Witnesses said a man got out of a car, approached her and shot her at point-blank range before returning to the car and speeding away.

See more detail here:

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Knowledge of Gene/Chromosome X-Y has been known 14 centuries ago

Sahih Muslim Hadith 614 Narrated by Thawban

Thawban, the freed slave of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: While I was standing beside the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) one of the rabbis of the Jews came and said: Peace be upon you, O Muhammad. I pushed him back so hard that he nearly fell over. Upon this he said: Why do you push me? I said: Why don't you say: O Messenger of Allah?

The Jew said: We call him by the name which he was given by his family.
The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: My name is Muhammad, which is how I was named by my family. The Jew said: I have come to ask you (something). The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: Will it be of any benefit to you, if I tell you that? He (the Jew) said: I shall lend my ears to it. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) drew a line with the help of the stick that he had with him and then said: Ask (whatever you like). Thereupon the Jew said: Where will the human beings be on the Day when the Earth changes into another earth and the Heavens too (change into other heavens)? The Messenger of Allah (p). said: They will be in darkness beside the bridge. He (the Jew) again said: Who amongst the people will be the first to cross (this bridge)? He said: They would be the poor amongst the refugees. The Jew said: What would constitute their breakfast when they would enter Paradise? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: A caul of fish-liver. He (the Jew) said: What would be their food after this? He (the Holy Prophet) said: a bullock which was fed in the different quarters of Paradise would be slaughtered for them. He (the Jew) said: What would be their drink? He (the Holy Prophet) said: They would be given a drink from the fountain which is named Salsabil.

He (the Jew) said: I have come to ask you about something which no one amongst the people on Earth knows except an apostle or one or two men besides him. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Would it benefit you if I tell you that? He (the Jew) said: I would lend my ears to that. He then said: I have come to ask you about the child. He (the Holy Prophet) said: The reproductive substance of a man is white and that of a woman (i.e. ovum central portion) is yellow. When they have sexual intercourse and the male's substance (chromosomes and genes) prevails upon the female's substance (chromosomes and genes), it is the male child that is created by Allah's Decree. When the substance of the female prevails upon the substance contributed by the male, a female child is formed by the Decree of Allah.

The Jew said: What you have said is true; verily you are an Apostle. He then turned round and went away. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: He asked me about such and such things of which I had no knowledge until Allah gave it to me.

Sayings of Wisdom

(sources: Ahaadits of Prophet Muhammad SAW)

  • ‘A’ishah, the Mother of the Believers, (may Allah be pleased with her) stated that she once asked the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), “O Messenger of Allah! I have two neighbors. To whom shall I send my gifts?” He said, “To the one whose gate is nearer to you.”
  • The best among you are those who have the best manners and character.'
  • Anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should not harm his neighbor, and anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should entertain his guest generously and anybody who believes in Allah and the Last Day should talk what is good or keep quiet. (i.e. abstain from all kinds of evil and dirty talk)
  • The messenger of God said to me, "Son, if you are able, keep your heart from morning till night and from night till morning free from malice towards anyone"; then he said, "Oh! My son, this is one of my laws, and the one who loves my laws verily loves me."
  • Abu Huraira reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: One is not strong because of one's wrestling skillfully. They said: Allah's Messenger, then who is strong? He said: He who controls his anger when he is in a fit of rage.
  • Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Don't nurse grudge and don't bid him out for raising the price and don't nurse aversion or enmity and don't enter into a transaction when the others have entered into that transaction and be as fellow-brothers and servants of Allah. A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim. He neither oppresses him nor humiliates him nor looks down upon him. The piety is here, (and while saying so) he pointed towards his chest thrice. It is a serious evil for a Muslim that he should look down upon his brother Muslim. All things of a Muslim are inviolable for his brother in faith: his blood, his wealth and his honour.
  • You will not enter paradise until you have faith; and you will not complete your faith, till you love one another.
  • Anyone of you who sees wrong, let him undo it with his hand; and if he cannot, then let him speak against it with his tongue, and if he cannot do this either, then (let him abhor it) with his heart, and this is the least of faith.
  • What actions are most excellent? To gladden the heart of a human being, to feed the hungry, to help the afflicted, to lighten the sorrow of the sorrowful, and to remove the wrongs of the injured.
  • "Forgive him who wrongs you; join him who cuts you off; do good to him who does evil to you, and speak the truth although it be against yourself."
  • Muhammad (saw): Wealth is not in vast riches but wealth is in self-contentment. The most enviable of my friends in my estimation is a believer with little property who finds pleasure in prayer, who performs the worship of his Lord well, who obeys Him in secret, who is obscure among men, who is not pointed out by people, and whose provision is bare sufficiency with which he is content.
  • Muhammad (saw): Feed the hungry, visit the sick and free the captive.
  • Muhammad (saw): "You must tell the truth. Truthfulness leads to right action. Right action leads to Heaven.
  • He who betrays the vicious deed of another in public, it is as though he has initiated the evil act himself.
  • Appreciate five things before five others: your youth before your old age, your health before your illness, your wealth before your poverty, your spare time before your hard work and your life before death.
  • A man asked Muhammad SAW what was the mark whereby he might know the reality of his faith. Muhammad said, "If thou derive pleasure from the good which thou hast performed and thou be grieved for the evil which thou hast committed, thou art a true believer." The man said. "In what doth a fault really consist?" Muhammad said, "when action pricketh thy conscience, forsake it."
  • Imam Ali RA said: "Tell the truth eventhough that is bitter"

