Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- KL112: Anwar mimicks Tunku’s “Merdeka”
- Fixed deposits? What interests?
- Just say NO to party party Malaya
- 7 Reasons To Go for Malaysian Public Rallies
- Royal fatwa on Allah word - has HRH been let down by advisor(s)?
- #KL112: Res Ipsa Loquitur!
- When Yong is hungry like the wolves
- Five contradictions in restricting the use of 'Allah'
- Anwar has changed
| KL112: Anwar mimicks Tunku’s “Merdeka” Posted: 12 Jan 2013 05:51 PM PST Fifty-six years ago, UMNO was etched into the history books as the party which helped free Malaysia from British colonialists, a feat which it has hitherto never stopped reminding Malaysians about. The declaration of Independence was made by UMNO's second president Tunku Abdul Rahman at Stadium Merdeka, which grew even more famous over the years by playing host to premier entertainment, sporting and national events. Today, the ageing stadium hosted yet another historical milestone. It was the site of the biggest ever rally organised by Opposition parties, which no doubt helped set a new record for the 30,000 capacity stadium. If it wasn't enough to stage a massive anti-UMNO and anti-BN rally at the venue which played a major role in UMNO's legacy, PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim capped off the event by chanting "Merdeka" seven times, mimicking Tunku not only in frequency but in mannerism as well. "Like how our forefathers cried out (Merdeka!), today we repeat that oath and this time, we will achieve genuine independence for the people," he said. To stress this point further, each time Anwar said "Merdeka", the crowd responded emphatically with "Rakyat". How will UMNO react? Pakatan Rakyat's antics in Stadium Merdeka is unlikely to bode well for UMNO diehards, who are likely to question the sudden and unexpected liberal approach. Until today, any major rally with a hint of anti-UMNO and anti-BN sentiments would have faced the full brunt of the law, with tear gas, batons and water cannons to boot. Instead, the Federal government went out of its way to make sure that the rally proceeded without incident, to the extent of having the police say that their aim was to have "zero casualties" during the event. In essence, Pakatan came out looking like its support base is growing, despite the intensifying negative press about them coming from the government-controlled media organisations since the last general election. Such media organisations are going to be hard-pressed to claim that 100,000 people were paid to attend the rally, whereas Pakatan supporters will claim they braved the heat and congestion, unlike BN's less organic approach in drawing a crowd. Looking beyond race Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's predecessors have never faced an opposition show of force on this scale before and his party will face a challenge to explain why opposition rally numbers are on the rise under his watch.
| ||||||||||||
| Fixed deposits? What interests? Posted: 12 Jan 2013 05:40 PM PST Najib Razak had previously declared the latter two, Sabah and Sarawak, as the BN's electoral 'fixed deposits', which ensure a solid bank of votes to see the UMNO-led coalition to victory in another federal election. Johor, the birth place of UMNO has hitherto been considered as also another 'fixed deposit'.
But after the March 2008 election, we saw a run on UMNO-BN's banks in these three UMNO blue ribbon strongholds, with the account holders possibly withdrawing the 'fixed deposits'. No doubt such a possibility and its likely consequences have sent UMNO into panic mode. Before I get into the meat of this post (non-halal of course, otherwise how can I convince you to read it to the end, wakakaka), let me give you my personal take on the author of the FMT article mentioned above, CJM, wakakaka. I can't find fault with his criticism of BN where he warned of UMNO-BN becoming even more corrupt, greedier and bolder if the 55-year old ruling coalition were to win again. Being a cultured person he of course didn't say stuff that kaytee would say, such as the BN leaders quipping "Look, those idiots are quite happy with us screwing them kau kau! Let's not disappoint them" (wakakaka). However, I am reminded he was once in MCA, and while we shouldn't hold that against him as we shouldn't hold an UMNO past against Anwar, there are conditions for excusing his MCA background, equally as there would be for Anwar Ibrahim's UMNO lamentable track record.
For CJM, his move to Pakatan would have been more credible (like Zaid Ibrahim's) if he had left when he was still in power, such as in a party or/and ministerial position, thus indicating his preparedness to sacrifice his power, position and privilege because of his repentance in being a part of an ineffectual MCA leadership or recognizing the BN's general poor performance in governance, transparency and accountability. He only joined PKR after he lost his bid to be a deputy president of MCA, very much like another sour grape, Anwar Ibrahim, who crooned reformasi only after he was kicked out of UMNO but not while he was in that party for 16 years, ... ... unlike Zaid Ibrahim who voluntarily resigned from his ministerial post under the AAB government to leave UMNO so as to come over to Pakatan.
