July 18th, 2010

Don’t scrap exams

 


I FULLY agree and support the views of Uthayakumar and Jessica Quek (StarEducation, July 11), who were against the scrapping of two important public examinations – the UPSR (Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah) and PMR (Penilaian Menengah Rendah).

The Education authorities while promising to seek the views of various parties, should also ask retired teachers to give their take on the proposed plan to abolish both exams.

I retired from the teaching profession after 35 years and to me both exams are important and necessary. The UPSR is to evaluate and gauge the knowledge and skills of those in their final year of primary school and the PMR to test the students at mid-scecondary school level.

The Education authorities should seek the views of experienced teachers whom I believe will only reiterate, the importance of both these exams.



School-based examinations as mentioned, may be biased and unreliable. Examination papers may be set with a number of objective questions but this is certainly not a good way of evaluating pupils. I have known teachers who carry out such assessments as they find them easier to mark.

Internal school assessments are not all a good idea as they are prone to abuse.

The quality and standards of teachers, have also deteriorated. Many of them take up teaching as a last resort and teach without much dedication. They are usually more interested in getting their monthly salary.


What I have expressed here is through my own working experience with others of my own profession.

Regarding stress and the effect examinations have on students, many students like me, had to sit for the Primary School Examination back in the 1950s and 1960s and LCE (Lower Certificate of Education) and the SRP (Sijil Rendah Pelajaran).

We obviously had more stress then as we had to write out lengthy answers as our exams were subjective, but there were rarely any complaints.

A student who excelled in sports and co-curricular activities, but who failed in the exams, would have to sit for the exams again until they passed. We attribute our success to our dedicated teachers, our learning methods and the pains we took in studying for our exams back then.

The authorities have proposed that both UPSR and PMR be abolished because of the stress and effect they have on students.

I don’t understand their logic. If students can’t cope with the stress of public exams in their teens, how will they cope with the challenges of life in later years?



L Abdullah


Source : The STAR Home > Education Sunday July 18, 2010

Teachers may hold too much power if exams are abolished

I BELIEVE teachers will give the correct feedback to the Government on the proposed abolition of public examinations. After all, the heavy burden will be on teachers who are already bogged down by so many duties.

My concern, however, is if teachers are able to assess their pupils fairly without discrimination. With immense pressure on teachers from their principals who want to see outstanding results, what easier way than to produce excellent results by simply manipulating the marks.

I know of teachers giving tuition to pupils in their own school. Can we be sure that they will not leak exam questions or give specific hints in their classes?

I have heard stories of teachers who promote themselves as the best tuition teacher in the district so as to make more money by getting more pupils to join their classes.

I have also noted kiasu parents who are always around the school to curry favour for their children by giving expensive presents or food to chosen teachers.

Ever wonder why your child never gets to be a prefect even though she is active or scores good results?

Greed and favouritism are human weaknesses. So think again about what would happen if exams are school-based. The school will be swarmed by parents as the ultimate power to decide will lie in the hands of teachers.

What about teachers who have children studying in the same school? Will these teachers exert pressure on their colleagues to give better ratings for their children?

WCK, Teluk Intan.



Source : The STAR News > Opinion Sunday July 18, 2010

Perspective: Deschooling Society

THE issue of the possible abolishment of examinations will be the subject of round-table talks soon. This is indeed refreshing as the debate is long overdue. But we must first examine the context of the discussion.

Almost 40 years ago, Ivan Illich broached the subject in Deschooling Society (1971) where he made a profound observation about what modern-day "school" and "education" is all about.

He wrote: "The pupil thereby 'schooled' to confuse teaching with learning, grade advancement with education, a diploma with competence, and fluency with the ability to say something new." This is no different when "medical treatment is mistaken for healthcare, social work for the improvement of community life, police protection for safety, military poise for national security, the rat race for productive work". Given this as the context, it would seem that we may be barking up the wrong tree thinking that examinations are the root of the problem of present-day school and education.


We tend to forget that examinations are just one part of an elaborate system called school and/or education, and tests are in reality about gauging the impact of the system on learning.