  • A bedouin came to the holy prophet Muhammad (s) and asked him some questions.
  • Bedouin: I wish to be the richest person in the world.
    Prophet: Be content and you will be the richest person in the world.
    Bedouin: I would like to be the most learned of people.
    Prophet: Fear Allah and you will be the most learned of people.
    Bedouin: I would like to be the most just of people.
    Prophet: Desire for others what you would like for yourself and you would be the most just of people.
    Bedouin: I would like to be the best of people.
    Prophet: Be good to others and you will be the best of people.
    Bedouin: I would like to be the most honorable of people.
    Prophet: If you do not complain to any fellow humans you will be the most honorable of people.
    Bedouin: I wish to be safe from Allah's Wrath on the Day of Judgment.
    Prophet: If you do not lose your temper with any of your fellow humans, you will be safe from Allah's wrath on the Day of Judgment.
    Bedouin: What are the worst evils in the sight of Allah?
    Prophet: Hot temper and miserliness (i.e. selfishness with money).
  • src:

Monday, October 16, 2006

Veil and Civilization

Interesting to see that the origin of word "West" and "East" come from the europeans during the 3G era (not "3rd Generation cellphone", but "Gold, Glory, Gospel" :-). So the direction was relative to "europe". So the "East" is any place in eastern of europe, while "West" is any place located west of european land (separated by sea). If we see, then the true "eastern" is Japanese, Korea, Indonesia, pacific islands, Australia [geographically and by the origin, but then changed after british came there].

Culturally, when we say "Eastern" civilization, people connote it with anything related to "eastern culture" like Budhism, Taoism, Hinduism, Confucianism (see, while "Western" civilization for anything comes from europe (interesting to see that Wikipedia says: "Various uses of the concept of Western culture have included, rightly or wrongly, critiques of American culture, materialism, industrialism, capitalism, commercialism, hedonism, imperialism, modernism,").

So, from just this point of view, "West" and "East" is nothing to do with religion of Islam or Christianity. Both religion started from what-so-called "Middle East". Christianity spreaded in the west during roman empire, while Islam is growing fast in the west this time. Allah says in the Al-Qur'an, Islam is not Western nor Eastern, but it is a straight path ("Hanifah").

In my opinion, "BURQA V.S. BIKINI" is more to "Secularism V.S. Religion" or "Hedonism V.S. Morality", not in the name of "Islam". Old western culture, more or less, similar to eastern culture, at least in many of its morality teachings. I can still remember, in old days, women were not allowed to have swimming suits shorter than what could cover their knees or something. Women of the west in renaisannce time were ordered to wear corset. But that morality has degraded alot now in the west as well as in the east. Besides, burqa is just a cultural tradition of people from central asia. I have to admit, many muslim women suffer at the hands of societies and governments who would harm them in the name of Islam. Islam, but it is not what true Islam is. If Islam opresses women, why 4 out 5 muslim converts are women? (one of the good answers are here:

It amazes me, some times, that if an eastern culture is rooted to Islam, people from west call it "opression", "uncivilized", etc., but if it comes from other than that, people called "a great civiliation" etc. (No offense, please). We rarely see people say "Ah...look at those great islamic legacies...we've learned a lot from them" (see

Hijab bukan dominasi Islam saja

Menarik juga setelah saya membaca suatu artikel yang mengatakan bahwa memakai kerudung/hijab/jilbab sebetulnya ada di ajaran agama kristen.

