Showing posts with label Nation - Race Religion NEP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nation - Race Religion NEP. Show all posts

Sunday, May 16, 2010

Muslims protest gambling. Non-Muslims protest polygamy.

Shouldn't the abolition of the immoral and family-breaking practice of gambling be matched by the abolition of the equally immoral and home-breaking practice of polygamy?

Malaysia Islamists protest gambling, rapper Pitbull
Written by Razak Ahmad
Friday, 14 May 2010 17:59

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian police broke up a protest by Islamists on Friday, May 14 against US rapper Pitbull's concert and the government award of a sports betting licence, underscoring a deepening tide of Islam in the country.

About 300 Malay Muslims representing several groups led by the opposition Pan Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) gathered in the compound of a mosque in the capital's Malay enclave after Friday prayers to denounce gambling and pop concerts.

The government recently approved a sports betting licence to a company set to be majority controlled by property-to-gaming group Berjaya Corp Bhd.

Pitbull is scheduled to perform at a dance music festival in the country on Saturday.

The concert and gambling licence are unrelated, but a PAS official said the protest was part of an ongoing awareness campaign against "immorality" in the country.

"We must act before gambling floods our country," PAS official Kamaruzaman Mohamad told the crowd. "Gambling is a cancer in our society."

Malaysia forbids its majority Muslims from gambling but allows licensed numbers forecast operations and a casino operated by Genting Group.

Condemning the US rapper whose recent hits include "I Know You Want Me," Kamaruzaman said Pitbull was not welcome.

"It's bad enough that he is named after a dog, but if you watch his video clip on Youtube, his performance and lyrics are against Malaysian cultural norms," said Kamaruzaman.

Demonstrators carried placards with the words "Malaysia is not a gambling nation", and chanted, "God is Greatest". Police moved in to disperse the crowd but made no arrests.

The protests highlight the occasional clash between modern and conservative Islam in this mainly Muslim but multi-ethnic Southeast Asian country.

PAS is part of a group led by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim which made record gains in the 2008 national elections.

It competes with Prime Minster Najib Razak's Umno for the critical Malay vote. Malays form 55% of the country's 28 million population.

Both parties often tout their Islamic credentials and the deepening conservatism saw ethno-religious tensions rise due to a row over the use of the word "Allah" by Christians to describe God. — Reuters

Saturday, April 03, 2010

Real Bumiputras need help. False ones want special rights & privileges.

Read this. Isn't this what any affirmative action should be targeting? Rather than ensuring rich Malay businessmen get more govt contracts, govt land or making sure millionaire Malays get big discounts when buying bungalows?

How Ketuanan Melayu has dispossessed the Orang Asli
Fri, 02 Apr 2010 22:30

By Dr Boo Cheng Hau & Helen Ang

Malaysia is the Asia-Pacific’s “best model” in dealing with the rights of indigenous peoples – or so it is claimed. Last Saturday (incidentally the same day Dr Mahathir Mohamad launched the Perkasa inaugural congress), BN MP Makcus Mojigoh said, in his paper presented at a regional conference, that the government is serious about the plight of the Orang Asli.

Really? The Orang Asli don’t think so.

Mojigoh’s comments follow on the heels of the march by more than 2,000 Orang Asli from all over the country earlier on the 17th of this month in Putrajaya. They had gathered to demand recognition of their customary rights to ancestral land – “Tanah kami, maruah kami” was the rallying cry.

The protest is not surprising as the Orang Asli have increasingly been pushed to the margins by Ketuanan Melayu – since the infamous 'Malay Dilemma' of Mahathir and long before that.

Mahathir argued in his 1970 book that the Orang Asli are not the definitive people of the peninsular as they did not form the first effective government, and moreover “at no time did they outnumber the Malays”.

Furthermore, he brushed off the notion that Orang Asli might have prior claims above “the right of the Malays to regard the Malay peninsula as their own country...” and cited his own reading of history to bolster the Malay contention.

Today, learning from school textbooks, pupils would be left with the impression that Malaysian history started from the Malaccan Sultanate, and that before the conversion to Islam of the prince Parameswara, the country was some kind of no-man’s land.

The Malay Dilemma also contended that “in fact, there are no more than a few thousand aborigines”. Contrary to Mahathir’s assertion rubbishing their numbers, in 1969 there were 52,943 Orang Asli.

Orang Asli are not a single ethnic group but collectively composed of 18 (official) tribes. The biggest grouping is classed Senoi, who are the Semai, Temiar, Jah Hut, Che Wong, Mah Meri and Semoq Beri tribes, while two other groupings are Negrito and proto-Malay. All are indigenous people.

Similar to apartheid

According to historians, Orang Asli had been victims of the slave trade by the Malays and Bataks. Despite official denials of slavery, Orang Asli oral literature has indeed recorded slave raids. The English colonial official JWW Birch had documented their enslavement since as early as 1874.


...one fact remains the same for all Orang Asli: they are the descendants of the earliest inhabitants of the peninsula.

Totalling some 147,500 persons in 2003, Orang Asli comprise about 0.6 percent of the population, and are disenfranchised on many counts.

Commenting on the demonstration in Putrajaya, Suhakam vice-chairman Simon Sipaun said: “It is expected that the Orang Asli community would protest as they have been marginalised in a system similar to apartheid”.

Previously in South Africa, the white Afrikaner nationalists used an ideology almost identical to that propounded by Mahathir to justify their own indigenous status above the black Khoisan, whom according to the white supremacists, had never established a ‘civilised government’.

If one were to look at Article 153 of our federal constitution, it says that the ‘special position’ is extended only to Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak. Omitting mention of the Orang Asli in the said article excludes them from the guarantee of quotas.

[But] ‘We are not Malays, we will always be Orang Asli’ – declare the placards hoisted in Putrajaya on March 17. How then?

‘Refugees’ in own country

Not too long ago on Feb 24, a group of Orang Asli held a demonstration outside the Orang Asli Affairs Department (JHEOA) hospital in Gombak. Speaking to reporters, their spokesman Sokyen Man said the hospital is dominated by non-Orang Asli who are incapable of fulfilling the needs of the community.

The group submitted a petition against the hospital which said, among other things: “A lot of us have faced medical staff who are uncomfortable with the Orang Asli. Sometimes, they pass comments on our features and skin colour.” This particular complaint infers that they are considered an ‘out group’ or ‘inferior group’ (implied by the derogatory connotations of ‘sakai’) by the mainstream.

The term ‘Orang Asli’ was first used by the post-Independence federal government and means ‘the original people’. Colin Nicholas of the Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC) notes, “one fact remains the same for all Orang Asli: they are the descendants of the earliest inhabitants of the peninsula.”

It is they whose fate could well be equated with that of aborigines in Australia, Maoris in New Zealand and Native Americans in the United States. This is a more compelling comparison than Utusan Malaysia’s constant, tiresome refrain that Malays are like Palestinians in their own homeland.

It is the Orang Asli who are akin to displaced refugees!

Most destitute group

Going by any socio-economic indicator, the Orang Asli are the worst off among all the local ethnic groups. About half live below the poverty line – according to the government’s most recent statistics. Relative to the other races, their children are malnourished and have high infant mortality rate; and Orang Asli have a lower life expectancy.

A bitter irony is that the authorities insist on perpetuating the myth that Orang Asli are ‘nomadic’. According to Robert Dentan, most of the Orang Asli have in fact settled in stable lifestyles although a small number remain semi-nomadic.

There are about 870 Orang Asli settlements (as at December 2003) mainly in Pahang, Perak and Kelantan. More than 500 of these villages are considered to be located in the fringe and 323 in the interior. About 400 villages are categorized as ‘backward’.

If at all Orang Asli can be regarded as nomadic foragers roaming in the forest or “tanah rayau” – a dismissive phraseology adopted by the government – it is this very government that is forcing them to move from place to place.

The Temuans in Sepang and Bangi had their land taken from them to build KLIA and UKM respectively. In Stulang Laut in Johor, the Orang Seletar were relocated to make way for a commercial and customs complex.

The “regroupment” – an euphemistic official doublespeak – of Orang Asli settlements has resulted in even their resettlements again giving way to logging, mining concessions, highway projects, industrial parks and golf courses.

National Land Act

The federal government expects to table amendments to the National Land Act in Parliament by June. It is learned that the new legislation will give the Orang Asli only 50,000 hectares of the 128,000-ha land they live on, which ultimately amounts to “a policy of planned poverty”.

The Bar Council has recommended the following legal measures on the Orang Asli land issues to empower the community:

1. the issuance of individual land titles to every indigenous family;
2. the gazetting of communal land parcels by the state governments under Section 62 of the National Land Code 1965;
3. the gazetting of communal land parcels under the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 with perpetual and unlimited foraging rights extending beyond the gazetted communal land parcels; and
4. in exceptional cases of certain semi-nomadic indigenous communities, who are the most vulnerable of indigenous peoples, perpetual and unlimited foraging rights (with concomitant and greater opportunities for education and vocational training towards sustaining their livelihood).

