Sebentar lagi kami pulang ke Indonesia setelah 4 thn membanting tulang dan otak di negeri orang. Ada yang sampai sekarang menggelitik dihati ini yang berkaitan dengan kecintaan pada tanah air. Semakin dekat pulang, semakin banyak saja orang yang menyayangkan "mengapa mesti pulang?". Pertanyaan itu selalu diikuti dengan "disini kan hidup lebih enak, atau disinikan lebih nyaman...dst..etc. Ah...mengapa mesti pulang??? yaaa....karena masa studi sudah selesai dong, hehehe. Tapi bukan itu pointnya,....saya inikan dikirim ke Australia sini untuk belajar, untuk menjadi lebih matang dan lebih pintar, biar klo sudah selesai belajar bisa meng aplikasikan ilmu, biar Indonesia bisa jadi lebih baik. Itu kan tujuannya pemerintah., dan bagi yang ikut program beasiswa itu mestinya juga punya misi dan visi yang sama dong ama pemerintah dan pemberi beasiswa.
Hidup di Australia memang enak. Birokrasi tidak berbelit2, tidak ada pungli, lingkungan bersih, tidak macet, fasilitas bagus, harga mobil terjangkau walaupun dengan beasiswa saja, sekolah anak2 gratis, etc..pokoke emang enak lah hidup disini. Tapi itu semua cukuplah saja saya nikmati selama sekolah deh ya... Saya tidak sabar ingin pulang, ingin menghirup udara Indonesia lagi, ingin menikmati makanan Indonesia lagi, kangen dengan keluarga, dan satu lagi..for sure...pengen cepat2 mengaplikasikan ilmu/pengalaman yang sudah capek2 saya timba...Ini serius...beneran....di otak saya sudah banyak rencana2 yang pengen saya lakukan sekembali kelak.
Kembali lagi ke pertanyaan orang2 "kok gak tinggal disini saja? kan enak. Waduh....kalo keenakan itu sudah diidentikkan dengan materi, saya jadi jengah!! enak apanya? klo saja saya gak dapat bewasiswa dan suami gak kerja mana mungkin hidup ini bisa enak!!! Kata teman2 disini (australia) gampang banget dapet duit, jadi cleaning service, kitchen hand, labour, etc aja seminggu udah bisa nyamain gaji sebulan guru di Indonesia. Iya sih..emang, tapi... apa emang jadi labour aja impian kita? Capek2 sekolah tinggi kok mo jadi labour aja?. I'm not a material girl!!!hehehe. Suer....ambisi saya bukanlah duit, target sayapun bukan lah duit. Cari kerja yang sesuasi dengan pendidikan di Oz sini susah juga kok, apalagi untuk pendatang. Maksud saya...jadi dosen di Indonesia hidup gak susah2 amat kok, masih bisa menikmati makan di KFC, Mc D, Pizza hut kok.... masih bisa beli mobil, masih bisa punya rumah sendiri. Tapi yaaa itulah... masing2 orang berbeda....
"Go back to your country".... ah....sebentar lagi kami terbebas dari teriakan itu. No more racist thingy!! .......at least! Good bye nice and clean country, I'll miss you but I don't love you.....
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Thursday, January 4, 2007
Muslim pertama di Kongress Amerika
Mengapa sih...orang2 pada takut kalo muslim menjadi anggota kongres? sebenarnya kan yang penting dia bukan teroris ataupun berpikiran teroris? picik...picik....
Di copy dari Republika 5 Januari 2007
Bukan hanya ingin tampil beda, Keith Ellison bertekad menggunakan Alquran bersejarah dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya sebagai anggota Kongres AS. Muslim pertama yang terpilih menjadi anggota Kongres AS ini berkeinginan kuat mengkampanyekan semangat toleransi lewat seremoni tersebut.
Anggota Kongres AS yang baru saja terpilih lewat pemilu beberapa waktu lalu diambil sumpahnya pada Kamis (4/1) waktu setempat. Hampir semua anggota Kongres, menggunakan Injil dalam acara tersebut. Namun Ellison memilih menggunakan Alquran. Lewat Kitab Suci tersebut, dia ingin menyampaikan pesan bahwa perbedaan agama bukanlah sesuatu yang perlu ditakuti.
Tak cuma itu, Alquran yang akan digunakan Ellison dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya itu adalah Alquran yang sudah berumur tua dan bersejarah. Kantor Berita AP, menulis Alquran tersebut murupakan salah satu koleksi bersejarah milik Thomas Jefferson (mantan presiden AS).
Presiden ketiga AS ini memang memiliki hobi mengoleksi buku tentang berbagai topik. Alquran yang semula menjadi koleksi bersejarahnya itu kemudian dijual ke Kongres AS pada 1815. Hingga saat ini, Alquran tersebut masih tersimpan di perpustakaan Kongres. Tak hanya bersejarah, Alquran ini juga selamat dari kebakaran yang pernah melalap gedung Kongres pada 1851.
Penjualan Alquran ini merupakan bagian dari penjualan sebanyak 6.400 buku koleksi Jefferson kepada perpustakaan Kongres AS. Transaksi senilai 24 ribu dolar AS itu dilakukan supaya perpustakaan Kongres kembali terisi buku. Pada perang 1812, seluruh koleksi perpustakaan ini dibakar tentara Inggris.
Alquran dengan terjemahan berbahasa Inggris ini diterbitkan di London pada 1764. Ini merupakan terbitan ulang dari Alquran yang edisi awalnya diterbitkan pada 1734. ''Keberadaan Alquran ini sebagai bentuk dari pengetahuan masyarakat Eropa terhadap Alquran,'' tutur Kepala Divisi Buku Langka dan Koleksi Khusus Perpustakaan Kongres AS, Mark Dimunation.
Dimunation akan menjadi orang yang mengambil peran penting dalam pengambilan sumpah Ellison. Dia akan menjadi pembawa Alquran tersebut dari perpustakaan menuju ruang pengambilan sumpah jabatan. Dimunation akan membawa Alquran tersebut dengan berjalan kaki. Usai seremoni, dia segera mengembalikan Alquran bersampul kulit itu ke tempat semula. Dia menyebut peristiwa ini sebagai sesuatu yang spesial.
Ide pengambilan sumpah menggunakan Alquran bersejarah itu mulanya muncul dari selembar surat yang dikirim orang tak dikenal kepada Ellison. Dari surat tersebut, pria berketurunan Afro-Amerika ini mengetahui keberadaan Alquran bersejarah tersebut. Dari situlah dia kemudian merancang penggunaan Alquran dalam sumpah jabatannya. Rencana ini kemudian terendus pers, dan kali pertama disiarkan Washington Post edisi Rabu (3/1).