Di dalam satu bagian di 'Perjanjian Baru', Santa Paul mengharuskan sesuatu yg. menjadi praktek umum wanita berkerudung:

Santa Tertullian (orang pertama yang memformulasikan trinitas), dalam rancangan tulisannya mengenai kerudung para perawan, bahkan mewajibkan pemakaiannyan di dalam rumah:
'Para wanita [muda], kenakanlah kerudungmu saat di jalan, juga kenakan ketika di gereja; kenakan ketika kalian bersama orang-orang asing, kemudian kenakan ketika kalian diantara saudara-saudara kalian.'

Most ironic and at the same stupid statement is given by Australian's PM

A friend of mine, a white american, sent me his opinion about this:

This response is a little editorial reflection. Hopefully it will not disrupt anyone's peace or Taqwah. It might be considered inflammatory.
Most ironic and at the same stupid statement is given by Australian's PM:

"Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, said It's not plausible, it's not based on anything other than a house to house survey."

How would these presidents and prime ministers know what's plausible? Where in the world would Bush get the information by which he refutes the study? Did some master deceiver like Karl Rove whisper this in Bush's ear, or has Bush's "gut" been talking to him again? Many of us are very alarmed at how easily Bush can simply believe whatever he feels like believing--scientific study be damned.

IMO (and I am not alone in this), these politicians have been blinded by their own ambition all along, and this self-blinding has been purposeful. They and their staffs have committed whatever strength their minds have to refusing to see reality -- or else they simply do not care about reality and have completely given their souls over to the shameless pursuit of money and power.

In our supreme arrogance and foolishness, we do not keep track of dead Iraqis, and since General Tommy Franks made this American policy into public knowledge three years ago, now the scientists have investigated it instead. In the Bush administration, at least, people who have tried to bring reality to this crowd has been either pushed out and publicly ridiculed or simply ignored. What is so regrettable for the American people is that too many have been willing to continue believing in the government's propaganda. IMO, if the American people were as brave and as moral as they think they are, they would demand to get an entirely credible report on all the damage that has happened in Iraq and not be satisfied with assurances from the government.

If reason and facts fail to penetrate the minds of the American people, events will succeed--eventually. As we say, "what goes around, comes around." This just means that the universal laws of retribution cannot be outwitted by mere humans. I am not suggesting that angry Muslims will be the vehicle of this retribution. Many other things can make willful denial impossible. For example, the staggering amount of debt this administration is creating so that the very few can make large amounts of money by obscene methods will surely damage many. It's already too late to prevent the damage, but perhaps further damage can be limited--but only if Americans wake up. In comparison to economic breakdown, one relatively small but morally significant cost will be the large numbers of wounded and psychologically crippled vets serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Veterans Administration is already overwhelmed, and the money-loving neocons will not be willing to commit enough money for the proper treatment for these disposable warriors in the future nor for the psychologically and genetically damaged Iraqi people. That is a prediction you can "take to the bank."

It has just been announced that the Pentagon plans for the US military to stay in Iraq through 2010? That's insane. The odds of this actually happening seem very small

At the moment, I am trying to find out some credible science on how much radiation has been spread around Iraq by the pervasive use of depleted uranium munitions and how much genetic damage has occurred. The seeds of cancer and birth defects will continue to be planted and to ripen for many, many years into the future. Already some male and female vets have decided not to have children because they know they have been genetically damaged. It's diabolical.

Thursday, October 12, 2006

Text of Ahmadinejad's Speech at 61st UN General Assembly Meeting

Madam President,
Distinguished Heads of State and Government,
Distinguished Heads of Delegation,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen

I praise the Merciful, All-Knowing and Almighty God for blessing me with another opportunity to address this Assembly on behalf of the great nation of Iran and to bring a number of issues to the attention of the international community.

I also praise the Almighty for the increasing vigilance of peoples across the globe, their courageous presence in different international settings, and the brave _expression of their views and aspirations regarding global issues.