The authorities tend to take a narrow reading of the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (revised 1974) and regard the Orang Asli’s rights to their land as being one of ‘tenant-at-will’. And that their right to remain in a particular area is at the pleasure of the state authority which can, if it so wishes, remove the Orang Asli from their lands without having to pay compensation for it.

The courts, especially in the Sagong Tasi case, have however deemed such thinking as archaic and unconstitutional. The Orang Asli do exercise native title rights over their traditional lands under common law. But it appears the government is not about to accept this legal precedent.

Writing in Aliran, Yogeswaran Subramaniam observes, “If past records are anything to go by, the states’ performance for gazetting Orang Asli reserves has been nothing short of dismal”.

Changing the face of Orang Asli

The policy that the government is now putting on the table does not recognise customary lands but instead proposes to change the face of Orang Asli land into plantations.

Orang Asli who accept the government’s deal offering 50,000 ha (amounting to just over one hectare per household and with no forests) will not be able to bring any claims later to the courts for customary lands or loss of such lands.

The Aliran article calculated that even assuming Orang Asli want to operate oil palm smallholdings at one hectare, each household will only be able to produce around 15 tonnes annually.

The cash crop sold at RM500 a tonne would bring net earnings of RM5,000 a year, or average income of just over RM400 a month – a poverty level income!

The Orang Asli are a vulnerable minority who have been physically removed from their traditional source of livelihood in the forests. Government coercion has additionally caused the erosion of their traditions, customs and values – and its attendant side-effect of mental stress.

They did not venture to the swanky Putrajaya for “school-holiday sightseeing” as gibed by the condescending Rural Development Minister Shafie Apdal. The Orang Asli descended on the administrative capital because the community has reached a crisis level.

Related stories:

Orang Asli in protest march over land rights

1Malaysia - politics first, people later

Dr Boo Cheng Hau is the Johor DAP chairman and the state assemblyman for Skudai while Helen Ang is an online media columnist. This article first appeared at the Centre For Policy Initiatives' website.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Non-malays don't join army because they are undisciplined cowards.

Why non-Malays don't join the army:

- they don't like discipline
- they don't like the potential need to sacrifice their lives.

Really???

And here I was... thinking it was due to rampant discrimination. Apparently, it's because they're undisciplined cowards.

Here's a thought... let the non-Malays hold the guns for a change. I reckon they'll show you just who the cowards are.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

JAIS on Valentine's Day. More sexual abuse & necromancy?

Based on the other stuff JAIS is known for, no good can come from their "prowling" on Valentine's Day.

- sexual abuse (videotaping naked girls during raids)
- necromancy (snatching dead bodies away from grieving families)

A word of advice if any non-Muslims are harassed by them.

1. They have NO AUTHORITY OVER NON-MUSLIMS.
2. So, if they accost you in any way, you can treat them as robbers or attackers. You can punch them, kick them, stab them, or if you have a gun, shoot them in self defence. A hotel fork in the eye of one of those turbaned idiots would garner you a personal note of appreciation from me.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

ASB vs ASW2020. 28% difference!

I always wondered exactly how much more dividend ASB (Amanah Saham Bumiputra) pays compared to the other PNB (Permodalan Nasional) funds that are open to non-bumis. As far as I can tell, the best performing fund that's not exclusive to the bumis is ASW2020.

It seems that ASB has returned an average of 9.55% over the last 10 years (1999-2009), while ASW2020 has returned an average of 7.48%.

The average difference of 2.07% is significant. It is 28% more. PNB has always said that the difference in performance is due to the difference in portfolio composition (types and mix of assets) and risk-return balance between the 2 funds. However since both funds are capital guaranteed, then I have to ask... how come PNB doesn't invest ASW2020 into the same portfolio composition as ASB to extract the same returns?

And how exactly does PNB guarantee the capital for both funds when their risk-return profiles are different? This means if ASB can be capital guaranteed with 9.55% return, why can't ASW2020? Why would ASW2020's portfolio, which is similarly capital guaranteed - only manage to return 7.48%? Why the disparity?

The real question in my mind is whether there is any cross-fund subsidisation of returns and/or capital guarantee from ASW2020 to ASB?

There are 2 other things that make ASB inequitably unfair compared to ASW2020.

1. ASW2020 caps the initial "fresh funds" investment of each individual at RM20,000 to 50,000. It has changed with every new issue over the years. ASB's cap is RM200,000 per individual.

If you look at it from a per capita citizen/investor point of view, an ASB investor would have earned an average 9.55% annually on RM200,000 in ASB. He would have pocketed RM19,100 per year or a total of RM191,000 over 10 years. With an initial investment of RM200,000, he has virtually doubled his money!

A non-bumi investor in ASW2020 would have earned an average of 7.48% annually on RM50,000 (lets say that's the cap). He would have earned RM3,740 per year or a total of RM37,400 over 10 years. Assuming he was allowed to invest RM200,000, his dividends would be RM14,960 per year or a total of RM149,600 over 10 years.

That is a difference of RM41,400... where has it gone?

In addition, the dividends can be left in the funds, to be reinvested. And they typically are. This differential will therefore be compounded exponentially year after year as the fund balance grows... ie. any cross-subsidisation gets larger and larger. So, while I have (for simplicity's sake on a hot Sunday afternoon) assumed a constant RM50,000 (for ASW2020) and RM200,000 (for ASB), the account balances involved are actually much, much larger due to the compounding effect of dividends reinvested in the funds.

2. Malaysian banks are compelled to offer financing or loans to people investing in ASB. Bumis can borrow up to their individual investment limit (ie. RM200,000) with nothing more their eventual ASB certificate as collateral.

RHB is offering ASB financing at a price of BLR-1.35%. In 2009, RHB's BLR was 5.55%. That simply means that in 2009, ASB investors were borrowing money with no personal undertaking required, at a cost of 4.25% in order to earn a dividend return of 8.55%.

Think about it. Supernormal returns above any other funds that PNB manages, without having to come up with any capital or take any risk due to available bank financing. That's a sweet, sweet deal for ASB investors.

In other words, money is simply being handed to them on a silver platter! Money that is being sucked out of PNB's non-ASB funds (like ASW2020, ASM, AS1Malaysia) and other bank borrowers.

Sources:
ASB dividend history: My Malaysia Stockfolio
ASW2020 dividend history: nutri for my soul
ASB financing info: RHB Bank
2009 BLR info: Meshio.com

Saturday, January 23, 2010

You don't know who your father is?!

This is a hilarious one. And here I was.., thinking that only the bastard children of prostitutes and sperm donors wouldn't know who their father was. Oh shoot... did I just imply that a whole bunch of people who have father issues are the bastard offspring of whores and test tubes?

AYAH CONTROVERSY: "Tell Your Children NOT to Call You AYAH"
Friday, January 22, 2010

The following story is being circulated in the Malaysian blogosphere and email network.

A man came home from work and his children ran to him and called out ‘AYAH! AYAH!’.

His neighbor got very upset and said to him, “Can you please tell YOUR children NOT to call YOU ‘AYAH'?”

The man asked, “Why?”

The neighbor retorted, “Because MY children call ME ’AYAH’ too. They might get confused and mistake YOU for their father.”

Then the man told his neighbour, "Are you not ashamed to say that your children do not know who is their ‘AYAH'. So you are saying by using the word ‘AYAH’, your children will call me "AYAH" too without knowing who is their father."

The neighbour said, "YES, ONLY I should use the word ‘AYAH".

The man said, "Then there is something wrong in what you are teaching your children. They are NOT sure and do NOT know who is their ‘AYAH’!"

Posted by Malaysian Unplug

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Dear Malaysia... it's time for sayang sayang

These are unprecedented times of communal strife n Malaysia. Yet hope and promise, in their myriad disguises, never stop trying to manifest themselves in our daily lives. There will be no heavy commentary today, no "in your face" racial rebuttal or religious rejoinder.

I'm just going to share one of my favourite songs ever. Every time I listen to it, I really feel it somehow describes us... what we are, our difficult journey, that hope beckons and what we must do as a nation. It seems to understand that the fates and fortunes of all Malaysians are joined, that we either swim together or we shall sink together. That the only way to succeed is with one hand firmly in the other.

Ladies and gentlemen, fellow Malaysians, now more than ever... it's time for a little lovin'... it's time for sayang sayang.



There seems so many things that lie before us
There's just so many things we want to do
But let's just stop and pause
For just a moment 'cos
We should do something special, me and you

It's time for sayang sayang
It's time for sayang sayang
Caring for one another, family and friends

It's time for sayang sayang
It's time for sayang sayang
As we go walking together, hand in hand

The time that we all love is here to treasure
A very special time of the year
These days are sure to find
These days are yours and mine
We'll share them with the ones we hold so dear

It's time for sayang sayang
It's time for sayang sayang
Caring for one another, family and friends

It's time for sayang sayang
It's time for sayang sayang
As we go walking together, hand in hand
As we go walking together, hand in hand...

