10 Kebiasaan Buruk yang Merusak Otak

10 Kebiasaan Buruk yang Merusak Otak 

 

Januari 28, 2010

Posted by Qolam_v in Do You Know?, Kesehatan.
trackback Sayangi otak Anda,dan ada baiknya kalau Anda kembali menelaah kebiasaan-kebiasaan kecil yang Anda anggap remeh namun berdampak negatif pada otak Anda
 

1. Tidak Mau Sarapan
Banyak orang yang menyepelekan sarapan. Padahal tidak mengkonsumsi apapun di pagi hari menyebabkan turunnya kadar gula dalam darah. Hal ini berakibat pada kurangnya masukan nutrisi pada otak yang akhirnya berakhir pada kemunduran otak. Sarapan yang terbaik di pagi hari bukanlah makanan berat seperti nasi goreng spesial, tetapi cukup air putih dan segelas jus buah segar. Ringkas dan berguna untuk tubuh!

2. Kebanyakan Makan.
Terlalu banyak makan mengeraskan pembuluh otak yang biasanya menuntun orang pada menurunnya kekuatan mental. Jadi makanlah dalam porsi yang normal. Biasakan menahan diri dengan cara berhenti makan sebelum Anda kekenyangan.

3. Merokok
Jika rokok memiliki segudang efek buruk, semua orang pasti sudah tahu. Dan ada satu lagi efek buruk rokok yang terungkap di sini. Merokok ternyata berakibat sangat mengerikan pada otak! Bayangkan, otak manusia lama kelamaan bisa menyusut dan akhirnya kehilangan fungsi-fungsinya karena rajin menghisap benda berasap itu. Tak ayal di waktu tua bahkan pada saat masih muda sekalipun, kita rawan alzheimer (alzheimer adalah penyakit pikun).

4. Terlalu Banyak Mengkonsumsi Gula
Terlalu banyak asupan gula akan menghalangi penyerapan protein dan gizi sehingga tubuh kekurangan nutrisi dan perkembangan otak terganggu. Karena itu, kurangi konsumsi makanan manis favorit Anda.

5. Polusi Udara
Otak adalah bagian tubuh yang paling banyak menyerap udara. Terlalu lama berada di lingkungan dengan udara berpolusi membuat kerja otak tidak efisien.

6. Kurang Tidur
Tidur memberikan kesempatan otak untuk beristirahat. Sering melalaikan tidur membuat sel-sel otak menjadi mati kelelahan. Tapi jangan juga kebanyakan tidur karena bisa membuat Anda menjadi pemalas yang lamban. Sebaiknya tidur 6-8 jam sehari agar sehat dan bugar.

7. Menutup Kepala Ketika Sedang Tidur
Tidur dengan kepala yang ditutupi merupakan kebiasaan buruk yang sangat berbahaya karena karbondioksida yang diproduksi selama tidur terkonsentrasi sehingga otak tercemar. Jangan heran kalau lama kelamaan otak menjadi rusak.

8. Berpikir Terlalu Keras Ketika Sedang Sakit
Bekerja keras atau belajar ketika kondisi tubuh sedang tidak fit juga memperparah ketidakefektifan otak. Sudah tahu sedang tidak sehat, sebaiknya istirahat total dan jangan forsir otak Anda.

9. Kurangnya Stimulasi Otak
Berpikir adalah cara terbaik untuk melatih kerja otak. Kurang berpikir akan membuat otak menyusut dan akhirnya tidak berfungsi maksimal. Rajin membaca, mendengar musik dan bermain (catur, scrabble, dll) membuat otak Anda terbiasa berpikir aktif dan kreatif.

10. Jarang Bicara
Percakapan intelektual biasanya membawa efek bagus pada kerja otak. Jadi jangan terlalu bangga menjadi pendiam. Obrolan yang bermutu sangat baik untuk kesehatan Anda.


http://qalamv.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/10-kebiasaan-buruk-yang-merusak-otak/

10 Wasiat Imam Hasan Al Banna

10 Wasiat Imam Hasan Al Banna  

 

Januari 25, 2010

Posted by Qolam_v in Do You Know?, Profil.
trackback Imam Hasan Al-Bana, pendiri gerakan dakwah Ikhwan yang terkenal ke seluruh dunia, banyak meninggalkan catatan penting pada sejarah perjuangan Islam modern. Ingat, kehadiran Imam Hasan bertepatan dengan hanya beberapa saat setelah hancurnya kekhalifan Islam yang terakhir. Tak pelak, setelah kepergian beliau, tak ada lagi figur dakwah yang bisa dijadikan acuan dalam gerakan Islam.
Setiap hari, dalam dakwahnya, ia berjalan kaki tidak kurang dari 20 KM. Beliau menyambangi desa-desa dan dilakukannya tanpa pamrih sedikitpun dari manusia. Ia duduk di warung kopi pada beberapa malam, menyatu dengan masyarakat yang sebenarnya, dan ia mampu mengingat nama orang yang baru saja ditemuinya walaupun hanya sekali, sehingga orang yang diajak bicara olehnya menjadi simpati.
Banyak warisan dari Imam Hasan yang sangat menggelorakan semangat dakwah Islam. Berikut ini beberapa di antaranya dari sekian wasiat-wasiatnya:

1. Bangunlah segera untuk melakukan sholat apabila mendengara adzan walau bagaimanapun keadaannya.
2. Baca, Telaah dan dengarkan Al-Quran atau dzikirlah kepada Allah dan janganlah engkau menghambur-hamburkan waktumu dalam masalah yang tidak ada manfaatnya.
3. Bersungguh-sungguhlah untuk bisa berbicara dalam bahasa Arab dengan fasih.
4. Jangan memperbanyak perdebatan dalam berbagai bidang pembicaraan sebab hal ini semata-mata tidak akan mendatangkan kebaikan.
5. Jangan banyak tertawa sebab hati yang selalu berkomunikasi dengan Allah (dzikir) adalah tenang dan tentram.
6. Jangan bergurau karena umat yang berjihad tidak berbuat kecuali dengan bersungguh-sungguh terus-menerus.
7. Jangan mengeraskan suara di atas suara yang diperlukan pendengar, karena hal ini akan mengganggu dan menyakiti.
8. Jauhilah dari membicarakan kejelekan orang lain atau melukainya dalam bentuk apapun dan jangan berbicara kecuali yang baik.
9. Berta’aruflah dengan saudaramu yang kalian temui walaupun dia tidak meminta, sebab prinsip dakwah kita adalah cinta dan ta’awun (kerja sama).
10. Pekerjaan rumah kita sebenarnya lebih bertumpuk dari pada waktu yang tersedia, maka manfaatkanlah waktu dan apabila kalian mempunyai sesuatu keperluan maka sederhanakanlah dan percepatlah untuk diselesaikan.

http://qalamv.wordpress.com/2010/01/25/10-wasiat-imam-hasan-al-banna/

Abdul Latif Rahbar: Ilmu hadith belum cukup tanpa fiqh (Bahagaian 2/4)

Abdul Latif Rahbar: Ilmu hadith belum cukup tanpa fiqh (Bahagaian 2/4)

 

Abdul Latif Rahbar
Ilmuan-ilmuan Islam yang terkenal seperti Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Abu Daud dan lain-lain imam muhaddithin yang mana mereka sudahpun menghafal ratusan ribu hadis masih tetap mengamalkan agama berdasarkan mazhab imam-imam mujtahid walaupun pada pandangan mata umum apalah perlunya mereka bertaqlid sedangkan mereka mempunyai ilmu agama yang jauh lebih daripada cukup? Di sinilah bezanya antara fuqaha (ahli-ahli fiqh) dan muhaddithin (ahli-ahli hadith). Apabila seseorang itu mengetahui beribu hadis sekalipun, tetapi dia tidak mempunyai ilmu yang cukup untuk membahaskannya, maka dia tidak layak untuk mengeluarkan sesuatu pendapat. Mereka-mereka yang mempelajari Sunan Tirmizi pasti mengetahui bahawa apabila membincangkan masalah fiqh, Imam Tirmizi tidak pernah mengambil pendapat guru beliau Imam Bukhari, tetapi beliau menyebut nama-nama seperti Imam Malik, Imam Syafie, Imam Ahmad atau ulama Kufah iaitu Imam Abu Hanifah. Imam Tirmizi hanya akan mengambil nama Imam Bukhari  apabila beliau membahaskan kesahihan atau status sesuatu hadis, kerana beliau mengetahui bahawa walaupun Imam Bukhari adalah pakar dalam bidang hadis, tetapi kepakaran Imam Bukhari dalam ilmu fiqh belum dapat menandingi kepakaran yang ada pada imam-imam mujtahid. Dapat kita fahami di sini, bahawa setinggi manapun ilmu hadith seseorang itu, belum tentu dia layak mengeluarkan fatwa sekiranya dia tidak mempunyai ilmu fiqh yang cukup. Sekiranya datang dua nas bertentangan antara satu sama lain, yang mana kedua-duanya adalah sahih dan sama kuat, yang mana satukah akan kita ambil? Ini hanya dapat dilakukan seandainya kita mampu memahami selok-belok ilmu fiqah, bukan dengan hanya bersandarkan kepada kesahihan semata-mata. Sebagai contoh ingin penulis menceritakan di sini perbahasan antara dua imam mujtahid Abu Hanifah dan Awza’I mengenai masalah mengangkat kedua belah tangan selepas bangun dari rukuk. Imam Awza’i mengatakan: “Saya meriwayatkan dari Salim, dari Nafi’ dari Ibnu Umar bahawa Rasulullah s.a.w. mengangkat tangan dalam solat Baginda s.a.w.” Lalu Imam Abu Hanifah menjawab: “Saya meriwayatkan dari Hammad, dari Ibrahim An-Nakh’i dari ‘Alqamah dari Ibnu Mas’ud bahawa Rasulullah s.a.w tidak mengangkat tangan Baginda s.a.w.” Imam Awza’i membalas: “Saya membawa sanad (rangkaian periwayat) yang lebih sedikit dan tuan ingin berhujah dengan sanad yang lebih perantaraannya?” (Mengikut pendapat ulama hadis, hadis yang lebih kurang perantaraannya antara perawi dengan Baginda s.a.w adalah lebih kuat dari hadis yang mempunyai lebih perawi, seperti yang tertera di atas bahawa antara Imam Awza’i dan Rasulullah s.a.w hanya tiga perawi dibandingkan dengan Imam Abu Hanifah yang mempunyai empat perawi). Jawab Imam Abu Hanifah: “Hammad lebih faqih daripada Salim, Ibrahim An-Nakh’i lebih faqih daripada Nafi’ dan ‘Alqamah lebih faqih daripada Ibnu Umar walaupun beliau adalah seorang sahabat Nabi s.a.w. Dan Ibnu Mas’ud adalah Ibnu Mas’ud (siapakah yang dapat menafikan kefaqihan Ibnu Mas’ud?).” Di sini Imam Abu Hanifah mengambil kira faktor kefaqihan perawi dalam mengeluarkan fatwa dan bukan bersandarkan kepada kekuatan dan nilai sesebuah hadis semata-mata. Pun begitu perlu diingatkan bahawa menurut pendapat Imam Syafie mengangkat tangan selepas rukuk adalah sunnah kerana ia adalah amalan penduduk Tanah Haram dan Syam, yang mana terdapat sekurang-kurangnya 35,000 sahabat dikebumikan di Syam. Dalam sebuah hadith riwayat Sunan, Nabi s.a.w. bersabda: "Semoga Allah ta’ala menyegarkan fikiran orang yang mendengar perkataanku, lalu dia menyampaikannya sepertimana yang dia dengar. Betapa ramai orang yang disampaikan itu lebih memahami dari si pendengar asal itu sendiri." Di sini Nabi s.a.w. sendiri mengkategorikan antara mereka yang menghafal hadis dan mereka yang memahami hadis. Kerana itulah Imam A’mash salah seorang perawi Bukhari telah berkata kepada anak murid beliau Imam Abu Hanifah: “Kamu wahai golongan fuqaha’ adalah doktor dan kami (golongan muhaddithin) hanyalah penjual ubat.” Dalam I’lam al-Muwaqqi’in Imam Ibnul-Qayyim meriwayatkan bahawa satu ketika Muhammad bin Ubaidullah bin Munadi telah mendengar seorang lelaki bertanya kepada guru beliau Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal: “Apabila seseorang itu menghafal 100,000 hadith, adakah dia dikira sebagai seorang yang faqih?” Imam Ahmad menjawab: “Tidak.” Dia ditanya lagi: “Sekiranya 200,000 hadith?” Balas beliau: “Tidak.” Orang itu bertanya lagi: “Sekiranya 300,000?” dan sekali lagi Imam Ahmad menjawab tidak. Kemudian orang itu bertanya: "Bagaimana sekiranya dia menghafal 400,000 hadith?” Lalu Imam Ahmad mengisyaratkan dengan tangan beliau, “Lebih kurang begitulah.” Riwayat di atas memberi gambaran jelas kepada semua, dengan hanya mempelajari beberapa ribu hadis belum tentu kita mampu untuk melayakkan diri kita dalam mengeluarkan pendapat sewenang-wenangnya. Apatah lagi bila hanya tahu beberapa kerat hadis? Mengapakah kita perlu bermazhab? Inilah soalan yang sering diajukan oleh ghair muqallidin (golongan tidak bermazhab). Jawapannya amat ringkas: Apabila kita tidak mempunyai ilmu yang cukup maka wajib untuk kita mendengar mereka yang paling arif, dan sekiranya kita mempunyai ilmu yang cukup maka haram untuk kita mengikut mana-mana mazhab. Ini bersesuaian dengan mafhum firman Allah ta’ala dalam surah al-Mulk apabila Allah ta’ala menceritakan perihal penduduk neraka: "Dan mereka berkata: 'Sekiranya kami mendengar (patuh) atau kami memahami (akan agama) maka sudah tentulah kami tidak akan menjadi penduduk Sa’ir (Neraka)'". Walaupun ayat di atas adalah berkenaan dengan iman, tetapi memandangkan konteks ayat adalah luas maka ulama berhujah tentang betapa pentingnya patuh kepada yang mahir. Dan sekiranya kita tidak mahu patuh maka kita sendiri mestilah menjadi dari golongan yang berakal dan memahami sedalam-dalamnya. Sekiranya kita tidak berhati-hati, maka dikhuatiri kita akan terjebak lalu tergelungsur jatuh dan jauh menyimpang dari kehendak syariah walaupun pada asalnya niat yang sebenar adalah untuk menegakkan hukum Allah di atas muka bumi bersesuaian dengan yang di bawa oleh Baginda s.a.w. Amalan ulama yang jauh lebih mahir berbanding kita sendiri adalah hujah yang kuat betapa kita tidak sepatutnya dengan sewenang-wenang mengeluarkan pendapat sendiri. Nama-nama seperti Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Tirmizi, Nasa'i, Ibnu Majah, Tahawi, Ibnu Hajar, Ibnu Rushd, Sayuti, Ibnu Kathir adalah antara mereka yang bertaqlid dengan imam-imam mujtahid yang datang sebelum mereka. Golongan yang tidak mengikut mazhab pada hari ini banyak menggunakan pendapat Ibnu Taimiyyah dan Ibnu Qayyim dalam membahaskan pendapat mereka. Tidakkah mereka sedar bahawa keduanya adalah antara ulama ulung dalam mazhab Hanbali? Dan mengapa tidak sahaja mereka digelar Taimi sekiranya mereka merasakan bahawa pendapat Ibnu Taimiyyah sahaja yang berasaskan al-Quran dan Sunnah? Adakah imam-imam mujtahid terdahulu tidak memahami sunnah sedangkan zaman mereka jauh lebih dekat dengan zaman Baginda s.a.w. dan para sahabat kalau nak dibandingkan dengan Ibnu Taimiyyah yang datang enam hingga tujuh abad selepas imam-imam mujtahid? Hakikatnya apabila kita berpegang kepada pendapat imam mujtahid, kita sudahpun berpegang kepada dalil dan tali yang kukuh. Imam Dzahabi seorang ahli sejarah yang terkenal dan alim mengenai ilmu-ilmu perawi hadis dalam kitab-kitab beliau tidak pernah berbahas mengenai imam-imam mujtahid. Ini kerana penerimaan umum dan kehebatan imam-imam mujtahid mencapai darjah mutawatir, iaitu mustahil untuk orang ramai bersepakat untuk berbohong dalam menyatakan keunggulan imam-imam tersebut. Ghair muqallidin hari inipun lebih banyak berpandukan pendapat ulama yang tidak mengikut mazhab seperti mereka antaranya Syeikh Nasirudin al-Albani. Persoalannya sekarang apabila mereka mengikut al-Albani maka mereka sahajalah Ahlusunnah wal-jama’ah. Dan apabila kita terikat dengan pendapat-pendapat Syafie maka kita tidak digelar sebagai Ahlussunnah. Di manakah keadilan? Jadi, apabila kita sedia maklum bahawa ilmu yang ada pada kita hari ini belum tentu cukup untuk kita berbahas segala dalil dalam sesuatu masalah agama, apakah hak kita untuk berijtihad apatah lagi memberi keizinan umum kepada orang-orang awam untuk berijtihad sendiri? Sedangkan tahap pemahaman dalam kalangan ulama ada bezanya, apakah perlu kita menyusahkan orang ramai untuk berfatwa?

http://www.harakahdaily.net/v2/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=23449%3Aabdul-latif-rahbar-ilmu-hadith-belum-cukup-tanpa-fiq&catid=95%3Aagama2&Itemid=132

Ad hominem

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Personal attacks" redirects here. For the Wikipedia policy, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks.

An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.^[1] The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy,^[2] but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.^[3]
The philosopher Charles Taylor has argued that ad hominem reasoning is essential to understanding certain moral issues, and contrasts this sort of reasoning with the apodictic reasoning of philosophical naturalism (philosophy).^[4]

Contents [hide] 1 Types 1.1 Abuse 1.2 Circumstantial 1.3 Tu quoque 1.4 Guilt by association 2 Common misconceptions 3 See also 4 References 5 Further reading 6 External links

[edit] Types

[edit] Abuse

Ad hominem abuse (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
Examples:

• "You can't believe Jack when he says the proposed policy would help the economy. He doesn't even have a job."
• "Candidate Jane's proposal about zoning is ridiculous. She was caught cheating on her taxes in 2003."

[edit] Circumstantial

Ad hominem circumstantial points out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position. Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source).^[5]
The circumstantial fallacy only applies where the source taking a position is only making a logical argument from premises that are generally accepted. Where the source seeks to convince an audience of the truth of a premise by a claim of authority or by personal observation, observation of their circumstances may reduce the evidentiary weight of the claims, sometimes to zero.^[6]
Examples:
Mandy Rice-Davies's famous testimony during the Profumo Affair, "Well, he would [say that], wouldn't he?", is an example of a valid circumstantial argument. Her point was that since a man in a prominent position, accused of an affair with a callgirl, would deny the claim whether it was true or false, his denial, in itself, carries little evidential weight against the claim of an affair. Note, however, that this argument is valid only insofar as it devalues the denial; it does not bolster the original claim. To construe evidentiary invalidation of the denial as evidentiary validation of the original claim is fallacious (on several different bases, including that of argumentum ad hominem); however likely the man in question would be to deny an affair that did in fact happen, he could only be more likely to deny an affair that never did.
Conflict of Interest: Where a source seeks to convince by a claim of authority or by personal observation, identification of conflicts of interest are not ad hominem - it is generally well accepted that an "authority" needs to be objective and impartial, and that an audience can only evaluate information from a source if they know about conflicts of interest that may affect the objectivity of the source. Identification of a conflict of interest is appropriate, and concealment of a conflict of interest is a problem.

[edit] Tu quoque

Main article: Tu quoque

Ad hominem tu quoque (lit: "You too!") refers to a claim that the source making the argument has spoken or acted in a way inconsistent with the argument. In particular, if Source A criticizes the actions of Source B, a tu quoque response is that Source A has acted in the same way. This argument is fallacious because it does not disprove the argument; if the premise is true then Source A may be a hypocrite, but this does not make the statement less credible from a logical perspective. Indeed, Source A may be in a position to provide personal testimony to support the argument.
For example, a father may tell his son not to start smoking as he will regret it when he is older, and the son may point out that his father is or was a smoker. This does not alter the fact that his son may regret smoking when he is older.

[edit] Guilt by association

Main article: Association fallacy

Guilt by association can sometimes also be a type of ad hominem fallacy, if the argument attacks a source because of the similarity between the views of someone making an argument and other proponents of the argument.^[7]
This form of the argument is as follows:

Source S makes claim C.

Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

[edit] Common misconceptions

Gratuitous verbal abuse or "name-calling" itself is not an ad hominem or a logical fallacy.^{[8][9][10][11][12]}
This is not to be confused with a true fallacy, which would be "X is idiotically ignorant [of politics], so why should we listen to him now?"
Identification of conflicts of interest - see "Circumstantial", above.

