New podcast episode uploaded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v6q8qIRThY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v6q8qIRThY
YouTube
Normalization. Middle Nation Podcast:(E22)
The #MuftiMenkiftar in #UAE with an Israeli rabbi provides a good opportunity to explore the topic of normalization of relations between Muslim and Arab countries with Israel. In my opinion, normalization is most properly understood, not as a betrayal of…
👍7🔥1
About 100 companies listed on the S&P 500 Index have already reported their first quarter earnings, and roughly 80% of them have profited above and beyond expectations. Another 180 companies will report their first quarter earnings by the end of this week, and except for some of the tech companies, it is expected that most of them are continuing to make such a significant profit that you’d think the world is not enduring an energy crisis, a food crisis, a supply chain crisis, rampant global inflation, ongoing economic shocks related to Covid-19, and a war in Europe. You would think, how can these companies be doing so well, when the whole world is suffering cascading disasters…how are these corporations safe from the effects of worldwide insecurity and collapse?
Well, they are safe from it the same way that the one shooting a gun is safe from the bullet he shoots.
I said before that these companies are going to be enjoying rising profits while global conditions decline, and they will be doing better next quarter than they are this one, and they will end the year at all time highs. You know for whom policies are made by who benefits from them.
This is what an Empire of Capital looks like.
Well, they are safe from it the same way that the one shooting a gun is safe from the bullet he shoots.
I said before that these companies are going to be enjoying rising profits while global conditions decline, and they will be doing better next quarter than they are this one, and they will end the year at all time highs. You know for whom policies are made by who benefits from them.
This is what an Empire of Capital looks like.
👍12🔥1
It is testament to the dismal deterioration of Western societies’ understanding of the values they proclaim, and to the relentless onslaught of Neoliberalism against every aspect of life, that people have so succumbed to the notion that company-owned social media platforms comprise the totality of what we identify as the public sphere; and that the purchase of one such a company by a single private investor who will exert complete control over that platform…is celebrated as a triumph for free speech.
👍10😢1
Written for a client:
At what point do we recognise that Myanmar’s creation of a refugee crisis with cascading impact across ASEAN constitutes that country’s interference in the domestic affairs of member states? While we have always maintained the core principle of non-interference, even with regards to the Rohingya genocide; we must see that Myanmar’s actions have imposed upon us all, and Malaysia in particular, challenging domestic issues that require our government to take action for our own peace and stability. The Tatmadaw military junta in Myanmar is, essentially, interfering in the politics of Malaysia..
Because Malaysia upholds the Myanmarese citizenship of the Rohingya, and their unalienable right to return to their home country, we do not have a legal framework for categorising them as refugees. Our approach is to presume repatriation, not to regard the Rohingya as permanently dispossessed and stateless. This has obviously made the situation for them extremely blurry in Malaysia with regard to their status, rights, and responsibilities. While this is certainly something we will have to address, and our legislators are going to have to hammer out clearer, more effective protocols for handling the ongoing influx of Rohingya fleeing genocide in Myanmar; this is a domestic political problem undeniably caused by the military of a foreign country – and that is unacceptable.
The horrific incident on April 20th at the immigration detention centre in Relau, Bandar Baharu highlights the atrocious extent to which Myanmar’s policies have intruded upon the security and stability of Malaysia. Undoubtedly, we have failed to effectively manage the challenges posed by the refugee crisis – we need to clarify the position of Rohingya in our country and end their state of legal limbo – but this is not a crisis of our own making; it has been imposed upon us, and Myanmar must be held responsible.
The ASEAN guiding principle of non-interference is indispensable; it safeguards the sovereignty of every member state, and ensures that no individual nation, or collection of nations, with greater power and influence can exert dominance over another. I do not support annulling this principle, but rather broadening its meaning. When any member state implements policies that predictably and inevitably cause negative spill-over consequences upon other ASEAN members; this should be regarded as a form of interference, and a violation of the principle.
The Tatmadaw has deliberately, calculatedly, and relentlessly driven the Rohingya out of their land; unquestionably knowing that this would flood ASEAN member states with refugees, thereby imposing upon us a complex legal, political, and economic problem that our governments would be forced to address. Malaysian NGOs and civil society have been grappling with this dilemma for years now, as have our officials. The issue of the Rohingya has become a divisive topic in our society, particularly over the course of the pandemic, as we struggle to adopt approaches that are both humane and fair to the refugees, and not detrimental to the rights and opportunities of our citizens. This dilemma arguably reached boiling point last week in the detention centre melee that left 10 people dead.