Title: It's Time for Sayang Sayang.
Music: John Lee
Lyrics: Alvin Oon, John Lee & Tan Kheng Hua
Performed by: John Lee & Tan Kheng Hua

Monday, January 11, 2010

S'pore's top O-Level student this year is M'sian. So was last year's.

Here's one more for the brain drain. No prizes for guessing that she's not going to come back... since she's got a bond-free scholarship and all. She heard about her school from another Malaysian student there... also a top student. And her brother's also in Singapore... also on scholarship.

YES, pour more money into the single race residential schools, matriculation schools, MARA and ITM. That'll show Lee Kuan Yew who's boss.

Top girl not keen on S'pore

THIS year's top O-level student Lai Kai Rou, who is from Selangor in Malaysia, was initially averse to the idea of studying in Singapore.

This was because she was not confident about living away from home.

But she changed her mind after hearing the praises fellow Malaysian students sang of CHIJ St. Nicholas Girls' School (SNGS). One of them was last year's top 0-level student Haw Sue Hern, who also scored 10 A1s.

'My seniors told me about the holistic education in St Nicholas. They said we will be exposed to much more co-curricular activities as compared to schools in Malaysia. I felt it felt it was a good opportunity to be exposed to different things and to learn how to be independent,' said Kai Rou,

She is on a bond-free scholarship from SNGS and stays at the Hwa Chong Insitution (HCI) hostel. She has a younger brother, a secondary two student in HCI, who is also also on scholarship.

St Nicholas turned in a glittering performance at last year's O-levels exams - 14 of the best performers in Singapore, including Kai Rou.

Hire your own vigilantes! Not enough police to guard churches & convent schools.

KUALA LUMPUR: Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan has advised churches to tighten security at their premises because there are not enough policemen to guard every one of them.

He suggested that churches raise their security by hiring guards. - The Star

I can't remember where I got this breakdown of police personnel numbers from. I think it's from one of the Opposition blogs. So, don't quote me on accuracy.

But if this is anywhere near the truth, then why do you need 38% of your people in "management" (ie. 1 manager for every 2 policemen)?

And what are the 40,608 Internal Security personnel doing now, besides protecting politicians and in the case of the FRU, staying in their barracks until the next Opposition candlelight vigil?

There are not enough police?

Saturday, January 09, 2010

"Allah' in state anthems forces non-Muslims to open a can of whup-ass.

Just read on the The Sensintrovert blog that the word 'Allah' appears all over the state anthems of several states. Good catch. I didn't think of it. But now that I have... jeng jeng jeng [cue epic biblical music].

If 'Allah' means the god of Muslims only, then I don't want to sing about somebody else's god. By default, it is not the true god because it is not my god. So, I don't want to commit a grievous sin by singing about a false god. In fact, I don't want it to be sung at any functions or events that I'm attending because it disrespects me and it disrespects my god.

As the most pious representitive of the gods of the Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Punjabis dan lain-lain, I DEMAND IT. As the leader of the Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Punjabis dan lain-lain, I DEMAND IT.

NOW... DON'T CABAR ME! Don't make me firebomb your house of worship and drag the head of livestock through the streets! I don't want to, but you MENGHINA my BANGSA and AGAMA. Don't CABAR my MARUAH and the KEDAULATAN of my AGAMA. Don't provoke a SENSITIVE and EMOTIONAL issue. Don't make me open a can of ULANGKAN January 8 on your ass!

Wait... hang on... where have I heard all this before? It sounds SO stupid, yet so familiar...

Ban These Songs Already!
Wednesday, January 06, 2010

Coz kafir students sing them at assemblies every week.

Johor Darul Takzim

Allah peliharakan Sultan
'Nugrahkan Dia segala kehormatan
Sehat dan ria, kekal dan makmur
Luaskan kuasa, menaungkan kami
Rakyat dipimpini berzaman lagi
Dengan Merdeka bersatu hati
Allah berkati Johor
Allah selamatkan Sultan

Selangor Darul Ehsan

Duli Yang Maha Mulia
Selamat di atas takhta
Allah lanjutkan usia Tuanku
Rakyat mohon restu
Bawah Duli Tuanku
Bahagia selama-lamanya
Aman dan sentosa
Duli Yang Maha Mulia

Terengganu Darul Iman

Allah peliharakan Raja kami
Memerintah Terengganu Negeri
Allah pelihara Raja kami
Sejahtera suami isteri
Allah pelihara Raja kami
Sejahtera rakyat Negeri

Pahang Darul Makmur

Ya Allah yang Maha Kuasa
Lanjutkan usia Duli Yang Maha Mulia
Dirgahayu Darul Makmur
Aman dan bahagia sentiasa abadi
Ya Allah selamatkan kebawah Duli Raja kami

Perak Darul Ridzuan

Dilanjutkan Allah usianya Sultan
Adil dan makmur memerintah watan
Ditaati rakyat kiri dan kanan
Iman yang soleh Allah kurniakan
Allah berkati Perak Ridzuan
Allah selamatkan Negeri dan Sultan

Kedah Darul Aman

Allah selamatkan Sultan Mahkota
Berpanjangan usia di atas Takhta
Memelihara ugama Nabi kita
Negeri Kedah serata-rata
Selamat Sultan Kelantan Darul Naim
Lanjutkan usia Sultan kami
Sultan Kelantan Raja ikrami
Aman sentosa Tuhan sirami
Berkekalan masa memerintah kami
Kasih dan taat disembahkan
Sepenuh keriangan patek ucapkan
Segala kebesaran Allah cucurkan
Darjah kemuliaan Allah tambahkan

Friday, January 08, 2010

Good Muslims should expel the church bombers from Islam

Everybody seems to have roundly condemned the firebomb attacks on the churches in Selangor. That's all very nice. Strongly worded condemnations are great for quotes in newspapers and sound awesome when it's played on air during the 8pm news. It really sounded like KJ, The Jib, Hisap and the IGP (Invincible Gangster Polis) really meant what they said and are going to do something about it.

The problem is that mere condemnation simply doesn't work. You can condemn all you want, but as the saying goes "sticks and stones may break their bones, but words can't hurt them". How on earth can harsh words be effective when these psychos think they are either doing the work demanded by god or by UMNO (who's almost like god)?

In this case, even sticks and stones won't work. Those who are driven by god will bear the punishment with relish, like how that albino chap on Da Vinci's Code flagellated himself because that's what he thought god demanded. Those who are driven by UMNO will never be punished... period. They'll probably get a sorry ass Indian staff sergeant from the RMAF to be the scapegoat.

Therefore, when earthly punishments don't work, use spiritual ones. I recommend what good Muslims need to do is to expel these evil church-bombing Muslims from Islam. And conveniently for us, Malaysia is just about the only place where you can actually do it, since Islam and being Muslim is legislated and enforced. Just draft a law to formally expel people who commit violence in the name of Islam from the religion and get the Sultans/Agong and Jabatan Agama Islam to enforce it. Those who commit violence in god's name will lose their identity and purpose when they lose their religion. Those who commit violence in UMNO's name will lose their influence and religious credentials amongst the Muslim electorate. Hopefully, both will lose their will to live as a result.

In the words of Thomas L. Friedman in The New York Times...

"The leadership of Islam rarely take on jihadist actions and ideology openly with the kind of passion, consistency and mass protests that we have seen them do, for example, against Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad.

Every faith has its violent extreme. The West is not immune. It's all about how the centre deals with it. Does it tolerate it, isolate it or shame it?"
Good Muslims... less tolerating, more isolating and shaming please.

PM, other leaders condemn arson attacks (The Star)

PUTRAJAYA: Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has condemned the attacks made on three churches in the Klang Valley but has asked the public not to start pointing fingers at who may have been responsible for the attacks.

The Prime Minister said he viewed the matter seriously as these actions could jeopardise harmony, adding that the Government would take all possible action to prevent such incident from recurring.

At the same time, Najib had directed the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan to beef up security and surveillance at places of worship.

“We must not allow the peace and the understanding that we have among Malaysians of various ethnic backgrounds and faiths be threatened by anyone or any parties.
Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein and IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan at a press conference at Bukit Aman on Friday.

“As I have said before, whatever problems that arise, we must use the right channel and method to solve it. Our action must not be against the law as this can jeapordise harmony,” he told reporters after chairing the fourth Northern Corridor Implementation Authority (NCIA) on Friday.

Also present were Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Chief Secterary to the Government Tan Sri Sidek Hassan.

Najib also reminded the public not to point fingers on who the perpetrators behind the church attacks were but should allow the authorities to conduct a thorough investigation into the matter.

