click for translator to read artichel

English French German Spain Italian Dutch

Russian Portuguese Japanese Korean Arabic Chinese Simplified
by : BTF

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Call for Najib's resignation

Posted by singamaraja

DAP dares MCA to dissolve and call for Najib’s resignation

April 21, 2011
Lim called the MCA leaders hypocritical. — File pics
KUALA LUMPUR, April 21 — The DAP challenged MCA leaders today to dissolve their party or call on the prime minister to resign should he lose Chinese community support in the coming general election.

DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang charged that the MCA was being hypocritical in calling for Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud’s resignation due to his failure to deliver the Chinese vote last week, pointing out that the MCA itself had performed no better in Election 2008.

In the Sarawak state polls last Saturday, Barisan Nasional (BN) lost 16 seats to the opposition, most of them Chinese-majority urban seats.

In Election 2008, MCA suffered its worst ever electoral defeat when it saw its parliamentary representation cut by more than half from 31 to just 15 seats.

“Now they are asking Taib to resign on grounds that he lost the Chinese vote. Will they apply the same standard to PM (Datuk Seri) Najib (Razak)?

“And why is MCA still in the Cabinet? Why was MCA’s president (Datuk Seri Dr) Chua Soi Lek so keen on securing his son (Chua Tee Yong) a deputy minister’s post?” Lim asked.

DAP publicity chief Tony Pua, who led the party’s campaign in Sarawak, agreed, saying that the MCA should “dissolve” itself for having failed in its purpose of representing the Chinese community.

“If you are talking about support based on race, the MCA has failed to represent the Chinese. So their organisation is completely irrelevant. They should dissolve themselves,” he said.

Lim and Pua were responding to a statement by MCA vice-president Gan Ping Sieu yesterday calling for Taib’s resignation due to the outcome of Saturday’s polls.

The DAP leaders also berated MCA’s Loh Seng Kok for “insulting the intelligence of Sarawak voters” when he claimed the Chinese community had been duped into voting for the opposition for racial reasons.

“They are insulting their intelligence because Sarawak voters, all those who supported DAP, were voting for the Pakatan Rakyat (PR). They were voting for new politics which surpasses racial boundaries,” said Lim.

Pua said it was the SUPP which had played the race card.
He pointed out that the outcome of the Sarawak polls had not only shown an increase in Chinese community support towards the DAP but an improvement in support from all communities towards PR as a pact.

This, he said, was mirrored in how the opposition had managed to increase its popular vote from 37 per cent in 2006 to 45.5 per cent or 300, 288 votes while BN managed to secure 54.5 per cent or 372, 379 votes.

“MCA and Gerakan leaders are feeling so aggrieved that they were treated with utter contempt in Sarawak that they are making these nonsensical statements.

“It is their way to vent their anger. They should know their days are numbered unless they change and rise above racial politics,” said Lim.

Pua also pointed out that it was the MCA’s parallel, the Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP), that had played the race card in the polls in order to convince people to reject the opposition.

In its campaign, the SUPP had warned Sarawakians that they would lose Chinese representation in the state Cabinet if they voted for the DAP.

On April 16, however, the DAP scored an electoral upset by winning 12 of the 15 seats it contested, most of them Chinese-majority urban seats.

The SUPP was nearly wiped out when the party, which claims to represent the Chinese, won in just six of the 19 seats it contested, only two of which were Chinese majority while the rest were Dayak seats.

“I want to challenge MCA to point out when and where in our entire campaign in Sarawak were we racist? Go back to school and learn what racism is.

“Fighting corruption, abuse of power and nepotism is not racism. These issues cut across the races and if MCA thinks they are racist, they should evaluate their own party constitution which prohibits other races from taking part in their organisation,” said Pua.

Lim agreed, pointing out that the MCA and Gerakan were largely to blame for the SUPP’s fall in Sarawak as leaders for both the peninsula-based BN partners had joined in the election campaign.

“The real reason why SUPP did so badly was because of the assistance rendered by MCA and Gerakan leaders who have only served to highlight the need for the country to rise above race and go for new politics. Since peninsula voters have rejected Gerakan and MCA, the Sarawak voters are doing the same.

“Nobody cared about them in Sarawak. Not just that, they were treated like garbage and with utter contempt,” he said.

Difficult for BN to win two-thirds majority in GE

Posted by singamaraja

KUALA LUMPUR, April 21 — Barisan Nasional (BN) will have a tough time scoring a two-thirds majority win in the next general election due to the continued snubbing of the ruling coalition by urban voters.

Analysts believe that the recently-concluded Sarawak election will also have a spillover effect on the possible outcome of the upcoming national polls, but differ as to when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak will call for it.

While some political pundits believe that Najib will call for elections by year end, others say that the rise in urban vote swing towards Pakatan Rakyat (PR) as well as anti-Taib (Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud) sentiments would be reason enough for Najib to delay national polls until early 2012.

"It is going to be difficult for Barisan Nasional to achieve a two-thirds majority," Dr Agus Yusoff told The Malaysian Insider today.

"Urban voters, particularly non-Malays, have voted against BN, as seen in Sarawak... this will have a big implication on BN, the effect of urban discontent towards BN can have a spillover effect in rural areas, given time," said the university lecturer.

BN won 55 out of the 71 seats in the Sarawak assembly, down from 63 it held when the assembly was dissolved last month. The DAP doubled its presence to 12 seats while PKR tripled its representation to three despite contesting 49 seats. An independent also took a seat.

In Election 2008, PR won a total of 82 out of 222 federal seats, with the DAP winning 28 seats, mainly in urban areas where there are large communities of Chinese, who decided to throw out BN’s lawmakers for the opposition party’s representatives.

The developments in the country within the next few months remain crucial, Agus cautioned, as "anything drastic" could change the voting trend, either in favour or against the ruling coalition.

"The economy is important... when the country is stable and its people are comfortable, then the government can feel safe.

"But in Sarawak, Tan Sri Taib Mahmud's insistence in not stepping down has affected Chinese votes for BN, if this remains BN will be affected further," said Agus.

BN retained its two-thirds majority in the Sarawak state assembly or 75 per cent of the seats in the Sarawak legislature. Initial estimates showed that BN’s popular vote went down from 62.93 per cent in the 2006 state election to 55.24 per cent in last weekend's polling.

PR, mainly the DAP, mounted a successful anti-Taib campaign, engaging in massive ceramahs attended by thousands of Sarawakians.

This in turn resulted in BN losing more urban seats compared to previous state elections.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has also added pressure on Taib, telling him to do the “needful”, while campaigning in Malay/Melanau areas.

Taib has said he will go in “two or three” years or “midway” into his new term, but stopped short of providing a firm date.

UKM lecturer Professor Shamsul Adabi Mamat chose to remain optimistic about BN's electoral chances.

The analyst feels that the ruling coalition should not be fixated with obtaining a two-thirds win.

Shamsul said a "comfortable majority" win scenario would suffice, where BN wins more than half of the 222 parliamentary seats but would fall short of the desired two-thirds.

"A comfortable majority win is enough, two-thirds is not so important," Shamsul told The Malaysian Insider.

He said that as long as BN had the rural votes, which made up the majority of the federal electorate, it should not be too worried about maintaining power.

"Yes, two-thirds is the focus, but BN needs to know that even a comfortable majority win is a huge victory.

"We live in interesting times, in a society with different cultures, differences of opinions, so not everyone may agree on everything," he said.

Shamsul believes that judging by BN's performance right now, Najib will call for national polls by the end of this year.

"A general election must be held as soon as possible... BN has the momentum right now with the Sarawak win. I think Najib realises this and would know how to capitalise this.

"My guess is that Najib will call for polls by the end of this year," said Shamsul.

Posted by singamaraja

Former MCA president Ong Tee Keat snapped at his successor Dr Chua Soi Lek (CSL) today and denied playing a role in the decision for the party to maintain a presence in cabinet despite being virtually wiped in the March 8, 2008, general election.

NONETee Keat (right) said Chua's suggestion otherwise was one that should be “disdained” in view of its “factual flaws” and “despicable intention of spreading lies”.

“Perhaps CSL has been overly obsessed with his prejudice against my political presence till today that he has erroneously attributed the decision of MCA to stay in cabinet after the said setback to my alleged insistence, when I was then not the party president,” the Pandan parliamentarian said in a statement today.

mca post cc meeting pc 130311 chua soi lekThe matter arose after Chua's call for SUPP to remain outside of government following the Sarawak-based party's dismal performance in the recent state polls. SUPP won only six of the 19 seats that it contested.

Faced with suggestions that MCA was being hypocritical given MCA's presence in the government despite being almost wiped out in the 12th general election, Chua (left) said he was not then the MCA president.

Similarly, said Chua, the appointment of Dr Mah Hang Soon as Perak exco member was also not his doing as it was decided on by his “predecessor”.

mca youth agm 060310 mah hang soon 01Though he did not name Tee Keat, observers have noted that Mah (right) is known to be in Tee Keat's faction in MCA.

Rebuffing such suggestions, however, Tee Keat noted that former housing and local government minister Ong Ka Ting was president of MCA until Oct 18, 2008.

Furthermore, said Tee Keat, Chua could have reversed any earlier decision pertaining to Perak MCA “if he were truly committed to what he advised SUPP, instead of resorting to finger-pointing”.

“He has no excuse to be evasive as he has been helming the Perak MCA for the past one year,” he added.

Tee Keat also said that when Najib Abdul Razak took over as prime minister in April 2009, he was consulted in his capacity as party president on the choice of MCA nominees to the cabinet, during which time the matter of opting out of the cabinet lineup had not arisen.

Tee Keat also pointed out that Chua was a member of the MCA presidential council by virtue of his position as the deputy president. The council, in turn, had unanimously mandated to Tee Keat to handle the matter with the new prime minister.

“At that material time, nobody, including Chua, had ever raised the issue of staying out of the cabinet,” said Tee Keat.

Rubbing it in further, Tee Keat suggested that Chua himself had been double-faced when he had the chance to stay out of cabinet in view of plummeting support for MCA from the Chinese community.

chua tee yong interview 110309 05“But instead, he had his own son, Tee Yong (MP for Labis, left) in the cabinet line-up when Najib announced the cabinet reshuffle on June 1, 2010,” he said.

Tee Keat said further that Chua had earlier vowed he would not lobby for any government posts, but chose to renege on his words when he accepted the appointment as chairperson of the Penang Port Commission.

Later on, Chua also accepted being on the Economic Council headed by the prime minister, said Tee Keat.

“I have no intention to pick a quarrel with such a character as there are many more meaningful things to do in serving the people, especially my Pandan electorate.

“Actions speak louder than fabricated lies deliberately dispensed with for political assassination.”

Ghost has never really died

Posted by singamaraja

Ghost has never really died. Only it went and then came apparentla. That's beliefs about the murder of Altantuya hantu.Begitulah. He was killed. It lives again as a ghost. As a ghost many believe it menghantuai Perdaya Minister Najib and his wife.

The reason is not hard narrated. Everyone knows. Najib knows those people do not like Najib and another to know. Her ghost story may live hundreds more as folklore.

Since its resonance 1Malaysia Merong-rong, morning and afternoon in all the world stage, her ghost is gone, and silence. Not quite remember anymore.

But revived by TV3. TV3 is well-known voice and mouthpiece said. He will do anything original Najib comfortable and happy.

TV3 chase Raja Petra who took refuge in the wind, interviewers will ask for consent. And TV3 broadcaster is to broadcast parts of a conversation with Raja Petra.

That it is seeing is what Raja Petra out of her ghost and when she turned into a ghost at the explosion occurred.

Asked on Raja Petra true that the explosion was witnessed by First Lady not called First Lady longer time.

TV3 broadcast the scene for what is a ghost? To seronokkan Prime Minister Najib and his wife now. It is also to save Najib and his wife and his kingdom.

Raja Petra made bait traps. With baits and traps that can beat Anwar Ibrahim to be destroyed. Once he hit and eliminate Raja Petra.

It happened when it was published, came to arrest Anwar Sarawak. I hope that Anwar's release makes it back with empty hands. Najib and his wife were safe, secure Taib his new bride.

What fun Najib's wife, Hollywood is it? TV3 has served longer considered to Najib and his wife.

How hatikah couple enjoyed the release of exploit Raja Petra?

Out of the movie is her ghost appears again in the memory of all the spectators. Never mind that the ghost appears again. The question arises is true that Najib's wife is in the location turns blasting her ghost.

Certainly not like Najib and his wife wanted kelibatnya in each Narration her. Najib and his wife did not want to be involved directly with the ghost story.

When connected, not just people remember the story of ghosts, but ghosts and the story will haunt Perdaya ministers and mistress. Delirium of a ghost that can disrupt sleep disappearance.

Hollywood releases, but the effect is only short delirium is time consuming and takes heart. Does not match the fun of TV3 tried entertained with spooky ghosts are troubling.

Since the release of Raja Petra interview that the issue of murder to life again. He returned all fresh in my memory. People talk about it and people mengigatkan back to resume the inquiry into the murder and how their causes?

Raja Petra will be writing again. He will explain he did not know who is in the area of ​​the explosion. He was just told that Najib's wife and others have also said no. He revealed in a statutory declaration about what people tell him.

Statutory declaration must be investigated. If Najib's wife was under investigation should be investigated. All of it has tried silenced. None of those initiatives mentioned in the statutory declaration to be investigated. But after the release of Raja Petra TV3 and urges that it be investigated, then the name will be mentioned again that Najib's wife.

Will it be appeased again?

TV3 itching because of hunting and trying to deceive Raja Petra Raja Petra, causing re-echoed the murder. TV3 never thought he wanted the Prime Minister dani troublesome wife, but the turbulence is expected to save cermatnya Najib and his family.

Raja Putra Murtad ?

Posted by singamaraja

Ini pertanyaan yang ditanyakan kepada saya. Saya jawab murtab bukan suatu yang boleh dibuat main-main atau sendiwara. Kita kena tahu dari isi hati mereka yang berkenaan. Tulisan atau percakapan dripada mulut orang lain bukan ukuran.

Memang saya tahu sudah lama perkara ini berbangkit, iaitu zaman Pak Lah lagi. Maksud saya isu murtad Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK) ini telah pun lama dibualkan orang, tapi tidak ada satu kenyataan rasmi terutama daripada pihak kerajaan (Jabatan Agama) untuk mengesahkannya.

Pihak kerajaan atau TV3 misalnya lebih berminat dalam isu Anwar daripada isu agama. Mereka lebih berkepentingan dalam hala ini, tidak hairan kalau baca "Testimony of Leaving Islam" RPK pun dia menjadi kabur apabila orang beragama yang sepatutnya baik telah menjadi tidak baik.

Untuk pengetahuan pembaca, sukar untuk mengukur keIslaman seseorang. Walau bagaimanapun kita juga patut mengetahui apakah isu disebalik maklumat ini.

Anda boleh merujuk di laman People Who Left Islam dan Testimony of Leaving Islam oleh RPK. Semoga Allah memebrikan kebaikan kepada RPK.

Saya perturunkan testimony tersebut;

They say only Islam is good and all other religions are bad, and that those with no religion whatsoever, or atheists, are even worse. But these people from the 'good religion' want the government to do bad things. That is what troubles me to no end. How can a good religion make people want to be bad?

Malaysia can pride itself in knowing that regardless of what religious celebration it may be, its ethnic groups will come together as one to honour the event. The mainstream newspapers reported:

Abdullah said religious festivals celebrated in Malaysia serve to bridge gaps and foster better ties among the multi-religious and multi-racial makeup of the country.

Malaysia, he said, was blessed, as the people not only had great respect for each other's religion, but also for the religious occasions that the different segments of society celebrated. Abdullah also said Malaysians never failed to display respect towards each other and it was customary for most to offer help and lend a hand during religious festivities, even to those outside their own race.

“A religious occasion, including Hari Raya, is a day when we seize the opportunity to visit our friends and strengthen our ties as true Malaysians. In our everyday lives, we prioritise aspects of goodwill and understanding towards each other, including on religious matters, which are deemed sensitive,” Abdullah said.

Have you noticed how politicians and religious people, especially if they are politicians masquerading as religious people - always say one thing to the non-Muslims and another to the Muslims? When the Indians and Chinese start showing signs of restlessness, they will talk about multi-racial, multi-cultural tolerance and all such crap. But to an all-Malay or all-Muslim audience, when they think that the non-Malays or non-Muslims are not within earshot, they will talk about the ‘enemies’ of the Malays and warn us that the kafir can’t be trusted and can’t be taken as our friend because they are the millennium-old enemies of Islam.

These public displays of keris-waving are small potatoes. The non-Malays were meant to see that. They knew the TV cameras were on and that what they said and did was being beamed live, straight into the living rooms of Malaysians. But what they talk behind closed doors would make even our First Prime Minister and Bapa Merdeka, Tunku Abdul Rahman, who in his days was accused of being a Chinese running dog who sold out the Malays, turn in his grave. Yes, the Tunku was ousted because he ‘gave in’ too much to the Chinese. But it was in the Tunku’s days that Malaysia was most peaceful, until someone came out with the ‘bright’ idea of how to unite the Malays under a common cause.

Can I be so bold as to say that in the Tunku’s days, the Malays were less religious? Not a single Malay senior government officer’s home did not have a bar, well-stocked with beer, brandy, whisky and wine that would make any pub turn green with envy. That was during the Merdeka era when you could admire the lovely legs of Malay women and when bare-back knee-length skirts were the ‘in’ thing. Miss Malaysia would be a sweet, young, Malay, lass in a bikini who would give the Chinese and Indian girls a run for their money -- until Pan-Asian girls appeared on the scene of course. Then we mixed-breed Eurasians beat the panties off the thoroughbreds. Hidup Pan-Asian!

Fifty years on and we celebrate our 50th anniversary of Merdeka. By now the Malays have become more religious. No longer will you find any bar in Malay homes. The army no longer toasts with wine but with syrup. And even then toasting, a western custom, is frowned upon. No longer can you get drunk with NAFI beer at fifty cents a can. You have to pay RM15 a glass at a pub and a crate of two dozen cans would be unaffordable for most Malaysians today.

But that is good. Malays have discarded their jahiliyah days or era of ignorance. Malays are now more Islamic. And Malays are told that we must not celebrate Christmas or wish the Chinese or Indians Kong Hee Fatt Choy or Happy Deepavali as this goes against Islamic teachings. Why, therefore, is Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi saying what he said, as reported by the mainstream media? Does he not know what he is saying goes against what Islam stands for, at least according to what the religious people tell us? Or is this a case of saying one thing to the non-Muslims and another to the Muslims? I suppose this is what politics is all about. You have to tailor your statements to suit the audience. And what Abdullah said was meant for the non-Malay ears, not for the Malays.

They say everyone goes through various stages of changes in their life and I suppose I am no exception. If I was asked to sum up my different stages of change, I would probably divide my life into three parts. The first part, the first 27 years of my life, would be what Malays (and Muslims as well) would call the jahil (ignorant) stage. That was when I did not pray, never for one minute stopped to think about God, drank beer, played Gin Rummy, and indulged in all form and manner of ‘sin’ that you can think of. Somehow, the consumption of pork was never one of those ‘sins’ though, for whatever reason I still can’t figure out until today.

When I touched 27 or 28, I suddenly ‘saw the light’ and became a ‘born-again’ Muslim. I used to jokingly tell my friends I was never born a Muslim but masuk Islam (converted to Islam) at the age of 27. From then on, I ‘fast-forward’ to catch up on all that I had missed the first 27 years of my life. I went to Mecca 10 times or so, twice for the Hajj - and the rest for my Umrah (small Hajj). I sat down and started reading the Quran and within a few weeks, was able to rattle away like one who had learnt to read the Quran at the age of five. Even my Tok Guru was surprised. He said it normally take months or maybe even years for ‘old’ people whose brain had already beku (frozen) to read the Quran. I was able to do it in a matter of weeks. I bought the entire nine volumes of Hamka’s Quran translation and nine volumes of Hadith Bukhari plus Imam Ghazali’s kitab which I read over and over again until I was able to quote from memory.

That was all just before the Iranian Islamic Revolution and I was smitten. During my first trip to Mecca to perform the Hajj, I joined an Iranian anti-Saudi demonstration and proudly carried a giant poster of Imam Khomeni high above my head. I wanted the Saudi government to be toppled and the two Holy cities of Mecca and Medina to be governed by an international Islamic coalition a la the Vatican City. I was slightly over 30 then and an Islamic revolutionary to the core.

I became the Chairman of our local mosque and set about ‘freeing’ all the mosques from government control. I helped raise funds to develop as many independent mosques as possible so that we could keep the Religious Department out of these mosques. Some of you probably remember the dua imam (two imams) episodes rampant in the State of Terengganu in those days. Datuk Yusof, the Terengganu head of the Special Branch (KCK), picked me up and brought me to meet the Terengganu Menteri Besar so that they could ‘rehabilitate’ me. They actually wanted to detain me under the Internal Security Act but there was this small complication concerning my father’s cousin (Emak Sepupu) who was the then Tengku Ampuan Terengganu. The Tengku Ampuan Terengganu was sister to the late Agong, the Sultan of Selangor, so they had to handle me with kid gloves.

Yes, I was a problem for Umno Terengganu and they would have liked to lock me away but my palace ‘immunity’ made this impossible. Anyway, eventually I left Terengganu and that sort of solved the whole thing. Five years later, Terengganu fell to the PAS-led opposition, so it really did not matter anymore, anyway.

That, in a nutshell, would be how I would describe the second 27 years of my life, phase two, and now I am in phase three, the third 27 years of my life. Of course, I really do not think I will live another 27 years or else I will live to a ripe old age of 81. No doubt Tun Dr Mahathir is still very much alive and kicking way past 81. But then Tun does not smoke, does not sleep at 3.00am, does not survive with a mere five hours sleep every night, is very careful with his diet, and much more. In short, I do everything opposite of what Tun does, so I do not hold the fallacy that I can live as long as he has thus far. But that is not the issue. Whether phase three will be another 27 years like phases one and two is not what I want to talk about. What I do want to discuss is what I am going through in this phase three.

As I said, my first 27 years of phase one was the jahil period, and the second 27 years of what I call phase two, the Iranian Islamic Revolution period, my ‘enlightenment’ period. Phase three, however, appears to be my questioning and doubting period, which is giving rise to my disillusionment period. I accept that I was like one of those lost sheep during phase one. Then I thought I had discovered the truth and saw the light in phase two. But now, in phase three, I am beginning to question this co-called truth. I am beginning to doubt that this was really the truth as I originally thought it was. I am beginning to become disillusioned with what I originally perceived as the truth.

Religion is supposed to be good, not only Islam, but any religion for that matter. And that is what I went through during phase two, discovering religion. But if religion is good, then why are religious people bad? Why is it when I meet non religious people or atheists, I see good people? And why when I meet orthodox religious people, I see bad people? Yes, that is what has been nagging me in this phase three of my life. If religion is good, then religious people should be good and non religious people or atheists should be bad. But why is it the other way around? And this does not apply to only Muslims.

I gave a talk to a group of pro-Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Umno people a few weeks ago. In that crowd was one whom I would classify as an ultra-religious person. When I pointed out that corruption is bad and that we must oppose it, he replied that corruption is O.K. I then argued that Islam says that corruption is Riba’ (usury) and that there are 80 levels of Riba’ and that the sin for the lowest level is equivalent to the sin of sexual intercourse with one’s own parent. He agreed and said that this is actually one of the sayings (hadith) of the Prophet Muhammad. I was flabbergasted. There I had before me a religious man. He was preaching to me and saying that the present secular system of government has to be rejected in favour of an Islamic system. He blames the ills facing this nation on the fact that we have turned our backs on Islam and chose instead a western secular system over the Islamic system as prescribed by the Prophet Muhammad. But corruption is O.K, he argued.

If even just one Muslim were to leave Islam and become a Hindu, Christian or Buddhist, then it is the duty of all Muslims to violently oppose this. Apostasy is forbidden and the prescribed punishment is death. And Muslims must run riot on the streets and burn buildings and kill people if anyone tries to leave Islam. No Muslim worth his salt will disagree with this. This is not violence, this is not extremism, this is not a threat to national security; this is defending the dignity of Islam. But if you march peacefully to the Agong’s palace or to Parliament to hand over a Memorandum, this is not allowed. The police must arrest you, beat you up, and the leaders or organisers must be detained without trial under the Internal Security Act. This is what Islam asks us to do and is mandatory. Ask any Malay-Muslim leader. Ask any imam in the mosque. Ask any Mufti. Ask any Religious Department official. Ask anyone from Pusat Islam. None will disagree that the peaceful marchers need to be dealt with harshly and detained without trial under the Internal Security Act. And none of these same people will disagree that apostates need to be dealt with harshly and rioting, and burning buildings, and killing people are necessary in defending the dignity of Islam.

Most of the police are Muslims, but they act violently towards peaceful marchers. Most of the government leaders are Muslims, but they act harshly towards peaceful marchers. And they say that they do this to preserve the peace, which is required by Islam. But if you ‘insult’ Islam or try to become an apostate, then you must accept the violent punishment. And this is not violence or harsh or a threat to national security. This is defending the dignity of Islam. And corruption is O.K. Cheating in the elections is O.K. Abuse of power and authority is O.K. Wastage of public funds is O.K. Denying you your fundamental rights is O.K. Using the mainstream media to lie is okay. Threatening the non-Malays is O.K. Persecution is O.K. Detention without trial is O.K. Assaulting detainees under police custody is O.K. Just do not insult Islam or try to leave Islam. That is not O.K and the use of violence to oppose this is also O.K.

I see religious people and I see bad people. I see non religious people and atheists and I see good people. How can religion be good if religious people are bad? How can religion be from God if the product of religion is bad people? Yes, that is what troubles me this third phase of the 27 years of my life. The more people pray, the worse they become. People who never pray are wonderful people. How can this be? Police officers pray. Government leaders pray. But they are terrible people. There must be something terribly wrong with praying. Is religion merely a scam? How can religion be right when those who profess religion are so wrong?

Sure, I have heard the old argument time and time again. There is nothing wrong with religion. It is the people who are wrong for not following what the religion really teaches us. But why? That still does not explain it. Why is it people who are religious become so bad? Is religion not supposed to guide us to become good? If religion has failed to turn us into good people then surely religion and not people is what is wrong. There is another old saying: there is no such thing as bad students, only bad teachers. If students turn out bad then the teacher has to be blamed. In that case, would not this same argument apply? If religion has failed to educate us then the teacher and not the student has to be blamed.

*Sigh* The third phase of my life, the third 27 years, is going to be very traumatic indeed. The first 27 years were easy. I just enjoyed my life. I lived for today and to hell with tomorrow. The second 27 years were also very satisfying. I lived for my religion. Everything I did I did for Islam. But this third 27 years is going to be an endless journey for me. And I may never reach my destination because I am not confident I will live another 27 years. I need to find out whether religions really exist or whether they are mere human inventions and old wives tales. Fruit from a poisonous tree will always be poisonous. It can never be any other way. And the fruit from a good religion must certainly be goodness. It can never be any other way. But that does not seem to be what is happening here.

Today, we are told that Muslims support detention without trial. Today, we are told that 1.5 million Malays from 395 Malay NGOs support the government in its use of the Internal Security Act against peaceful marchers. Many are angry that those 31 from HINDRAF are not going to be tried for attempted murder after all. They want blood. They want the blood of the BERSIH and HINDRAF marchers. They want the blood of those who merely exercised their God-given right of free expression.

These 1.5 million Malays are followers of a good religion. They say only Islam is good, all other religions are bad. And those with no religion whatsoever or atheists are even worse. But these people from the good religion want the government to do bad things. That is what troubles me to no end. How can a good religion make people want to be bad?

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

MCA the real racists ?

Posted by singamaraja

MCA president Chua Soi Lek today defended his statements calling for SUPP to reject posts in the Sarawak cabinet, saying he would do the same should they fare badly in the next general election.

“Should the MCA suffer the same fate, as in the 2008 polls, in the next general election, the MCA central committee will then have to deliberate on its position in the federal and state government,” he said in a statement.

chua soi lek supp ceramah 120411Chua (left) was responding to DAP's criticism that the MCA president was hypocritical for making the call to SUPP over the latter's dismal showing at last week's state election.

DAP secretary general Lim Guan Eng and party veteran Lim Kit Siang had pointed out that although MCA and Gerakan both fared just as miserably in the 2008 general election, their members had still accepted senate and cabinet posts.

The MCA president sidestepped the criticism saying he was not president at the time.

“As regards to the decision of the MCA to take up government posts after the 2008 general election despite the setback suffered by the MCA, I wish to reiterate that it was not my call. I was then not the party president,” said Chua.

“Similarly, I am not in a position to comment on the position of Perak exco member Mah Hang Soon. I cannot comment on a decision that has been decided by my predecessor,” he added.

kuching grand finale 150411 bird stageMCA only managed to get one state seat in Perak in the 2008 elections.

While returning barbs with his arch rival DAP over who was legitimately the racist party, Chua also maintained his stand on SUPP.

“...SUPP should respect the views of the Chinese community and not be a part of the Sarawak state government. If SUPP wishes to take up any state government positions, it should be represented by its Dayak ADUN in the state government,” he said.

Kok: MCA the real racists

Meanwhile DAP Seputeh MP Teresa Kok lashed out at MCA deputy president Liow Tiong Lai for dismissing DAP's election results as a result of “racial politics”.

NONE“So deeply entrenched is ... Liow Tiong Lai in Barisan Nasional's (BN) racial rhetoric that he aped Dr Mahathir in blaming the resounding defeat of SUPP leaders in the recent Sarawak state elections upon racial politics by DAP,” said Kok (left) in a statement.

Stressing that DAP's campaign had centred not on race but Sarawak CM Taib Mahmud, Kok said, “It is BN who has been turning a blind eye to the obscene accumulation of wealth by Taib Mahmud through corrupt means while the people of Sarawak continued to live in abject poverty.”

Kok defended DAP as a multiracial party that had fielded an Iban candidate and had non-Chinese in their party, and pointed out that MCA's own constitution clearly limits the BN party's membership to the Chinese, as a point of hypocrisy.

She added that DAP's criteria for candidates was merit, not race.

NONE“Furthermore, many of the seats won by DAP in the Sarawak state election could not have been won on Chinese votes alone, particularly Kidurong, Meradong, and Dudong. In Meradong for example, DAP received a simple majority of 51 perecnt of the Iban votes.

"In Batu Kawah, DAP received substantial votes from the Malay-Melanau community,” said Kok, who is also Selangor senior exco.

“Thus, Liow's implication that Sarawak voters voted according to racial lines is not only false, it is also extremely insulting to the people of Sarawak.

“Thus, I urge Liow Tiong Lai to lead MCA to abandon racial politics and instead, examine his conscience and study the failings of BN which led Sarawak voters to oust SUPP instead of maligning DAP with false accusations best directed at MCA itself,” said Kok.

Posted by singamaraja

Building Malaysia in London

IS the Federal Constitution secular or Islamic? Are the prime minister’s New Economic Model and Government Transformation Programme all they are cracked up to be? And what about corruption in Malaysia? Big questions, these, with discussions amongst politicians often ending up bitter, polemical and unyielding. Not to mention the name-calling, character assassinations and government muzzling of critical individuals and organisations.

PAN logo

PAN logo (all pics courtesy of UKEC)

Therefore, it was with great curiosity and slight apprehension that I accepted an invitation to speak at the United Kingdom and Eire Council of Malaysian Students (UKEC)’s Projek Amanat Negara (PAN). Held in London, PAN aims to “spur intellectual discourse amongst Malaysian youth studying in the United Kingdom and Ireland”. Thus, on 9 Apr 2011, I walked into the halls of Limkokwing University of Creative Technology in Green Park at 8am to be greeted by an army of bright-faced Malaysian students in business suits.

How would the students fare when discussing the “big issues” of our nation? I must confess that during my own undergraduate days in Melbourne, Australia in the late 1990s, it was, shall we say, difficult to drag me to any conference of Malaysian students. Not so with PAN. PAN (and UKEC) confirmed that my excitement and optimism about Malaysia and Malaysians are justified, albeit with a need for more empirical confirmation. Let me explain.

Pan-Malaysian solidarity


Dzulkefly Ahmad

First of all, how could I not love a group of bubbly young Malaysian students who took such pains to organise a day-long conference as their commitment to nation-building? And this was not some Biro Tatanegara-type camp. This was a conference explicitly discussing whether the Federal Constitution is secular or Islamic, where the country’s economy is headed, and what to expect in the next general election. And UKEC invited the likes of PAS’s Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, former Kedah Menteri Besar and Umno vice president Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, former de facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, and human rights activist Edmund Bon of LoyarBurok and MyConstitution fame to share their candid views.

Sure, these discussions did get tense, not least because of the presence of a few older, critical Malaysian migrants to London who locked horns with a few speakers. But my commentary is not concerned with them. What I found remarkable throughout this event was how younger Malaysians, students all, listened calmly to all the ideas being discussed, and then asked pointed and critical questions of their own.

Edmund Bon (left) with Tai Zee How

Edmund Bon (left) with Tai Zee How

And for Malaysians who advocate an inclusive Malaysia that embraces diversity, the UKEC, which represents over 6,500 Malaysian students, provides an encouraging model of participation and leadership. The names of UKEC’s office bearers embody the functioning diversity of the group — the chairperson is a Farquar Haqqani, his deputy is a Tai Zee How, one of their vice-presidents is a Roshan Mark Singh Sidhu, and the editor of their magazine is a Natasha Su Sivarajah. Aren’t these wonderfully Malaysian names? Besides, I could also detect ideological diversity among the students there, which is noteworthy.

To check whether this was diversity imposed from the top down, I tried to hang out in the hallways and listen to conversations in between sessions. I also made it a point to lepak with the student organisers after the conference. The young men and women I hung out with were not only comfortable being Malaysian, with the delicious elasticity and ambiguity that the concept entails, but they were also hilarious. They had a sense of humour, and if we want to see sustainable change in Malaysia, I believe we also need to be able to laugh with each other good-naturedly.

Broken sociological record

Why am I so excited about a bunch of urban, elite young Malaysians, you might ask? That’s a valid question – most of the current UKEC bunch consists of bright young things who are studying under impressive state and corporate scholarships. How representative are they of general trends in Malaysian society? But can we define what “representative” means? Or you might ask, will they not eventually get co-opted by The System? My question is: can we define “co-optation” and “The System”?

Temple from Brickfields

Hindu temple (© Lainie Yeoh)

See, the issues of such sombre and current importance in Malaysia have been there for at least the past four decades. Back in 1976, social scientist Daniel Regan was already hinting, through empirical research, that race and religion would only become more politicised in post-independence Malaysia. Anthropologist Prof (Emeritus) Judith Nagata corroborated Regan’s observations in 1980, observing for instance that Hindu temples were being attacked in West Malaysia in the late 1970s by advocates of a certain brand of Islamism.

So, the tensions we are seeing in Malaysia now with regard to authoritarian government and racial and religious tensions are not exactly new. What is arguably new is the emergence of voluntary organisations composed of a young and diverse assembly of Malaysians, such as UKEC. As Regan observed in 1976, “Mixed or integrated societies [in Malaysia] are scarce, and those that exist are less stable than those formed along strict religio-ethnic lines.” This is one of the reasons why he was not optimistic that trans-religious and trans-ethnic solidarities could organically emerge in Malaysian society. Thirty-five years on, I wonder if I have caught a glimmer of exactly the kind of trans-religious and trans-ethnic relationships that eluded Regan’s findings.

Measured optimism

Of course, I admit that this is hardly evidence of a revolution in the making. Besides, there are issues that UKEC needs to work out as well. For example, how is it going to grow women leaders within its ranks, and how is it going to ensure gender balance among its panel speakers in the future? How is it going to create connections with other Malaysian students back in Malaysia or in other countries? However, based not only on PAN as it was officially presented and documented, but also on the sorts of informal interactions and relationships I observed, I have faith.

PAN organising committee

PAN's organising committee

My faith does not rest on UKEC alone — let’s not endow it with messianic and millenialist powers it does not and should not have. What I mean to say is I’ve seen these dynamics before among other configurations of younger Malaysians. However, my examples must remain merely anecdotal for now. Furthermore, some of us who have observed these dynamics where diversity was celebrated, might have thought they were one-off or inconsequential. And who could blame us for thinking these are isolated and inconsequential moments when the news headlines and political blog posts are often so depressing and bitter?

Here’s the thing, though: depressing news is important. It forces us to reckon with the journey Malaysia needs to take to become a truly just and democratic society. But if we fixate only on the depressing and allow ourselves to become embittered, we miss out on other interesting and hopeful developments that, frankly, are not headline material, such as UKEC’s PAN event. These are no less important developments, because they tell us that the nation can be built and continues getting built regardless of an environment of enduringly rubbish

Why don't the police investigate the matther ?

Posted by singamaraja

The events and personalities featured here are purely fictional and any resemblance to person or persons dead, alive, or about to die, is purely coincidental.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Why don’t the police investigate the matter? A police report has already been made. What is holding them back? Investigate lah! If this involved someone from the opposition, they would have immediately investigated the matter. And they would have needed only one week to complete the investigation and then would have taken action straight away. The police are full of bullshit. Cannot be trusted.

But they just announced this morning that they are launching an investigation.

Aiyah, don’t trust them lah! They will not really investigate the matter. They are just main wayang because a police report has been made. I bet you the investigation will come to nothing and they will announce that no crime has been committed. If this involved someone from the opposition, they would say there is enough evidence to take action. Now they will say there is no evidence of any crime having been committed. The police are full of bullshit. Cannot be trusted.

Aiyah, the only reason why DAP make a big issue out of this is because Teoh Beng Hock is Chinese and an opposition man. If he were Malay or not an opposition man you think DAP cares? They would not bother about the death. DAP is a racist and opportunist party. They are just politicising the issue, playing up the Chinese sentiments. Not sincere lah! Ini semua issue Cina. Bullshit lah these DAP people.

Aiyah, the only reason why DAP make a big issue out of this is because Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed is Malay so they want to show that the party is multi-racial and also fights for the Malays. They want to make it seem like DAP is fighting for justice and not only for the Chinese. This is their opportunity to play up Sarbani’s death. Now they can say even Malays who are killed in MACC’s office gets DAP’s attention. This is just politics lah! DAP is not really sincere about fighting for Malays. They just want to exploit Sarbani’s death for political gain. Bullshit lah these DAP people.

Why they bar Malaysiakini from covering the press conference? Say got freedom of speech in Malaysia. Where got freedom of speech? Talk only lah! When Malaysiakini wants to cover the press conference they will not allow. They are actually scared that Malaysiakini will ask the Minister tough questions that he cannot answer. They got something to hide. That’s why they are scared of letting Malaysiakini cover the press conference. They know that if Malaysiakini asks sensitive questions they cannot reply. Reply also die, don’t reply also die. So better just bar Malaysiakini from the press conference. Hah! No respect for freedom of the media. All bullshit one! Just because Malaysiakini is opposition media they bully them.

Why talk to TV3? TV3 is government-owned media. TV3 cannot be trusted. They will surely spin the story the wrong way. Next time, just boycott TV3. Don’t talk to them. If they want to talk to you or want to interview you just tell them to go to hell. TV3 should be banned from all opposition events. If not they will distort the news. Bastards! Only stupid people talk to TV3.

Why don’t Anwar contest for the party post? What bullshit is the? Ketua Umum konon. Podah! If you want to become the party leader then contest lah. Why so scared of contesting? Defacto leader is bullshit. More like illegitimate leader. Who voted for him? No one. Want to become the party leader then contest lah! All bullshit!

Why challenge Anwar for the party leadership? Why so impatient? Wait lah a few years. Anwar just took over. Pakatan has not even won the elections yet. If you contest now it will create a split in the party. That will jeopardise Pakatan’s chances for the next election. I think he is a Trojan horse. He is paid by Umno to cause trouble in the party. The party should kick him out. People like this are not welcome in the party. I guarantee you he has been bought off. Must have been paid a few million.