The Osama Trial

In regards of Ba’asyir trial, let me posit a simple question, does Osama also deserve the same trial?

My quick response would be, no. Here’s why?

1. From long time ago, since 9/11, Osama was asked to surrender. But he refused to comply and rather die than to give up, thus legal aspect is no longer relevant.

2. Even more, he had admitted that he was the perpetrator of the attack through his propaganda videos. He even endorsed his supporters to commit the same terrorist acts. This ascertained the fact that he was indeed guilty, thus no need for trial, for such confession was enough to establish mens rea and actus reus needed to indict him.

3. There is no need, especially for the victim, to know how and why Osama did that act. They just need to know that this terrorists will stop, and the lengthy process of trial (especially the debate over which jurisdiction will be used) will shift government focus and blur the essence of closure towards the case.

4. Trial will further belittle society suffering, because it will open up the idea that Osama’s ideology and terrorist act are acceptable (on the basis of presumption of innocence). Furthermore, a writ of habeas corpus needs physical presence of Osama, which in turns may give room for public interaction that could spread fear, aggravate the pain of victim, or even trigger retaliation of terrorist members thus compromising societal security.

5. Under International Humanitarian Law, it’s been allowed to employ deadly force if the military is certain that there will be retaliation from terrorist member. Assuming Osama would decline to be restrained (which he did) and there would be terrorist members in his compound, then the killing of Osama was justified. Furthermore, International Human Right Law allows the killing of rebellion commander as well. Using the rationale that Al-Qaeda is an “organized armed group” engaged in an “armed conflict” then suffice it to say that those laws are applicable.

Well, what do you have in mind?

The China Problem

The China Problem

Alright, in this post I will make it succinct, because, who wants to read verbose analyses nowadays? :D

This post is about how China is currently regarded as strong country in terms of economic. But here, I’ll show you how actually its foundation is shaky.

1. The effect of one child policy introduced in 1979 that creates low birth rate. This is further exacerbated by the imbalance between men and women: boys under 20 are 32 millions more than girls under 20, because back then female babies were aborted more than male (because from cultural side, only male children could pass his family’s name). How this affecting China economy? Firstly, in the future China would experience the lacking of labors meanwhile its industries are mostly labor intensives. Secondly, in the future China’s social services system will be overburdened. If we take a look into China’s population curve, it shows how older populations are abundant compared to children and newborns. If this trend continues, then every single child in China will be burdened to taking care the cost of living as many as six parents and grandparents.

2. The danger of property market bubble. Currently, the price of property market in China continues to rise irrationally (for instance, a 40 m2 apartment in Beijing is priced at USD 112,000 or 1 billion rupiah) in spite of government attempts to curb it by increasing interest rates and minimum down payment. How could this happen? Turns out that this is a result from irrational decision taken by Chinese government back then. The plenty of consequence free loans backed by the saving of its 1 billion workers made government recklessly invested it into luxurious properties in Beijing and Shanghai, and also a number of golf course in northern China (despite the fact that water is scarce there) instead of the more affordable housings in rural area. This trend drives the property price in China to be overvalued and thus go skyrocketing. (I will make another post about the origin of economic bubble, but not now :D)

3 Middle income trap. According to a paper by Donghyun Park and Kwanho Shin, an economy experiencing rapid catch-up growth (like China) will experience a decline in its per capita output level at USD 17,000. It is predicted that China will hit that level in 2015 and the middle income economy that comprises the majority in China will suffer from economic slowdown. How could this happen? Suffice it to say, the causes are multi-factorial: misallocation of investment to projects that aren’t economically viable (like in point 2), low interest rates, undervalued currency, various direct and indirect subsidies, and incentive system that gives reward to jurisdiction that initiates investment but spreading the cost to entire banking system. These all disguised the true growth rates of China that is actually not sustainable. Meanwhile the cost of living keeps on increasing, wages of labor and social security system can’t keep up with that rising cost.

Then how could China survive from these? In my opinion, China should firstly improve working condition of labors, including wages, social security, health care, and working environment. This will lead to an increase in purchasing power parity, which then is used to drive economic foundation from investment (which is overly done and become unsustainable) to domestic consumption. Secondly, to lessen the discrepancy between urban and rural area and to redistribute wealth and labor, China should do something to stop urbanization. Thirdly, improvement in land and water use, improvement in living environment (including the usage of waste and pollution management and also clean and sustainable energy), and also massive utilization of information technology. Fourthly, some scheme to add capital to back up its banking system against the massive capital inflows (that are mostly hot money) to further guarantee its strength in case of massive capital outflows occur in the future.

On Self

There is something about yourself that you don’t know. Something that you will even deny it ever exists, until it’s too late to do anything about it.

It’s the reason you get up in the morning.

The only reason you’re able to stay happy even if you suffer the shitty boss.

The only reason you can stand your blasphemous and loathsome friends, and becoming part of their cults.

The only reason you love your naughty-stingy-bitchy-fussy-sissy-but-not-sexy girlfriend, her blood, her sweat, and her tears.

And even the only reason for you to compete who have more followers or friends on Twitter or Facebook, even if to do so you have to add someone who’s a totally stranger to you and say on Twitter, “Follow me back, please!”

How pity and miserable. What a vanity of vanities that we have.

You want people to know how good, attractive, generous, funny, wild, and clever you are. You want people to know how much affiliations that you have.

A need of acknowledgement.

“Fear me, or revere me. But please, think I’m special.”

That’s what we are. We share an addiction: we are approval junkies.
We’re all in it for the slap on the back, a kiss, a perpetual claps, and the gold cup.

Craving for another Halelujah or another “hip-hip-hoo-rah..”
Insatiable fondness of nods and salutes, a match that trigger a conflagration in your heart.


Perpetuating, but destroying yourself at the same time.

We’re just monkeys wrapped in suits, begging for approval of others. Sick, pity, and miserable. A cradle of filth, a gang of psychic vampire, a bunch of low-class attention suckers. Those are us.

We’re no better than a tapeworm, maybe.
Whether we realize it or not, we, not only you, but also me, unconsciously do the same. Wired and rooted in the deepest part of our brain.

This out-of-sanity conscientiousness: approval junkies.

How miserable we are.

I still don’t know why I write this. If you wanna curse it, feel free to do it, because I’d do the same.

——————-

When alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine is consumed at the same time at 2:30 in the morning,

A Meddlesome Rambling: The Necessity of God to Answer Prayer

Hello, this is Andreas speaking :D. This is my first post. And this is… well about a random chat I had with Nanang, my friend, but he hasn’t posted anything yet :P) on the previous night.

On the way home from our family’s sanctuary (called Echo), me and Nanang engaged in a debate about God, and the necessity (in my opinion) of God to immediately respond to prayer, or at least, give a slightest hint in regards of His*) purpose to each human in this world.

This debate was actually stemmed from my disappointment to God recently. I made some prayers in these recent months, that apparently go unanswered, not even answering, “No,” or “Wait,” or “Kids, I have a plan for you. The plan was blah blah.” The God that I defended in some atheist forums (yeah, I was, or still am, maybe, a rampant theist back then) refused to speak.

Nanang told me that it was purposely done by God, because, somehow, God works in mysterious way. But blah blah, if God “works” in a mysterious way, why couldn’t Him give a quick peek to His plan for me. Because, if God didn’t do anything, then what was the difference with a mere coincidence, or pure randomness? That makes the first necessity of God to answer prayer: to establish the authority of God as a Being.

Then again, Nanang told me, that maybe, my way to ask God was too rude. But then again it’s supposed to be no problem. As a manifestation of An Infinite Love, He is not supposed to differentiate people based on how they conduct a prayer (or complain, whatever). Why?

1. If He gives different treatment, then what makes Him different with human? After all, we do good mostly to those who do good to us. But God’s moral conduct should be higher and more grandiose than that.

2. The one who’s questioning Him, who is weak at faith, is supposed to get the first priority. After all, it’s those who is sick who needs doctor the most, not the one who is healthy. That makes the second necessity of God to answer prayer: to establish the moral aspect of God.

But let me take it further, if God could simply stop Holocaust, where six millions Jews were killed, or stop Aceh tsunami, in which on those two cases millions and millions people were praying for the Holocaust to end or for disasters not to happen. But God do nothing. Is He good but not capable to stop? Then He is not omnipresent. But let’s assume He is, by definition, omnipresent, but simply refuse to stop, then God is evil.

But then it could be responded by saying that our moral judgement is not sufficient to judge Him. I said that if there is an animal, that walks in two feet, that looks like duck, and quacks like duck, and behave like ducks according of our preconceived definition of duck, then it is duck. If according to human moral standard not stopping a crime, or an bad thing to be happened when you could actually stop it, is deemed as evil, then a similar behavior done by God can be said as evil as well.

Nanang, in his latest rambling, said that it is necessary as a test for me to be strong, to be patient. My question, “Then what makes the difference when I walk by myself and walk by God?” If all things that I do are the results of my sole patience, strong will, endurance, and hard work, why should I attribute it to God? That makes the third necessity of God to answer prayer: to establish the purpose of God as a helper to human being.

I’ll be waiting, as per Nanang suggestion. But till when? If God is mysterious and stays mysterious by not giving me any hint, then why should I believe?

Where are you God? Is this silence be Your answer, if any? Then it means nothing for me. Nothing.


Andreas

*) or Her, or Its, or whatever. I believe God, if any, is genderless. The usage of He and His and Him are strictly for convenience only.

About

This is a platform for me whenever I want to share thoughts and random things; whenever my fingers aren't playing the guitar and play the computer keyboard instead. 

About me? I am not really sure of what I am. But what I am sure is that I have interests on many things. Oh, I still struggle to cook well, though. If you want a friend to be with you in a coffee shop, or angkringan, just to talk about anything in this world, you can just mention me here.