“Action will be taken against those responsible based on facts and the law,” he said.

Asked if there were fears of retaliation due to the incident, the Prime Minister said the authorities must nip the problem in the bud.

“I hope with statements and action taken by the police, people will not take law into their hands. The IGP will report to me on the incident once there are evidence and new developments,” he added.
Umno Youth head Khairy Jamaluddin at the Tabernacle Church in Desa Melawati on Friday

Other public figures have come out to condemn the arson attacks against the two churches.

Urging all parties to remain calm, they also asked for swift police action to ensure the situation does not get out of control.

In the meantime, the MCA is offering the Metro Tabernacle Church the use of its hall at Wisma MCA for its services this Sunday, vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen said.

The MCA, through its religious bureaus, will find an immediate place for the Metro Tabernacle to relocate, she said.

“This is the act of a very small group of Malaysians. We need to come together and work against any form of violence.
MCA vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen at the Metro Tabernacle Church in Desa Melawati on Friday.

“Do not leave it to the Government or the police alone; the rakyat (people) must come together and stand up for each other,” she said.

MCA national youth chairman Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong also condemned the attacks, saying the movement is saddened.

“Such despicable acts serve no purposes in bridging differences, and ... will ultimately destroy initiatives to help shore up harmony between the various faiths in Malaysia.

“MCA Youth urges all decent minded Malaysians not to let the mercury rise further, and pray in our own ways, that peace will prevail,” he said in a statement.

Kedah Gerakan’s youth wing condemned the acts as despicable and shameful, and described the wrongdoers as cowards trying to cause disunity.

“Our country had came a long way since independence in promoting unity among Malaysians, despite the differences in race and religion.

“As such, all Malaysians should unite to condemn these cowardly attacks that threaten national unity,” said the wing’s chief Tan Keng Liang.

“As an act of good faith in condemning the arson attacks, I hope that the Government would consider assisting, including financially, the churches in repairing the damage caused by the despicable act of arson,” he added.

Gerakan central committee member Dr Hsu Dar Ren described the arson as “a wanton attack on the freedom of practice of religions which we should all treasure and protect in this multiracial society of ours.”

“I hope politicians on both sides of the divide will refrain from fanning emotions and instead try their best to cool the temperature down and let the judicial process run its course,” he said.

Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim described the attacks as heinous and said such actions were against the teachings of Islam.

“Islam teaches its followers to respect the places of worship of other religions. I urge all parties to remain calm. I have full faith that Malaysians will be able to resolve the matter without any conflict,” he said in a statement.

Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, who was at the Assumption Church, condemned the attack, describing it as a cowardly act.

“I urge the police to give protection to all churches and conduct a thorough investigation on the attack on the Assumption Church,” he added.

Khalid also said that he was grateful to the church authorities, who had given their reassurance that they would not react to the arson attack.

“I appeal to the people in Selangor to refrain from any further such action, which will only cause further trouble for all people,” he added.

Umno Youth Chief Khairy Jamaluddin said it was a dark day for Malaysia.

"This is a despicable act. This is not the Malaysia I know," said Khairy, who visited the Metro Tabernacle Church in Desa Melawait in Kuala Lumpur, which was attacked by arsonists early Friday.

He urged the police to act swiftly.

Saying that Barisan Nasional Youth strongly condemned the action, Khairy Jamaluddin added that whatever the feelings of anyone on the issue of the usage of the word “Allah” in the Herald, the irresponsible action of those who destroy places of worship should not be defended by Muslims.

“If Muslims are responsible for this incident, they should be ashamed and remorseful because clearly Islam advises Muslims to respect other religious beliefs.

“Malaysia is a multiracial country. There will be arguments and misunderstandings over issues which touch on race and religion.

“What is important is the people should resolve any problems with maturity and respect for each other’s sensitivity,” he said in a statement.

Selangor PAS termed the arson attacks as cowardly acts.

“We view the news of the attacks on churches, including in Selangor, with sadness and regret. Such attacks have never happened in our country and they do not at all reflect our culture, tradition or the religious beliefs of Malaysians.

“Selangor PAS sympathises with the affected churches and urges all PAS members in the state to remain calm and patient and pray for the safety of all,” its state Information chief Roslan Shahir Mohd Shahir said in a statement.

The Muslim Professionals Forum described this as “the cowardly and utterly senseless act of a group of misguided, chauvinistic bigots.”

“This act of arson, committed presumably in the name of Islam, desecrates the very religion it purports to protect. The Holy Quran unequivocally prohibits destroying the houses of worship of all religions, as warned in Surah Al-Hajj, Verse 40,” its board of directors said in a statement.

“During the reign of Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second righteous caliph, the religious freedom of the citizens of Ilya (Jerusalem) and the sanctity of their synagogues and places of worship were confirmed, they said.

Muslim Professionals Forum urged the authorities to immediately conduct an impartial and thorough investigation to identify, apprehend and punish the perpetrators.

It also urge individuals, organisations and political parties to refrain from further issuing provocative and inflammatory statements related to the high court verdict.

“We also urge all Malaysians to empathise and stand in solidarity with our Christian community in their hour of grief and need, and urge all peace-loving Malaysians to maintain composure and let cool heads prevail,” they said in their statement.

Social activist Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir said it was very important for all Muslim Malaysians to condemn the act whole-heartedly.

"This is not what Islam is about. The leadership must play its role and come out and tell the people not to condemn houses of worship," she told reporters at the church site.

Veteran DAP leader Lim Kit Siang said all political party leaders should take a common stand to condemn the attacks.

They should condemn “in the strongest possible terms the spate of church attacks in the wake of the ‘Allah’ controversy and ensure that there is no further escalation.

“As Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should immediately impress on the Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to take all urgent and necessary measures to protect the good name of the country or be held responsible for any undesirable consequences,” he said.

Wangsa Maju Member of Parliament Wee Choo Keong said he was very shocked.

“The Prime Minister and Inspector-General of Police mus take immediate action to protect all places of worship regardless of their religion.

“We do not want to inflame the present tensions in the country or the country’s unity will be set back many years -- this is a test for the Prime Minister and his 1Malaysia vision,” he said.

In Miri, Sarawak political leaders condemned the attacks as well, callling for the swift restoration of common sense and wisdom to prevent any escalation of violence.

Senior Iban state leader Datuk Peter Nyarok Entrie said his party, the Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP), viewed the arson as an attack against the 1Malaysia concept and an attack against all peace-loving Malaysians.

“SPDP, a multiracial and multi-religious party that is made up of Muslims and non-Muslims, is shocked and saddened that the dispute over the use of the name ‘Allah’ in the peninsula had erupted into violence,” he said.

Nyarok, who is deputy president of SPDP, said there was a need to restore calm and order in the Klang Valley.

Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) president and state Minister Datuk Seri Dr James Masing said the issue should not have been blown out of proportion.

“Politicians should stay out of this matter and leave it to the religious bodies of the respective religions to sit down and discuss a mutually acceptable way to resolve this,” he said.

Masing said Sarawak and Sabah do not have such controversies because people of all faiths and races were mature enough to accept each others’ beliefs.

Assistant state minister Datuk Daud Abdul Rahman, from the Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu, also stressed the need for common sense to prevail, saying that the state government has always practised tolerance and acceptance when it comes to handling issues of religious and racial nature.

Keadilan Sarawak chairman Baru Bian said the usage of Allah’s name became blown out of context in the peninsula because of political meddling.

He said this is a non-issue in Sarawak despite the name being used widely by all religions in the state for so many decades.

By the way, Hisap says they won't hesitate to use ISA:
"Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein said the Government would not hesitate to use any means necessary, including the Internal Security Act, on anyone who threatens the security of the country."
At the same time, the IGP says they will use ISA against those who send SMSes about the church bombings.
"Those spreading vicious rumours over the arson attacks on three churches in the Klang Valley on Friday can be arrested under the Internal Security Act, IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan warned."
Funny... neither mentioned anything about using ISA against the church bombers or those who instigated them to violence.

Monday, January 04, 2010

Question to Ustazs... Why the Selective Outrage?

Some obvious but nonetheless, pertinent questions to PAS religious leaders... and published on PAS' propaganda website, no less. I'd be definitely interested to know the reasons behind the outrageously selective outrage. It is almost always directed to the softest (and generally innocuous) targets that garner the most sensationalised, mouth frothing headlines.

3 soalan bukan Islam untuk ustaz PAS
Li Fook Gao in harakahdaily.net

JAN 4 — Wahai ustaz-ustaz PAS sekalian,

Diharap ustaz-ustaz dapat membantu saya dalam mencari jawapan-jawapan terhadap beberapa kebuntuan dan persoalan saya mengenai agama Islam dan juga isu hangat yang sedang dibincangkan sekarang mengenai kalimah Allah.

Untuk makluman ustaz-ustaz, saya pernah membaca buku al-Quran demi memahami intipati saranan ajaran Islam yang dipeluk oleh beribu juta manusia ciptaan Tuhan (Bolehkah saya menggunakan perkataan Allah di sini?). Walaupun pernah membacanya, masih ada banyak perkara yang saya tidak faham mengenai ajaran Islam; mungkin sebab itulah sehingga kini saya tetap tergolong dalam kategori seorang yang kafir.

Soalan 1: Perkara-perkara haram.

Mengapa umat Islam mempunyai perasaan berbeza terhadap perkara-perkara dan benda-benda yang dikelaskan sebagai haram di dalam ajaran Islam? Umpamanya – mengapa umat Islam lebih senang merasa jijik dan mempunyai ketahanan diri yang jauh lebih tinggi terhadap binatang haram seperti khinzir daripada perkara-perkara seperti rasuah, berjudi, berminum arak dan berzina sedangkan perkara-perkara ini sama haramnya di sisi agama Islam?

Adakah fenomena ini berlaku disebabkan budaya kita yang suka untuk membezakan bangsa atau kesilapan proses pengajaran dan penghayatan terhadap agama Islam itu sendiri? Bagaimana ustaz-ustaz sekalian boleh memperbetulkan keadaan ini supaya umat-umat Islam boleh menjauhkan diri dan merasa jijik terhadap benda-benda haram secara sama rata tanpa ada tafsiran tersendiri?

Soalan 2: Persoalan mengenai khutbah.

Di sini saya ingin memberikan satu senario untuk dibahaskan bersama ustaz-ustaz sekalian. Setahu saya, ramai ustaz yang memberikan ceramah agama di masjid-masjid. Persoalan pertama saya, adakah ustaz-ustaz menyediakan khutbah-khutbah itu sendiri ataupun khutbah ini telah disediakan oleh orang lain untuk dibaca ustaz-ustaz sekalian sahaja?

Andai kata jikalau khutbah yang disediakan (sama ada sendiri ataupun orang lain) itu bermasalah dan mempunyai unsur menyeleweng daripada agama Islam, apakah hukum dan tahap dosanya terhadap ustaz-ustaz yang masih sanggup membacanya kepada para hadirin solat sekalian kerana takut dikenakan hukuman manusia seperti penarik-balikan sijil tauliah mereka?

Jika benar perkara di atas berlaku, apakah yang perlu dilakukan oleh ustaz-ustaz untuk mengatasi masalah di atas dalam membendung terlahirnya lebih banyak umat Islam yang berfikiran sempit di dunia ini?

Soalan 3: Kalimah Allah dan nama baik Islam.

Pada pendapat saya, sebuah negara yang majoritinya Muslim perlu sentiasa kelihatan bersih, amanah, cekap dan berintegriti di mata rakyat dan juga dunia. Sebarang kecalaran pada imej negara tersebut akibat amalan rasuah yang berleluasa, kroniisme, nepotisme dan tidak menghormati undang-undang patut dilihat sebagai satu penghinaan besar terhadap nama baik Islam. Sedihnya, sehingga kini tidak banyak pertubuhan gerakan Islam (selain PAS) menggerakkan jentera untuk membantah atau memboikot parti pemimpin yang merosakkan nama baik Islam.

Dalam isu kalimah Allah ini pula, umat-umat Islam negara kita telahpun mula menggerakkan bantahan demi bantahan sekitar negara dengan alasan untuk menjaga kalimah Allah daripada dihina dan disalahgunakan. Semangat “sediakan payung sebelum hujan” di sini amatlah dikagumkan, tapi perkara ini juga amat membinggungkan banyak orang kafir seperti saya, kerana, kebanyakan kami hairan mengapa pula semangat yang membara ini tidak wujud dalam hal isu menjaga nama baik Islam daripada dikaitkan dengan amalan rasuah, kroniisme dan nepotisme yang dipraktikkan secara terang-terangan oleh pemimpin-pemimpin negara kita.

Wahai ustaz-ustaz PAS sekalian,

Mengapa umat Islam tidak pula mempunyai semangat yang membara (seperti semangat yang ditunjukkan dalam mempertahankan kalimah Allah daripada disalahgunakan) terhadap penghinaan terhadap nama baik Islam akibat perbuatan pemimpin-pemimpin Muslim yang jauh menyeleweng daripada ajaran Islam walaupun setelah 29 tahun lamanya? Adakah ini menunjukkan nama baik Islam tidak lebih penting daripada kalimah Allah? Saya rasa sudah tentu tidak, akan tetapi saya tidak tahu di mana silapnya. Adakah ustaz-ustaz sekalian tahu jawapannya?

Sekiranya semangat yang membara dalam menjaga kalimah Allah ini dapat diaplikasikan oleh umat Islam secara sama rata dalam hal penjagaan nama baik Islam daripada diseleweng pemimpin-pemimpin negara yang jahat; sudah pasti kejadian-kejadian seperti kehilangan enjin pesawat, kematian saksi di MACC, bumbung-bumbung bangunan yang sering keruntuhan, skandal kes pembunuhan, pembelian RM42,000 untuk komputer dan katak-katak diutamakan daripada rakyat tidak akan berlaku. Betul tak?

Itulah sahaja soalan-soalan daripada saya pada masa ini. Diharap dapat mendengar jawapan daripada ustaz-ustaz PAS yang sudi menjawab. Saya memohon beribu ampun sekiranya terdapat silap bahasa dan ketelanjuran ayat-ayat saya yang menyinggung perasaan mana-mana pihak.

Buku ilmiah dibawa belayar,
Untuk dibaca mencari tema,
Niat saya mahu belajar,
Bertanya demi muafakat bersama.

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Why I dismiss your god.

Quote of the day:

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.

When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”


- Stephen F Roberts

Brief history of The Quote

...Yep, that's me! I am the author of the above quote which has become a bit of a popular statement throughout the net (and some in the real world too).

...I first used The Quote as a tag line for postings on the newsgroups alt.atheism and talk.atheism at some point before October 1995.

...The Quote is an original quote that came from an online debate I was having with religious people in the newsgroups. I used the a similar comparison in a debate when my opponent wondered why I ignored the evidence for god, and in return, I wondered why my debate opponent chose to ignore the evidence for Shiva, or Zeus, or any of the other possible gods.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

1Malaysia. Whose one? Your one or my one?

Najib's administration has been dragging a kicking and screaming Malaysia towards his concept of 1Malaysia. But the thing is... what is in fact, 1Malaysia? Which one is the 1?


The Non-Malays and Non-Muslims are afraid of this 1...


The Malays and Muslims are afraid of this 1...


The Non-Malay Muslims really want this 1... (think Mahathir A/L Mohd Kutty of Kerala, India, Ridhuan Tee and the Mamaks in UMNO). Read Utusan's man of hour, Ridhuan Tee's bullshit here, and an enlightening rebuttal from Art Harun here.


Everyone should be afraid of this 1...


I truly hope we'll someday end up with this 1...


But as things stand, it's 11Malaysia, split into your 1 and my 1. Like 2 parallel lines that is the number 11, never the twain shall meet.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

NON MUSLIM TAXES CANNOT BE USED TO BUILD MOSQUES!


This Utusan Malaysia editorial against a question raised by a DAP politician (about the astronomical funding given to the building of mosques) is nothing less than a blatant attempt to read self-serving meaning and intent into the Malaysian constitution where (1) no such meaning and intent exists in the wording nor spirit of the document, and (2) it selectively over-interprets certain articles while ignoring the explicit application of other articles.

11/12/2009

Do not fool around with Islam

By NORAINI ABD. RAZAK

Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution is crystal clear. No ambiguity. The expression of meaning is also unequivocal. Since its formulation, the clause has never been amended. Its position is conspicuous. Matters that give dignity to Islam as the federal religion is emplaced in Part 1 of the Constitution.

It is read after Article 1 on the name of Malaysia and other States and Article 2, which touches on new region in the Federation. Article 4 mentions about the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the country. The Federal Constitution is structured in such a way to reflect the importance and sanctity of Islam as the official religion of the land.

However, realizing the racial complexity in the country, Article 3(1) which states “Islam is the religion of the Federation” doesn’t end with a fullstop but a semi-colon before it continues with a phrase “but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any parts of the Federation.” Despite undergoing a process of 40 amendments since its formulation in 1956, Article 3 has literally never been touched for any revision.

Its position and privilege remains. It should be so in line with the position of the majority of its people who are Malays and professed Islam as their religion. However after 52 years of independence, there seem to be an attempt to test the position of Islam. The first attempt which was carried out openly came after a bid to question the special privileges of the bumputera, which is interpreted as the Malay supremacy.