To me, this disturbing incident does not so much represent the shortcomings of the Malaysian government’s policy towards the Rohingya, but more the spreading of the chaos created by the policies of Myanmar. The military regime in Naypyidaw makes decisions that reverberate throughout the region, and interfere with the domestic tranquillity of Malaysia.
At what point do we recognise that Myanmar’s creation of a refugee crisis with cascading impact across ASEAN constitutes that country’s interference in the domestic affairs of member states? While we have always maintained the core principle of non-interference, even with regards to the Rohingya genocide; we must see that Myanmar’s actions have imposed upon us all, and Malaysia in particular, challenging domestic issues that require our government to take action for our own peace and stability. The Tatmadaw military junta in Myanmar is, essentially, interfering in the politics of Malaysia..
Because Malaysia upholds the Myanmarese citizenship of the Rohingya, and their unalienable right to return to their home country, we do not have a legal framework for categorising them as refugees. Our approach is to presume repatriation, not to regard the Rohingya as permanently dispossessed and stateless. This has obviously made the situation for them extremely blurry in Malaysia with regard to their status, rights, and responsibilities. While this is certainly something we will have to address, and our legislators are going to have to hammer out clearer, more effective protocols for handling the ongoing influx of Rohingya fleeing genocide in Myanmar; this is a domestic political problem undeniably caused by the military of a foreign country – and that is unacceptable.
The horrific incident on April 20th at the immigration detention centre in Relau, Bandar Baharu highlights the atrocious extent to which Myanmar’s policies have intruded upon the security and stability of Malaysia. Undoubtedly, we have failed to effectively manage the challenges posed by the refugee crisis – we need to clarify the position of Rohingya in our country and end their state of legal limbo – but this is not a crisis of our own making; it has been imposed upon us, and Myanmar must be held responsible.
The ASEAN guiding principle of non-interference is indispensable; it safeguards the sovereignty of every member state, and ensures that no individual nation, or collection of nations, with greater power and influence can exert dominance over another. I do not support annulling this principle, but rather broadening its meaning. When any member state implements policies that predictably and inevitably cause negative spill-over consequences upon other ASEAN members; this should be regarded as a form of interference, and a violation of the principle.
The Tatmadaw has deliberately, calculatedly, and relentlessly driven the Rohingya out of their land; unquestionably knowing that this would flood ASEAN member states with refugees, thereby imposing upon us a complex legal, political, and economic problem that our governments would be forced to address. Malaysian NGOs and civil society have been grappling with this dilemma for years now, as have our officials. The issue of the Rohingya has become a divisive topic in our society, particularly over the course of the pandemic, as we struggle to adopt approaches that are both humane and fair to the refugees, and not detrimental to the rights and opportunities of our citizens. This dilemma arguably reached boiling point last week in the detention centre melee that left 10 people dead.
To me, this disturbing incident does not so much represent the shortcomings of the Malaysian government’s policy towards the Rohingya, but more the spreading of the chaos created by the policies of Myanmar. The military regime in Naypyidaw makes decisions that reverberate throughout the region, and interfere with the domestic tranquillity of Malaysia.
For over a decade, Malaysian NGOs have dedicated resources to helping the Rohingya, whose UNHCR cards do not ennoscript them to work in this country; and we have proposed multiple plans for temporary measures to facilitate better living conditions for them. But ultimately, we have to recognise that no permanent solution can be reached to solve the problems created by another country’s policies. The Rohingya refugee crisis is the fault of no one but the Myanmar regime, and any stop-gap measures we undertake to temporarily manage the situation only helps to avert accountability for that regime; which in turn guarantees the continuation of the crisis.
For too long the ASEAN non-interference principle has been invoked to justify inaction against Myanmar for the genocide of the Rohingya; but it seems to me that it is time for us to realise that action is justified precisely on the grounds of non-interference; because Myanmar’s policies have been disrupting countries like Malaysia year after year, and this cannot be allowed to continue.