Unfortunately for Zaid and us, he was manoeuvred out by a political pygmy who was terrified of his leadership potential in PKR. OTOH, I respect Ong Tee Keat because despite losing to the Chua Soi Lek-Liow Tiong Lie team, he stayed true to the party he joined. Though I don't respect today's MCA, I still respect Ong TK, the man. Thus I couldn't help chuckling when I read CJM's article in FMT titled Give MCA the boot wakakaka. Anyway, let's not dwell too long on CJM as we are stuck with him in Pakatan, though I would advise that he won't be MB of Johor even if Pakatan wins the state, because Salahuddin Ayub of PAS has been anointed for that post, wakakaka. Salahuddin is currently MP for Kubang Kerian, Kelantan. But he has been instructed by the 2 Pak Hajis to return to his birthplace in Johor for 'higher duties', wakakaka. And DAP is no doubt backing PAS on this as it knows Johoreans are not ready yet, no, not even for a DAP Malay politician to politically head the state.
One year ago I discussed the survey by Zentrum Future Studies think-tank which showed Chinese approval of Pakatan in Johor rose to 68% after the last election, and climbed further to 79% in 2010. These staggering stats, if they come about in GE-13, would effectively enable Pakatan to pick up 15 federal and 30 state seats in Johor, compared to 1 and 6 respectively on 08 March 2008. And Salahuddin Ayob will become the new Pakatan MB of Johor. Could it be confirming the reliability of the Zentrum survey when rumours have it that our dearest Hishamuddin Hussein is likely to shift from his current seat of Sembrong to Kota Tinggi? And why should he consider such a move, assuming the rumours have been reliable? Well, stats again, those damn stats, because 40% of the registered voters in the Sembrong federal constituency are Chinese, wakakaka. And to make the forecast even shittier for our dearest Hisham, Professor Abu Hassan Hasbullah of Zentrum revealed that "… its end-of-year surveys [end of 2011] have seen Johor Chinese catch up with and possibly overtake their northern kin in terms of backing PR. Opposition leaders in the state estimate that they won 55 per cent of Chinese votes in the last election but ….. support from the community has surged to close to 90 per cent." 90%! Oh, those bloody Chinese - no wonder Hisham likes to wave his keris and can you blame him, wakakaka.
The Prof described the massive political swing as a 'silent Tionghua revolution'. Basically, PKR wants a monopoly on mixed ethnic constituencies (based on whatever nebulous basis it has claimed) while at the same has been avariciously eyeing the attractive DAP blue ribbon seats with Chinese majority. DAP which has traditionally contested in the latter type also wants a share of the far more numerous mixed constituencies, especially those which Pakatan hasn't hitherto contested.
We saw a perverted version of this in the last Sarawak state election where sore loser PKR groused about DAP staying safe in urban areas instead of venturing forth into rural constituencies, conveniently forgetting that it was PKR itself which unilaterally and preemptively grabbed 52 (subsequently 49) seats out of an available 71 in the Sarawak State election. I wrote about the Sarawak debacle for PKR in May 2011 in a post PKR's green-eyed monster where I commented: ….. a disgraceful petulant sour grapes merajuking Baru Bian … told The Malaysian Insider PKR wants DAP and PAS to prove they're multiracial, but obviously targeting the DAP. He claimed that PKR "...wants its Pakatan Rakyat PR partners to contest in 'black seats' in the next general election and dismiss the notion that they cannot cross the racial divide."
He also told reporters that PKR "... could not continue shouldering the burden of contesting in BN strongholds alone." Shouldering the burden of contesting in BN strongholds alone? My bloody foot, don't make my toes laugh! This is the state head of a party who pre-emptively grabbed 52 seats without even a thought for its coalition allies in an unrealistic expectation PKR could be the winning PR member with the majority of seats, with him as CM wakakaka. Here's a case of a greedy gluttonous grabbing beast which had refused to share and ate more than it could practically swallow, and now blames DAP for its tummy ache. Padan muka.