Matters on Islam and the Malays are spelled out in the Constitution. As such, the incessant effort actually is consciously aimed at ridiculing the spirit of the Constitution. The picture is very clear. What is the purpose of the Taiping Member of Parliament from the DAP in instigating the issue if not an attempt to question the “sanctity” of the Constitution? Does it not cross his mind before distributing the statement to the media that the issue he had raised is invariably linked with the Federal Constitution? The content of the Constitution has underlined the exalted position of Islam as official religion that should be inherent with financial allocation including for the purpose of building mosques throughout the country.

What then is the purpose of Nga Kor Ming to stir up the issue? Issuing the provocative statement at a time when the communal solidarity is running thin, is nothing more than an attempt to light up the fire of hatred among the people. The statement is crafted to link other community as tax payers that should be given equal rights in all aspect including the building of houses of worship. Has Kor Ming being blind to the houses of worship of other religions which are scattered throughout the country, many of them at strategic locations? Malaysia being a Muslim country is visited by other believers during the Thaipusam festival.

Hindus from outside Malaysia came to Batu Caves to perform their religious obligation. There are temples located right in the middle of the city. In a religious festival, the giant incenses are burnt in open space without any hindrance although it goes against environmental law. The freedom is line with the provision in the Constitution which allows other religions to be practiced in the country with the condition that it is to be carried out in harmony.

When Kor Ming charged that followers of other religions are being treated as “step-child” by the government for not being given financial allocation as much as in the construction of mosques, it is a misplaced issue. Kor Ming has forgotten that in many countries which specify a certain religion as its official religion, it comes with special privileges.

In Thailand where Buddhism is the official religion doesn’t accord Muslims, who are also tax payers, the same privileges in building their mosques. Muslims in other countries had been restricted to practice their religion and many had to flee after being persecuted. Kor Ming should not have been blind with the fate of these Muslims.

What about the developed countries which claimed to practice the highest form of democracy? Are the Muslims there accorded the same so-called freedom enjoyed by others and behave disrespectfully as Kor Ming does in this country? So what is the most logical justification for Kor Ming in kicking up the issue which is contradictive to the spirit of the Constitution? If the spirit of the Constitution is to be taken literally, the government has the right not to fork out even a single cent of allocation for other religion.

However, out of respect and generosity, the government is kind enough to give out millions of ringgit in allocation for the houses of worship of other religions. But such benevolence is seen by the likes of Kor Ming with blind eyes. More worrying is the 1Malaysia slogan which is being twisted to serve their dubious interest.

Effort initiated by Kor Ming should not be allowed to continue. The repercussion will be severe. The Federal Constitution which form the foundation of a country called Malaysia must be protected at all cost and should not be made the “basis” for any outbreak of racial tension and the fall of Islam as the official religion of the country.

The WRITER is News Editor of Utusan Melayu

The editorial tries to suggest that the wording of Article 3 that "Islam is the religion of the Federation" somehow dictates (although the constitution never specifies) that "the content of the Constitution has underlined the exalted position of Islam as official religion that should be inherent with financial allocation including for the purpose of building mosques throughout the country."

Article 3

1. Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.

2. In every State other than States not having a Ruler the position of the Ruler as the Head of the religion of Islam in his State in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution, all rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers enjoyed by him as Head of that religion, are unaffected and unimpaired; but in any acts, observance or ceremonies with respect to which the Conference of Rulers has agreed that they should extend to the Federation as a whole each of the other Rulers shall in his capacity of Head of the religion of Islam authorize the Yang di-pertuan Agong to represent him.

3. The Constitution of the States of Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak shall each make provision for conferring on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be Head of the religion of Islam in that State.

4. Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution.

5. Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be the Head of the religion of Islam in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan; and for this purpose Parliament may by law make provisions for regulating Islamic religious affairs and for constituting a Council to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam.

However, the Utusan editorial feigns ignorance of subarticle (4) of Article 3 that states "Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution."
derogate
vb [ˈdɛrəˌgeɪt]
1. to cause to seem inferior or be in disrepute; detract
2. to deviate in standard or quality; degenerate
3. to cause to seem inferior, etc.; disparage
4. (Law) to curtail the application of (a law or regulation)
It means that nothing in Article 3 shall limit or lessen of any other article in the constitution. This indicates to me that the writers of the constitution intended to ensure that the statement that "Islam is the religion of the federation" would not be misused and misinterpreted - by people like this Utusan editor - to mean anything more than ensuring the constitutional freedom of Muslims to practice their religion with the Agong and sultans as the protectors of that freedom.

In fact, this explicitly means that Article 3 does not derogate or reduce the application of Article 11.

Article 11

1. Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.

2. No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.

3. Every religious group has the right -
* (a) to manage its own religious affairs;
* (b) to establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes; and
* (c) to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.

4. State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.

5. This Article does not authorize any act contrary to any general law relating to public order, public health or morality.

Article 11(2) states that: "No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own." This, Noraini Abd Razak, is what's crystal clear, free of ambiguity, unequivocally stated in no uncertain terms.

This means that TAXES COLLECTED FROM NON-MUSLIMS CANNOT BE USED TO BUILD MOSQUES! Otherwise, taxes cannot be collected from non-Muslims... period. That politician from DAP has every right to question why such RM748.26 million of taxpayer money has been used to build 611 mosques between 2000 and 2008, when the Article 11(2) expressly forbids it. We, as non-Muslim citizens of Malaysia, have every right to question why the taxes we paid have been used for the purposes of Islam, which is a religion other than our own.

So Noraini Abd Razak... if you want to talk constitution, let's talk constitution. But please limit yourself to stuff that is actually written in the constitution. Not some imaginary position, privilege or meaning that you conjured up yourself for your own racist, thieving purposes.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Last of the Mohicans

From 45% of the population at independence, to 22% now. The ethnic Chinese in Malaysia have lost half their numbers, all of their political power and the remnants of their share in the economic pie is being decimated by apartheid style affirmative action.

How did we end up like this? Robert Kuok, Lim Goh Tong and many others have been transferring their wealth out of Malaysia into Singapore and Hong Kong for a while now (Wilmar, Genting Singapore etc). Perhaps they saw years ago what many Chinese Malaysians are only coming to terms with now?

The Incredible Shrinking Chinese.

The statistics tell a very sobering story. In another short 25 years, Chinese will only be a mere 18.6 percent of the population. They will soon fall below the sustainable threshold for propagating their culture, and their diminishing numbers will only increase the pressure for assimilation – something Chinese are reluctant to do.

Neighbourhoods today are increasingly Malay, and one of the largest is Shah Alam where the authorities have disallowed the building of a Catholic church, tried to restrict the sale of beer, made it very difficult to own a dog, and residents protested against a proposed Hindu temple.

http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1804:honey-i-shrunk-the-chinese-&catid=198:helen-ang&Itemid=156

Saturday, July 05, 2008

It's a problem of class... not race.

Interesting reading from Singapore's Today newspaper. It aptly debunks arguments that poverty and disadvantage is solely defined by race (as UMNO's holy book so says). It however is not instructive on how to kill the latest racial fetish that privilege and special (read: retarded) rights are also solely defined by race.

“Poverty and the problems associated with it are always a consequence of class, never of race.” And [there is] an alternative way to help the needy that bypass ethnic self-help groups: A ministry for the poor."

“If that (race) is the only factor that decides one’s thinking and action, it will not be healthy for a multi-racial society”

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Asia Sentinel revisits the so-called Social Contract

Good article on the background of the unvarnished version of the Social Contract.

Revisiting Malaysia’s Social Contract
Asia Sentinel
Joe Fernandez
01 July 2008


The contractual glue that keeps Malaysia’s races together seems to be running out

It was the turn of Malaysia’s Bar Council this time to host a public forum over the weekend in Kuala Lumpur on the country’s Social contract, the arrangement between Malays and non-Malays at the country’s birth to share its wealth.

In the end, no surprises were in store. The four panelists were evenly split, two calling it a piece of fiction, two disagreeing in polite terms. This is an endless debate and we can be sure the Bar Council Forum won’t be the end of the matter. Every school child in Malaysia has been well fed in the early years of independence with tons of material on the Social contract. It’s the younger generation that seems perplexed. Hence, the issue is revisited at regular intervals and the debate continues.
The contract, a simple unwritten arrangement fostered between Malays and non-Malays by the founding fathers, brought about a rare unity among the multiracial peoples of British Malaya and expedited the advent of independence on 31 Aug 1957. The Social contract also paved the way for the inclusion of Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei in an enlarged Federation within just six years of the midnight air ringing with shouts of “merdeka” – “freedom” – in Stadium Merdeka in Kuala Lumpur. Brunei stayed out over oil revenues and Singapore, as we will see later, was soon booted out. The Social contract remained intact.

At independence the Malaysian economy was held almost 29 percent by the Chinese; less than 2 percent by the Malays, who were largely outside the money economy; less than 1 percent by the Indians and about 69 percent held mostly by the British and other foreigners. (Malaysia introduced the 20 year 1070-90 New Economic Policy in late 1969. The NEP pledged to eliminate the identification of race with economic function and place of residence; eradicate poverty irrespective of race, color and creed; and ensure that the Malays and other indigenous races own, control and manage at least 30 percent of the nation’s corporate economy by 1990.