Ide tersebut, dikatakan Ellison, sebagai langkah untuk mengikuti tokoh yang pernah menjadi pendahulunya, yakni Jefferson. ''Kita memiliki tokoh yang sangat visioner, sangat religius dan toleran, juga sangat percaya nilai-nilai kearifan bisa diambil dari mana saja, termasuk Alquran,'' ungkap Ellison dalam wawancara lewat telepon dengan AP.
Dia menambahkan tokoh visioner seperti Jefferson berani memiliki kepercayaan yang berbeda dari umumnya kepercayaan bangsa AS waktu itu. ''Ini menunjukkan toleransi beragama merupakan sendi dasar negara kita (AS). Dan perbedaan agama bukanlah sesuatu yang pantas ditakuti,'' tutur dia. Koran USA Today juga menuliskan bahwa Theodore Roosevelt tidak menggunakan Injil dalam pengambilan sumpahnya sebagai presiden AS ke-26 pada 1901.
Keberadaan Ellison di Kongres AS memang menjadi sejarah baru bagi Muslim AS. Tak heran jika kiprah pria kelahiran Detroit 43 tahun lalu itu kerap menjadi sorotan pers. Mulanya, Ellison adalah penganut Katolik Roma, seperti kedua orang tuanya. Namun saat duduk di bangku kuliah dalam usia 19 tahun, dia menemukan Islam dan langsung mengucap dua kalimat syahadat.
Dalam pemilihan anggota Kongres AS, November 2006, dia mewakili daerah pemilihan Minneapolis. Dengan meraup suara sebanyak 56 persen, dia berhasil terpilih sebagai anggota Kongres AS untuk Partai Demokrat. Dia juga sekaligus sebagai orang keempat yang mewakili daerah pemilihan tersebut di Kongres AS sejak 1943. Selain toleransi beragama, dia juga menentang sangat keras agresi militer yang dipimpin AS ke Irak.
Rencana Ellison untuk bersumpah di bawah Alquran ini rupanya mengundang komentar sinis dari wakil Partai Republik di Kongres AS, Virgil Goode. Komentar sinis Goode tidak hanya ditujukan kepada Ellison dan Alquran, tapi juga kepada umat Islam secara luas. Dalam surat terbuka yang dibuat untuk konstituennya, dia memperlihatkan kekhawatiran akan munculnya Muslim lain selain Ellison di Kongres AS, jika pemerintah AS tidak segera memperbaiki aturan tentang imigrasi.
''Jika rakyat AS tidak segera bangkit dan tidak mengadopsi ide saya tentang imigrasi, nanti akan lebih banyak Muslim yang terpilih (menjadi anggota Kongres AS) dan akan menggunakan Alquran dalam upacara pengambilan sumpah,'' ujar dia dalam situs USA Today.
Koran ini pun mengungkapkan bahwa sebenarnya sebagian warga Yahudi yang terpilih juga tidak menggunakan Injil dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya. Ellison pun enggan menanggapi pernyataan ini. Dia tetap pada tekadnya untuk bersumpah menggunakan Alquran. (irf )
Di copy dari Republika 5 Januari 2007
Alquran Mewarnai Seremoni Kongres AS
Bukan hanya ingin tampil beda, Keith Ellison bertekad menggunakan Alquran bersejarah dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya sebagai anggota Kongres AS. Muslim pertama yang terpilih menjadi anggota Kongres AS ini berkeinginan kuat mengkampanyekan semangat toleransi lewat seremoni tersebut.
Anggota Kongres AS yang baru saja terpilih lewat pemilu beberapa waktu lalu diambil sumpahnya pada Kamis (4/1) waktu setempat. Hampir semua anggota Kongres, menggunakan Injil dalam acara tersebut. Namun Ellison memilih menggunakan Alquran. Lewat Kitab Suci tersebut, dia ingin menyampaikan pesan bahwa perbedaan agama bukanlah sesuatu yang perlu ditakuti.
Tak cuma itu, Alquran yang akan digunakan Ellison dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya itu adalah Alquran yang sudah berumur tua dan bersejarah. Kantor Berita AP, menulis Alquran tersebut murupakan salah satu koleksi bersejarah milik Thomas Jefferson (mantan presiden AS).
Presiden ketiga AS ini memang memiliki hobi mengoleksi buku tentang berbagai topik. Alquran yang semula menjadi koleksi bersejarahnya itu kemudian dijual ke Kongres AS pada 1815. Hingga saat ini, Alquran tersebut masih tersimpan di perpustakaan Kongres. Tak hanya bersejarah, Alquran ini juga selamat dari kebakaran yang pernah melalap gedung Kongres pada 1851.
Penjualan Alquran ini merupakan bagian dari penjualan sebanyak 6.400 buku koleksi Jefferson kepada perpustakaan Kongres AS. Transaksi senilai 24 ribu dolar AS itu dilakukan supaya perpustakaan Kongres kembali terisi buku. Pada perang 1812, seluruh koleksi perpustakaan ini dibakar tentara Inggris.
Alquran dengan terjemahan berbahasa Inggris ini diterbitkan di London pada 1764. Ini merupakan terbitan ulang dari Alquran yang edisi awalnya diterbitkan pada 1734. ''Keberadaan Alquran ini sebagai bentuk dari pengetahuan masyarakat Eropa terhadap Alquran,'' tutur Kepala Divisi Buku Langka dan Koleksi Khusus Perpustakaan Kongres AS, Mark Dimunation.
Dimunation akan menjadi orang yang mengambil peran penting dalam pengambilan sumpah Ellison. Dia akan menjadi pembawa Alquran tersebut dari perpustakaan menuju ruang pengambilan sumpah jabatan. Dimunation akan membawa Alquran tersebut dengan berjalan kaki. Usai seremoni, dia segera mengembalikan Alquran bersampul kulit itu ke tempat semula. Dia menyebut peristiwa ini sebagai sesuatu yang spesial.
Ide pengambilan sumpah menggunakan Alquran bersejarah itu mulanya muncul dari selembar surat yang dikirim orang tak dikenal kepada Ellison. Dari surat tersebut, pria berketurunan Afro-Amerika ini mengetahui keberadaan Alquran bersejarah tersebut. Dari situlah dia kemudian merancang penggunaan Alquran dalam sumpah jabatannya. Rencana ini kemudian terendus pers, dan kali pertama disiarkan Washington Post edisi Rabu (3/1).
Ide tersebut, dikatakan Ellison, sebagai langkah untuk mengikuti tokoh yang pernah menjadi pendahulunya, yakni Jefferson. ''Kita memiliki tokoh yang sangat visioner, sangat religius dan toleran, juga sangat percaya nilai-nilai kearifan bisa diambil dari mana saja, termasuk Alquran,'' ungkap Ellison dalam wawancara lewat telepon dengan AP.
Dia menambahkan tokoh visioner seperti Jefferson berani memiliki kepercayaan yang berbeda dari umumnya kepercayaan bangsa AS waktu itu. ''Ini menunjukkan toleransi beragama merupakan sendi dasar negara kita (AS). Dan perbedaan agama bukanlah sesuatu yang pantas ditakuti,'' tutur dia. Koran USA Today juga menuliskan bahwa Theodore Roosevelt tidak menggunakan Injil dalam pengambilan sumpahnya sebagai presiden AS ke-26 pada 1901.
Keberadaan Ellison di Kongres AS memang menjadi sejarah baru bagi Muslim AS. Tak heran jika kiprah pria kelahiran Detroit 43 tahun lalu itu kerap menjadi sorotan pers. Mulanya, Ellison adalah penganut Katolik Roma, seperti kedua orang tuanya. Namun saat duduk di bangku kuliah dalam usia 19 tahun, dia menemukan Islam dan langsung mengucap dua kalimat syahadat.
Dalam pemilihan anggota Kongres AS, November 2006, dia mewakili daerah pemilihan Minneapolis. Dengan meraup suara sebanyak 56 persen, dia berhasil terpilih sebagai anggota Kongres AS untuk Partai Demokrat. Dia juga sekaligus sebagai orang keempat yang mewakili daerah pemilihan tersebut di Kongres AS sejak 1943. Selain toleransi beragama, dia juga menentang sangat keras agresi militer yang dipimpin AS ke Irak.
Rencana Ellison untuk bersumpah di bawah Alquran ini rupanya mengundang komentar sinis dari wakil Partai Republik di Kongres AS, Virgil Goode. Komentar sinis Goode tidak hanya ditujukan kepada Ellison dan Alquran, tapi juga kepada umat Islam secara luas. Dalam surat terbuka yang dibuat untuk konstituennya, dia memperlihatkan kekhawatiran akan munculnya Muslim lain selain Ellison di Kongres AS, jika pemerintah AS tidak segera memperbaiki aturan tentang imigrasi.
''Jika rakyat AS tidak segera bangkit dan tidak mengadopsi ide saya tentang imigrasi, nanti akan lebih banyak Muslim yang terpilih (menjadi anggota Kongres AS) dan akan menggunakan Alquran dalam upacara pengambilan sumpah,'' ujar dia dalam situs USA Today.
Koran ini pun mengungkapkan bahwa sebenarnya sebagian warga Yahudi yang terpilih juga tidak menggunakan Injil dalam pengambilan sumpah jabatannya. Ellison pun enggan menanggapi pernyataan ini. Dia tetap pada tekadnya untuk bersumpah menggunakan Alquran. (irf )
Wednesday, January 3, 2007
Watada refuses Deployment order
Di copy dari yahoo.com
Conscientious Rejector?
First Lieutenant Ehren Watada still refuses Iraq deployment orders, calling the war illegal. A six-year prison term could result. Preliminary hearings are set for Thursday.By the Hot Zone Team, Tue Jan 2, 6:38 PM ETEmail Story IM Story
First Lt. Ehren Watada, a 28-year-old Hawaii native, is the first commissioned officer in the U.S. to publicly refuse deployment to Iraq. He announced last June his decision not to deploy on the grounds the war is illegal.
Lt. Watada was based at Fort Lewis, Washington, with the Army's 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. He has remained on base, thus avoiding charges of desertion.
He does, however, face one count of "missing troop movement" and four counts of "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman." If convicted, he faces up to six years in prison.
First Lt. Ehren Watada
Photo courtesy:
Jeff Paterson/thankyoult.org
Watada's court martial is on February 5. A pre-trial hearing is set for January 4, with an added scope of controversy: the Army has ordered two freelance journalists, Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail, to testify against Lt. Watada at the hearing. Both journalists are fighting the subpoenas.
Kevin Sites recently spoke with Lt. Watada about the reasoning behind his decision, the controversy the decision has caused and how he is dealing with the repercussions.
Lt. Watada spoke on the phone from his family's home in Hawaii. Click here to listen to the full audio version of the conversation. A transcript of the interview follows.
KEVIN SITES: Now, you joined the Army right after the US was invading Iraq and now you're refusing to go. Some critics might look at this as somewhat disingenuous. You've taken an oath, received training but now you won't fight. Can you explain your rationale behind this?
EHREN WATADA: Sure. I think that in March of 2003 when I joined up, I, like many Americans, believed the administration when they said the threat from Iraq was imminent — that there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout Iraq; that there were stockpiles of it; and because of Saddam Hussein's ties to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist acts, the threat was imminent and we needed to invade that country immediately in order to neutralize that threat.
Since then I think I, as many, many Americans are realizing, that those justifications were intentionally falsified in order to fit a policy established long before 9/11 of just toppling the Saddam Hussein regime and setting up an American presence in Iraq.
SITES: Tell me how those views evolved. How did you come to that conclusion?
WATADA: I think the facts are out there, they're not difficult to find, they just take a little bit of willingness and interest on behalf of anyone who is willing to seek out the truth and find the facts. All of it is in the mainstream media. But it is quickly buried and it is quickly hidden by other events that come and go. And all it takes is a little bit of logical reasoning. The Iraq Survey Group came out and said there were no weapons of mass destruction after 1991 and during 2003. The 9/11 Commission came out and said there were no ties with Iraq to 9/11 or al-Qaeda. The president himself came out and said that nobody in his administration ever suggested that there was a link.
And yet those ties to al-Qaeda and the weapons of mass destruction were strongly suggested. They said there was no doubt there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout 2002, 2003 and even 2004. So, they came out and they say this, and yet they say it was bad intelligence, not manipulated intelligence, that was the problem. And then you have veteran members of the CIA that come out and say, "No. It was manipulated intelligence. We told them there was no WMD. We told them there were no ties to al-Qaeda. And they said that that's not what they wanted to hear."
SITES: Do you think that you could have determined some of this information prior to joining the military — if a lot of it, as you say, was out there? There were questions going into the war whether WMD existed or not, and you seemingly accepted the administration's explanation for that. Why did you do that at that point?
WATADA: Certainly yeah, there was other information out there that I could have sought out. But I put my trust in our leaders in government.
SITES: Was there a turning point for you when you actually decided that this was definitely an illegal war?
WATADA: Certainly. I think that when we take an oath we, as soldiers and officers, swear to protect the constitution — with our lives as necessary — and those constitutional values and laws that make us free and make us a democracy. And when we have one branch of government that intentionally deceives another branch of government in order to authorize war, and intentionally deceives the people in order to gain that public support, that is a grave breach of our constitutional values, our laws, our checks and balances, and separation of power.
SITES: But Lieutenant, was there one specific incident that happened in Iraq or that the administration had said or done at a certain period that [made you say] "I have to examine this more closely"?
WATADA: No, I think that certainly as the war went on, and it was not going well, doubts came up in my mind, but at that point I still was willing to go. At one point I even volunteered to go to Iraq with any unit that was short of junior officers.
SITES: At what point was that?
WATADA: This was in September of 2005. But as soon as I found out, and as I began to read and research more and more that the administration had intentionally deceived the public and Congress over the reasons for going to Iraq, that's when I told myself "there's something wrong here."
"I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop."
— Lt. Ehren Watada
SITES: Was there any kind of personal conviction as well, I mean in terms of exposure to returning soldiers or Marines — the kinds of wounds they suffered, the kinds of stories that they were bringing back with them — did that have any kind of influence or create any factors for you in coming to this decision?
WATADA: Sure, I felt, well, in a general sense I felt that when we put our trust in the government, when we put our lives in their hands, that is a huge responsibility. And we also say that "when we put our lives in your hands, we ask that you not abuse that trust; that you not take us to war over flimsy or false reasons; that you take us to war when it is absolutely necessary." Because we have so much to lose, you know — the soldiers, our lives, our limbs, our minds and our families — that the government and the people owe that to us.
SITES: Was there a fear that played into that? Did you see returning soldiers with lost limbs? Was there a concern for you that you might lose your life going to Iraq?
WATADA: No, that had nothing to do with the issue. The issue here is that we have thousands of soldiers returning. And what is their sacrifice for? For terrorism or establishing democracy or whatever the other reasons are. And I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop. We cannot have people in power that are irresponsible and corrupt and that keep on going that way because they're not held accountable to the people.
SITES: You know on that note, Lieutenant, let me read you something from a speech that you gave in August to the Veterans for Peace. You had said at one point, "Many have said this about the World Trade Towers: never again. I agree, never again will we allow those who threaten our way of life to reign free. Be they terrorists or elected officials. The time to fight back is now, the time to stand up and be counted is today." Who were you speaking about when you said that?
WATADA: I was speaking about everybody. The American people. That we all have that duty, that obligation, that responsibility to do something when we see our government perpetrating a crime upon the world, or even upon us. And I think that the American people have lost that, that sense of duty. There is no self-interest in this war for the vast majority of the American people. And because of that the American soldiers have suffered.
There really is a detachment from this war, and many of the American people, because there is no draft, or for whatever reason, because taxes haven't been raised, they don't have anything personally to lose or gain with this war, and so they take little interest.
SITES: Do you think President Bush and his advisers are guilty of criminal conduct in the prosecution of this war?
WATADA: That's not something for me to determine. I think it's for the newly-elected congress to determine during the investigations that they should hold over this war, and pre-war intelligence.
SITES: But in some ways you have determined that. You're saying this is an illegal war, and an illegal act usually takes prosecution by someone with criminal intent. Is that correct?
WATADA: Right, and they have taken me to court with that, but they have refused — or it will be very unlikely that the prosecution in the military court will allow me to bring in evidence and witnesses to testify on my behalf that the war is illegal. So therefore it becomes the responsibility of Congress, since the military is refusing to do that. It becomes the responsibility of Congress to hold our elected leaders accountable.
SITES: Now this is the same Congress though that in a lot of ways voted for this war initially. Do you think that they're going to turn around and in some ways say that they were wrong? And hold hearings to determine exactly that, that they made a mistake as well? It seems like a long shot.
WATADA: Right, well I think some in Congress are willing to do that, and some aren't. And that's the struggle, and that's the fight that's going to occur over the next year.
Lt. Watada with his mother, Carolyn
Ho, and father, Robert Watada
Photo courtesy:
Jeff Paterson/thankyoult.org
SITES: Let me ask you why you decided to go to the press with this. In this particular case you're the first officer — there may have been other officers that have refused these orders, but you're the first one to really do this publicly. Why did you do that?
WATADA: Because I wanted to explain to the American people why I was taking the stand I was taking — that it wasn't for selfish reasons, it wasn't for cowardly reasons.
You know, I think the most important reason here is to raise awareness among the American people that hey — there's a war going on, and American soldiers are dying every day. Hundreds of Iraqis are dying every day. You need to take interest, and ask yourself where you stand, and what you're willing to do, to end this war, if you do believe that it's wrong — that it's illegal, and immoral. And I think I have accomplished that. Many, many people come up to me and say, "because of you, I have taken an active interest in what's going on over in Iraq."
And also, you know, [I want to] give a little hope and inspiration back to a lot of people. For a long time I was really without hope, thinking that there was nothing I could do about something that I saw, that was so wrong, and so tragic. And I think a lot of people who have been trying to end this war felt the same way — that there was just nothing that they could do. And I think by taking my stand publicly, and stating my beliefs and standing on those beliefs, a lot of people have taken encouragement from that.
SITES: You've said that you had a responsibility to your own conscience in this particular situation. Did you also have a responsibility to your unit as well? I just want to read you a quote from Veterans of Foreign Wars communications director Jerry Newbury. He said "[Lt. Watada] has an obligation to fulfill, and it's not up to the individual officer to decide when he's going to deploy or not deploy. Some other officer will have to go in his place. He needs to think about that." Can you react to that quote?
WATADA: You know, what I'm doing is for the soldiers. I'm trying to end something that is criminal, something that should not have been started in the first place and something that is making America less safe — and that is the Iraq war. By just going there and being willing to participate, and doing my job, or whatever I'm told to do — which actually exacerbates the situation and makes it worse — I would not be serving the best interest of this country, nor the soldiers that I'm serving with. What I'm trying to do is end something, as I said, that's illegal, and immoral, so that all the soldiers can come home and this tragedy can come to an end.
It seems like people and critics make this distinction between an order to deploy and any other order, as if the order to deploy is just something that's beyond any other order. Orders have to be determined on whether they're legal or not. And if the order to deploy to a war that is unlawful, if that is given, then that order itself is unlawful.
SITES: How did your peers and your fellow officers react to your decision?
WATADA: I know that there have been some people within the military who won't agree with my stance, and there have been a lot of members of the Army of all ranks who have agreed with what I've done. And I see it almost every other day, where someone in uniform, or a dependent, approaches me in person, or through correspondence, and thanks me for what I have done, and either supports or respects my stand.
SITES: You've remained on base, and that's been a situation that can't be too comfortable for you. Can you fill us in on what that's been like there?
WATADA: I think that for the most part, people that I interact with closely — I have been moved, I'm no longer in the 3rd Striker Brigade, I'm over in 1st Corps — treat me professionally, politely, but keep their distance. I don't think anybody wants to get involved with the position that I've taken, either way. People approach me in private and give me their support.
SITES: Tell me about the repercussions you face in this court martial.
WATADA: Well I think with the charges that have been applied to me and referred over to a general court martial, I'm facing six years maximum confinement, dishonorable discharge from the army, and loss of all pay and allowances.
STES: Are you ready to deal with all those consequences with this decision?
WATADA: Sure, and I think that's the decision that I made almost a year ago, in January, when I submitted my original letter of resignation. I knew that possibly some of the things that I stated in that letter, including my own beliefs, that there were repercussions from that. Yet I felt it was a sacrifice, and it was a necessary sacrifice, to make. And I feel the same today.
I think that there are many supporters out there who feel that I should not be made an example of, that I'm speaking out for what a lot of Americans are increasingly becoming aware of: that the war is illegal and immoral and it must be stopped. And that the military should not make an example or punish me severely for that.
SITES: Do you think that you made a mistake in joining the military? Your mother and father support you in this decision, and your father during the Vietnam War refused to go to Vietnam as well, but instead joined the Peace Corps. He went to his draft board and said, "let me join the Peace Corps and serve in Peru," which is what he did. Do you think in hindsight that that might have been a better decision for you as well?
WATADA: You know I think that John Murtha came out a few months ago in an interview and he was asked if, with all his experience, in Korea, and Vietnam, volunteering for those wars -- he was asked if he would join the military today. And he said absolutely not. And I think that with the knowledge that I have now, I agree. I would not join the military because I would be forced into a position where I would be ordered to do something that is wrong. It is illegal and immoral. And I would be put into a situation as a soldier to be abused and misused by those in power.
STIES: In your speech in front of the Veterans for Peace you said "the oath we take as soldiers swears allegiance not to one man but to a document of principles and laws designed to protect the people." Can you expand upon that a little bit — what did you mean when you said that?
WATADA: The constitution was established, and our laws are established, to protect human rights, to protect equal rights and constitutional civil liberties. And I think we have people in power who say that those laws, or those principles, do not apply to them — that they are above the law and can do whatever it takes to manipulate or create laws that enable them to do whatever they please. And that is a danger in our country, and I think the war in Iraq is just one symptom of this agenda. And I think as soldiers, as American people, we need to recognize this, and we need to put a stop to it before it's too late.
Conscientious Rejector?
First Lieutenant Ehren Watada still refuses Iraq deployment orders, calling the war illegal. A six-year prison term could result. Preliminary hearings are set for Thursday.By the Hot Zone Team, Tue Jan 2, 6:38 PM ETEmail Story IM Story
First Lt. Ehren Watada, a 28-year-old Hawaii native, is the first commissioned officer in the U.S. to publicly refuse deployment to Iraq. He announced last June his decision not to deploy on the grounds the war is illegal.
Lt. Watada was based at Fort Lewis, Washington, with the Army's 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. He has remained on base, thus avoiding charges of desertion.
He does, however, face one count of "missing troop movement" and four counts of "conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman." If convicted, he faces up to six years in prison.
First Lt. Ehren Watada
Photo courtesy:
Jeff Paterson/thankyoult.org
Watada's court martial is on February 5. A pre-trial hearing is set for January 4, with an added scope of controversy: the Army has ordered two freelance journalists, Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail, to testify against Lt. Watada at the hearing. Both journalists are fighting the subpoenas.
Kevin Sites recently spoke with Lt. Watada about the reasoning behind his decision, the controversy the decision has caused and how he is dealing with the repercussions.
Lt. Watada spoke on the phone from his family's home in Hawaii. Click here to listen to the full audio version of the conversation. A transcript of the interview follows.
KEVIN SITES: Now, you joined the Army right after the US was invading Iraq and now you're refusing to go. Some critics might look at this as somewhat disingenuous. You've taken an oath, received training but now you won't fight. Can you explain your rationale behind this?
EHREN WATADA: Sure. I think that in March of 2003 when I joined up, I, like many Americans, believed the administration when they said the threat from Iraq was imminent — that there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout Iraq; that there were stockpiles of it; and because of Saddam Hussein's ties to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 terrorist acts, the threat was imminent and we needed to invade that country immediately in order to neutralize that threat.
Since then I think I, as many, many Americans are realizing, that those justifications were intentionally falsified in order to fit a policy established long before 9/11 of just toppling the Saddam Hussein regime and setting up an American presence in Iraq.
SITES: Tell me how those views evolved. How did you come to that conclusion?
WATADA: I think the facts are out there, they're not difficult to find, they just take a little bit of willingness and interest on behalf of anyone who is willing to seek out the truth and find the facts. All of it is in the mainstream media. But it is quickly buried and it is quickly hidden by other events that come and go. And all it takes is a little bit of logical reasoning. The Iraq Survey Group came out and said there were no weapons of mass destruction after 1991 and during 2003. The 9/11 Commission came out and said there were no ties with Iraq to 9/11 or al-Qaeda. The president himself came out and said that nobody in his administration ever suggested that there was a link.
And yet those ties to al-Qaeda and the weapons of mass destruction were strongly suggested. They said there was no doubt there were weapons of mass destruction all throughout 2002, 2003 and even 2004. So, they came out and they say this, and yet they say it was bad intelligence, not manipulated intelligence, that was the problem. And then you have veteran members of the CIA that come out and say, "No. It was manipulated intelligence. We told them there was no WMD. We told them there were no ties to al-Qaeda. And they said that that's not what they wanted to hear."
SITES: Do you think that you could have determined some of this information prior to joining the military — if a lot of it, as you say, was out there? There were questions going into the war whether WMD existed or not, and you seemingly accepted the administration's explanation for that. Why did you do that at that point?
WATADA: Certainly yeah, there was other information out there that I could have sought out. But I put my trust in our leaders in government.
SITES: Was there a turning point for you when you actually decided that this was definitely an illegal war?
WATADA: Certainly. I think that when we take an oath we, as soldiers and officers, swear to protect the constitution — with our lives as necessary — and those constitutional values and laws that make us free and make us a democracy. And when we have one branch of government that intentionally deceives another branch of government in order to authorize war, and intentionally deceives the people in order to gain that public support, that is a grave breach of our constitutional values, our laws, our checks and balances, and separation of power.
SITES: But Lieutenant, was there one specific incident that happened in Iraq or that the administration had said or done at a certain period that [made you say] "I have to examine this more closely"?
WATADA: No, I think that certainly as the war went on, and it was not going well, doubts came up in my mind, but at that point I still was willing to go. At one point I even volunteered to go to Iraq with any unit that was short of junior officers.
SITES: At what point was that?
WATADA: This was in September of 2005. But as soon as I found out, and as I began to read and research more and more that the administration had intentionally deceived the public and Congress over the reasons for going to Iraq, that's when I told myself "there's something wrong here."
"I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop."
— Lt. Ehren Watada
SITES: Was there any kind of personal conviction as well, I mean in terms of exposure to returning soldiers or Marines — the kinds of wounds they suffered, the kinds of stories that they were bringing back with them — did that have any kind of influence or create any factors for you in coming to this decision?
WATADA: Sure, I felt, well, in a general sense I felt that when we put our trust in the government, when we put our lives in their hands, that is a huge responsibility. And we also say that "when we put our lives in your hands, we ask that you not abuse that trust; that you not take us to war over flimsy or false reasons; that you take us to war when it is absolutely necessary." Because we have so much to lose, you know — the soldiers, our lives, our limbs, our minds and our families — that the government and the people owe that to us.
SITES: Was there a fear that played into that? Did you see returning soldiers with lost limbs? Was there a concern for you that you might lose your life going to Iraq?
WATADA: No, that had nothing to do with the issue. The issue here is that we have thousands of soldiers returning. And what is their sacrifice for? For terrorism or establishing democracy or whatever the other reasons are. And I saw the pain and agony etched upon the faces of all these families of lost soldiers. And I told myself that this needs to stop. We cannot have people in power that are irresponsible and corrupt and that keep on going that way because they're not held accountable to the people.
SITES: You know on that note, Lieutenant, let me read you something from a speech that you gave in August to the Veterans for Peace. You had said at one point, "Many have said this about the World Trade Towers: never again. I agree, never again will we allow those who threaten our way of life to reign free. Be they terrorists or elected officials. The time to fight back is now, the time to stand up and be counted is today." Who were you speaking about when you said that?
WATADA: I was speaking about everybody. The American people. That we all have that duty, that obligation, that responsibility to do something when we see our government perpetrating a crime upon the world, or even upon us. And I think that the American people have lost that, that sense of duty. There is no self-interest in this war for the vast majority of the American people. And because of that the American soldiers have suffered.
There really is a detachment from this war, and many of the American people, because there is no draft, or for whatever reason, because taxes haven't been raised, they don't have anything personally to lose or gain with this war, and so they take little interest.
SITES: Do you think President Bush and his advisers are guilty of criminal conduct in the prosecution of this war?
WATADA: That's not something for me to determine. I think it's for the newly-elected congress to determine during the investigations that they should hold over this war, and pre-war intelligence.
SITES: But in some ways you have determined that. You're saying this is an illegal war, and an illegal act usually takes prosecution by someone with criminal intent. Is that correct?
WATADA: Right, and they have taken me to court with that, but they have refused — or it will be very unlikely that the prosecution in the military court will allow me to bring in evidence and witnesses to testify on my behalf that the war is illegal. So therefore it becomes the responsibility of Congress, since the military is refusing to do that. It becomes the responsibility of Congress to hold our elected leaders accountable.
SITES: Now this is the same Congress though that in a lot of ways voted for this war initially. Do you think that they're going to turn around and in some ways say that they were wrong? And hold hearings to determine exactly that, that they made a mistake as well? It seems like a long shot.
WATADA: Right, well I think some in Congress are willing to do that, and some aren't. And that's the struggle, and that's the fight that's going to occur over the next year.
Lt. Watada with his mother, Carolyn
Ho, and father, Robert Watada
Photo courtesy:
Jeff Paterson/thankyoult.org
SITES: Let me ask you why you decided to go to the press with this. In this particular case you're the first officer — there may have been other officers that have refused these orders, but you're the first one to really do this publicly. Why did you do that?
WATADA: Because I wanted to explain to the American people why I was taking the stand I was taking — that it wasn't for selfish reasons, it wasn't for cowardly reasons.
You know, I think the most important reason here is to raise awareness among the American people that hey — there's a war going on, and American soldiers are dying every day. Hundreds of Iraqis are dying every day. You need to take interest, and ask yourself where you stand, and what you're willing to do, to end this war, if you do believe that it's wrong — that it's illegal, and immoral. And I think I have accomplished that. Many, many people come up to me and say, "because of you, I have taken an active interest in what's going on over in Iraq."
And also, you know, [I want to] give a little hope and inspiration back to a lot of people. For a long time I was really without hope, thinking that there was nothing I could do about something that I saw, that was so wrong, and so tragic. And I think a lot of people who have been trying to end this war felt the same way — that there was just nothing that they could do. And I think by taking my stand publicly, and stating my beliefs and standing on those beliefs, a lot of people have taken encouragement from that.
SITES: You've said that you had a responsibility to your own conscience in this particular situation. Did you also have a responsibility to your unit as well? I just want to read you a quote from Veterans of Foreign Wars communications director Jerry Newbury. He said "[Lt. Watada] has an obligation to fulfill, and it's not up to the individual officer to decide when he's going to deploy or not deploy. Some other officer will have to go in his place. He needs to think about that." Can you react to that quote?
WATADA: You know, what I'm doing is for the soldiers. I'm trying to end something that is criminal, something that should not have been started in the first place and something that is making America less safe — and that is the Iraq war. By just going there and being willing to participate, and doing my job, or whatever I'm told to do — which actually exacerbates the situation and makes it worse — I would not be serving the best interest of this country, nor the soldiers that I'm serving with. What I'm trying to do is end something, as I said, that's illegal, and immoral, so that all the soldiers can come home and this tragedy can come to an end.
It seems like people and critics make this distinction between an order to deploy and any other order, as if the order to deploy is just something that's beyond any other order. Orders have to be determined on whether they're legal or not. And if the order to deploy to a war that is unlawful, if that is given, then that order itself is unlawful.
SITES: How did your peers and your fellow officers react to your decision?
WATADA: I know that there have been some people within the military who won't agree with my stance, and there have been a lot of members of the Army of all ranks who have agreed with what I've done. And I see it almost every other day, where someone in uniform, or a dependent, approaches me in person, or through correspondence, and thanks me for what I have done, and either supports or respects my stand.
SITES: You've remained on base, and that's been a situation that can't be too comfortable for you. Can you fill us in on what that's been like there?
WATADA: I think that for the most part, people that I interact with closely — I have been moved, I'm no longer in the 3rd Striker Brigade, I'm over in 1st Corps — treat me professionally, politely, but keep their distance. I don't think anybody wants to get involved with the position that I've taken, either way. People approach me in private and give me their support.
SITES: Tell me about the repercussions you face in this court martial.
WATADA: Well I think with the charges that have been applied to me and referred over to a general court martial, I'm facing six years maximum confinement, dishonorable discharge from the army, and loss of all pay and allowances.
STES: Are you ready to deal with all those consequences with this decision?
WATADA: Sure, and I think that's the decision that I made almost a year ago, in January, when I submitted my original letter of resignation. I knew that possibly some of the things that I stated in that letter, including my own beliefs, that there were repercussions from that. Yet I felt it was a sacrifice, and it was a necessary sacrifice, to make. And I feel the same today.
I think that there are many supporters out there who feel that I should not be made an example of, that I'm speaking out for what a lot of Americans are increasingly becoming aware of: that the war is illegal and immoral and it must be stopped. And that the military should not make an example or punish me severely for that.
SITES: Do you think that you made a mistake in joining the military? Your mother and father support you in this decision, and your father during the Vietnam War refused to go to Vietnam as well, but instead joined the Peace Corps. He went to his draft board and said, "let me join the Peace Corps and serve in Peru," which is what he did. Do you think in hindsight that that might have been a better decision for you as well?
WATADA: You know I think that John Murtha came out a few months ago in an interview and he was asked if, with all his experience, in Korea, and Vietnam, volunteering for those wars -- he was asked if he would join the military today. And he said absolutely not. And I think that with the knowledge that I have now, I agree. I would not join the military because I would be forced into a position where I would be ordered to do something that is wrong. It is illegal and immoral. And I would be put into a situation as a soldier to be abused and misused by those in power.
STIES: In your speech in front of the Veterans for Peace you said "the oath we take as soldiers swears allegiance not to one man but to a document of principles and laws designed to protect the people." Can you expand upon that a little bit — what did you mean when you said that?
WATADA: The constitution was established, and our laws are established, to protect human rights, to protect equal rights and constitutional civil liberties. And I think we have people in power who say that those laws, or those principles, do not apply to them — that they are above the law and can do whatever it takes to manipulate or create laws that enable them to do whatever they please. And that is a danger in our country, and I think the war in Iraq is just one symptom of this agenda. And I think as soldiers, as American people, we need to recognize this, and we need to put a stop to it before it's too late.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Kontroversi Saddam Husein
Sepulang shalat Ied dari mesjid kemarin pagi (30 Dec) saya langsung menyalakan TV di rumah. Tiba2 ada breaking news bahwa Saddam Husein telah di hukum gantung pagi dini hari tadi. Inna Lillahi wa Inna Illahi Raji'un. terus terang ada perasaan kecewa ketika mendengar berita itu. Mengapa dia digantung disaat hari suci begini? disaat ummat Islam berkumpul di tanah suci menunaikan ibadah haji, disaat umat islam saling mengucapkan Ied Mubarak, dan saling meminta maaf?.
Saya mengerti bahwa Saddam telah menzalimi segolongan aliran di Irak, saya mengerti mengapa Saddam harus di hukum seberat itu, tapi harus kan pelaksanaannya dilakukan pada saat Idul Adha? tidak bisa kah "para penentu" itu menunda eksekusi itu barang beberapa hari?. Tapi yang lebih menyedihkan lagi adalah....orang2 pembencinya menari2 disaat dia telah dieksekusi... Dimana nilai2 islam yang menjadi pegangan mereka? mereka tertawa-tawa, menari-nari seolah2 pembunuhan pada saat Idul Adha adalah hal yang sangat menggembirakan. Tidak cukupkah mereka berbahagia bahwa Saddam akhirnya tertangkap, diadili dan kemudian dihukum mati? Mengapa mereka tidak mengungkapkan kesyukuran mereka (atas terhukumnya Saddama) dengan shalat syukur misalnya? Ah..."para korban Saddam" kalian semakin membuat saya merasa bahwa kematian Saddam pada hari besar adalah "suatu penghinaan" terhadap Islam.
Korban2 pasca tertangkapnya Saddam jauh...jauh...lebih banyak di banding korban2 dari "tangan" Saddam sendiri. Situasi di Irak (keamanan dan ekonomi) semakin terpuruk..thanks to Amerika dan para sekutu2 tak berhatinya!!!
Saya mengerti bahwa Saddam telah menzalimi segolongan aliran di Irak, saya mengerti mengapa Saddam harus di hukum seberat itu, tapi harus kan pelaksanaannya dilakukan pada saat Idul Adha? tidak bisa kah "para penentu" itu menunda eksekusi itu barang beberapa hari?. Tapi yang lebih menyedihkan lagi adalah....orang2 pembencinya menari2 disaat dia telah dieksekusi... Dimana nilai2 islam yang menjadi pegangan mereka? mereka tertawa-tawa, menari-nari seolah2 pembunuhan pada saat Idul Adha adalah hal yang sangat menggembirakan. Tidak cukupkah mereka berbahagia bahwa Saddam akhirnya tertangkap, diadili dan kemudian dihukum mati? Mengapa mereka tidak mengungkapkan kesyukuran mereka (atas terhukumnya Saddama) dengan shalat syukur misalnya? Ah..."para korban Saddam" kalian semakin membuat saya merasa bahwa kematian Saddam pada hari besar adalah "suatu penghinaan" terhadap Islam.
Korban2 pasca tertangkapnya Saddam jauh...jauh...lebih banyak di banding korban2 dari "tangan" Saddam sendiri. Situasi di Irak (keamanan dan ekonomi) semakin terpuruk..thanks to Amerika dan para sekutu2 tak berhatinya!!!
Thursday, December 21, 2006
HARTA... bermanfaat...
Siang kemarin ngobrol dengan seorang teman. ..nta kenapa kemudian pembicaraan beralih ke topik "keinginan untuk menjadi kaya". Pada saat itu saya mengatakan bahwa saya tidak punya ambisi tuk menjadi orang kaya. Teman saya itu dengan tersenyum mengatakan bahwa Allah menyuruh kita untuk menjadi orang kaya agar bisa membantu mereka yang membutuhkan, yang kemudian saya balas bahwa kita tidak perlu menjadi kaya untuk membantu orang kan?.
Well, memang jika kita dilimpahi banyak rejeki dan menjadi kaya, dan kemudian bermanfaat alias dinikmati juga oleh "needy people" itu adalah rahmat yang luar biasa ya??? Tapi jika tidak?. Bagi saya yang pekerjaannya (menurut perhitungan diatas kertas) tidak memungkinkan untuk menjadi sodagar, ukuran "indikasi kaya" saya turunkan. Maksud saya....biarlah saya merasa aja bahwa saya kaya, walaupun sebenarnya gaji saya (dan digabungkan dengan suami pun) berada dalam skala menengah kebawah. Untuk bisa membantu orang lain yang membutuhkan saya selalu merasa kaya dan kemudian dengan ikhlas memberikan apa yang bisa saya berikan..walaupun tabungan saya ternyata tidak banyak. Alhamdulillah sejak kecil kami dididik untuk "memberi" dan peka terhadap kesusahan. walaupun orang tua kami tidak lah kaya tapi sikap ikhlas orang tua sangatlah membekas dihati. Membekas di ingatan saya ketika seorang sahabat sewaktu kuliah saya tidak bisa membayar spp, kemudian saya ceritakan ke orang tua , dengan cepat alm. Ayahanda memberikan kepada saya duit sebesar beaya kuliah 1 semester agar diserah kan ke teman saya itu. Kemudian ada teman lain yang tidak begitu akrab, juga dibantu beliau membayar spp setiap tahun. Padahal saat pembayaran spp Ayah harus membayar spp 10 orang anaknya yang masih di smp, sma dan kuliah (5 org). Pada saat2 begitu kami kemudian harus makan makanan yang sangat sederhana (tapi tetap bergizi lo...) lauk ikan teri...., Ibupun kemudian meniadakan duit bulanan kami. Pernah sewaktu Ayah sudah pensiun dan lumpuh, adik saya ke bank untuk mengambilkan pensiun ayah. sepulang dari bank si adik bercerita klo tadi ada seorang mahasiswi mau menarik cash dari account nya...ternyata kata teller rekening itu sudah kosong....dan si gadis itu pulang dengan wajah yang sangat sedih karena mau bayar spp... Ayah mendengar itu langsung menangis dan meminta adik untuk kembali ke bank dan menyerah kan sebagian uang pensiunannya untuk dimasukkan kerekening si gadis itu. Itulah....teladan2/bekal yang diberikan orang tua kami, yang kami anggap harta yang sangat berharga. Alhamdulillah mungkin karena ke ikhlasan orang tua kami itulah makanya selalu aja ada rejeki yang Allah berikan buat orang tua kami.
Jadi begitulah..."merasa kaya untuk orang lain" adalah jalan untuk bisa beramal. Feeling guilty pun adalah alat ampuh untuk beramal. Setiap habis jajan atau belanja sesuatu yang termasuk tertiery demand, dan kemudian membaca kisah orang yang tertimpa musibah atau memerlukan pertolongan, lalu kemudian merasa bersalah jika tidak "memberi" sebagai imbalan telah "menikmati" harta sendiri. Belajar ikhlas untuk memberikan yang barang terbaik yang kita miliki pun adalah cara yang ampuh untuk memulai.
"Sebaik2 manusia adalah yang berguna bagi orang lain".
Well, memang jika kita dilimpahi banyak rejeki dan menjadi kaya, dan kemudian bermanfaat alias dinikmati juga oleh "needy people" itu adalah rahmat yang luar biasa ya??? Tapi jika tidak?. Bagi saya yang pekerjaannya (menurut perhitungan diatas kertas) tidak memungkinkan untuk menjadi sodagar, ukuran "indikasi kaya" saya turunkan. Maksud saya....biarlah saya merasa aja bahwa saya kaya, walaupun sebenarnya gaji saya (dan digabungkan dengan suami pun) berada dalam skala menengah kebawah. Untuk bisa membantu orang lain yang membutuhkan saya selalu merasa kaya dan kemudian dengan ikhlas memberikan apa yang bisa saya berikan..walaupun tabungan saya ternyata tidak banyak. Alhamdulillah sejak kecil kami dididik untuk "memberi" dan peka terhadap kesusahan. walaupun orang tua kami tidak lah kaya tapi sikap ikhlas orang tua sangatlah membekas dihati. Membekas di ingatan saya ketika seorang sahabat sewaktu kuliah saya tidak bisa membayar spp, kemudian saya ceritakan ke orang tua , dengan cepat alm. Ayahanda memberikan kepada saya duit sebesar beaya kuliah 1 semester agar diserah kan ke teman saya itu. Kemudian ada teman lain yang tidak begitu akrab, juga dibantu beliau membayar spp setiap tahun. Padahal saat pembayaran spp Ayah harus membayar spp 10 orang anaknya yang masih di smp, sma dan kuliah (5 org). Pada saat2 begitu kami kemudian harus makan makanan yang sangat sederhana (tapi tetap bergizi lo...) lauk ikan teri...., Ibupun kemudian meniadakan duit bulanan kami. Pernah sewaktu Ayah sudah pensiun dan lumpuh, adik saya ke bank untuk mengambilkan pensiun ayah. sepulang dari bank si adik bercerita klo tadi ada seorang mahasiswi mau menarik cash dari account nya...ternyata kata teller rekening itu sudah kosong....dan si gadis itu pulang dengan wajah yang sangat sedih karena mau bayar spp... Ayah mendengar itu langsung menangis dan meminta adik untuk kembali ke bank dan menyerah kan sebagian uang pensiunannya untuk dimasukkan kerekening si gadis itu. Itulah....teladan2/bekal yang diberikan orang tua kami, yang kami anggap harta yang sangat berharga. Alhamdulillah mungkin karena ke ikhlasan orang tua kami itulah makanya selalu aja ada rejeki yang Allah berikan buat orang tua kami.
Jadi begitulah..."merasa kaya untuk orang lain" adalah jalan untuk bisa beramal. Feeling guilty pun adalah alat ampuh untuk beramal. Setiap habis jajan atau belanja sesuatu yang termasuk tertiery demand, dan kemudian membaca kisah orang yang tertimpa musibah atau memerlukan pertolongan, lalu kemudian merasa bersalah jika tidak "memberi" sebagai imbalan telah "menikmati" harta sendiri. Belajar ikhlas untuk memberikan yang barang terbaik yang kita miliki pun adalah cara yang ampuh untuk memulai.
"Sebaik2 manusia adalah yang berguna bagi orang lain".
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Perdana
Kadang kadang perlu juga menuangkan unek unek yang ada dikepala ini.... dari pada disimpan sendiri....!
Membaca atau mendengar berita yang kontroversi atau pun fenomena yang baru membuat saya sering bercakap2 dengan diri sendiri (kalau tidak dengan suami tercinta). Mungkin ada baiknya yah...klo percakapan sendiri itu saya tuangkan ajalah di blog ini biar gak numpuk di kepala, hehehe....
Membaca atau mendengar berita yang kontroversi atau pun fenomena yang baru membuat saya sering bercakap2 dengan diri sendiri (kalau tidak dengan suami tercinta). Mungkin ada baiknya yah...klo percakapan sendiri itu saya tuangkan ajalah di blog ini biar gak numpuk di kepala, hehehe....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