Today, humanity passionately craves commitment to the Truth, devotion to God, quest for Justice and respect for the dignity of human beings. Rejection of domination and aggression, defense of the oppressed. And longing for peace constitute the legitimate demand of the peoples of the world, particularly the new generations and the spirited youth, who aspire a world free from decadence, aggression and injustice, and replete with love and compassion. The youth have a right to seek justice and the Truth; and they have a right to build their own future on the foundations of love, compassion and tranquility. And, I praise the Almighty for this immense blessing.

Madame President,

What afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human dignity; the Almighty has not created human beings so that they could transgress against others and oppress them.

By causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination, accumulating greater wealth and usurping all the resources, while others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery.

Some seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others live in perpetual insecurity and danger.

Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.

Such behavior is not worthy of human beings and runs counter to the Truth, to justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question is that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek justice? Who or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed, and suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the seat of global justice?

A brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues can further illustrate the problem.

A. The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons

Some powers proudly announce their production of second and third generations of nuclear weapons. What do they need these weapons for? Is the development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to promote peace and democracy? Or, are these weapons, in fact, instruments of coercion and threat against other peoples and governments? How long should the people of the world live with the nightmare of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons? What bounds the powers producing and possessing these weapons? How can they be held accountable before the international community? And, are the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste of their wealth and resources for the production of such destructive arsenals? Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead of these instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more compatible with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and biological weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then oppression and aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither away and no reason will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition because most global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from the powerful, not being contented with their own rights, striving to devour the rights of others.
People across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice for its sake.

Would it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and win hearts and minds through the championing of real promotion of justice, compassion and peace, than through continuing the proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of their use?

The experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons are before us. Has it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than exacerbation of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?

B. Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities

Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three years. Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq. Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society, and instigate civil strife.

There is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political will to eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists were apprehended by the Government of Iraq, only to be let loose under various pretexts by the occupiers.

It seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves as a pretext for the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.

Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the Government of Iraq seek justice?

Who can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire region. Can the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security in Iraq, while the occupiers are themselves permanent members of the Council? Can the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?

Consider the situation in Palestine:

The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War. Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that War, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the War survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world, who had not been even affected by the Second World War; and a government was established in the territory of others with a population collected from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land into a Diaspora and homelessness. This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history. Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee camps, and many have died still hoping to one day return to their land. Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?

The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to merely speak about them, as they are concerned that shedding light on the facts would undermine the raison d'ĂȘtre of this regime, as it has. The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception, that regime has been a constant source of threat and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the region. Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.

Worst yet, is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime.

Just watch what is happening in the Palestinian land. People are being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?

At the same time, a Government is formed democratically and through the free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of democracy, its Ministers and Members of Parliament are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.

Which council or international organization stands up to protect this brutally besieged Government? And why can't the Security Council take any steps?

Let me here address Lebanon:

For thirty-three long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced; meanwhile some members of the Security Council practically chose a path that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its objectives militarily. We witnessed that the Security Council of the United Nations was practically incapacitated by certain powers to even call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat idly by for so many days, witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities against the Lebanese while tragedies such as Qana were persistently repeated. Why?

In all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind the hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council, how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?

C. Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international community


I now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people and speak to the injustices against them.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends including the production of nuclear bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.

Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?

The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.

Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten others with the Security Council and declare, even before any decision by the Council, the condemnation of their opponents by the Council. The question is: what can justify such exploitation of the Security Council, and doesn't it erode the credibility and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to maintain security?


A review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the conclusion that regrettably, justice has become a victim of force and aggression.

- Many global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and irresponsible as a result of undue pressure from some of the powerful;

- Threats with nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some powers have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility;

- For some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy can only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure and intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the interests of the claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right of self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and intelligence of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value. This is blatantly manifested in the way the elected Government of the Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support extended to the Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine, turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned or besieged; that must not violate human rights.

- Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by international law. Enjoying these rights is dependent on the whim of certain major powers.

- Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the security and the rights of some big powers. But when the oppressed are decimated under bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and not even call for a ceasefire. Is this not a tragedy of historic proportions for the Security Council, which is charged with maintaining the security of countries?

- The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such that certain powers equate themselves with the international community, and consider their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries. They consider themselves the masters and rulers of the entire world and other nations as only second class in the world order.


The question needs to be asked: if the Governments of the United States or the United Kingdom, who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?

Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms, including the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness of this most universal system of collective security.


How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.

The present structure and working methods of the Security Council, which are legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive to the expectations of the current generation and the contemporary needs of humanity.

Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective. Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not, expect the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the Council.

Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves about the world in which they want to live?

Today, serious reform in the structure and working methods of the Security Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming the Organization and particularly rescue the Security Council from its current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African continent should each have a representative as a permanent member of the Security Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance would hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.

Madame President,


It is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful place in international relations. Without ethics and spirituality, attained in light of the teachings of Divine prophets, justice, freedom and human rights cannot be guaranteed.

Resolution of contemporary human crises lies in observing ethics and spirituality and the governance of righteous people of high competence and piety.

Should respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant objective, then injustice, ill-temperament, aggression and war will fade away.

Human beings are all God's creatures and are all endowed with dignity and respect.

No one has superiority over others. No individual or states can arrogate to themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the rights of others and, through influence and pressure, position themselves as the "international community".

Citizens of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six billion inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.

Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in maintaining sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the world.

It is for this reason that we state:

Sustainable peace and tranquility in the world can only be attained through justice, spirituality, ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity.

All nations and states are entitled to peace, progress and security.

We are all members of the international community and we are all entitled to insist on the creation of a climate of compassion, love and justice.

All members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter and the sweet events and developments in today's world.

We can adopt firm and logical decisions, thereby improving the prospects of a better life for current and future generations.

Together, we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and afflictions, and instead, through the promotion of universal and lasting values such as ethics, spirituality and justice, allow our nations to taste the sweetness of a better future.

Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek Good, Virtue, Perfection and Beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection. Whether we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or later prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is imperative, and also desirable, that we too contribute to the promotion of justice and virtue.

The Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe, is also its Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands His creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety, and not in decadence and corruption.

He commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness and virtue and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets from the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called humanity to monotheism, justice, brotherhood, love and compassion. Is it not possible to build a better world based on monotheism, justice, love and respect for the rights of human beings, and thereby transform animosities into friendship?

I emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before, longs for just and righteous people with love for all humanity; and above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has been promised to all peoples and who will establish justice, peace and brotherhood on the planet.

O, Almighty God, all men and women are your creatures and you have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by you, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause. []

Monday, October 02, 2006

Lelucon Perang Libanon

Meski jembatan, jalan, dan gedung-gedung hancur dihajar rudal Israel , korban tewas dan luka-luka berjatuhan, orang Libanon tetap bisa guyon. Banyak lelucon beredar Libanon Selatan naik pamornya sejak berhasil mengalahkan Israel dalam perang bulan lalu. Meskipun ribuan rumah, jembatan, jalan, dan gedung-gedung hancur dihajar rudal Israel , dan korban tewas dan luka-luka berjatuhan, orang Libanon tetap bisa guyon. Banyak lelucon beredar. Salah satunya kami kutipkan untuk Anda di bawah ini.

Seorang petani tembakau di Libanon Selatan bernama Abu ‘Abid menelfon PM Israel Ehud Olmert.

“Mr. Olmert?!”

“Ya, saya sendiri.”

“Saya Abu ‘Abid dari Libanon Selatan. Dengan ini kami rakyat Libanon menyatakan perang dengan Israel !”

“Baik. Berapa orang pasukan infantri Anda?”

“Saya, anak saya, keponakan saya, ipar saya, sepupu saya, dan semua teman saya di warung kopi!”

“Oke. Pasukan saya jumlahnya 1 juta orang, terdiri dari pasukan khusus, intelijen, dan pasukan regular.”

“Nggak takut! Kita tetap perang!”

“Oke. Persenjataan apa saja yang Anda punya, Abu ‘Abid?”

“Kami punya sedan Mercedes tahun ’86, ditambah truk sayur ipar saya, dan masing-masing anggota pasukan bawa cangkul, garu, dan sekop. Oh iya, linggis juga ada!”

“Oke. Saya punya 300 rudal nuklir. 200 jet tempur. 25 kal perusak. 700 tank Merkava.”

“Nggak takut! Kita tetap perang!”

“Baiklah. Karena kamu pemberani saya akan menambah jumlah pasukan saya jadi 2 juta orang!”

“Mr. Olmert. Kita batalkan saja perang ini…”

“Kenapa? Takut ya..?”

“Bukan. Kami nggak mampu ngasih makan 2 juta tawanan perang.”

Telepon ditutup.* [dzik/]