Of course I would not be surprised if PKR has been singing a different tune in Johor where it sure as hell doesn't want DAP to contest in the so-called 'black seats', wakakaka. Okay, let's move back to Sarawak. I wasn't surprised by CT Ali's article in FMT titled What comes first for Anwar? because I can easily answer Ali's titled question, wakakaka. Anyway Ali, pissed off with Anwar's wheeling and dealing with super-frog Lajim Ukin in Sabah, has been super pissed off with Anwar and Taib (yes, the Sarawak peh moh) 'holding each others' hands', wakakaka.
Guess CJM has been right about Johor, Sabah and Sarawak representing the 3 vital states in GE-13 where principles, let alone the bullsh*t reforms, have been trampled upon virtually everyday. Poor frustrated CT Ali wrote:
| ||||||||||||
| Just say NO to party party Malaya Posted: 11 Jan 2013 03:48 PM PST Many among us have become naive in mind and spirit. Allowing fear to create a philosophy of no can do. Where others see opportunity, we see hardship. When push to a corner we capitulate and succumbed to appeasement. When confronted, we find excuses for timidity. When described as cowards we justify our behaviour as preserving life and use God to justify our weakness. Such traits have gotten us a raw deal with Malaya. However, such traits are good if appreciated. The problem was, we were never appreciated in a respectable manner. Instead, we were marked for marginalization. Being innocent in worldly affairs, our people always wears a pleasant smile because our natural world is beautiful and naturally peaceful. Indeed, living in a "Land below the wind" does have its advantages.People tend to expect a longer life expectancy, build a larger family, and take a laid back attitude for there is no rush to undertake or overtake anything. The land is rich with eatable wild plants, healing herbs, one of a kind creature, and filled with valuable sources of energy such as oil and gas. Life is great, so it seems! In our slumber, we become complacent. When other societies around the world had to learn and adapt to their harsh environment, they also learnt to improve their human condition and ingenuity. Thus, they became more sophisticated and advanced than those that seldom went through catastrophic trials in life. In short, Sabahans had to be content with the status quo for a long time because we were programmed to feel contented within our narrow sphere of existence. That explains how little have changed in our society and our communities over 20 years. We were never progressive because we were excluded from the executive planning committee. We were controlled by a political bundestag that spouts supremacy of race and religion, while foolishly ignoring nature's common sense. The ultimate puzzle lies with us. We are a people who have become reliant on government to feed us. Not that we wanted to be fed by government, but because we are living in poverty, therefore, we have no choice but to rely on government. Hand outs are common place in our society. Hand outs are a welcome gesture, but a hand out is also a tool of the devil that may be. Living in poverty makes us an easy target for hand outs. If use by the dark forces for unscrupulous intent then we are doomed. The trick is to not put ourselves within the confines of poverty. This is the challenge of a leader. A leader who cares for the people must find a solution that would elevate the standard of living of the people. A good leader will guarantee that the people are well cared for. Too many of our past leaders did not meet these standards of leadership. Being of poor disposition, a position of leadership put them in a frenzy to enrich themselves instead of finding a solution that is good for everyone. These are the quality of leaderships we have had for so many years. The cycle of bad leadership could not be broken because the yoke of poverty continues to elude us. People vote for the same leadership repeatedly because they have been program by the poverty mind-set to expect better things for so little. It is not uncommon to meet a person in the kampong who tells you that he or she is satisfied with what they have. That, although, life was hard, he or she is thankful that they have something to eat. That if there were no foods at the pantry they can always rely on the jungle to provide food (makes me wonder what will they do if the jungle is gone.). So whenever a wealthy personality comes along and give hard cash they see it a treasure worthy of their votes. This ignorant programming is bolstered by a government whose agenda are bias and bigoted for a selfish ambition. Therefore, here comes the story of the good versus the evil. For those of us who understand the matrix involved and wishes to change for the better, we will stand and struggle for the good side. Those that served a selfish and bigoted agenda stand on the evil side. Evil somehow tends to be stronger because they have no qualms in using whatever means to achieve their agenda. So the good had to struggle to the brink of exhaustion just to get even. The evil side always have the upper hand, whiles the good side has to rely on the people's sense of justice and integrity to build a strong foundation. For the good, it is a hazardous journey, but for the evil it is a game of chance and slight of hand. The good does not gamble, whilst the evil is a gambler with a gun.
