The World of Prejudice

A friend of mine forwarded an email attached with 9 cartoon pictures of a bit sarcastic (?) jokes. The picture illustrates a monk sitting with an osario, as trying to depict a wise-man addressing his preach or words of wisdom. While the jokes can end our day with a smile, tagging it with Dalai Lama as mentioned in the email (not the cartoon, though) might become a concern in light of what's happening in Tibet-China nowdays. I am cautioning my friend as to observe a sort of diversity and culutral sensitivity as not to possibly insult any religious figure.

I don't know if I am thinking too much. It might just be a good joke and, as my friend responded back, needs to be read 'wisely'. I seemed to be a bit cautious, learning from a world-wide news coverage, concerns and uproar with regard to a 15-minute Fitna movie created and posted by Geert Wilders in the Internet (LiveLeak). Having briefly seen it, I would say that it's quite outrageous and too much out of proportion. Ducth Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkanende, was within the context as wisely noted that we believe it serves no other purpose than to cause offense. He continued as to remind that feeling offended must never be used as an excuse for aggression and threats.

Violence, let alone act of terror in any form, is out of question and shall not be tolerated at all. Sadly enough, the iceberg is sometimes rooted deep in the prejudice that people might not be aware of. As the dictionary goes on saying, it is an adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the fact. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgements or convictions. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion. We can find it anywhere. From the extreme one that could cause serious consequences to the light one that probably becoming a food of thought. Obama dressed in a Kenyan tribe clothing during a visit to Africa was a target of "issue". Finding that the biological father of Apple CEO Steve Jobs is a Syrian Abdulfattah Jandali "inspired" many with a lot of discussions that some ended up with a "what-if prejudice analysis".

Now and then. It travels fast with technology and media. In the World Debate on media hosted and broadcasted by BBC in the face of TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference in Monterey, California (March 2008), Andrew Mwneda, a journalist from Uganda (?), complained that mainstream media in the west tend to convey prejudice instead of info. He was referering to news coverage about Africa that are always associated with disease, war, charity, disaster, and despair. The East-West different interpretation is apparent as Queen Noor of Jordania reminding about Iraq War in light of distortion, successful manipulation of information that the media was also taking part. However, Sergey Brin (Google co-founder), indicated that with Internet or Google people can see news they way the want to see it. And information is abundantly available, a more complete picture as not to cause any prejudice. People put a comment as a response in real time, unlike in the old media that would take a week or a month for a response to a news to be published.

Well, the advance of Internet technology and information access, global business operation and social interaction shall bring people of the world getting closer and closer. Physically and virtually, yes. Mutual understanding and respects are keeping on improving. Yet, it might not be at the speed and scale we all are expecting for the peace of mind. To make the world a much better place to live in. As such, inter-faith dialogue, socio-cultutal engagement, and embracing diversity are something of significant importance to be encouraged. It shall be based on pluralism and tolerance. It's not the game of blame, as one of the cartoons mentioned above "preaching" to err is human, to blame someone else for your problem, is strategic. Or my cab driver here in Jakarta that quickly slammed "It's CIA" referring to a poltical figure here, a former presidential candidate that often made statements that difficult for the grass roots to understand and digest. Anything bad or dirty work or things incomprehensible, people seems to prejudicely stamp or label it with CIA.

It shall be a conspiracy of kindness offered to all stakeholders of the blue planet. Respect and dignity, in one-go with freedom of expression. And be wise to see any act of individual as opposed to a state's policy or action as not to draw excessive repsonses that would trigger a further negative chain of reactions. As Sir Paul McCartney conveys a meesage in Ebony & Ivory --- There is good and bad in everyone. We learn to live, we learn to give each other what we need to survive, together alive.

A perfect harmony. Sound like a utopia?

On Iran's Nuclear Program

The world, at least some people including myself, is watching in a very deep concern about the proceeds of issues with regard to the Nuclear Program that Iran is pursuing. On particular concerns are on how USA and UN would deal with it, in an equal importance on how that Iran would "cooperate". We could no longer afford seeing a war in middle east. More even a "war based on assumptions" as the world is realizing on what's happening in Iraq now.

While the rethroric ways that President Amhadinejad deliver speeches were perceived as threatening by the west, we need to see resolving the issues thru constructive dialogues, more on "substances" rather than "styles".

We glad to hear about IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and NIE(US National Intelligence Estimate) that indicate a 'negative' on Iran's pursuance to nuclear weaponry (military purposes). Yet, we still see that President George Bush seems to be still after Iran. Even during the press conference with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, on his visit to Israel a few weeks ago, Mr. Bush seemed to be 'dismissing' the report from both IAEA and NIE.

Mr. Olmert is also keeping on saying that Israel sure Iran seeking nuclear arm. In response to this, a spokeperson of the embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Jakarta, Mr. Hamid Soltan Soleki wrote to Jakarta Post daily, yesterday Feb 16, 2008:

"It is very strange that representatives of a regime, which obtains hundreds of nuclear warheads and has been source of unrest, instability, crisis by resorting to agression, usurpation and killing of innocent men and women of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria, is judging Iran's nuclear program".

It's quite a strong statement, amidst a naked fact that some people might see as what's really happening in middle east. So it would absoulutely need extra energy to make both sides sit down together in a round table -- peace, justice, mutual respects, no double standards. -- seems to be quite a utopia:)

Above all, what are the (moral) grounds that some could have nuclear weapon while others could not ? People even now are worry about nuclear weapon in a relatively unstable Pakistan in the events following Bhutto's death. India has also got it just sometime ago without any issue. I just recalled on what President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, cleverly stated quite a while ago that he very much agreed that middle east should be free from nuclear warheads - no exception. Yap, all parties have to be back to the table on reducing and eliminating this WMD in more time certainty.

An Israeli friend of mine (a businessman), that often comes to visit Jakarta, once said that we make friends by doing business and partnering - across nations that may have different political views or adversaries -- and contribute, whatever small it might be -- to mutual understanding among people in every part of the world on a peaceful earth.

Agreed. But was it true, Erez, that business contacts give also pathways to Camp David and Oslo Accords ?