[edit] See also

• Ad feminam
• And you are lynching Negroes
• Appeal to authority
• Association fallacy
• Character assassination
• Credibility
• Discrediting tactic
• Fair game (Scientology)
• Fundamental attribution error
• Negative campaigning
• Reputation
• Self-hating Jew
• Shooting the messenger

[edit] References

1. ^ "ad hominem: West's Encyclopedia of American Law (Full Article) from". Answers.com. 2007-09-10. http://www.answers.com/topic/ad-hominem. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
2. ^ Walton, Douglas (2008). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press. pp. 190 pp. 
3. ^ Walton, Douglas (2008). Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge University Press. pp. 170 pp. 
4. ^ Charles Taylor, "Explanation and Practical Reason", Philosophical Arguments (Harvard, 1997), 34-60.
5. ^ Walton DN. Ad Hominem Arguments. University of Alabama Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8173-0922-5, pp.18-21
6. ^ fallacyfiles.org (2007). "Argumentum ad Hominem". fallacyfiles.org. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html. Retrieved September 10, 2007. 
7. ^ Walton DN. Ad Hominem Arguments. University of Alabama Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8173-0922-5, pp.18-21
8. ^ "Ad Hominem". Plover.net. http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
9. ^ "Logical Fallacy: Argumentum ad Hominem". Fallacyfiles.org. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
10. ^ "Logic Fallacies". The Autonomist. http://theautonomist.com/aaphp/permanent/fallacies.php#adhom. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
11. ^ "AdHominem". Drury.edu. http://www.drury.edu/ess/Logic/Informal/AdHominem.html. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 
12. ^ "Logical Fallacies» Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)". Logicalfallacies.info. http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/. Retrieved 2009-11-08. 

[edit] Further reading

• Hurley, Patrick (2000). A Concise Introduction to Logic, Seventh Edition. wadsworth, a division of Thompson Learning. pp. 125–128, 182. ISBN 0-534-52006-5. 
• Copi, Irving M. and Cohen, Carl. Introduction to Logic (8th Ed.), p. 97-100.
• Walton, Douglas (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments. Tuscaloosa: University Alabama Press. pp. 240 pp. 

[edit] External links

Look up ad hominem in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Nizkor.org: Fallacy: Ad Hominem.
• Nizkor.org: Fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem.
• Argumentum Ad Hominem
• the ad hominem fallacy fallacy
• University of Winnipeg: Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominen ArgumentPDF (70.2 KB)
• About.com: Argument Against the Person (Argumentum ad hominem)
• Logical Fallacies: Ad Hominem
• Infidels.org: Logic and Fallacies: Constructing a Logical Argument (Argumentum ad Hominem)
• Mission Critical: Introduction to Ad Hominem Fallacies

HAPUSKAN KEISTIMEWAAN ISLAM DI MALAYSIA - IFC

Gambar di atas adalah peristiwa bagaimana pejuang-pejuang Melayu Islam menggempur Dewan di Ibu Pejabat Majlis Peguam Council di mana tempat berlangsungnya Forum "Memeluk Islam' anjuran Majlis Peguam pada 11 Ogos 2008 yang lalu. Kelihatan bersongkok dan berbaju kemeja putih di atas, YB Sdr Zulkifli Nordin ( Ahli Parlime Kulim Bandar Baru - PKR ) yang turut membantah Majlis Peguam di atas penganjuran forum ini. Akhirnya YB Zulkifli Nordin telah diberi surat tunjuk sebab oleh PKR kerana menentang Majlis Peguam. MAJLIS PEGUAM INILAH YANG MENJADI DALANG KEPADA PENUBUHAN IFC..!

Assalamualaikum. Tahukah tuan/puan sekelian apakah itu IFC..?
1. IFC (Interfaith Commission) yang nama asalnya ialah IRC - Inter Religious Council (IRC) adalah sebuah suruhanjaya yang dicadangkan penubuhannya seperti sebuah badan berkanun yang mempunyai kuasa undang-undang yang boleh mengubah ajaran sesetengah agama. Badan ini berfungsi mirip sebuah mahkamah dan segala keputusannya adalah muktamad ke atas agama yang terlibat. IFC juga akan berfungsi seperti SUHAKAM yang menerima dan melayan aduan-aduan berkaitan agama. Kalau SUHAKAM berfungsi untuk mendengar kes-kes yang berkaitan dengan hak asasi manusia, maka IFC pula akan bertindak dan berfungsi sebagai badan yang mendengar kes-kes yang berkaitan dengan hak-hak individu di dalam mengamalkan hidup beragama (kebebasan beragama).

SIAPAKAH YANG MENCADANGKAN PENUBUHAN IFC?

2. IFC digagaskan penubuhannya oleh Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism (Majlis Perundingan Malaysia Agama Buddha), Christianity, Hinduism dan Sikhism (MCCBCHS) melalui memorandumnya kepada majlis Peguam bertarikh 21 Ogos 2001. Presiden MCCBCHS ialah V.Harcharan Singh. Saya sempat berdialog dua kali dengan kumpulan-kumpulan ini dalam satu mesyuarat PANEL anjuran Jabatan Perpaduan Negara dan Integrasi Nasional. Kebanyakan daripada pemimpin-pemimpin agama ini bersifat angkuh dan begitu radikal yang mana pernah pada satu ketika mereka mendesak agar kedudukan agama Islam sama rata sahaja dengan agama-agama lain di sisi Perlembagaan Negara.

SIAPAKAH YANG PALING BERSEMANGAT MENYOKONG IFC?

3. Majlis Peguan terutamanya Jawatankuasa Kecil Hak Asasi Manusia amat kuat menyokong penubuhan IFC dan amat berharap ia akan berjaya. Kronologinya seperti berikut :

- Pada 8 Ogos 2001, Majlis Peguam telah menerima satu memorandum daripada MCCBCHS ( Majlis Perunding Antara Agama Buddha - Kristian - Hindu - Sikh) mengenai perkara ini dan selepas itu idea penubuhan IFC berjalan dengan lancar.

- Pada 8 Disember 2001 satu perayaan 'Festival of Rights' diadakan dengan tema 'Kebebasan Beragama'.

- Pada 10 Disember 2001, Majlis Peguam menganjurkan forum mengenai 'Kebebasan Beragama' dan menerbitkan satu artikel dalam jurnal INSAF.

- Pada 17 Mac 2003 bengkel untuk menimbang keperluan wujudnya IRC (Inter Religious Council) diadakan. Bengkel ini gagal apabila ke semua NGO Islam menarik diri daripada terlibat dengan penubuhan suruhanjaya ini iaitu ABIM, ACCIN, JUST dan Sisters In Islam termasuk Dr. Chandra Muzaffar yang menjadi antara orang awal yang mencadangkan dialog antara kepecayaan. Bagaimanapun Sister s In Islam kemudian menyertai semula dan menyokong penubuhan suruhanjaya ini.

- Pada pertengahan tahun 2004, satu persidangan mengenai penubuhan IRC diadakan. Bagi menunjukkan wujudnya sokongan, penganjur seminar telah melantik ke semua ahli Jawatankuasa Kecil Syariah majlis Peguam sebagai ahli Jawatankuasa Penganjur tanpa pengetahuan mereka.

- Mengemukakan deraf ketiga undang-undang penubuhan IFC bertarikh Januari 2005 kepada persidangan cadangan penubuhan IFC. Persidangan ini dianjurkan oleh suatu badan Yayasan Kristian yang beribu pejabat di negara Jerman, iaitu Konrad Adeneuer Foundation (KAF).

APAKAH MATLAMAT PENUBUHAN IFC ?

4. Matlamat IFC ialah untuk meminda beberapa ajaran asas Islam yang akan merosakkan akidah orang Islam dan berpihak kepada kepentingan orang-orang bukan Islam.

APAKAH TUNTUTAN MCCBCHS (BUKAN ISLAM) MELALUI IFC..?

a. Seseorang anak yang dilahirkan oleh ibu-bapa Islam tidak seharusnya secara terus menjadi orang Islam.

b. Orang-orang bukan Islam yang telah memeluk agama Islam hendaklah diberikan kebebasan untuk kembali kepada agama asal mereka (murtad) dan tidak boleh dikenakan tindakan undang-undang.

c. Sebarang kes pertukaran agama orang Islam kepada bukan Islam tidak sepatutnya dikendalikan oleh Mahkamah Syariah tetapi dikendalikan oleh mahkamah sivil.

d. Tidak perlu dicatatkan di dalam Kad Pengenalan seseorang Muslim bahawa ia beragama Islam.

e. Orang bukan Islam tidak perlu dikehendaki menganut Islam sekiranya ingin berkahwin dengan orang Islam. Orang Islam hendaklah dibenarkan keluar daripada Islam (murtad) sekiranya ingin berkahwin dengan orang bukan Islam tanpa boleh dikenakan apa-apa tindakan undang-undang.

f. Seseorang atau pasangan suami isteri yang menukar agamanya dengan memeluk Islam tidak patut diberikan hak jagaan anak.

g. Orang-orang yang bukan Islam yang mempunyai hubungan kekeluargaan dengan seorang yang memeluk Islam hendaklah diberikan hak menuntut harta pusaka selepas kematiannya.

h. Kerajaan hendaklah menyediakan dana yang mencukupi untuk membina dan menyelenggara ruah-rumah ibadat orang bukan Islam seperti Kuil Hindu dan Gereja sebagaimana kerajaan menyediakan dana yang serupa untuk masjid.

i. Orang-orang bukan Islam hendaklah dibenarkan dan tidak boleh dihalang daripada menggunakan perkataan-perkataan suci Islam dalam percakapan dan sebagainya.

j. Bibel dalam Bahasa Malaysia dan Bahasa Indonesia sepatutnya dibenarkan untuk diedarkan kepada umum secara terbuka.

k. Pelajaran agama bukan Islam untuk penganut agama itu hendaklah diajar di semua sekolah.

l. Program-program berunsur Islam dalam bahasa ibunda sesuatu kaum hendaklah ditiadakan. Program dakwah agama lain selain Islam pula hendaklah dibenarkan untuk disiarkan dalam bahasa ibunda masing-masing.

m. Orang-orang Islam yang membayar zakat tidak sepatutnya dikecualikan daripada memvayar cukai pendapatan dan wang hasil zakat sepatutnya digunakan juga untuk keperluan orang-orang bukan Islam.

n. Sepatutnya Islam tidak disebut sebagai pilihan pertama masyarakat Malaysia seperti dalam soal pakaian menutup aurat kepada pelajar sekolah.

APAKAH BAHAYANYA PENUBUHAN IFC TERHADAP ISLAM..?

5. Berdasarkan deraf undang-undang penubuhan IRC, suruhanjaya ini jika ditubuhkan amat bahaya kepada Islam dari sudut :

(i) Membuka ruang seluas-luasnya untuk orang bukan Islam mencampuri hal ehwal agama Islam. IFC jelas sebuah suruhanjaya anti Islam. Ini adalah campurtangan orang bukan Islam dalam hal ehwal agama Islam secara terang (tanpa berselindung). Orang bukan Islam memang berhak untuk menuntut hak mereka mengamalkan agama sendiri tetapi tidak sampai mempersoalkan dan campurtangan dalam urusan agama Islam. campurtangan ini amat bahaya. Perkara yang berkaitan dengan agama Islam hendaklah diselesaikan oleh mereka yang berkelayakan di dalam Islam sendiri. Tidak perlu campurtangan IFC.

(ii) IFC berhak menentukan status agama seseorang. Seseorang yang ingin murtad boleh mengemukakan permohonannya kepada IFC. permohonannya akan ditentukan oleh ahli-ahli IFC yang antaranya adalah orang bukan Islam. Ini adalah camprtangan yang amat nyata dan menghina Mahkamah Syariah yang selama ini diberi kuasa untuk meentukan status agama seseorang itu. Manakala Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara pula tidak berhak menolak permohonan seseorang untuk menukar nama daripada Islam kepada bukan Islam dengan alasan suatu percubaan untuk murtad. Perkara ini terkandung dalam Seksyen 19(3) deraf undang-undang IFC.

APAKAH SIKAP KITA SEBAGAI SEORANG MUSLIM..?

Walaupun pada tahun 2005 yang lalu pihak kerajaan telah menangguhkan kelulusan penubuhan IFC ini, tetapi perjuangan IFC ini telah mula meresap dan merebak ke dalam masyarakat melalui suara-suara yang di bawa oleh Majlis Peguam , HINDRAF dan sebagainya. Nampaknya sekarang Majlis Peguam dan HINDRAF lebih agresif dalam hal untuk menuntut kesamarataan tentang agama-agama lain dengan kedudukan Islam di negara ini.

Jadi, sebagai seorang muslim mahukah kita membiarkan kedua-dua anasir ini meneruskan agenda IFC dalam bentuk pertikaian perundangan Islam oleh Bar Counsil dan juga perjuangan menerusi berarak di jalan-jalan raya macam HINDRAF. Kalau tak mampu nak menentang agenda IFC ini secara berdepan, maka cukuplah kalau tuanh/puan tolong sampaikan maklumat saya ini pada kawan-kawan rapat kita. Wassalam.
Tahukah tuan/puan sekarang ini..? Puak-puak pendokong IFC ini sekarang sedang berusaha untuk mendapatkan dana antarabangsa bagi membina pusat/kompleks rumah ibadat untuk gereja, kuil, dan juga tok kong di Putrajaya. Dengar ceritanya kompleks akan dibina berhampiran dengan PICC, Putrajaya dan kalau terbina nanti maka akan terserlah dari udara jika kapalterbang yang nak mendarat ke KLIA. Berapa kerat sangat orang kristian, hindu dan buddha di Putrajaya tu. Tapi, demi kerana mereka nak menonjolkan syiar agama mereka bagi menandingi Islam, maka akan bina sebesar-besarnya di Putrajaya nanti.

http://shamsuddinmoner.blogspot.com/2008/11/hapuskan-keistimewaan-islam-di-malaysia.html

Ahmed Yassin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Ahmed Yassin
Ahmed Yassin in Gaza, first quarter of 2004
Born	June 28, 1937 Al-Jura, British Mandate for Palestine
Died	March 22, 2004(2004-03-22) (aged 66) Gaza City, Gaza Strip

Sheikh Ahmed Ismail Hassan Yassin (1937 – 22 March 2004 ^[1]) (Arabic: الشيخ أحمد إسماعيل حسن ياسين‎, alŚaỉċ Åhmad Ḁsmáoíl Hasan Iásín) was a founder of Hamas, an Islamist Palestinian paramilitary organization and political party.^{[2][3][4][5][6]} Yassin also served as the spiritual leader of the organization. Hamas gained popularity in Palestinian society by establishing hospitals, education systems, libraries and other services,^[7] but it has also claimed responsibility for a number of suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians, leading to its being characterized by the European Union,^[8] Israel,^[9] Japan,^[10] Canada,^[11] and the United States^[12] as a terrorist organization.^[13][14]
Yassin, a quadriplegic who was nearly blind, had used a wheelchair since a sporting accident at the age of 12.^[15] He was assassinated when an Israeli helicopter gunship fired a missile at him as he was being wheeled to early morning prayers.^[16] His killing, in an attack that claimed the lives of both his bodyguards and nine bystanders, precipitated much criticism of Israel, and many observers suggested that the act would negatively impact the peace process.^[16] 200,000 Palestinians attended his funeral procession.^[17]

Contents [hide] 1 Early life 2 Involvement in the Israel-Palestinian conflict 2.1 Alleged involvement in terrorist attacks 3 Assassination 4 Reaction to assassination 4.1 Palestinian 4.2 Israeli 4.3 Arab world 4.4 Western 5 Notes and references 6 External links

[edit] Early life

Ahmed Yassin was born in al-Jura, a small village near the city of Ashkelon, during the British Mandate of Palestine. His date of birth is not known for certain: according to his Palestinian passport, he was born on 1 January 1929, but he claimed to have actually been born in 1938. His father, Abdullah Yassin, died when he was three years old. Afterward, he became known in his neighborhood as Ahmad Sa'ada after his mother Sa'ada al-Habeel. This was to differentiate him from the children of his father's other three wives. Together, Yassin had four brothers and two sisters. He and his entire family fled to Gaza, settling in al-Shati Camp after his village was captured by the Israel Defence Forces during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.^[16][18]
Yassin came to Gaza as a refugee. When he was 12, he sustained a severe spinal injury while wrestling his friend Abdullah al-Khatib. His neck was kept in plaster for 45 days. He damaged his spinal cord rendered him a quadraplegic for the rest of his life. Fearing a rift between his family and al-Khatib's, Yassin initially told his family that he sustained his injuries while playing leapfrog during a sports lesson with his school friends on the beach.^[19]
Although Yassin applied and attended al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, he was unable to pursue his studies there due to his deteriorating health. He was forced to be educated at home where he read widely, particularly on philosophical matters and on religion, politics, sociology, and economics. His followers believe that his worldly knowledge made him "one of the best speakers in the Gaza Strip." During this time, he began delivering weekly sermons after Friday prayers, drawing large crowds of people.^[19]
After years of unemployment, he got a post as an Arabic language teacher at an elementary school in Rimal, Gaza. Headmaster Mohammad al-Shawa initially had reservations about Yassin, concerning the reception he would receive from the pupils due to his disability. However, according to al-Shawa, Yassin handled them well and his popularity grew, especially among the more scholarly children. His teaching methods reportedly provoked mixed reactions among parents because he encouraged his students to attend the mosque an additional two times a week.^[19] Having a regular job gave Yassin financial stability, and he married one of his relatives Halima Yassin^{[verification needed]} in 1960 at the age of 22.^[20] The couple had eleven children.

[edit] Involvement in the Israel-Palestinian conflict

Yassin subsequently became involved with a Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. In 1984 he and others were jailed for secretly stockpiling weapons, but in 1985 he was released as part of the Jibril Agreement.^[21] In 1987, during the First Intifada, Yassin co-founded Hamas with Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, originally calling it the Palestinian Wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, and becoming its spiritual leader.^[13]
Yassin opposed the peace process between the Palestinians and the Israelis. He supported armed resistance against Israel, and was very outspoken in his views. He asserted that Palestine is an Islamic land "consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgment Day" and that no Arab leader had the right to give up any part of this territory.^[13] Yassin's rhetoric did not distinguish between Israelis and Jews, at one point stating that "Reconciliation with the Jews is a crime."^[22] Yassin's inflammatory rhetoric was often scrutinized in the news media.^[23] On one occasion, he opined that Israel "must disappear from the map".^[23] Yassin's declaration that "We chose this road, and will end with martyrdom or victory" later became an oft repeated mantra among Palestinians.^[24]
In 1989, Yassin was arrested by the Israelis and sentenced to life imprisonment. In 1997 Yassin was released from Israeli prison as part of an arrangement with Jordan following the failed assassination attempt of Khaled Mashal, which had been conducted by the Israeli Mossad in Jordan. Yassin was released by Israel in exchange for two Mossad agents who had been arrested by Jordanian authorities,^[13] on the condition that he refrain from continuing to call for suicide bombings against Israel.^[25]
Following his release, Yassin resumed his leadership of Hamas. He immediately resumed his calls for attacks on Israel, using tactics including suicide bombings, thus violating the condition of his release.^[25] He also sought to maintain relations with the Palestinian Authority, believing that a clash between the two groups would be harmful to the interests of the Palestinian people.^[13] Yassin, however, was repeatedly placed under house arrest by the Authority. Each time he was eventually released, often after extended demonstrations by his supporters.^{[citation needed]}
Yassin criticized the outcome of the 2003 Aqaba summit. His group initially declared a temporary truce with Israel. However, in July 2003, the truce unravelled after a Palestinian suicide bombing of a Jerusalem bus left 21 people dead. Israeli forces killed two Hamas members in retaliation.^[13]
On 6 September 2003, an Israeli Air Force (IAF) F-16 fired several missiles on a building in Gaza City, the Gaza Strip. Yassin was in the building at the time but survived.^[16] Israeli officials later confirmed that Yassin was the target of the attack. His injuries were treated at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. Yassin responded to the media that "Days will prove that the assassination policy will not finish the Hamas. Hamas leaders wish to be martyrs and are not scared of death. Jihad will continue and the resistance will continue until we have victory, or we will be martyrs."^[26]
Yassin further promised that Hamas would teach Israel an "unforgettable lesson" as a result of the assassination attempt.^[27] Yassin made no attempt to guard himself from further attempts on his life or hide his location. Journalists sometimes visited his Gaza address and Yassin maintained a routine daily pattern of activity, including being wheeled every morning to a nearby mosque.
Reem Raiyshi's suicide bombing at the Erez crossing on 14 January 2004, which killed four civilians, was believed by the Israeli military to have been directly ordered by Yassin.^[28] Yassin suggested that the suicide bomber was fulfilling her "obligation" to make jihad,^[29] and Israel's Deputy Defence Minister responded by publicly declaring that Yassin was "marked for death".^[28] Yassin denied having any involvement in the attack's planning.^[28]

[edit] Alleged involvement in terrorist attacks

See also: List of Hamas suicide attacks

Yassin was a founder and prominent leader of Hamas, which is regarded as a terrorist organization by a number of national governments.^[14] Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon characterized Yassin as "the "mastermind of Palestinian terror" and a "mass murderer".^[17] The Israeli government repeatedly asserted that Yassin was responsible for a number of terrorist attacks, which targeted and killed a number of civilians.^[30] They accused him of being behind all the attacks perpetrated by Hamas against Israel. Israel said the targeted killing was in response to dozens of suicide attacks by Hamas against Israeli civilians.^[31] According to an Israeli government website:

Yassin was the dominant authority of the Hamas leadership, which was directly involved in planning, orchestrating and launching terror attacks carried out by the organization. In this capacity, Yassin personally gave his approval for the launching of Qassam rockets against Israeli cities, as well as for the numerous Hamas terrorist bombings and suicide operations. In his public appearances and interviews, Yassin called repeatedly for a continuation of the 'armed struggle' against Israel, and for an intensification of the terrorist campaign against its citizens. The successful operation against Yassin constitutes a significant blow to a central pillar of the Hamas terrorist organization, and a major setback to its terrorist infrastructure.^[32]

In his statement Yassin has declared that Hamas did target Israeli civilians, only in direct retaliation for the death of Palestinian civilians. In his thinking this was a necessary tactic to “show the Israelis they could not get away without a price for killing our people“ .^[33]

[edit] Assassination

Ahmed Yassin was killed in an Israeli attack on 22 March 2004. While he was being wheeled out of an early morning prayer session, an Israeli AH-64 Apache helicopter gunship fired Hellfire missiles at Yassin and both of his bodyguards. Yassin and his bodyguards were killed instantly, along with nine bystanders.^[16][34] Another 12 people were injured in the operation, including two of Yassin's sons.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Reaction to assassination

Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, condemned the killing.^[35] The UN Commission on Human Rights passed a resolution condemning the killing^[36] supported by votes from 31 countries including the People's Republic of China, India, Indonesia, Russia, and South Africa with 2 votes against and 18 abstentions. The Arab League council also expressed condemnation,^[37] as did the African Union.^[38]
A draft resolution condemning the extrajudicial execution of Yassin and six other Palestinians, as well as all terrorist attacks against civilians^[39] was brought before the United Nations Security Council and vetoed by the United States, with United Kingdom, Germany, and Romania abstaining.^[40] The United States explained that the draft resolution should have condemned Hamas explicitly following its sponsored suicide bombings in Ashdod the week before.^[41]

[edit] Palestinian

The Palestinian Authority declared three days of mourning and closed Palestinian schools. Hamas official Ismail Haniyeh suggested, "This is the moment Sheikh Yassin dreamed about". The Hamas leadership said Ariel Sharon had "opened the gates of hell." Hamas called for retaliation against Israel. About 200,000 people took to the streets of the Gaza Strip for Yassin's funeral as Israeli forces declared a national alert.^[17]
Abdel Aziz Rantisi was announced as the new head of Hamas. At a memorial service for Sheik Yassin, he declared that "The Israelis will not know security... We will fight them until the liberation of Palestine, the whole of Palestine."^[42] Publicly addressing the "military wing" of Hamas, Rantisi suggested, "The door is open for you to strike all places, all the time and using all means."^[42] Rantisi was himself killed by Israel on 17 April 2004 in an assassination almost identical to Yassin's.

[edit] Israeli

Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli Defense Minister, branded Yassin "the Palestinian Bin Laden" and said, "If we have to balance how many more terrorists Yassin would have sent, how many terror attacks he would have approved, if we weigh this on the scales, we acted rightly".^[17]
Avraham Poraz, Israel's Interior Minister and member of the centrist Shinui Party, said he believed the assassination of Yassin "was a bad idea because I am afraid of a revenge coming from the Palestinian side, from the Hamas side."^[43] Shimon Peres, then leader of the Labour opposition, was critical of the assassination, suggesting that it "could lead to an escalation of terror".^[43]

[edit] Arab world

King Abdullah II of Jordan described the assassination as a "crime";^[16] Lebanon's president Emile Lahud vehemently denounced the Israeli act as "...a crime [which] will not succeed in liquidating the Palestinian cause";^[16] Emir of Kuwait Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah said: "Violence will increase now because violence always breeds violence";^[16] the head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Mohammed Akef, described Yassin as a "martyr" and his assassination a "cowardly operation."^[16]

[edit] Western

Jack Straw, then British Foreign Secretary, said: "All of us understand Israel's need to protect itself – and it is fully entitled to do that – against the terrorism which affects it, within international law. But it is not entitled to go in for this kind of unlawful killing and we condemn it. It is unacceptable, it is unjustified and it is very unlikely to achieve its objectives."^[44]
In response to a question about the killing, U.S. President George W. Bush responded,

As far as the Middle East, it's a troubled region, and the attacks were troubling. There needs to be a focused, concerted effort by all parties to fight terror. Any country has a right to defend itself from terror. Israel has the right to defend herself from terror. And as she does so, I hope she keeps consequences in mind as to how to make sure we stay on the path to peace.^[45]

United States Representative to the United Nations John Negroponte stated that the USA was "deeply troubled by this action by the Government of Israel", while asserting that the U.S. would not support any U.N. Security Council statement condemning Israel's assassination of Yassin that did not include a condemnation of "Hamas terrorist attacks".^[46] According to his statement to the UN Security Council,

“

The killing of Sheikh Yassin has escalated tensions in Gaza and the greater Middle East, and sets back our effort to resume progress towards peace. However, events must be considered in their context and as we consider the killing of Sheikh Yassin, we must keep in mind the facts. Sheikh Ahmed Yassin was the leader of a terrorist organization, one which has proudly taken credit for indiscriminate attacks against civilians, including most recently an attack last week in the Port of Ashdod, which left 10 Israelis dead. He preached hatred, and glorified suicide bombings of buses, restaurants, and cafes. Yassin was opposed to the existence of the State of Israel, and actively sought to undermine a two-state solution in the Middle East.

”

[edit] Notes and references

1. ^ "Sheikh Ahmad Yassin". Jewish Virtual Library. 2004. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/yassin.html. Retrieved 2008-04-06. "Ahmed Yassin's Palestinian passport listed his date of birth as 1 January 1929, but Palestinian sources listed his birth year as 1937 (other Western media reported it as 1938)." 
2. ^ Suicide Bombings in Israel and ... – Google Books. Books.google.com. 2006-01. ISBN 978-0-8368-6561-5. http://books.google.com/?id=XhZfgInbb7oC&dq=Ahmed+Yassin+suicide+bombing+hamas. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
3. ^ Fighting suicide bombing: a ... – Google Books. Books.google.com. 2007. ISBN 978-0-275-99336-8. http://books.google.com/?id=Lg364v_RmvkC&dq=Ahmed+Yassin+suicide+bombing+hamas. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
4. ^ The path to paradise: the inner ... – Google Books. Books.google.com. 2007. ISBN 978-0-275-99446-4. http://books.google.com/?id=wEZQqIJJOTYC&dq=Ahmed+Yassin+suicide+bombing+hamas. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
5. ^ Terrornomics – Google Books. Books.google.com. 2007-04-26. ISBN 978-0-7546-4995-3. http://books.google.com/?id=CtfSiaj9R5wC&dq=Ahmed+Yassin+%22suicide+bombing%22+%22islamic+state%22+hamas. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
6. ^ A Devil's Triangle: Terrorism ... – Google Books. Books.google.com. 2007-03. ISBN 978-0-7425-4953-1. http://books.google.com/?id=Uw1WGl0iHa0C&pg=PA21&dq=Ahmed+Yassin+%22suicide+bombing%22+%22islamic+state%22+hamas&cd=4#v=onepage&q=%22islamic%20state%22%20hamas. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
7. ^ "Palestinian election raises varying opinions within U"^{[dead link]}. The Minnesota Daily. January 31, 2006
8. ^ Guardia, Anton La (September 12, 2003). "Telegraph.uk". London: Telegraph.co.uk. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/1441311/Hamas-is-added-to-EUs-blacklist-of-terror.html. Retrieved May 27, 2010. 
9. ^ The Financial Sources of the Hamas Terror Organization (Israel MFA)
10. ^ "Japan's Diplomatic Bluebook 2005" (PDF). 2005. http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/other/bluebook/2005/ch3-a.pdf. 
11. ^ "EU blacklists Hamas political wing". BBC News. September 11, 2003. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3100518.stm. Retrieved May 27, 2010. 
12. ^ "Country reports on terrorism 2005", United States Department of State. Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism. US Dept. of State Publication 11324. April 2006. p 196
13. ^ ^{a b c d e f} "Sheikh Yassin: Spiritual figurehead". BBC Online. 22 March 2004. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2001/israel_and_the_palestinians/profiles/1695470.stm. Retrieved 2007-08-07. 
14. ^ ^{a b}
    • Also: Banned in Jordan--Karmi, Omar. "What does the Hamas victory mean for nearby Jordan?", The Daily Star, 2006-2-18
    • Australia lists the militant wing of Hamas, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, as a terrorist organization--Listing of Terrorist Organisations, Australian Government Attorney-General's Department, 27 January 2006. Accessed 2006-7-31.
    • United Kingdom lists the militant wing of Hamas, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, as a terrorist organization--" United Kingdom Home Security Office. Terrorism Act 2000. Proscribed terrorist groups
15. ^ "islam.about.com". http://islam.about.com/b/a/073913.htm. Retrieved 2007-06-18. 
16. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i} "The life and death of Shaikh Yasin". Al Jazeera. 27 March 2004. Archived from the original on 2007-08-16. http://web.archive.org/web/20070816132853/http://english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=2639. Retrieved 2007-08-07. 
17. ^ ^{a b c d} Prusher, Ilene R. Killing of Yassin a Turning Point. The Christian Science Monitor. 23 March 2004.
18. ^ Chehab, 2007, p.15.
19. ^ ^{a b c} Chehab, 2007, p.16.
20. ^ Chehab, 2007, p.17.
21. ^ "HAMAS and Israel: Conflicting Strategies of Group-Based Politics" (PDF). http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/zuhur.pdf. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
22. ^ Yassin, Ahmed. Interview. Filastin al-Muslimah. March 1995. as quoted in Passner, Deborah (28 October 2003). "Hamas Takes "Revenge"?". Israel National News. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/2885. Retrieved 2007-09-30. 
23. ^ ^{a b} Poole, Elizabeth and Richardson, John E. Muslims and the News Media. 2006, page 112.
24. ^ Harel, Amos; Arnon Regular (March 22, 2004). "Security forces on heightened terror alert". Haaretz. http://www.haaretz.com/news/security-forces-on-heightened-terror-alert-1.117564. Retrieved June 13, 2010. 
25. ^ ^{a b} Plaw, Avery (2008). "The Expansion of Israeli Targeting During the Second Intifada" (Google Book Search). Targeting terrorists : a license to kill?. Ashgate Publishing. p. 76. ISBN 978-0-7546-4526-9. LCCN 2008-005474. http://books.google.com/books?id=lrLGaUvJfykC&pg=PA76&lpg=PA76&dq=Yassin+released+condition+suicide&source=bl&ots=3EUgkORFwI&sig=ZWssJJNvJuD1An4vuxx9GlVE20g&hl=en&ei=d3zZSeaaIKnrlQfd1_zgDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6#PPA76,M1. Retrieved 2009-04-06. 
26. ^ "Hamas founder targeted in Gaza airstrike". CNN. 6 September 2003. http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/09/06/mideast.violence/. Retrieved 2007-06-18. 
27. ^ "abc.net.au". ABC. Archived from the original on 2010. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200309/s940813.htm. Retrieved 2007-06-18. 
28. ^ ^{a b c} "Sheikh Yassin denies attack role". BBC News. January 16, 2004. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3402753.stm. 
29. ^ Thursday, January 15, 2004 – Page updated at 12:00 A.M. (2004-01-15). "The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Palestinian mother is suicide bomber in attack at border". Seattletimes.nwsource.com. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001837056_mideast15.html. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
30. ^ "Behind the Headlines: Ahmed Yassin 22-Mar-2004". Mfa.gov.il. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2004/3/Behind%20the%20Headlines-%20Ahmed%20Yassin%2022-Mar-2004. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
31. ^ "Thousands mourn Hamas founder (CNN)". Edition.cnn.com. 2004-05-06. http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/03/22/yassin/index.html. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
32. ^ "IDF strike kills Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin". MFA. 2004-03-22. http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Templates/ArticleDynamicFix.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2fMFA%2fTerrorism-%2bObstacle%2bto%2bPeace%2fTerrorism%2band%2bIslamic%2bFundamentalism-%2fSheikh%2bYassin%2bkilled%2bin%2bIDF%2battack%2b22-Mar-2004%2ehtm&NRNODEGUID=%7b2B09115D-4DE6-47A2-96E4-ECCB2FCC8F03%7d&NRCACHEHINT=Guest. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
33. ^ Faisal Bodi, “My Meeting with Sheikh Yasin,” Al-Jazeera (English) March 22, 2004)
34. ^ "scoop.co.nz". http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0403/S00292.htm. Retrieved 2007-06-18. 
35. ^ "domino.un.org". http://domino.un.org/unispal.NSF/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/cb710ee41effd1ef85256e6000501683!OpenDocument. Retrieved 2007-06-18. ^{[dead link]}
36. ^ "domino.un.org". http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/8bae3e0b4870ce9185256e610075e22d!OpenDocument. Retrieved 2007-06-18. ^{[dead link]}
37. ^ "domino.un.org". http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/029fa086fb91031885256e680074212a!OpenDocument. Retrieved 2007-06-18. ^{[dead link]}
38. ^ "domino.un.org". http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/99818751a6a4c9c6852560690077ef61/df19a9217edaf7ac85256e7b0066a9cb!OpenDocument. Retrieved 2007-06-18. ^{[dead link]}
39. ^ United Nations Security Council Document 240 S-2004-240 on 24 March 2004 (retrieved 2007-09-13)
40. ^ United Nations Security Council Verbotim Report meeting 4934 page 3 on 25 March 2004 at 17:05 (retrieved 2007-09-13)
41. ^ United Nations Security Council Verbotim Report meeting 4934 page 2, John Negroponte United States on 25 March 2004 at 17:05 (retrieved 2007-09-14)
42. ^ ^{a b} Myre, Greg (24 March 2004). "After Sheik Is Slain, Hamas Picks Fiery Figure as Its Leader in Gaza". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E1DB1430F937A15750C0A9629C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1. Retrieved 23 April 2010. 
43. ^ ^{a b} Israel defiant over Yassin killing. BBC News. Monday, 22 March 2004
44. ^ "Blair condemns Hamas chief death". BBC News. 2004-03-22. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3556753.stm. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
45. ^ "President Discusses Economy and Terrorism After Cabinet Meeting". Georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov. 2004-03-23. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/03/20040323-5.html. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 
46. ^ "U.S. Mission to Italy". Usembassy.it. http://www.usembassy.it/viewer/article.asp?article=/file2004_03/alia/a4032408.htm. Retrieved 2010-06-11. 

[edit] External links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Yassin?wasRedirected=true