| ||||||||||||
| 7 Reasons To Go for Malaysian Public Rallies Posted: 11 Jan 2013 10:53 AM PST 2) Legal Aid Lawyers actually give free representation to those arrested! Yes, lawyers actually doing work for free! Crazy! Shocking! 3) Hot chicks/studs. 'nuff said. Remember Bersih 3.0, anyone? 4) Good cardio workout. Nothing like running for your dear lives. Forget running a marathon! Orfaux pas zombies. 5) Networking. Where the hell else can you find thousands of people believing in the same cause/having something in common? Church? A Multi-racial crowd, cutting across even social-economical and religious backgrounds! Astounding! Read more at: http://www.loyarburok.com/2013/01/11/7-reasons-malaysian-public-rallies/
| ||||||||||||
| Royal fatwa on Allah word - has HRH been let down by advisor(s)? Posted: 09 Jan 2013 02:47 PM PST RPK has lamented on this, which I detected in one post of his where a visitor challenged him on issues he had actually explained comprehensively in that post, wakakaka. Given the experts' etymological and historical clarifications on the Allah word, I am in no doubt that Father Lawrence Andrew is on strong legal grounds to use it ... and indeed we know that the court has supported his stand. […] Legally, High Court Judge Lau Bee Lan had ruled as unconstitutional the Malaysian government's ban of the use of Allah as the Bahasa equivalent of the word God in the Catholic Herald. […] I'm afraid on a personal basis, kaytee isn't all that supportive of the Church's insistence on using the Allah word to represent/indicate/describe their Christian God in the Malay language. […] But I have always believed that religion is about faith and morality and not legality or for that matter, political approval. Thus I find it unfortunate that the Father Andrew and the Catholic Herald had taken the issue to the courts. Surely on a matter of religious faith and knowledge, there are numerous other names of God it could have use beside Allah. I view its arguments for the use of Allah as seemingly based on obduracy and legality rather than any plausible unavoidable reason. I then went on to detail my challenge to Father Lawrence Andrew's arguments. Apart from shooting down Father Andrew's arguments that the Allah word is vital because the Tuhan word is inadequate for serving the message in some biblical passages, I also voiced my sympathy for the Muslim community's concerns for the reason I know the Christian Church has an evangelistic mission ... ... and endowing it with a Bahasa version of the Bible (al Kitab) which uses the Allah word to refer to the Christian god would be akin to asking lil' Johnny to mind the cookie jar to ensure it's not raided, a totally unrealistic expectation. I have been and still am deeply concerned that the potential (and actual realization) of the issue of Christian proselytizing of Muslims, will destabilize further the already shaky politically-affected inter-communal relationship, with all its attendant unpleasant consequences, ... ... of which we obtained an ugly glimpse of when a mufti sms-ed his followers to stop a fabricated case of a church in Perak proselytizing Muslims. On New Year's day I had a chitchat with my matey, Ong Kian Ming whose Malaysiakini article Allah row - what's the name of the game? I had challenged. Kian Ming was his usual gentlemanly self where he kindly took on the task of explaining to me the logistical problems involved in switching from al Kitab's Allah word to what I have suggested, to wit, Yahweh, Elohim and a host of other Hebraic appellations that the Christian god is better known by in the Christian world. I've been impressed by Kian Ming's masterly grasp on the logistic issue, though it must be noted too both of us didn't touch on the Church's evangelistic angle. Unfortunately due to pressing prior engagements I was not able to continue discussion with him on the topic. But nonetheless, the point I wish to make is that while I didn't and still don't support the Church's intention to use the Allah word, I have never questioned its legal rights (thus far, until the government's appeal is known) to use that word in its newsletter, the Catholic Herald, and al Kitab. I am taking the trouble to reiterate this because (a) of the poor reading skills of some visitors wakakaka, and (b) the thrust of this new post. This new post refers to an article in The Malaysian Insider, namely, Non-Muslims must not use 'Allah', says Selangor Sultan. MAIS informed us HRH Sultan Selangor has decreed that the word Allah is a sacred word specific to Muslims in a fatwa gazetted 3 years ago, and thus must not be used by any non-Muslim religion in Selangor. Look mateys, there must be no doubt that while HRH is a constitutional monarchy, he has a role which entitles him to issue direct decrees, that is, those on Islamic affairs in his state of Selangor, as he is the head of the Islamic religion in Selangor. And on such Islamic issues, it has been claimed that he would be advised by the Menteri Besar (MB). It has been precisely this factor, that of the MB of a state or his deputy advising HRH on Islamic affairs, that in March 2008, immediately after the general election, we saw Khalid