boston itu kan di amerika utara, bukan di eropa. jadi apa masih layak belajar dari prof shahid alam?
At 08:21 PM 11/13/2008 -0800, you wrote: >nota bene: > >apakah Jaringan "Islam" Liberal-nya Goenawan Mohamad termasuk Kaum >"Orientalis Pribumi" ini? siapakah yang mengundang "Irshad Manji" yang >mereka puji-puji sebagai "Feminis Muslim Sejati" itu ke Indonesia tempohari? > >hahaha... > >============= > >CounterPunch, May 9, 2006 > >The Native Orientalists: >The Muslims America Loves > >By M. SHAHID ALAM > >Being a Muslim today--in the middle of America's 'war against global >terrorism'--carries some new hazards. But it is not without its bright >side for a few Muslims who are eager to profit from this war. > >Muslims need little tutoring in the hazards they now face. Many tens of >thousands are already dead in wars imposed by the United States--on Iraq >and Afghanistan. The death toll is expected to climb, perhaps steeply, as >these wars are carried to Iran, Syria or Pakistan. Iranians also face the >prospect--perhaps, imminent--of incineration in nuclear strikes. > >Death or dislocation in wars are not the only hazards that confront >Muslims. In principle, any Muslim can also become the object of >'extraordinary renditions.' No matter where they happen to be, they could >be kidnapped by the CIA, hooded, and transported to secret offshore US >prisons, or delivered into the hands of US-friendly regimes with expertise >in the fine arts of interrogation. No one knows how many Muslims have >suffered this cruel fate--or how many of them are still alive. > >By comparison, Muslims who are captured or bought, and imprisoned in >Guantanamo as 'enemy combatants,' are lucky. After facing down several >legal challenges to these detentions, the US now brings these prisoners >before military review boards. Although many of them have been cleared of >any terrorist connections, it is quite touching that the US is now >refusing to release them--it says--because they could be tortured by their >own governments. The prisoners can now thank the US for offering sanctuary. > >In fairness, America's 'war against global terrorism' has also created a >few hard-to-resist opportunities. The chief beneficiaries of the new US >posture are the Muslim rulers eager to get the US more firmly behind the >wars they have been waging against their own people. They are happy to >torture Muslims 'rendered' to them by the CIA, and, periodically, they >capture their own 'terrorists' and put them on flights to Guantanamo. > >The 'war against global terrorism' is also a war of ideas. In order to >defeat the 'terrorists' the US must win the hearts and minds of Muslims. >This is where Muslims can help. The US needs a few 'good' Muslims to >persuade the 'bad' ones to reform their religion, to learn to appreciate >the inestimable benefits of Pax America and Pax Israelica. > >In the heyday of the old colonialism, the white man did not need any help >from the natives in putting down their religion and culture. Indeed, he >preferred to do it himself. Then, the opinion of the natives carried >little weight with the whites anyway. So why bother to recruit them to >denounce their own people. As a result, Orientalists wrote countless tomes >denigrating the cultures of the lesser breeds. > >Today the West needs help in putting down the uppity natives--especially >the Muslims. One reason for this is that with the death of the old >colonialism, some natives have begun to talk for themselves. A few are >even talking back at the Orientalists raising all sorts of uncomfortable >questions. This hasn't been good: and something had to be done about it. >In the 1970s the West began to patronize 'natives' who were deft at >putting down their own people. Was the West losing its confidence? > >The demand for 'native' Orientalists was strong. The pay for such >turncoats was good too. Soon a whole crop of native Orientalists arrived >on the scene. Perhaps, the most distinguished members of this coterie >include Nirad Chaudhuri, V. S. Naipaul, Fouad Ajami and Salman Rushdi. >They are some of the best loved natives in the West. > >Then there came the 'war against global terrorism' creating an instant >boom in the market for Orientalists of Muslim vintage. The West now >demanded Muslims who would diagnose their own problems as the West wanted >to see them--as the unavoidable failings of their religion and culture. >The West now demanded Muslims who would range themselves against their own >people--who would denounce the just struggles of their own people as moral >aberrations, as symptoms of a sick society. > >So far these boom conditions have not evoked a copious supply of Muslim >Orientalists. Irshad Manji has made herself the most visible na-tive >Orientalist by cravenly playing to Western and Zionist demands for >demonizing Muslims and Palestinians. I can think of a few others, but they >have little to recommend themselves other than their mediocrity. This must >be a bit disappointing for those who had pinned their hopes on using >Muslim defectors to win the battle for Muslim hearts and minds. > >There are some indications that this disappointment is turning to >desperation. On March 11 the New York Times published a front page story >on Dr. Wafa Sultan, "a largely unknown Syrian-American psychiatrist, >nursing a deep anger and despair about her fellow Muslims." Deep anger and >despair at fellow Muslims? Are these the new qualifications for Muslims to >gain visibility in America's most prestigious newspaper? > >If the only Muslims that the United States can recruit in its battle for >ideas are at best mediocrities or worse--nobodies--what chance is there >that it can win the battle for Muslim hearts and minds? The short answer >is: very little. Muslims are not helpless children. You cannot molest them >and then expect to mollify them with trifles and protestations of pure >intentions. That may have worked for a while. It will not work for ever. > >Muslims are too large and too dense a mass to be moved by wars. Military >might could not break the spirit of Palestinians, Afghans, Bosnians, >Chechens, Lebanese, Moros and Iraqis. What chance is there that wars will >be more effective if applied against larger masses of Muslims? > >The United States cannot expect to change Muslims unless it first thinks >seriously about changing its policies towards Muslims. Americans must stop >deluding themselves. Muslims do not hate their freedom: they only want >that freedom for themselves. The United States and Israel seek to build >their power over a mass of prostrate Muslim bodies. Stop doing that and >then you will have a chance to win Muslim hearts and minds. > >M. Shahid Alam is professor economics at a university in Boston. He may be >reached at <mailto:alqalam02760%40yahoo.com>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Saut Situmorang > ><http://sautsitumorang.multiply.com/>http://sautsitumorang.multiply.com/ >http://sautsitumorang.wordpress.com/ > >CARILAH ILMU SAMPAI KE EROPA, >JANGAN KE AMERIKA UTARA!!! > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