If the system is inherently "bad", it can never be good enough, no matter how good the measure.

We are missing the woods for the trees! To further illustrate this, Illich said: "Health, learning, dignity, independence and creative endeavour are defined as little more than the performance of the institutions which claim to serve these ends, and their improvement is made to depend on allocating more resources to the management of hospitals, schools and other agencies in question." Deschooling Society calls for a much deeper discussion on what scholarship is all about, which is particularly relevant in this increasingly dehumanising and unsustainable society that schools (including universities) are perpetuating since the emergence of the industrial revolution.


There is one historical context that is missing in today's discussion, namely the purpose of modern-day school and education.

The current schooling system has evolved over time to meet the needs of the industrial age as it moved away from the agricultural age.

Industrialisation was "perfected" in the 19th century to resemble a factory assembly line -- some even sponsored by the powerful and famous of the time to support production.


It is therefore no coincidence that schools including tertiary institutions are organised like factories.

The "factory" metaphor is more pervasive today when the marketplace has practically taken over the raison d'être of modern-day education.

We still hear, for example industrial demand for a tailor-made graduate who is regarded as nothing more than the "product" of the education system. In moulding this product, examination is a mere process of "quality control" that segregates the ones who meet the "benchmark" set by the marketplace from those who do not.

We talk in the language of the industry of creating "human capital" -- when education is all about nurturing a "human being".

It emphasises "employability" rather than "liveability", where "earning" becomes more important the "learning".

Courses that are deemed to be marketable are given priority over the non-marketable.

As a result, two (of four) pillars of learning -- "learning to be" and "learning to live together" -- as advocated by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation are neglected. Our biggest concern should be the direction that "education" is heading in the post-industrial age when "new" physical and mental structures are fast emerging to replace the old ones across the board -- socially, economically and politically. Is it sufficient to have a New Economic Model (NEM) when education is lagging behind and based on an old, outdated and dysfunctional model? Can the transformational demands of the NEM be met with an education system that is no longer compatible? Can "inclusiveness" be effectively achieved when we fail to create a unified, if not, a singular educational system? These are but some of pertinent questions that go far beyond the issues related to examinations alone.

They strike deep at the heart of the purpose of education in the coming era.

What is more pressing is transforming the current system much like the change from agricultural to the industrial age some 150 years ago.

And this is what the present discussion should be focused on.

We may well decide to do away with a few examinations but we need a transformational change in line with the needs of an advanced nation.





Source : Home » Learning Curve 2010/07/10 Dzulkifli Abdul Razak. The writer is vice chancellor of Universiti Sains Malaysia

Read more: Perspective: Deschooling Society

Comment: Reinvent our pedagogy

I NEVER had any formal training in teaching. My other half who is a teacher, could have been one of the discussants at the recent Perdana Discourse Series on the Role of Education in Leadership Development delivered by Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

But the subject of education is not exclusive to teachers.

Since the idea of reviewing the status of two public examinations -- Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah and Penilaian Menengah Rendah -- was mooted, there has been a litany of views, for and against the proposition.

On July 1, Muhyiddin announced that roundtable discussions will be held to deliberate on the issue, where "stakeholders and interested parties are invited to give their views, although we have conducted a lot of research on this subject".

But I did not discuss Malaysia's examination-oriented school system during the panel session after the keynote address.

I spoke about coercion, choice and consciousness.

The other two discussants were Tan Sri Arshad Ayub and Datin Freida Mohd.Pilus.

I was alluding to the meaning of education and being educated.

We go to primary school not by choice.

Our parents decide for us.

In school, the teachers take over, instilling order and discipline, and teaching us the fundamental modes of knowing and doing things.

In his keynote address, Muhyiddin described education as a holistic process of developing each individual's potential.

It is both inside and outside the classroom.

Apart from transmitting knowledge and skills, education includes experiential and exploratory learning, leading to creativity and innovation.

To produce the right human capital, he called for a revaluation of the curriculum towards an effective and holistic system of assessment, failing which "we run the risk of failing the nation in the future".
I told participants who attended the panel discussions that the outcome of education is consciousness.

It is about being, about our identity, where we come from and where we are in the larger scheme of things.

It is as much about character and nation-building as being critical and subversive. The nation expects a new phase in education in Malaysia.

Australian academic James Campbell in his article (Learning Curve, June 20) on education revolution encapsulates the context in which we are going through.

He delves into wisdom -- not the mode of its acquisition, but understanding what it is -- an intangible element defining how we make use of our education and what lessons we take from it.

How then do understand wisdom?

The indicator of a wise man is in his questions.

Ask my students.

In the courses that I had taught ranging from Opinion Writing to a graduate course on Epistemology, and now Malaysian Studies, I shared with them the art and science of asking the right questions.
I often ask my students, as part of their examinations, to ask a series of questions on what had been taught.

I am not interested in their answers.

I would grade them on their questions.

But I have also asked my students to ask their own questions during examinations and answer them.

Grades were given for both.


Campbell argued that an education system that understands wisdom and its manifestation, and instilled practices and capacities into its students would be world-class.

He relates these arguments to the 10th Malaysia Plan where the education system is "critical in strengthening the competitiveness of the country and in building 1Malaysia".

But how do we create wisdom? Should we cultivate wisdom, and intelligence and thinking at the same time? If I were asked about the product of the present education system, my response would be intelligence -- not wisdom and not thinking.


During the panel session, I had raised issues and ramifications of the education system for Malaysia -- that pertaining to consciousness and competitiveness.

I had imagined the value of being critical by not necessarily being subversive to nationhood and nation-building.

In that regard I had raised the value of cultivating a sense of time and a sense of place in the teaching and the conceptualisation of history and geography respectively.

The education system in Malaysia must instil a shared concept of history and that of geographical space in students.

The system must make us territorial -- both in the concrete and abstract sense.

The national flag represents that symbol.

Place it in every classroom and know why it is there. Various parties have complained that the Malaysian education system is examination oriented.

It has been argued that because of the focus on tests, learning is not enjoyable, it takes away creativity, innovation, thought and reflection.


Some have said that students are passive and do not know how to ask questions.

They are also not active in extracurricular activities and sports.

The focus on public examinations has taken away the education from the system. But any move to re-evaluate and revamp the Malaysian education system has to address the teaching profession -- talent, capacity and excessive bureaucracy.


Much of the discourse focuses on the output -- the students; but few have addressed the profession and the culture of the education bureaucracy in Malaysia.Both the profession and policy makers represent the input.

These greatly shape and structure the system.

The obsession with authority and hierarchy will have to go.

I observe a condescending attitude of the education authorities towards teachers. But the more significant problem is the urban-rural gap in the teaching profession.

I have doubts about how this has been approached by our education policy-makers and administrators.


We are not only talking about facilities.

We are also talking about ethos.

There are two cultures and two education systems in Malaysia -- one rural, the other urban.

And this is not to mention different ideologies and parochialisms.

The difference is visible.

The gap is significant.


This affects the conception and execution of order and discipline, attitudes and world views between rural and urban schools, not to speak of exposure to language and information. If it is argued that Information and Communications Technology (ICT) facilities in both rural and urban schools can level the playing field, think again.

ICT is not wisdom.

It is the wisdom of teachers, school heads and principals, not forgetting parents and the authorities.
The policy of placing new teachers in rural areas also must be re-evaluated.

This policy has damaged the system.

Instead of sending rookies, send the experienced ones if we are serious about educating our rural population.


At the same time, have teacher exchange programmes where, for example, teachers from the Klang Valley serve in rural areas for a period of time and vice versa.

When this happens, there will be interaction of ethos and values, a more mitigating situation is created where teachers learn from each other in different social, cultural and economic settings.


Rural school teachers, for example, should be exposed to more cosmopolitan settings, learn and understand world-class systems and procedures in Klang Valley schools.

Urban teachers should also experience teaching in rural schools.

This is essential in designing and perpetuating an effective education system.

The narrowing of the rural-urban gap is urgent and critical.

The status of History is also a concern.

This is where vision and idealism come in.

Apart from reconstituting the subject of History, what has to be addressed is the teaching of History.

At issue here is not so much the curriculum, but its delivery.

Who teaches History, to whom and in what context? Certainly, the approach and emphasis differ depending on the background, intellectual orientation and ideology of the teachers.

Also I would assume that perspectives vary among different types of schools -- national, national-type and religious.

Apart from History, subjects such as Geography, Literature, Art and Music should be enhanced to develop thought, creativity and reflection to enable long-term and abstract thinking. Much has been said about sport and its role in schools.

The one student, one sport policy can only be implemented in a situation where public examinations are de-centred.

The massive task is transforming values and attitudes towards sport among teachers, students and parents.


The approach towards the teaching of physical education needs to be re-examined.

Non-option teachers should not be forced to teach physical education.

And no more ustaz or ustazah to teach Physical Education.

I am sure the education bureaucracy would face some resistance in phasing out examinations. This would especially come from publishers; distributors and retailers of examination notes and questions; and tuition centres. These emerged due to the examination focused school system. Let there be no compromise on such stakeholders.

But assessments in schools would still be there. This is where school systems and procedures, facilities and the character and ethos of teachers would have to be uniform regardless of setting and locality. The Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia is to be maintained. A common assessment needs to be developed for entry into boarding schools and universities, for example.

Doing away with such a regimentation also augurs well for teacher creativity, which is now constrained by the need to comply with completing the syllabus and ensuring their students make the grade.

Doing away with public examinations would remove this "monolithic" pressure nationwide to the family unit and in turn would eradicate other problems too.

On the other hand, would taking the pressure away from public examinations lead to other issues of a more potent kind? This reminds me of German-born British economist E. F. Schumacher's view on education. In his 1973 book Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered, he likened education to a toolbox. It provides the relevant and necessary tools for life. Schumacher was silent on its context.

But value would have to be given to the toolbox. The tools would have to be used in context. There must be a purpose. Each tool has a specific function; and the user of the tool must not only have the intelligence for its use, but also the wisdom for its proper use in time and place.

We have to de-school ourselves. This is the time to reinvent our pedagogy and the ethics of the consumption of national identity. In so doing, taking the cue from Spanish philosopher George Santayana, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.



Source : Learning Curve 2010/07/10 A. Murad Merican. The writer is a Professor of Humanities at the Department of Management and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS. He is also the Perdana Leadership Foundation Honorary President Resident Fellow. Email him at amurad_noormerican@petronas.com.my


Read more:Comment: Reinvent our pedagogy

To test or not to test

THE proposal to do away with the Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR), known in English as the Primary School Evaluation Test which is a national examination taken by all Standard 6 Six (12-year old) students pupils, in Malaysia and the Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR), examinations known in English as the Lower Secondary Assessment, a public examination test taken by all Form Three students in schools throughout the country Malaysia, has provoked and stirred an interesting debate.


The Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin’s suggestion that these tests be scrapped has opened up the issue of assessment and testing up for debate in Malaysia and hopefully will provide a good impetus for reform in Malaysian education.


In a sense the Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin has thrown down the gauntlet to parents, academics and teachers to enter a debate discussion as to the future direction of Malaysian local schooling and the way students are assessed in the future.

The question that arises is why have this debate now? What is the problem with examinations as currently constituted? What are the likely outcomes of scrapping these examsthem?

The whole issue of exams and testing in schools is now on the agenda because of the perceived problems that a singular single-minded focus on testing has wrought in the Malaysian education system.


Critics of the way exams are currently constituted in Malaysia argue that the their summative nature of exams produces students who are good at rote recitation of facts learnt in the classroom, but lack an inability to critically think critically or innovate in their thinking. In other words the argument put by critics of currently constituted testing is that it encourages rote learning but does not provide us with useful data on a student’s deep understanding or cognition of a topic or a problem.

Why is the issue of exams considered a problem now?

To understand the arguments over assessment, in Malaysia, we have to grasp it in a deeper context of social, economic and educational change.

Socially, schooling should produce students who have the capacity to work together, cooperate, and trust each other.

Seen from these perspectives, forms of assessment can either add to an environment in school that develops collaboration, discussion and social creativity or assessment they can create an atmosphere in schools which focuses simply on individual achievement and rote recitation.

To be sure, in schools we must be able to assess the extent to which a student actually knows and has learnt something.

We must also recognise that not all forms of testing and examinations are simple right/wrong, or multiple-choice type examinations.

However, when most of us think of exams we do tend to think of exams in terms of summative tests and the regurgitation of facts by students in a pressure cooker environment.

High stakes testing of students accentuates a competitive individualistic and rote centred approach to knowledge.

What is wrong with that you may ask?

The problem is that the social, economic and learning needs of society, the nation and the student are ill served by an over emphasis on rote and summative testing.

Assessment is in fact a social process. Assessment can either be summative insofar as it measures what a student can recite at the end of the semester or year, or formative insofar as it can be used to the help students develop their learning but also help aid teachers to improve their teaching.

The extent to which exams and tests help assist students to improve their learning and teachers to improve their teaching in learning and teaching is an open question.

However, with the needs of Malaysian society evolving and changing under the pressures of globalisation and economic development, the need requirement to have forms of assessment which can help students and teachers learn and adapt to change is all the more necessary.

Economically, forms of traditional exam-centred summative assessment have served the needs of rapidly developing industrial economies well. Exams have acted as a sorting mechanism, which has been useful for providing the proper numbers of students to the requisite needs of an industrialising economy.

However, the shift towards the knowledge economy suggests the need to rethink our attitude towards assessment and exams.

A knowledge economy needs workers who are productive, creative and adaptive to change.

A knowledge economy It needs requires workers who can think in creative and innovative ways to solve and address problems that are dynamic and challenging.

Rote learning and the habits and stresses that are built up in students through preparation for high stakes assessment need to be looked at closely to see if they provide the necessary aptitudes, abilities and cognitive capacities necessary for the knowledge economy.

As reported in Bernama (June 21) in an article titled, ‘Abolishing UPSR/PMR: Views of Teachers, Parents to be Considered, director-general of education Tan Sri Alimuddin Mohd Dom also agrees that,’ “the country’s education system has been too examination-oriented and change should thus be made, in line with the current education philosophy that places importance on human capital development”.’

There is, however, one thing everyone can agree on in regard to exams, assessment and testing. in Malaysia. Before any reform is initiated, there needs to be a rigorous and thorough study of the problems, implications and issues that characterise shifting away from exams in Malaysia’s schools.

Tan Sri Muhyiddin’s Yassin’s recognition that of the stress and pressure placed on Malaysian school schoolchildren by exams is problematic is a welcome and humane contribution to the debate over about educational reform in Malaysia.

The issue before us is to combine empathy for students with a commitment to shifting assessment towards encouraging deep learning and growth.

This is critical, not simply for the needs of a knowledge-based economy but, more importantly, for the growth and development of student’s capacities and potential.



Source : 2010/07/07 James Campbell. The writer is a Lecturer in Education in Australia and a visiting researcher at Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). He is currently working on the APEX monograph series with USM on sustainability and education. Email him at jamesca@deakin.edu.au



Read more: To test or not to test http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/Totestornottotest/Article#ixzz0tzl351XN

Kawan, Sahabat, Rakan dan Kenalan - Satu Pandangan

Assalamualaikum dan salam sejahtera. ok, selalunya org selalu salah tafsir antara maksud dalam istilah sahabat, kawan dan lain-lainnya. Mari kita tengok, lihat apa sebenarnya maksud di sebalik istilah-istilah itu. Kerap juga saya terbaca keluhan dari 'friends' yang mencatatkan betapa mereka dipinggirkan, disisihkan, di tidak pedulikan, di ngangakan oleh KSRK ini. Namun ini hanyalah sekadar pandangan.

"Definisi kawan dan sahabat kadangkala dianggap mengelirukan bagi sesetengah individu. Berikut adalah definisi atau maksud bagi istilah sahabat, kawan, rakan dan kenalan. Saya menggunakan istilah seperti 'sahabat saya', 'kawan saya', 'rakan saya' dan 'kenalan saya' bagi menerangkan perbezaan maksud antara istilah-istilah tersebut.

Sahabat Saya

Sahabat saya adalah orang yang memiliki rasa tanggungjawab terhadap diri saya, tetapi tidak memiliki hubungan darah. Dalam erti kata lain, sahabat bukan terdiri daripada adik-beradik saya tetapi berupaya mewujudkan hubungan yang mirip hubungan persaudaraan antara adik-beradik. Sahabat saya adalah orang yang banyak memberi manfaat dan kebaikan kepada saya, dan saya juga begitu.

Sahabat saya adalah seorang yang setiakawan, dia boleh membantu saya apabila saya berada di dalam kesusahan, meredakan kesedihan saya, menghilangkan kebimbangan saya dan sanggup berjuang demi kebaikan saya. Sahabat adalah orang yang mampu menyimpan rahsia dan keaiban saya. Mereka akan sentiasa melindungi saya.

Sahabat tidak semestinya memiliki minat atau pendapat yang sama dengan saya, tetapi mereka akan sentiasa ada apabila saya memerlukannya. Sahabat adalah orang yang membuatkan saya berasa selamat apabila mereka ada bersama-sama saya, sebab mereka adalah orang yang sangat setiakawan. Sahabat adalah orang-orang yang sangat menyayangi saya.

Sahabat kadangkala adalah penjaga saya, pelindung saya dan semangat mereka akan sentiasa ada bersama saya.


Kawan Saya

Kawan saya ialah seorang yang boleh berkongsi lebih dari satu perkara seperti minat, hobi, perasaan, perjuangan dan sebagainya biarpun bukan dari organisasi yang sama. Kawan ialah orang yang selalu berinteraksi dengan saya dan saya mengenali beberapa fakta peribadi mengenainya.

Kami selalu memiliki masa untuk bersama, bergembira, berseronok dan sebagainya. Kawan biasanya terjadi apabila seseorang itu menemui individu yang lain, yang memiliki persamaan seperti hobi, minat, sikap, tabiat dan pemikiran yang sama dengan dirinya. Saya selalunya berasa seronok dan terhibur apabila berada bersama-sama kawan saya.

Kawan mungkin boleh berkongsi kesedihan dan kegembiraan, tetapi mereka selalunya tidak akan pergi lebih jauh daripada itu. Malah, sekiranya tidak sependapat, hubungan kawan mungkin boleh terputus.


Rakan Saya

Rakan saya ialah perantaraan antara kawan daan kenalan. Rakan ialah orang yang berkongsi minat, kerjaya, hobi, permainan, guru, kelas, matlamat dan sebagainya dalam satu organisasi atau kumpulan seperti persatuan, kelab, syarikat, pertubuhan dan sebagainya. Contohnya, saya ada rakan satu tingkatan, rakan satu sekolah, rakan satu kelab dan sebagainya.

Rakan biasanya orang yang boleh mewujudkan kerjasama. Contohnya saya boleh belajar bersama-sama dengan rakan sekelas saya, saya boleh membuat tugasan berkumpulan bersama-sama rakan satu tingkatan saya, saya bekerjasama dengan rakan-rakan sepasukan untuk menewaskan pihak lawan dalam pertandingan bola sepak, saya dan rakan-rakan sekerja mengadakan mesyuarat untuk syarikat kami dan sebagainya.

Ada rakan yang rapat, ada pula rakan yang boleh dianggap sebagai sahabat, ada pula rakan yang boleh dianggap sebagai kawan, dan ada pula rakan yang hanya boleh dianggap sebagai kenalan.


Kenalan Saya

Kenalan saya mungkin wujud sebagai rakan. Contohnya rakan chatting, rakan siber dan rakan blogger. Apabila saya mengenali seseorang itu dalam bentuk atau identiti tertentu, maka dia adalah kenalan. Kenalan saya adalah orang yang pernah berinteraksi dengan saya tetapi saya tidak dapat mengesahkan identiti atau kewujudan sebenarnya. Saya perlu berwaspada dengan kenalan-kenalan siber saya kerana, di luar alam siber, mereka tidak semestinya orang yang sama seperti yang saya pernah kenal di internet.

Kenalan saya boleh meluahkan perasaan mereka, masalah mereka kepada saya menerusi ruangan komen, e-mel dan kemudahan-kemudahan interaksi yang lain di internet, tetapi tidak 100% boleh dipercayai. Kenalan kadangkala wujud sebagai satu hiburan, tetapi kadangkala tidak mustahil mereka boleh memberi kebaikan kepada saya menerusi perkongsian pendapat, idea dan penyelesaian masalah."




Sumber : Kawan, Sahabat, Rakan dan Kenalan

Hitler ~ Satu Penghormatan Kejutan


Adakah kita tertipu selama ini? Hmmm... patut buka mata semua kita yg mengaku Islam...

Apa yang bakal anda baca ini ialah sebuah email yang saya terima dari seorang kawan dari Arab Saudi...saya terjemahkan ke dalam Bahasa Melayu dan saya kongsi bersama anda semua...


____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

Penghormatanku kepada lelaki agung, Adolf Hitler, semoga ada sepertinya di zaman ini...


(Embedded image moved to file: pic25411.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/38435_413470971282_111965761282_511.jpg


Aku berbual dengan seorang ahli keluarga yang sedang menamatkan tesis PhD beliau dan aku amat terperanjat apabila beliau nyatakan tesis beliau berkaitan Adolf Hitler, pemimpin Nazi. Maka aku katakan "Takkan dah habis semua tokoh Islam di dunia ini sampai kamu memilih si bodoh ini dijadikan tajuk?"

Beliau ketawa lalu bertanya apa yang aku ketahui tentang Hitler.

Aku lalu menjawab bahawa Hitler seorang pembunuh yang membunuh secara berleluasa dan meletakkan German mengatasi segala-galanya. ..lalu dia bertanya dari mana sumber aku. Aku menjawab sumberku dari TV pastinya.

Lalu dia berkata : " Baiklah, pihak British telah melakukan lebih dahsyat dari itu...pihak Jepun semasa zaman Emperor mereka juga sama...tapi kenapa dunia hanya menghukum Hitler dan meletakkan kesalahan malahan memburukkan nama Nazi seolah-olah Nazi masih wujud hari ini sedangkan mereka melupakan kesalahan pihak British kepada Scotland, pihak Jepun kepada dunia dan pihak Afrika Selatan kepada kaum kulit hitam mereka?"

Aku lantas meminta jawapan dari beliau. Beliau menyambung : "
Ada dua sebab -

1. Prinsip Hitler berkaitan Yahudi, Zionisme dan penubuhan negara
Israel . Hitler telah melancarkan Holocaust untuk menghapuskan Yahudi kerana beranggapan Yahudi akan menjahanamkan dunia pada suatu hari nanti.

2. Prinsip Hitler berkaitan Islam. Hitler telah belajar sejarah kerajaan terdahulu dan umat yang lampau, dan beliau telah menyatakan bahawa ada tiga tamadun yang terkuat, iaitu Parsi,
Rome dan Arab. Ketiga-tiga tamadun ini telah menguasai dunia satu ketika dulu dan Parsi serta
Rome
telah mengembangkan tamadun mereka hingga hari ini, manakala Arab pula lebih kepada persengketaan sesama mereka sahaja. Beliau melihat ini sebagai satu masalah kerana Arab akan merosakkan Tamadun Islam yang beliau telah lihat begitu hebat satu ketika dulu.

 




(Embedded image moved to file: pic21025.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/34237_413471026282_111965761282_511.jpg

Beliau juga telah meberi peluang kepada tentera German yang beragama Islam untuk menunaikan solat ketika masuk waktu di mana jua...bahkan tentera German pernah bersolat di dataran Berlin dan Hitler ketika itu menunggu sehingga mereka tamat solat jemaah untuk menyampaikan ucapan beliau...




(Embedded image moved to file: pic20355.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/38354_413471061282_111965761282_511.jpg


(Embedded image moved to file: pic31001.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/34541_413471101282_111965761282_511.jpg
Hitler juga sering bertemu dengan para Ulamak dan meminta pendapat mereka serta belajar dari mereka tentang agama dan kisah para sahabat dalam mentadbir...

Hitler bersama Syeikh Amin Al-Husainiy
Hitler bersama Syeikh Amin Al-Husainiy

(Embedded image moved to file: pic22549.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/35330_413471151282_111965761282_511.jpg

 





(Embedded image moved to file: pic09496.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/35232_413471241282_111965761282_511.jpg




(Embedded image moved to file: pic18584.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/34838_413471276282_111965761282_511.jpg

Seorang tentera Nazi melekatkan gambar Mufti Al-Quds
Seorang tentera Nazi melekatkan gambar Mufti Al-Quds

(Embedded image moved to file: pic09515.jpg)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m252/fcranell/34510_413471326282_111965761282_511.jpg

Semua maklumat ini ialah hasil kajian sejarah yang dilakukan oleh saudara aku untuk tesis PhD beliau dan beliau meminta aku tidak menokok tambah apa-apa supaya tidak menyusahkan beliau untuk membentangkannya nanti. Beliau tidak mahu aku campurkan bahan dari internet kerana aku bukan pakar bidang sejarah. Tetapi gambar-gambar yang ada di sini sudah lama tersebar dan semua orang boleh melihatnya di internet.

Aku juga sedaya upaya mencari maklumat tambahan di internet dan berjumpa beberapa perkara :

1: Pengaruh Al-Quran di dalam ucapan Hitler.


Ketika tentera Nazi tiba di Moscow, Hitler berhajat menyampaikan ucapan. Dia memerintahkan penasihat-penasihat nya untuk mencari kata-kata pembukaan yang hebat tak kira dari kitab agama, kata-kata ahli falsafah ataupun dari bait syair. Seorang sasterawan
Iraq yang bermastautin di German mencadangkan ayat Al-Quran :

(اقتربت الساعة وانشق القمر) bermaksud : Telah hampir Hari Kiamat dan bulan akan terbelah...

Hitler berasa kagum dengan ayat ini dan menggunakannya sebagai kalam pembukaan dan isi kandungan ucapan beliau. Memang para ahli tafsir menghuraikan bahawa ayat tersebut bermaksud kehebatan, kekuatan dan memberi maksud yang mendalam.

Perkara ini dinyatakan oleh Hitler di dalam buku beliau Mein Kampf yang ditulis di dalam penjara bahawa banyak aspek tindakan beliau berdasarkan ayat Al-Quran, khususnya yang berkaitan tindakan beliau ke atas Yahudi...


2. Hitler bersumpah dengan nama Allah yang Maha Besar

Hitler telah memasukkan sumpah dengan nama Allah yang Maha Besar di dalam ikrar ketua tenteranya yang akan tamat belajar di akademi tentera German.

" Aku bersumpah dengan nama Allah (Tuhan) yang Maha Besar dan ini ialah sumpah suci ku,bahawa aku akan mentaati semua perintah ketua tentera German dan pemimpinnya Adolf Hitler, pemimpin bersenjata tertinggi, bahawa aku akan sentiasa bersedia untuk berkorban dengan nyawaku pada bila-bila waktu demi pemimpin ku"


3. Hitler telah enggan meminum beer (arak) pada ketika beliau gementar semasa keadaan German yang agak goyah dan bermasalah. Ketika itu para doktor mencadangkan beliau minum beer sebagai ubat dan beliau enggan, sambil mangatakan " Bagaimana anda ingin suruh seseorang itu minum arak untuk tujuan perubatan sedangkan beliau tidak pernah seumur hidupnya menyentuh arak?"

Ya, Hitler tidak pernah menjamah arak sepanjang hayat beliau...minuman kebiasaan beliau ialah teh menggunakan uncang khas...


Bukanlah tujuan penulisan ini untuk membela apa yang dilakukan oleh Hitler, tetapi ianya bertujuan untuk menyingkap apa yang disembunyikan oleh pihak Barat. Semoga kita semua beroleh manfaat.

 via Nor A Ismail