Ibrahim, then appointed MB of Selangor, tap dancing away from appointing his deputy. DAP, the second largest component of the informal (winning) coalition in Selangor, had nominated sweetie Teresa Kok to be the deputy MB. But Khalid Ibrahim did not deal courageously with the triple political whammy (to him) candidate proposed as his deputy, one who was/is a Chabor (woman), Chinese and a Christian (all rolled into one), a triple-C factor which sh*tted him ... ... whilst the neighbouring State of Perak also saw HRH Regent sidelined Ngeh Koo Ham of DAP (the Pakatan party with the most number of ADUNs) and picked instead Nizar Jamaluddin of PAS (the Pakatan party with the least number of ADUNs) to be the state's new MB. Mind you, HRH's choice, for whatever reason, turned out to be a serendipitious one for us. It was alleged that Muhammad Munir Bani, the Selangor sultan's private secretary, had advised Khalid Ibrahim about the palace's 'preference' for a Malay (and, alas, not a Malaysian) deputy MB. However, Muhammad Munir denied reports that HRH wanted 'a deputy from a particular race' (meaning 'Malay'), although he added the sultan was the religious head for Islam and Malay culture, and thus the MB has the task of assisting in these duties, which in his absence would also have to handled by his deputy. In that most unbelievable zigzagging explanation, Muhammad Munir, after denying HRH wanted a Malay deputy MB, in the same breath averred that it was only proper a Malay (not a Malaysian) be the deputy MB. Following that, Malaysiakini reported in Expert: No legal need for Malay deputy MB that Prof Abdul Aziz Bari, a constitutional expert who lectured law at the International Islamic University Malaysia, was consulted on the matter. Prof Abdul Aziz dismissed Muhammad Munir's claims that the deputy MB should ideally be a Malay to assist the MB in Islamic and cultural duties. The Prof said: "The Sultan of Selangor does not need the menteri besar or the deputy menteri besar in matters pertaining to religion and Malay custom." According to the Prof, the sultan, as the head of Islamic matters and the Malay adat, is the person in charge of such matters in the state, and not the MB or his deputy. He said: "Matters cited by the palace are entirely within the sultan's jurisdiction. As the sultan may act on his own discretion on these matters, the constitution provides that a council may be appointed to assist him. This is what is commonly known as religious councils or majlis agama, which looks after the religious department or the jabatan agama. In the other four states and federal territories, the Agong will have the same establishment." Prof Abdul Aziz also commented that a prolonged delay in the appointment of a deputy MB was unnecessary and might even be unconstitutional. But when asked whether the appointment of a Deputy MB had been postponed or scrapped altogether, Khalid Ibrahim side-stepped the issue by stating the need to explain the matter (what?) properly to the people (who?), and that he would do this after the executive councillors had been sworn-in (why?).
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: 09 Jan 2013 11:24 AM PST To be very, very honest I was quite gobsmacked and was in confusion when I heard from one of my favourite maestre Tukar Tiub Hishamuddin Rais that there was a sequel to the already massive BERSIH 3.0 to be held this Saturday, 12 January 2012, namely for a mega-rally dubbed #KL112. Coupled with his obvious disdain for apocalypse that makes the Mayan Grand-Witch doctor fume with rage, Tukar Tiub went on the offensive against his arch-nemesis the United Malays National Organisation (of which he stubbornly refuse to dub otherwise) by enlisting the NGO, opposition parties, the punks and skinheads; to be honest everything under the unfalling sky that is 'Anything But UMNO' or more affectionately known as ABU; in joining forces (again) to pressure Najib Razak into a position that would make the late Bobby Fischer, Gary Kasparov and Anatoly Karpov blush with admiration. For here are the facts: (1) Najib Razak has now been drawn into a corner (yet again) in his pussy-footing over calling for the 13th Malaysian General Elections. If Najib Razak deals with this rally with force as was what had happened in BERSIH 3.0, he would face another big, big backlash among the young voters, of whom believe that freedom of assembly should not be curtailed. On the other hand, if he gives in and allows the demo to proceed, he would obviously be regarded as a reformer, though would be at loggerheads with the far-rightist in his right wing organisation including (but not limited to) PERKASA, who is UMNO's step-sister on his stepdad's side twice removed. (2) All these very tall tales of UMNO and BN's 'transformation' would again be rendered bland if heavy-handedness were to prevail. All BRIMs, KRIMs and stuff would be effectively neutralised and Najib would be left trying to salvage his efforts through ANOTHER round of an mandatory but improved BRIM etc with maybe a RM3000 payout financed by IMF loans this time around and blaming it to Anwar Ibrahim. (3) Malaysia has high domestic and extra-terrestrial debts for which is well documented which runs to more than a couple of hundred billion Ringgits - nothing much. But Najib Razak knows that corruption of the citizenry has a very high price - that is the Rakyat will feel that they deserve it and that the next handout MUST be more than the previous. At the rate he is going by labelling everything under the sun as being 1Malaysia, we will have a very difficult time finding out what is NOT 1Malaysia. Desperation has seen that even recycled bread is now fielding that name, no matter how ingenius the idea was. Read more at: http://puterakemuning.blogspot.com/2013/01/kl112-res-ipsa-loquitur.html | ||||||||||||