But deviations soon set in and there was rampant nepotism, cronyism and corruption to sabotage the NEP and send the economy into a tailspin by the early 1980s. The NEP had to be scaled back to bring the economy out of a recession in the mid-1980s.)
The thrust of the contract was simple: since the Chinese of the towns in particular had considerable economic power in comparison with the largely rural-dwelling Malays who saw themselves as the indigenous people of the country, it was felt that it was only right that the Malays held the reins of political power firmly in their hands in a quid pro quo. This power they would then share with the non-Malays and thereby underwrite the continued economic success of the country. Malay hopes, unlike the disastrous route taken by economic nationalists in so much of Africa, Myanmar and Fiji, hinged on the economy going right. Had the Malays been overwhelmingly in the majority, it is unlikely there would have been a social contract of any sort. The non-Malay numbers almost matched the Malay, even after being bolstered for nearly 150 years by immigrants from the Malay Archipelago. Had overwhelmingly Chinese Singapore been included with Malaya, the Malays would have been in a distinct minority in their “own land”.

There were shades of New Zealand, Australia, Mauritius and the Americas here, all lands where the original inhabitants were reduced to an insignificant minority caught in a vicious cycle of alcohol and drug abuse, poverty, ignorance and disease in vice-ridden shantytowns or in god-forsaken reservations apportioned the most inhospitable and difficult terrains.

The founding fathers, perhaps in a stroke of genius, saw no reason for a time-frame-bound social contract, nor did they see any reason for preserving the arrangement in print for posterity. The social contract, it was foreseen, would serve the nation well and melt away when its time came.

As the nation ends its celebration of its 50th anniversary of independence, an important watershed when we look back at this moment in history in the years ahead, the thinking among many Malaysians is that the social contract has entered the history books as a minor footnote. They point out that not only have Malay numbers increased significantly but the community itself has considerable leverage in the economy of the nation within and without the context of an expanding economic pie.

The levers of the economy at the policy level are almost totally in Malay hands, albeit because of their sheer numbers, although the community continues to be edged out at the retail level. The market is a different ball game altogether.

Not so, scream a vociferous minority, who not only see the social contract as far from having outlived its purpose but insist that it also includes other aspects like the granting of citizenship status to hundreds of thousands of stateless and immigrant non-Malays and their descendents; the position of the Malay rulers, the position of Islam as "the religion of the Federation" according to Article 3 of the Federal Constitution; the position of Bahasa Melayu as the basis of Bahasa Malaysia, the national language, and the sole medium of instruction in education; and the special privileges of the Malays, and by extension, other indigenous peoples of the Federation in the peninsula and Borneo.

This revisionist approach among a diehard Malay nationalist core hasn’t gone down well with the Indians and Chinese in particular and they have made no bones about it in the vernacular media and other channels. Malay moderates feel it’s high time to take the debate behind closed doors, not so much to re-negotiate the social contract, “but to remind community leaders about the history of the past so that they can re-assure themselves and their people once again and renew their faith in the nation and a common destiny, sharing and caring alike”.

(Article 3 of the Federal Constitution states that "Islam is the religion of the Federation but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation." Wanita Umno called in November 2007 at the Umno Assembly for the insertion of the word "official" before the word "religion" to prevent any "misunderstanding".)

Essentially, the various issues being bandied about outside the social contract are either well covered in the Federal Constitution or backed by social convention. Hence, the question of including these in an unwritten political arrangement like the Social contract should not arise at all. Generally, non-Malays are even more for the Malay rulers and see the institution as an important bulwark against mob rule and rabble-rousers. Meanwhile, the Federal Constitution remains secular, despite Islam being recognized by the otherwise color-blind document as the official religion. There’s a fine distinction between official and national and the fact remains that Malaysia does not have a national religion and the Federal Constitution guarantees complete freedom of worship.

Again, the country is definitely multiracial, multi-religious, multilingual and multicultural, as anyone with eyes can see, and nobody can take that away – “Malaysia Truly Asia” runs the official tourism theme proudly all over the globe -- despite conflicting claims that it is an Islamic state one day, Muslim the next day, run according to Islamic principles the third day while admittedly not a theocratic state, a bizarre contradiction in terms.

These shifting mindsets even among the religious moderates can best be seen as their coming to terms slowly and painfully with secular Malaysia and preaching a brave, new way to combat the dangerous mix of politics with religion. Religion is religion, and politics is politics, and never the twain shall meet in Malaysia. We need not go so far as to echo DAP MP Karpal Singh’s infamous outburst not so long ago that, “Malaysia will only be an Islamic state over my dead body”. Karpal was quickly hailed as “the tiger – shouldn’t it be lion – of Jelutong.”

The current debate over the social contract is not the first time that attempts have been made to revise history for reasons of political expediency.

Nearly 40 years ago, after the searing Sino-Malay race riots May 1969 in Kuala Lumpur, many historians attributed the bloodshed to the “breakdown” of the social contract when non-Malay political parties made substantial gains in the May 1969 General Elections. The island of Penang, the Pearl of the Orient, had fallen to the newly-formed Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia, which was in fact mostly composed of ousted rebel leaders from the Malaysian Chinese Association, a key member of the ruling Alliance Party.

The DAP (Democratic Action Party), the Malaysian chapter of Singapore’s ruling PAP, had almost half the seats in the Selangor State Assembly, while the PPP (People’s Progressive Party) made similar gains in its Perak heartland. The MCA saw no further purpose in being part of the Federal Government and pulled out while still remaining as a member of the Alliance. The MIC (Malaysian Indian Congress), the other key member of the Alliance, stayed put in the Federal Government and in the states and at the local levels even as quite a number of panicky families sold their properties for a mere song and packed their bags for India. Elsewhere, long queues of would-be migrants formed for weeks outside the Australian, New Zealand, and Canadian High Commissions in particular and the US Embassy.

The MCA pullout from the federal government was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Race riots erupted first in the Chinatown area of Chow Kit which had a Malay hinterland and soon spread all over the capital city. The incomplete polling was abandoned, Parliament was disbanded, democracy suspended, a state of emergency declared by the caretaker government and Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, seen as too pro-Chinese, was ousted and placed virtually under house arrest for a while. It was like a coup d’ etat. There were isolated incidents everywhere. The police were hopelessly outnumbered and overwhelmed and the Malay Regiment was brought in while the multiracial Federation Army and the famed Sarawak Rangers of elite Iban and other Dayak troops were both confined to their barracks. The Malay Regiment were mindless robots who contributed to the carnage as well in perceived defense of race, religion and country. They were eventually ordered, albeit reluctantly and gently, to return to their barracks but not until the blood-letting had dragged on for some ten days or more of unspeakable tales of horror.

In hindsight, the apologists and conspiracy theorists rationalize that the Malay Regiment ran amok in revenge for the killings over two weeks by the Communist Party of Malaya’s Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army which virtually had a free run of the country while awaiting the return of British troops in strength following the Japanese surrender after the 2nd World War. The Japanese looked on. The MPAJA’s victims were mostly Malays seen as Japanese collaborators. There were feeble attempts in official circles to blame the communists for May 13 but these were quickly denounced and roundly condemned by the man in the street. At the height of the Vietnam War, the communists were the eternal bogeyman in Southeast Asia and everywhere in the Free World.

The Malay Regiment, disgraced in the eyes of the non-Malay population, was replaced by the Federation Army and the Sarawak Regiment and calm quickly returned to the burnt-out streets of Kuala Lumpur. There had been a heavy price to pay in innocent lives, all because extreme-right Malays in Umno, the lead player in the Alliance, had been rattled by the electoral setbacks suffered by the MCA and feared the unraveling of the Social contract. Apparently, the rightwing game plan was to intimidate the political opposition, punish the voters and force the MCA back into the Government. The fact that the political opposition had never been party to the Social contract was lost on the rightwing instigators of the May 13 bloodbath.

Even so, the Gerakan and the PPP were virtually blackmailed, with the promise of democracy being restored, to become members of an enlarged Alliance which was renamed Barisan Nasional. The Social contract was back on track. The Alliance, symbolized by a sailing boat, had sunk. The BN chose the scales of justice as the new symbol.

Hardly five years before May 13, Singapore had queried the social contract as a member of the Federation and was quickly ushered out. It's important that Malaysian history books explore the expulsion of Singapore from the Federation. However, this tragedy along with the Japanese occupation is simply glossed over. The key lies in former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew's "infamous" outburst: "If these people (Kuala Lumpur) think they can squat on Singapore and get away with it, they are sadly mistaken." Apparently, Lee was alarmed that Kuala Lumpur had rapidly changed track after Malaysia with the extreme right wing in Umno calling the shots.

A serious deviation of the social contract was the misinterpretation by the right wingers that it was a carte blanche for Ketuanan Melayu --Malays first -- Malay political dominance and supremacy. This was anathema to Lee. Many saw Ketuanan Melayu as nothing less than an unabashed amalgamation of the Nazism of Hitler's Germany and the Apartheid of South Africa's white supremacists with the caste system of the Brahmins of India. Surely, such a system could not be good for anyone, even including the great majority of the Malays themselves.

Sabah and Sarawak, the Borneo states, remained in the Federation after some initial demands for a review by Sabah. Kadazandusun leader, Donald Stephens (later Mohd Fuad Abdullah), was eventually packed off into exile as the High Commissioner to Australia, before making a stunning political comeback in 1976 and dying mysteriously in an air crash shortly after with almost his entire State Cabinet.

Is the social contract still relevant in this day and age? Every two people have three opinions.

A simple reading of history and the demographics shows that the Malay factor will henceforth continue to be an important aspect of the nation’s politics unlike in the early days when the community genuinely feared being swamped by the immigrants from India and China and their descendents. No longer can a non-Malay be the Prime Minister of Malaysia, for example, unless with the consent of the governed, predominantly Malay and other indigenous peoples.

Malays have also entered the money economy in a big way as a community and made considerable gains as well in this field. As the Malays prosper and emerge more educated and universal in outlook, having a stranglehold on politics will be less and less the community’s main pre-occupation and obsession. Herein lie the seeds of destruction of the social contract despite having served the nation well. It is unlikely too that the Chinese parties in government will ever contemplate leaving the ruling coalition and should they do so, as was the case with MCA in the aftermath of the 1969 polls, they would not be wooed back. The Chinese in the political opposition, too long in the wilderness, are waiting in the wings for a historical opportunity to taste the spoils of office.

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Utusan tells Malays to blow themselves up like terrorists

Read this article from the journalistic equivalent of a noisy retard that won't shut up... yes, Utusan Malaysia. I'll add some comments tomorrow. It's late and I won't sacrifice sleep for the sake of racist morons who somehow think they are the 'tuans' when they are no more than beggars and thieves.

Orang Melayu perlu berani pertahankan hak
Saturday, 28 June 2008 06:26am
Utusan Malaysia (as reproduced by The Bar Council)
Oleh Azmi Md Deros


AGENDA pembangunan Melayu tetap relevan sampai bila-bila. Selagi wujudnya bangsa Melayu, selagi itulah semangat ini harus didukung sepenuhnya oleh parti politik yang dianggotai orang Melayu.

Dalam hal ini, Melayu sendiri yang perlu memperjuangkan nasib dan masa depan bangsanya. Mereka tidak boleh menyerahkannya kepada orang lain kerana mereka juga mempunyai agenda sendiri yang harus diperjuangkan.

Ketika terlalu ghairah berpolitik, semua parti siasah umat Melayu tidak harus lupa tanggungjawab mereka mempertahankan hak bangsa, budaya, agama dan tanah airnya, selaras dengan tuntutan Islam.

Bagi orang Melayu di Malaysia, kita masih bernasib baik kerana kuasa politik yang menjadi penentu utama perjuangan memartabatkan bangsa Melayu dan agama Islam masih berada di tangan kita, walaupun sudah ada tanda ia sedikit terhakis.

Orang Melayu tidak perlu segan silu atau takut untuk membicarakan hal ini kerana mereka adalah tuan di tanah airnya sendiri. Pada masa sama, bangsa lain pula tidak perlu berasa takut kerana sejarah di negara ini menunjukkan hak mereka tidak pernah dirampas begitu saja dalam usaha kumpulan Melayu cuba memperkukuhkan kedudukan peribumi.

Dasar perjuangan kerajaan, khususnya Barisan Nasional (BN) sejak dulu lagi ialah perkongsian yang melahirkan situasi ‘menang-menang’. Jaminan yang diberikan Ketua Pemuda Umno, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein bahawa Umno akan terus berpegang kepada perjuangan asas parti, iaitu membela nasib orang Melayu dan pada masa sama, mengambil kira sokongan semua parti komponen BN yang lain, perlu menjadi sandaran.

Tidak dapat dinafikan, Umno sebagai parti yang bercorak kebangsaan sudah banyak membawa kejayaan dalam memperjuangkan hak bangsa Melayu dan umat Islam di negara ini, termasuk menerusi Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) yang diperkenalkan sejak 1970-an yang menyaksikan kedudukan orang Melayu dalam pelbagai bidang bertambah baik.

Dasar itu menggariskan hala tuju yang jelas dalam memperkasakan kedudukan bangsa Melayu dalam pelbagai sektor.

Namun, apa yang dibimbangi ialah kekuasaan untuk memperkasakan kedudukan orang Melayu pasca Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-12 pada Mac lalu, menjadikan usaha itu sedikit terganggu apabila Umno yang selama ini amat dominan dalam memperjuangkan nasib dan masa depan Melayu tergugat apabila mereka tidak dapat membentuk kerajaan di lima negeri.

Biar pun pada peringkat pusat BN yang diterajui Umno masih membentuk kerajaan, apabila wujud ketidakseragaman pada peringkat negeri akan menjejaskan sedikit sebanyak agenda pembangunan Melayu yang dirangka pada peringkat pusat.

Bagi tokoh akademik yang juga pensyarah Kolej Kerajaan, Undang-undang dan Pengajian Antarabangsa Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), Prof Dr Ahmad Atory Hussain, konsep kesamarataan yang diperjuangkan kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat dikhuatiri boleh menyebabkan orang Melayu akan terus tertinggal daripada arus persaingan kerana kaum berkenaan masih belum mampu bersaing sepenuhnya tanpa diberikan perhatian khusus.

Beliau berkata, di Kedah misalnya negeri yang majoriti orang Melayu, taraf ekonomi bangsa berkenaan masih jauh ketinggalan, berbanding kaum lain, terutama Cina yang menguasai pelbagai sektor perniagaan dan perkhidmatan.

“Sebagai tuan di bumi sendiri, orang Melayu mesti lebih, tidak boleh sama rata. Orang Melayu perlu mencapai tahap gemilang dalam semua aspek, sama ada ekonomi, politik dan pendidikan. Islam juga menuntut umatnya supaya berada pada tahap paling atas supaya dihormati,” katanya.

Apa yang menarik ialah beliau mengumpamakan konsep sama rata sama seperti keadaan tanah yang rata, iaitu ia mudah dipijak sesiapa saja dan itulah akan dialami bangsa Melayu jika prinsip itu didukungi.

“Oleh itu, kita perlu menjadi bangsa yang berada lebih tinggi daripada orang lain supaya kita tidak mudah dipijak. Bila kita berada di atas, akan lebih mudah untuk kita menentukan keadilan kepada orang lain. Selama ini pun kita tidak pernah menindas bangsa lain,” katanya.

Beliau juga mengingatkan bangsa lain supaya tidak mudah melatah dengan perjuangan memartabatkan orang Melayu kerana selama ini belum pernah berlaku hak bangsa lain diambil untuk diserahkan kepada orang Melayu kerana kerajaan sentiasa mengambil berat terhadap semua kaum.

Sehubungan itu, beliau mahu kerajaan Pas Kedah lebih serius dalam menjaga kepentingan bangsa Melayu di negeri itu dan tidak terlalu terikut-ikut dengan slogan atau konsep sama rata dilaungkan rakan mereka, seperti Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) dan DAP.

Dr Ahmad Atory berkata, Pas yang ahlinya terdiri daripada orang Melayu dan beragama Islam perlu lebih fokus terhadap usaha membangunkan bangsa Melayu selepas mereka mengambil alih tampuk pemerintahan kerajaan negeri kerana jika tidak, masa depan orang Melayu akan terbiar.

Sementara itu, Yang Dipertua Dewan Perhimpunan Melayu Kedah (DPMK), Tan Sri Khalid Abdullah, berkata dalam keghairahan orang Melayu mengejar kemewahan melalui apa juga parti politik yang diwakili, mereka perlu mengelak daripada menjadi apa yang kini dialami bangsa Arab.

“Orang Arab amat kaya dari segi ekonomi kerana negara mereka dianugerahkan minyak, tetapi mereka tiada kuasa sehingga terpaksa bergantung kepada pihak lain. Kita harus meminjam semangat pengebom berani mati yang sanggup mempertaruhkan nyawa mereka demi memastikan tanah air dan agama mereka terbela,” katanya.

Beliau berkata, orang Melayu perlu membuang tabiat hanya mementingkan diri sendiri kerana ia hanya akan menyebabkan bangsa berkenaan tidak dapat bangkit secara total dalam memperjuangkan hak mereka secara menyeluruh.

Penulis ialah Ketua Biro Berita Harian, Kedah