For too long the ASEAN non-interference principle has been invoked to justify inaction against Myanmar for the genocide of the Rohingya; but it seems to me that it is time for us to realise that action is justified precisely on the grounds of non-interference; because Myanmar’s policies have been disrupting countries like Malaysia year after year, and this cannot be allowed to continue.
👍1
Don’t engage with radical conspiracy theorists, flat-earthers, or Atheists. These are people whose thinking skills are stunted far below any level that accommodates intelligent discussion. I believe they should be berated, not debated. Atheists have the most shallow, immature, and severely limited minds of anyone out there; their second most egregious claim is that they are rational thinkers; akin to an infant who “rationally” thinks their parent’s face ceases to exist during a game of peek-a-boo.
❤10😁5👍3🤣1
Written for a client for Al Nakba Day:
There is something disingenuous about the way we talk about the Nakba; even the term itself; Arabic for “catastrophe”, is largely misleading. It implies the idea of a single cataclysmic event, like a giant meteor slamming into the earth, that caused the sudden transformation of Palestine into Israel, and the abrupt degradation of the Palestinians into a nation of dispossessed and oppressed people, as it were, all of a sudden. Obviously, this is not what happened. The 1948 declaration of Israeli statehood was a milestone reached after over 50 years of aggressive Zionist immigration to Palestine, and the gradual marginalisation of the Palestinians. In other words, for half a century, the Zionists were doing what the Israelis have done ever since as a matter of policy; they were “creating facts on the ground” which would inevitably have to be recognised at the political level eventually.
What we call the Nakba, then, was essentially just the political recognition of the real existing facts on the ground; and this recognition normalised Zionist dominance – it did not create it. By portraying the establishment of the Zionist state as some sort of catastrophic blast out of nowhere, we both absolve ourselves of responsibility and wilfully suppress the lessons that should be drawn from how this event occurred. Indeed, just as referring to the 50 years of incremental Zionist gains in Palestine as if it was a singular disaster; I would argue that the annual commemoration of Al Nakba Day has itself become a way to persistently ignore ongoing Zionist gains. Israel has never stopped creating facts on the ground and our yearly lamentations on Al Nakba Day are tantamount to an Orwellian 2 minutes of hate by which we collectively exonerate ourselves from blame for Israel’s apparently unhindered success and expansion.
No, I am not talking about the obvious expansion of Israel’s territorial dominance; I am not talking about land acquisitions, evictions, and settlements. I am talking about the reality of Israel’s integration into the economies of the Muslim world. These are facts on the ground being created by the Zionist state which make political recognition, or normalisation, inevitable – just as aggressive immigration and ethnic cleansing in historical Palestine 120 years ago made the political recognition which we call the Nakba, inevitable.
You would be hard-pressed to find a single Muslim or Arab country today that formally opposes normalisation with Israel, which is not simultaneously engaged in a trading relationship with the Zionist state. From the richest to the poorest; from the biggest to the smallest; there is almost no Muslim-majority country that does not have economic relations with Israel; regardless of their rejection of diplomatic ties. This official rejection, then, represents a kind of smokescreen by states that know their populations want nothing to do with Israel. The “No to Normalisation” stance is little more than a veneer laid on top of a real, existing, and meaningful economic relationship, intended precisely to obscure it.
There is something disingenuous about the way we talk about the Nakba; even the term itself; Arabic for “catastrophe”, is largely misleading. It implies the idea of a single cataclysmic event, like a giant meteor slamming into the earth, that caused the sudden transformation of Palestine into Israel, and the abrupt degradation of the Palestinians into a nation of dispossessed and oppressed people, as it were, all of a sudden. Obviously, this is not what happened. The 1948 declaration of Israeli statehood was a milestone reached after over 50 years of aggressive Zionist immigration to Palestine, and the gradual marginalisation of the Palestinians. In other words, for half a century, the Zionists were doing what the Israelis have done ever since as a matter of policy; they were “creating facts on the ground” which would inevitably have to be recognised at the political level eventually.
What we call the Nakba, then, was essentially just the political recognition of the real existing facts on the ground; and this recognition normalised Zionist dominance – it did not create it. By portraying the establishment of the Zionist state as some sort of catastrophic blast out of nowhere, we both absolve ourselves of responsibility and wilfully suppress the lessons that should be drawn from how this event occurred. Indeed, just as referring to the 50 years of incremental Zionist gains in Palestine as if it was a singular disaster; I would argue that the annual commemoration of Al Nakba Day has itself become a way to persistently ignore ongoing Zionist gains. Israel has never stopped creating facts on the ground and our yearly lamentations on Al Nakba Day are tantamount to an Orwellian 2 minutes of hate by which we collectively exonerate ourselves from blame for Israel’s apparently unhindered success and expansion.
No, I am not talking about the obvious expansion of Israel’s territorial dominance; I am not talking about land acquisitions, evictions, and settlements. I am talking about the reality of Israel’s integration into the economies of the Muslim world. These are facts on the ground being created by the Zionist state which make political recognition, or normalisation, inevitable – just as aggressive immigration and ethnic cleansing in historical Palestine 120 years ago made the political recognition which we call the Nakba, inevitable.
You would be hard-pressed to find a single Muslim or Arab country today that formally opposes normalisation with Israel, which is not simultaneously engaged in a trading relationship with the Zionist state. From the richest to the poorest; from the biggest to the smallest; there is almost no Muslim-majority country that does not have economic relations with Israel; regardless of their rejection of diplomatic ties. This official rejection, then, represents a kind of smokescreen by states that know their populations want nothing to do with Israel. The “No to Normalisation” stance is little more than a veneer laid on top of a real, existing, and meaningful economic relationship, intended precisely to obscure it.
👍9👌1
In our own region, for example, Indonesia does not formally recognise the state of Israel, but nonetheless exports nearly $150 million worth of goods and services every year to Israel, and imports roughly $50 million. Now, every country that normalised diplomatic relations with Israel, either individually or via the Abraham Accords, has been widely condemned across the Muslim world as a traitor to the Palestinian cause; but this ignores the fact that all of these countries had already normalised economic and trade ties with Israel well before signing any treaties. Just as with the Nakba, these forms of political recognition of the Zionist state were preceded by de facto normalisation over the course of decades in the economic sphere. No one is isolating Israel; this is the unvarnished truth. One can easily predict what could be called the second Nakba occurring within the next decade or so – the full normalisation of diplomatic relations with Israel by every Muslim and Arab country in the world; and this will occur exactly as the first Nakba did, i.e., as merely the recognition of existing reality, because everyone actually already has relations with Israel and the charade of non-normalisation will eventually be pointless.
Lamenting the 1948 Nakba while our countries are actively providing the Zionists with goods and services, and buying goods and services from them; contributing to the exponential growth of the Israeli economy – essentially supporting the Zionist project as much as pre-1948 immigration did – is hypocritical; particularly when we do not publicly acknowledge the extent of our trade relations.
Malaysian exports to Israel are estimated to be close to $9 million, with imports at around $7 million. Granted, this is not particularly massive, but it also only accounts for direct trade and not trade via third parties. However, even if the amount was much lower, it still belies Malaysia’s official non-recognition of Israel, and many Malaysians might be surprised to discover that any trade exists between the two countries at all. This is something we have to be open about. Every trading relationship endows both parties with a degree of leverage over the other, and if those trade relations are conducted in the shadows, the public cannot discern whom is leveraging whom; and we cannot know whether our country’s economic leverage is being used to support the Palestinians or making us complicit in the crimes committed against them. We would not like to be in a position, such as Indonesia, where economic relations have grown to such an extent that political normalisation becomes potentially inevitable without the population even realising it.
If we can discuss the reality of trade ties with Israel frankly, we can either insist that they be suspended, or formulate a strategy for pursuing tactical trade in pursuit of justice for the Palestinians and a lasting solution. But if we continue quietly building economic relations with Israel while pretending to oppose normalisation, then we are laying the groundwork for a second Nakba that no one will see coming.
Lamenting the 1948 Nakba while our countries are actively providing the Zionists with goods and services, and buying goods and services from them; contributing to the exponential growth of the Israeli economy – essentially supporting the Zionist project as much as pre-1948 immigration did – is hypocritical; particularly when we do not publicly acknowledge the extent of our trade relations.
Malaysian exports to Israel are estimated to be close to $9 million, with imports at around $7 million. Granted, this is not particularly massive, but it also only accounts for direct trade and not trade via third parties. However, even if the amount was much lower, it still belies Malaysia’s official non-recognition of Israel, and many Malaysians might be surprised to discover that any trade exists between the two countries at all. This is something we have to be open about. Every trading relationship endows both parties with a degree of leverage over the other, and if those trade relations are conducted in the shadows, the public cannot discern whom is leveraging whom; and we cannot know whether our country’s economic leverage is being used to support the Palestinians or making us complicit in the crimes committed against them. We would not like to be in a position, such as Indonesia, where economic relations have grown to such an extent that political normalisation becomes potentially inevitable without the population even realising it.
If we can discuss the reality of trade ties with Israel frankly, we can either insist that they be suspended, or formulate a strategy for pursuing tactical trade in pursuit of justice for the Palestinians and a lasting solution. But if we continue quietly building economic relations with Israel while pretending to oppose normalisation, then we are laying the groundwork for a second Nakba that no one will see coming.
👍12👌1
Another new upload
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owZ2fGQNu_g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owZ2fGQNu_g
YouTube
Singapore's Abdul-Somad Problem
Singapore has been doubling down on their unjustified entry ban against popular Indonesian Muslim scholar, Abdul-Somad; but it still sounds like gaslighting and tone-deaf Islamophobia to Muslims in the region.
❤8
You know, you can actually think of the Federal Reserve and global Central Bank interest rate hikes as a kind of equivalent to a sanctions regime. Sanctions largely impact the general population, and interest rate hikes do too. Everyone knows that about sanctions, the idea being, if you increase the pain for the public, maybe they will rise up against the ruler you want deposed; and they will certainly understand that interest rate hikes risk the same outcome. Except, because sanctions are imposed from outside, the public response is usually to rally around the leader whom they see as being unfairly besieged; when you basically impose sanctions n your own population, the risk of unrest is much greater. So, we should expect to see stricter controls on assembly, protest, and freedom of expression across the West.
👍6
Originally published April 29, 2014 on my old Facebook account
___________________________________________________________
It is important to recognize that the religion of this new empire is neither Christianity nor Judaism. The religion of the Taghut is closer to that of Fir'aun and Nimrud and the self-anointed god-emperors of ancient times.
They obligate their subjects to pay homage to them, to seek refuge in them, to appeal to them, to serve them, to imitate them, to place their hope in them, to fear them, to love them, to admire and praise them, to do nothing short of worship them.
They regard themselves as the source of law, the source of provision, the source of security, the givers of life and death. They believe that everything in the sky and the earth belongs to them, and none has a right to any of this except by their permission.
They regard the people as inherently inferior and deficient, and that we can only achieve any degree of goodness through complete immersion in their worship. To dress, eat, drink, work, rest, talk, and live exactly as they dictate.
They want us to replace our familial, cultural, national and religious affiliations with consumer loyalty to their companies and product lines; to devalue our own heritage, lineage and identities in deference to their logos and brand names.
This is essentially derived from the contempt Iblees, who is their master, has for Mankind. This is their Deen, the Deen of their empire, and it is what they are trying to impose upon us.
Allah is enough as a Protector
___________________________________________________________
It is important to recognize that the religion of this new empire is neither Christianity nor Judaism. The religion of the Taghut is closer to that of Fir'aun and Nimrud and the self-anointed god-emperors of ancient times.
They obligate their subjects to pay homage to them, to seek refuge in them, to appeal to them, to serve them, to imitate them, to place their hope in them, to fear them, to love them, to admire and praise them, to do nothing short of worship them.
They regard themselves as the source of law, the source of provision, the source of security, the givers of life and death. They believe that everything in the sky and the earth belongs to them, and none has a right to any of this except by their permission.
They regard the people as inherently inferior and deficient, and that we can only achieve any degree of goodness through complete immersion in their worship. To dress, eat, drink, work, rest, talk, and live exactly as they dictate.
They want us to replace our familial, cultural, national and religious affiliations with consumer loyalty to their companies and product lines; to devalue our own heritage, lineage and identities in deference to their logos and brand names.
This is essentially derived from the contempt Iblees, who is their master, has for Mankind. This is their Deen, the Deen of their empire, and it is what they are trying to impose upon us.
Allah is enough as a Protector
🔥14❤8👍5