| When Yong is hungry like the wolves Posted: 09 Jan 2013 10:46 AM PST President of Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) Taiko Yong Teck Lee's romancing of the Barisan National may end his love affair with the Sabah opposition front soon. But this new love story bring up the moot question as to why he is so desperate when the Barisan National has hardly given any indication to warmly accommodate him under its fold. Sources in the Barisan National say Yong Teck Lee can't be trusted. How can they depend on a leader who was willing to ditch the Barisan National — his decade-old senior partner — when he felt the relations between both were strained because of one man Pak Lah? Earlier too, Yong Teck Lee parted ways with Pairin Kitingan and formed the SAPP. The gainer of this triangular game being played in the state may be Shafie Apdal a good friend of Yong Teck Lee who is waiting and watching in the wings to take over as chief minister from Musa Aman. Remember when Yong Teck Lee was chief minister he together with Shafie Apdal milked Yayasan Sabah until it nearly when dry? However, thanks to Musa Aman,he saved the day for Yayasan Sabah. Even Lajim Ukin, Sabah's famous party hopper and old buddy of Yong Teck Lee from the Party Bersatu Sabah (PBS) days where both began their political career and where both plotted to destroy PBS are seen regularly together nowadays. If recent gathering in the meetings of SAPP is any indication, then Yong Teck Lee being adamant to go for a majority of the state seats (60 in Sabah) this coming looming 13th general election on what he termed as "the principle of Sabah autonomy" is all about splitting the opposition votes and helping Barisan National win big. The political signal coming from Yong Teck Lee in the last few months indicate that he is trying to sail on two boats — Barisan National and Pakatan Rakyat — at the same time. His shifting statements to keep both the major political parties in good humour may end with a backlash. At the same time, Pakatan Rakyat camp specially The Democratic Action Party (DAP) feels that Yong Teck Lee is not dependable and his track record for the last couple of years shows that he is more committed to divide and split the opposition votes. It is a known fact that despite poor governance Yong Teck Lee ruled this politically vibrant state for 2 years but a lot say he worked 4 long years (pun added because he worked day and night 24hours a day making hay while there is sunshine with his partner in crime Joseph Ambrose Lee). Read more at: http://selvarajasomiah.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/when-yong-is-hungry-like-the-wolves/
| ||||||||||||
| Five contradictions in restricting the use of 'Allah' Posted: 08 Jan 2013 09:38 AM PST The contradictions are as follows. 1. If we disallow non-Muslims from using the word 'Allah', are we implying that Allah has no relation to the non-Muslims, that Allah did not create the non-Muslims, but to whom Allah must belong if He is the Creator of all things? 2. If we say Allah is not the god of the non-Muslims, does this not imply that besides Allah there must exist a second god specifically for the non-Muslims, the former god of Muslim converts? Does this not clash with the Islamic concept of tauhid, which proposes that there cannot possibly be another god apart from Allah, and that no being can perform the work of a god other than Allah? 3. If we maintain that 'Allah' has no relevance to other religions, who then ultimately created these religions if not Allah, the Creator of all things? Are we suggesting that Allah got it wrong before unveiling Islam? But if tauhid is to stand and Allah is the sole Creator, and if Allah is infallible, perfect and all-knowing, does it not mean that Allah happily created, with no games intended, all the variety of religions and religious philosophies including Christianity and Hinduism? Read more at: http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2465&catid=219&Itemid=189
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: 07 Jan 2013 12:47 PM PST Whatever Dr M says however, must never be brushed off as inconsequential. Like Robert Mugabe and Hosni Mubarak, he has a large following and some rebuttal is required lest people believe him. He first flogged US President Barack Obama as someone who did not deliver on his promises of change. He forgets that Obama was re-elected with an bigger margin than the first time he won the presidency. Dr M also ignores the fact that American citizens are in a better position to judge their President than a wealthy but old and retired Malaysian Prime Minister. He then went on to say that Anwar and his friends in the Pakatan would bring havoc to the country, even if they rule for only five years. Anwar and the Pakatan, he said, would make all kinds of sweet promises but would not be able to deliver them. Why? The main thrusts of his argument were as follows: Anwar did not accomplish much when he was in government, and even when he tried to do something, he was a disaster. During the 1998 financial crisis, for example, he wanted to follow the solutions prescribed by the International Monetary Fund, solutions Dr M said would have only bankrupted the country. He then said Anwar is not as pious or religious as he appears, and is a corrupt politician who practises cronyism to enrich his friends and family. For now, my response to these allegations is to say that even if all of the above were true, we should still give Anwar and his friends a chance to rule. This is because Dr M is unable to give an objective assesment of Anwar. He is dumfounded that his nemesis is not only politically alive, but will probably be the next Prime Minister. Dr M is unable to accept this possibility as this would be a devastating defeat for him. Dr M is unable to accept that the person he targeted with the whole machinery of the state is still an active political leader who is more popular than he is. In other words, Dr M is too disturbed by Anwar's thriving success to give a balanced view . I have been an Anwar follower from afar for a long time. I was never his friend, but my interest in politics made me especially interested in him when my first preference, Tun Musa Hitam, pulled out of the political arena. When Anwar was sacked in 1998 and the black eye incident became worldwide news, I felt really sorry for him. I could not do much except to quietly support the Free Anwar campaign. I even named my horse "Deputy Coming Back" in 2000 as a symbolic gesture of support. Unlike Dr M, I can give a better and more detached assesment of both Anwar and his friends in the Pakatan, which voters in the upcoming General Election can rely on. Yes, Anwar did not do much good when he was in UMNO. His tenure as Education Minister was poor and even as Deputy Prime Minister, he was not a trailblazer. He was imperious, feudalistic, strong willed and more interested in strenghtening his position in the party than pushing for real reform. But he was obviously good enough for the job; Dr M would not have picked him as his successor otherwise. Anwar was never shy about showing off his Malay and Islamic agendas, even if these made non- Malays/non-Muslims uncomfortable. His "slaughter" of Tun Ghafar Baba manifested the rapacious character of a man who was willing to abandon friendship and good behaviour so long as he could become Prime Minister. He had friends and allies who were given concessions and allotted shares in public companies. There was no doubt that he was filling up his war chest. In short, he did what a typical UMNO leader would do if he wants to move up the ladder and be Prime Minister. However, I believe that tragic and traumatic experiences can change a man. Anwar has suffered more than any political leader I know and because of these hardships, he is a different man today. He still wants to be Prime Minister (who doesn't), but he knows Malaysians have also changed. Today the people want a cleaner and more responsible Government. They do not want a corrupt leader who would only enrich himself, his party and his family. Anwar and the members of his family are not rich, and live modestly. Stories of him having billions stashed away are lies. He has wealthy friends, of course, and they have kept his struggle going. I don't believe money is terribly important to Anwar and his family, so I don't think we will have pilferage on a huge scale when he becomes Prime Minister. So one up for him. Malaysians also want to coexist in harmony. They are tired of UMNO's divide-and-rule system. Anwar has travelled far and wide in his political campaigns and has seen for himself how groups outside the gated communities live. He relates well with the rural as well as the urban poor and emphatises with the grievances of the marginalised. His concern for the less fortunate is genuine. His strong sense of justice is perhaps due to his own experiences, but they are real and something we can trust him with. He has changed, but Dr M has not. Two up. An important point to remember is that Anwar has a close relationship with PAS. I was initially sceptical that PAS could ever be a strong political force in a moderate Malaysia because for many years, they were hystericaly extreme in their views. Today Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang is no longer the firebrand Islamic leader from Rusila of the 1980's, but a moderate and practical politician. PAS has many young and moderate leaders, and they inject a strong ethical amd moral dimension to governance, at least more so than UMNO. I believe Anwar's influence on PAS and political Islam as a whole is positive. Three up.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan