Rabu, 16 Januari 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Religious Pluralism: The Key to Overcoming Global Conflict and Achieving Peace

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 10:17 AM PST

http://media.patheos.com/Images/HNPT/HNPT_RameshRao_100.jpg 

Those who assert that their religious faith is the only one that paves the way to God contribute to human suffering and conflict.

Ramesh Rao, Patheos Hindu 

The only way we can reduce human conflict is to understand the human quest for liberation, knowledge, and finding the answers to the fundamental questions that have troubled us—Who are we? Why are we here? Where do we go from here?—is to acknowledge that we can access answers to these questions using a variety of means, under the guidance of a variety of spiritual and religious leaders, and as adherents to any of the world's faith groups.

The other facet of this argument is that those who claim God for themselves, or assert that their religious faith is the only one that paves the way to God contribute to human suffering and conflict by denying others the right to follow their own spiritual instincts, their God-given freedom to probe the universe as they wish. They do so by imposing hierarchies that categorize people as infidels or believers, saved or lost, devil worshipers or God-followers, and heathens or religious people. These exclusivist and monopolistic claims to God then pave the way to predatory proselytism, and the denial of agency to others—the "adhikara" (authority or ownership) and "ishta" (desired, liked)—guiding principles that shape the Hindu pursuit of transcending the mundane.

This argument is not new. In fact, I wrote a short piece for United Press International's "religion and spirituality forum" in 2006, which I think can describe why religious pluralism is essential to mitigating conflict in the world. Before we get there, we have to clarify what pluralism means. Swami Vivekananda said, "We not only tolerate, but we Hindus accept every religion, praying in the mosque of the Mohammedans, worshipping the fire of the Zoroastrians, and kneeling before the Cross of Christians, knowing that all the religions, from the lowest fetishism to the highest absolutism, mean so many attempts of the human soul to grasp and realize the infinite, each determined by the conditions of its birth and association, and each of them marking a stage of progress" (The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, pp. 331-32). Vivekananda was stating something a hundred years before what Professor Diana Eck of Harvard and the Pluralism Project callnecessary conditions for the practice of and belief in pluralism. Pluralism, for her, has to be "the energetic engagement with diversity . . . , the active seeking of understanding across lines of difference . . . , the encounter of commitments . . ." arrived at through dialogue. In 2006 we had a visitor at Longwood University where I teach. He was a holocaust survivor. Jay Ipson, President and Executive Director of the Virginia Holocaust Museum, came to talk to our students about love, hate, and bigotry. He began by asking the luncheon audience what it was that made Germans hate the Jews. One person said that maybe Germans learned it at home; another said that the media played a role; and yet another offered the hypothesis that maybe they learned it at school. I suggested that it was religion that was at the bottom of that hatred. He nodded his head, looked around, and asked us to consider that fact.

In the audience were a Presbyterian minister, a Catholic priest, and Christians of other denominations. People uncomfortably shifted in their chairs, and one person said that religions don't teach hate but people misuse religion. Is that true, Ipson asked, and he himself seemed to indicate that it might be so. Some others pointed out that there is much in religious literature that is problematic, if not hateful.

Ipson's story of survival in a Lithuanian Jewish ghetto, and of escape with his father and mother from the ghetto, while the rest of his family was sent to the concentration camps and to their deaths, made us all acknowledge the real import of religious discrimination. Ipson still retains a strong German/European accent but has a fine command of American colloquial English. His talk was precise, and he avoided the politically correct clichés that many modern speakers use to soften the horrors of the past, and the vulgarities of the present.

The holocaust survivor's story is important not only in the context of continuing anti-Semitism but it can also provide the context for pluralism, the lessons we can learn from Hinduism, and the concerns of Hindus, Native Americans, and others about the effects of predatory proselytism—aggressive and manipulative efforts at converting others through force, fraud, seduction, and lies.

At the end of his presentation, Ipson asked the audience what they felt were the answers to reducing conflict and hate. There were the usual suggestions of education, interfaith dialogue, acceptance, and so on. I raised my hand. Once again, there was some uncomfortable shifting in the chairs. I was, after all, the first one in the audience to say that some people learn hate from religion, and Ipson had acknowledged that. He also found that I was the one person in the audience who knew the group, other than the Nazis, who had mandated the wearing of a piece of colored cloth to identify the "other": these were the Taliban, who in Afghanistan had mandated that Hindus wear yellow-colored clothing to identify themselves as Hindus.

Read more at: http://www.patheos.com/Hindu/Religious-Pluralism-Ramesh-Rao-01-07-2013?offset=1&max=1 

‘Allah’ & Freud’s Borrowed Kettle

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 10:09 AM PST

http://i.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/9/2/0/17920.jpg?v=1 

Alwyn Lau 

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Not long after, Man messed it up. Somehow we managed to produce greed, pollution, bad music and value meals. We also started parties like UMNO which gave birth to bigger groups like Barisan Nasional - and now even God is in trouble.

What's the name of God if not the name for truth, love and power which over-shadows the pain of the world? What's the on-going controversy over the name of God – 'Allah' - if not a game of shadows?

East Malaysian Christians have been calling God 'Allah' since creation; therefore any suggestion that they should now be disallowed to do so is akin to cronies telling the orang asli their forest homes are now up for grabs.

Barisan Nasional is getting desperate, so why not churn up some friendly-fire? Why not strike at the heart of Pakatan's "Odd One In", PAS? Of course, many are wondering: Why couldn't PAS' Syura Council wait till May to throw cold water over the Sikhs and Bornean Christians? What a divine mystery. Then again, maybe we shouldn't discredit God. For surely He is pragmatic enough to not fling a spanner into an election that may potentially topple an unjust government, whatever His approved name(s)?

Also, the whole fiasco sounds like Freud's story of the borrowed kettle. A man borrowed a kettle from his neighbour. Later when he returned the kettle, the neighbour complained that it's broken and there are cracks. The man vehemently denied it – in three ways. First, by insisting that he didn't borrow that particular kettle at all. Second, by claiming the returned kettle is in perfect condition. Finally, by explaining that the cracks were already there when he borrowed it. Even the pot would conclude that something isn't right. The very contradictories of the replies prove the falsity of the man's denial.

Does this not resemble PAS' response? At first, it was no problem : Non-Muslims can use 'Allah' (which, really, is like telling an American it's fine to call his mother Mum). This later evolved to Okay, non-Muslims can use it as long as they don't abuse it (which is like telling a Brit that he has the right to call his PM 'David' as long as he doesn't insult other perspectives of 'David'). Then the u-turn came and suddenly the word is exclusively for Muslims (which is like a theologian disagreeing with Webster Dictionary's definition of the word 'the'). But in the latest twist it became: Okay, non-Muslims can use it as long as they believe in one God (which is like telling A&W they can continue serving Coney Dogs as long as this doesn't violate the 'one sausage' rule).

Does the above sound like a 'borrowed kettle' argument to you? Doesn't the form of PAS' responses render suspect their whole argument? Probably the two most confused parties here are the average atheist and God Himself.

Finally, fretting over who can or cannot use 'Allah' sounds like the biggest red herring in Malaysia, given our many problems - like too many cars, too little water, and some folks saying 'listen' too many times. On this point, it is interesting to note how nobody grabbed the mike from Sharifah Zohra Jabeen and how, in fact, many in the auditorium applauded her berating of law student, KS Bawani. Why didn't someone stop Sharifah? Doesn't this remind you of the case in the United States where a crime was taking place and, despite many people watching through their windows, nobody helped? Why not? Because they believed someone else would.

The parallel between the UUM fiasco and the 'Allah' controversy is how, even right now, no one from within the government dares to 'grab the mike' from the Islamic authorities (including the Sultan) regarding this issue. Why? Because 'Allah' is exclusively for Muslims. Because Islam doesn't restrict the use of 'Allah' to Muslims, but the word shouldn't be abused. Because the Christians believe in three gods and thus shouldn't use 'Allah' in their Bibles.

Do we see the broken kettle? Or are we waiting for someone else to point it out?

 

Allah is not the problem, mankind is

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 09:59 AM PST

http://cdn2.2dayblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/langit-israk-mikraj.jpg 

In each religion, it is only normal for their religion to tell them that theirs is the only and correct religion. Others are not correct. In fact, they are false. This is alright, because the constitution allows freedom of religion. But what a person believes must only be confined to himself or herself. They are not to extend what they believe onto others. If that is done, it will cause war.

Lembu Susu 

I wish to share my thoughts to laypersons and have intentional omitted out Scriptures from both the Quran and the Bible, so as to make it easy reading for both divide.

1. The word 'Allah' is meant only for Muslims and for all who hold the view that there is only one God, according to the PAS Majlis Syura. This view resonates well with the majority of Muslims in Malaysia. The non-Muslims and the Christians must understand that the reason PAS do not allow the word 'Allah' in the Bible translation was because of theological reasons. Christians hold the view that God is a Trinity; that is, the belief in a Triune God (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Though the Christians maintain that they believe in One God, the concept of the Trinity is unacceptable in Islam. Hence, if the Christians were to use the word 'Allah' for their God, then, it will not represent correctly the 'Allah' of the Muslim God.

2. The Christians, on the other hand, has a problem if they use the word 'Allah' without qualification. The problem is that the 'Allah' of the Bible is not the same as the 'Allah' of the Quran. For example, the Christians believe the Bible teaches monogamous marriages, but in the Quran, polygamy is allowed, albeit with certain conditions. Moreover, in the Quran, jihad also involves wiping out infidels, which is not advocated at all in the New Testament of the Bible. Hence, when the Christians use the word 'Allah' for God, they have to clarify, that though the word 'Allah' is the same word being used for 'God' by both the Christians and the Muslims, yet, the 'Allah' revealed in the Bible is different from the 'Allah' in the Quran.

3. The bottom line is this: 'Allah' is just a word to denote 'God'. It is how you fill that word with meaning. This is where the teachings in the Quran and in the Bible gives meaning to the word 'Allah' by each religion.

4. But if we are to look it from another angle, actually, Allah is greater than any human words can express. Allah cannot be confined to a word. Words are only necessary to help man connect to Him, but He is greater than a word. In fact, there is no word that is sufficient to address Him. He is beyond words. He cannot be reduced to just a word, 'Allah'. He is greater than any words mankind can call Him.

5. So, on 'Allah's side, there is no issue for the Muslims and there is no issue for the Christians. He will never be confused by the Christians or by the Muslims.

6. As for Muslims and Christians, there are also no confusion with the word 'Allah', as the years have proven. It is how you fill the meaning of the word 'Allah'. The teachings from the Quran and the Bible will give understanding and meaning to that word, by each one's religion accordingly.

7. Every person will believe his or her religion is the correct and right one. Malaysia has existed in harmony all these years because of the mutual respect shown towards another person's religion and faith.

8. In each religion, it is only normal for their religion to tell them that theirs is the only and correct religion. Others are not correct. In fact, they are false. This is alright, because the constitution allows freedom of religion. But what a person believes must only be confined to himself or herself. They are not to extend what they believe onto others. If that is done, it will cause war.

9. Though Islam is the religion of the Federation, the Constitution allows freedom of religion. Hence, to stretch one's belief and impose it on others infringes on the rights of a citizen.

10. The non-Muslims cannot impose on the Muslims their beliefs, neither can the Muslims' beliefs be imposed onto the non-Muslims. Instead, there must be mutual respect for one another's beliefs.

11. No one can tell another religion what word they can use and what word they cannot use. If this is allowed, it will break down the peace and harmony that was built and cherished all these years. It will be the same as telling them, 'you cannot practice your own religion, because your religion violates my religious beliefs; and we all know that it is common for almost every religion, if adhered fully, will violate another. If this happens, then, there will be provocation and war.

So, in conclusion, may the one in authority not use their authority to impose one's beliefs onto another, just because this is what they believe in. Instead, the call for restraint and respect over one another's faith and belief should be paramount and be upheld. Let the Muslims respect the non-Muslims' faith and beliefs, and vice-versa the non-Muslims respect the Muslims' faith and beliefs. If 'Allah' is consider a sacred word to the Muslims, then, keep it within the context of that religion. Don't impose it on another, who may not share the same beliefs. The Christians have no intention to hurt or to confuse the Muslims. They are only asking for their right to practice their own religion, using a word that has been there and has already being used all these years.

Surat dr PM

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 09:55 AM PST

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTx6-fhz9B-4DxkEGR-WfaambQdtvxQPTBGxY7gGGz3VTPyPhHET9QY5pBvCZR2E70_CVac1IJKsLjcq_cIDJnU5NUEyxFlWaPBmpXb-D752IvAXWmVw1TvqI1d0gQNwwCv9ssLwJ_vzQu/s1600/surat+PM.jpg 

Changing Our Mindset 

Pengundi di Selangor sudah mula menerima surat ucapan Selamat Tahun Baru 2013 & sekeping kalendar poket versi BN di dalam peti surat mereka. Saya menerimanya semalam dan amat terharu dengan keinsafan yg dinyatakan dan janji-janji untuk perubahan yg diutarakan di dalam surat tersebut. Pastinya ramai Pak Cik- Pak Cik dan Mak Cik- Mak Cik yg menitiskan air mata kesyahduan penuh keinsafan semasa membaca surat tersebut.


Tetapi kami yang tinggal di Selangor tahu berita yg disensasikan di akhbar-akhbar dan media massa arus perdana tentang keburukan pentadbiran Kerajaan PR Selangor lebih banyak tohmahan daripada kebenaran. Penduduk luar Selangor mungkin boleh ditipu kerana mereka tak tinggal di Selangor. Bagi kami rakyat Selangor kami tahu MB kami tak ambil jam tangan bernilai lebih RM100,000 sebagai cenderahati daripada PKNS seperti amalan yang lepas, MB kami prihatinkan kebajikan rakyat, kami tak perlu bayar bil air sejak tahun 2008 jika isi rumah kami cuma 3 org dan bermacam2 lagi keindahan yang tak dpt Kerajaan Negeri Selangor di bawah BN berikan sepanjang lebih 50 tahun pemerintahan. Dulu kami nampak ramai pemimpin-pemimpin BN Selangor yang mewah-mewah, yang kaya makin kaya, yang miskin semakin miskin. 

 

Read more at: http://ikhlasmalaysia.blogspot.com/2013/01/surat-dr-pm.html  

Bawani gets MCA, PAS youth wings support

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 12:33 AM PST

(fz.com) - The MCA Youth Education Bureau says it is "astounded" at the "uncouth behaviour" displayed by Suara Wanita 1Malaysia president Sharifah Zohra Jabeen Syed Shah Miskin against UUM law student KS Bawani at a forum held at the university.

"As much as Sharifah may have disagreed with Bawani's views, as a moderator, she should have displayed maturity and allowed the student to complete her views and then offer a differing view in a diplomatic and constructive manner," bureau chairman Chong Sin Woon said in a statement today.

Sharifah berated Bawani, who is a Parti Sosialis Malaysia member, after the latter disagreed with the forum's pro-government slant, especially with regards to Bersih.  Bawani had also questioned why Malaysia is unable to provide free tertiary education.
 
Although the incident took place on Dec 8, it is only making news now after a video clip of the exchange of words between Sharifah and Bawani went viral on YouTube last week.
 
Chong, in his statement, applauded Bawani for urging the public not to make sexual innuendoes against Sharifah, saying it showed the student's magnanimity, maturity and concern for the security of all women.
 
"Sharifah with the degree she proudly extols should be able to learn a thing or two from the undergraduate whose education background she belittled.
 
"Sharifah's behaviour of assuming that public condescension, and getting the audience to support her to shut and obliterate different views belongs to a bygone era," he added. 
 
Meanwhile, PAS Youth has congratulated Bawani  "for her courage in stating her stand", according to PAS organ Harakahdaily.  
 
A PAS Youth delegation, led by executive council member Mohd Hakim Mohd Nor, visited  Bawani at her house in Kampar, Perak to express the movement's support for the "plucky" student.
 
Bawani was quoted as saying that she was touched by the support she has been receiving from various people, and that it had strengthened her to keep fighting for students' rights.
 
PAS Youth vice leader Dr Raja Ahmad Iskandar, in a statement, said the incident at  UUM showed that students were no longer afraid of stating their stand.
 
"The courage shown by Bawani will serve as an example to be emulated by the youth in rising up to speak the truth wherever they are without being fearful of action against them," he said.
 
Ameerah Malaysia, a youth group which forms part of PAS's Muslimat wing, added to the calls for Sharifah to apologise to Bawani.
 
"We urge Sharifah Zohra to apologise to Bawani publicly, in the same way she had humiliated Bawani (publicly)," the group's chief Fareedah Samad told Harakahdaily.

 

Student bodies rally behind Bawani

Posted: 16 Jan 2013 12:31 AM PST

Stephanie Sta Maria, fz.com

Within a day of a video clip of her public humiliation going viral, K S Bawani has been deluged by messages of support from outraged university student bodies.

The University Utara Malaysia (UUM) student became an overnight sensation after the 24-minute clip showed her being berated by a panellist at a UUM forum entitled "Are University Students In Line With Politics?".
 
The panelist, Sharifah Zohra Jabeen Syed Shah Miskin, let loose a barrage of insults at Bawani for speaking out against forum organisers for what she believed was their wrongful presentation of Bersih and its leaders. 
 
Bawani had also questioned why Malaysia was unable to offer free tertiary education unlike other countries. 
 
Sharifah Zohra Jabeen however mocked Bawani's opinions and belittle her intellect before launching into a startling monologue on problems faced by animals. 
 
Internet users have had a field day in showcasing their scorn towards Sharifah Zohra through memes, songs, criticism on her Facebook page and a mock Facebook page for animal complaints.
 
In the midst of that however, another Facebook page entitled "We Are All Bawani" was set up and was almost immediately swamped by messages from indignant Malaysians. The page has garnered more than 24,500 "Likes" so far. 
 
Many university student body representatives posted official statements on the Facebook page with a good number of them demanding that Sharifah issue a public apology to Bawani. 
 
The previously unknown Suara Wanita 1 Malaysia (SW1M), of which Sharifah Zohra Jabeen is president, yesterday said that there was no reason for her to apologise as Bawani should "learn to respect others". 
 
But according to forum participant, Faiz Razali, Bawani had not been provocative and had in fact even asked Sharifah Zohra Jabeen for permission to speak beforehand. 
 
"It was instead the forum itself that was provocative in raising politically sensitive issues that caused discomfort among some of us," Faiz wrote on Facebook. "I was very disappointed at the forum's content." 
 
Vice-president 1 of the Student Representative Council at the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) Ahmad Fathi Salleh pointed out that tertiary education is meant to mold students into individuals who uphold the ideas of intellectualism, critical thinking and refined manners.
 
But to their dismay, he said Bawani's opinions were met with a "hostile disposition" that did not portray the culture of tolerance and open-mindedness. 
 
"Instead it reflected the shallow judgment of a supposedly respectful figure," Ahmad stated. "We firmly stand with Bawani and it's for the speaker to apologise to university students for degrading our rationale and intellect."
 
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia's Student Society vice-president 1 Nur Afifah Abdull Rahim, meanwhile, noted the irony in Bawani being humiliated for voicing an opinion that was in line with the forum's theme. 
 
Izham Ismail from Universiti Malaya's (UM) Student Representative Committee called Sharifah's behaviour "unacceptable" and contradictory to what students are championing. 
 
"As students, our rights must be defended, our voices must be nurtured and our hearts, dignity and stand must be prioritized," he said. "Sadly, Sharifah doesn't understand that." 
 
"If Sharifah wants to open our eyes then she should also learn to open her eyes to respecting us. I believe that if animals could talk, they would ask her to do the same."
 
UM also challenged Sharifah Zohra Jabeen to hold a forum on its campus and invited her to join them if UUM does not stand up for her. 
 
UUM's International Affairs Society Committee had already issued a statement condemning Sharifah's Zohra Jabeen behaviour. 
 
"Any rebuttal should be delivered professionally and not through an analogy of animals that had no connection whatsoever to the facts that Bawani had put forth," it said. 
 
Both the committee and the UUM Student Progressive Front have called on Sharifah Zohra Jabeen to issue a public apology to Bawani.
 
Even political parties leapt at the opportunity to support her with Pas Youth vice-chief Raja Ahmad Al Hiss congratulating Bawani for showing that students are now brave enough to voice their political views. 
 
"They are an intellectual group and have the maturity to grasp political issues," he said. "They are not a group to be taken lightly."

 

‘We gave Muslim foreigners IDs to vote’

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 07:16 PM PST

Sabah NRD director tells the RCI that he was personally instructed by Megat Junid Megat Ayub to recruit new voters. 

(FMT) - KOTA KINABALU: A former National Registration Department (NRD) officer told an inquiry here that he took part in a project to give foreigners here identity cards so that they could vote in an election in the 1990s.

Mohd Nasir Sugip, who was detained under the now repealed Internal Security Act (ISA), told the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) he was part of a top secret operation dubbed 'Ops Durian Buruk' (Operation Rotten Durian) on the instruction of his bosses in the department.

He claimed the operation ran from 1992 to 1995 and said the instruction to furnish the foreigners with identity cards so that they could vote came from the state Election Commission (EC).

"At that time, Sabah SPR director Wan Ahmad handed over a list of 16,000 names to be made into 'bumiputera Islam' voters.

"My boss, Sabah NRD director Ramli Kamarudin, then verbally told me to execute this project," he said.

Mohd Nasir said three other individuals were present when the instruction was issued but their names could not be immediately ascertained.

He said he followed the instructions given to him and recruited other officers at the district level for the operation.

Based on a list of names provided by the EC, foreigners were issued with new identity card numbers that contained their date of birth, photographs and names and all were mostly from Sandakan, Tawau, Sempoerna and other parts of the state, he said.

"The list consisted of Filipinos and Indonesians who were Muslim and aged above 21 years," Mohd Nasir told the inquiry.

'We planted voters'

These individuals were then planted as voters in various constituencies around Sabah with the objective of boosting the number of Muslim voters in the state.

"An example is in the state assembly seat of Sugut and the parliamentary seat of Kinabatangan. We planted about 800 voters in Sugut and in the next general election. the result was in favour of BN. The candidate won by 79 votes," he said.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Go to India’, Umno woman tells Bawani

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 07:11 PM PST

Norhayati Saiddin claims that Indians are demanding too much even though they did not know the existence of toilets while living in the estates.

K Pragalath, FMT

The critical comments of a Wanita Umno member regarding law student KS Bawani is causing a stir.

In her Facebook posting, Norhayati Saiddin wrote: "Deii Bawani.. kalau mau pendidikan percuma tanggechi pergi ler belajar sana India… you mother land.. sana tanggechi boleh dapat pree… ammakk!!" (Bawani… if you want free education, go and study in India, your motherland. There you can get free…)

"Untung lorrr… dulu India banyak duduk estet… itu jamban pun lu orang tarak tau… sekarang India org banyak mahu sebab itu BN ada perintah ini negeri." (It's a privilege.. before Indians mostly lived in estates. They didn't even know toilets. Now Indians have a lot of demands that is why BN rules this country.)

Norhayati's Facebook also had a photograph of her posing with three other Wanita Umno members at a function.

Some people who found her comments offensive took a screen capture of the statement and Facebook and tagged her to the photo.

One Facebook user Tajol Ariffin Omar questioned the need for Indians to vote for Umno candidates following such offensive comments.

"It is Umno members' mentality. Indian voters do you still want to vote for Umno?" Tajol wrote and posted a photo which read: "Umno then, now and forever racist"

The photo was also shared in various Facebook group pages such as "1,000,000 Chinese don't want MCA to represent the Chinese."

Bawani had become an overnight sensation went a video of her being reprimanded by a pro-government NGO leader went viral on the Internet.

 

‘Halal’ lifts to avoid cross-contamination

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 04:30 PM PST

The controversial signboards, explains MAH, are there as a preventive measure. 

Jared Pereira, FMT

The controversial signboards at the Crystal Crown Hotel here are not meant to discriminate but were put up to ensure that the guidelines pertaining to "non-halal" food are adhered to, said Malaysian Association of Hotels (MAH) head Reginald Pereira.

He said that the steps were taken to avoid "incidental cross contamination" of food but clarified that no such incidents had happened to date.

According to Pereira, it was more of a preventive measure.

"This is why Crystal Crown had to put up the signboards…which only serves to make sure that suppliers are in the know," he added, referring to the signboards next to elevators in the hotel which stated that only "halal" goods could be transported in them.

Pereira said hotels which still had valid halal certificates and were not up for renewal could still operate based on the Malaysian Islamic Development Department's (Jakim) previous standard operating procedure.

However, he said that once these licenses expired, the hotels would have to comply with the strict guidelines set by Jakim in order to renew their licenses.

"There is a certain set of regulations and requirements set by the religious authorities based on the Malaysian standard of halal certification," he told FMT.

He was referring to the government encouraging hotels to apply for or renew their halal certification, only if they complied with Jakim's guidelines.

"This whole application and renewal issue for hotels that serve pork is under review through focus group discussions and hopefully a solution will be met soon," he said.

He also explained that MAH and Jakim decided to clarify the current procedures and to rationalise matters that MAH members must practice to attain their "halal" certification.

 

DAP: Koay had better be sorry

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 04:20 PM PST

(The Star) - A day after suspended DAP assemblyman Koay Teng Hai's declaration that he would serve his constituents as an independent, the party's powerful disciplinary committee has hit back by accusing him of being unapologetic after he missed a crucial Penang state assembly meeting.

The Pulau Tikus assemblyman was also blamed for giving a flimsy excuse of not being formally told of the assembly meeting, in which the state government tabled the constitutional amendment to bar party-hopping.

DAP's disciplinary committee chief and party deputy chairman Tan Kok Wai said Koay had chosen to ignore the interests of the party for his own personal interests and put the entire Penang Pakatan Rakyat government at risk.

"We are very surprised that you are not apologetic at all after committing such a huge mistake," said Tan in the suspension letter dated Jan 14, which was made available to The Star.

It was also stated in the letter that Koay's reason for missing the sitting was not because of a personal holiday in the United States as previously reported, but because he was there to attend a programme on an invitation of the US embassy here.

Tan said Koay decided to go to the United States even after Penang Chief Minister and party secretary-general Lim Guan Eng rejected his leave application twice.

He said the absence of another representative, who had to skip the meeting due to a family emergency, left other Pakatan colleagues with the bare minimum of exactly 27 representatives needed for a two-thirds majority to amend the state constitution.

On Monday, Koay who has been suspended for six months, folded the DAP flag at a press conference and said he would remove all party logos from his service centre.

While the Penang Pakatan Rakyat backbenchers club chairman called for calm among his supporters, his wife Lee Su Li created a bit of a stir with her posting on his Facebook account implying that he was in trouble because he did not pray to the "tokong" (deity).

Some netizens have linked her post to Deputy Chief Minister I Datuk Mansor Othman's alleged claim that the Chief Minister was regarded as a "tokong" by the people in Penang.

Meanwhile, Penang DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow said it was wrong for Koay to describe himself as an "independent" assemblyman.

"He has to follow rules. It is not that when you are under suspension, you can disregard the party's constitution and rules," he said at a press conference at Wisma DAP in Rangoon Road yesterday.

 

After ‘Listen, listen, listen’ video, speaker loses paid gig

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 04:17 PM PST

(The Malaysian Insider) - Sharifah Zohra Jabeen Syed Shah Miskin's tirade on YouTube may have cost the controversial speaker a paid engagement, after organisers of an entrepreneurial seminar scheduled for next week said today they are calling off the event over security concerns.

The activist who is seen as pro-Barisan Nasional had sparked a firestorm this week after a varsity video exposing her verbal assault on a student went viral, leading Internet users to dub her the "'Listen, listen, listen' woman" over her repeated use of the word while interrupting a student.

"The committee discussed the pros and cons, and decided that it would be best to cancel it," organiser Lina Ahmad was reported saying by The Star Online.

The police had advised the organiser to call off the talk following news of a planned public protest against Sharifah Zohra on that day, the news portal reported Lina adding.

Sharifah Zohra was set to appear on January 26 at the DoubleTree Hotel, part of the Hilton group, in the national capital for a talk titled, "How to make your first million" with two other speakers, retired diplomat Datuk Pahamin A. Rajab and Zafri Zakaria Merican, that charged participants RM200 per person.

A former member of the Indian Muslim Congress of Malaysia (KIMMA), Sharifah Zohra had been blackmailed over the now-viral video showing her bullying a Universiti Utara Malaysia student and has now gone into hiding to ensure her safety and that of her children, a representative of the little-known organisation Suara Wanita 1 Malaysia (SW1M) had told The Malaysian Insider yesterday.

The spokesman, who wanted to be known only as Emalee, is also the chief administrator of the SW1M Facebook page.

"I ask her to go somewhere safe because she has children. Someone try to blackmail her, this issue has become quite serious," said the SW1M supreme council member, who uses the moniker "Ratu Naga" on the NGO's fanpage.

 

Teach PAS a lesson for behaving like Umno

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 04:06 PM PST

YOURSAY 'Unless and until we have a credible alternative coalition, I have no choice but to just spoil my vote for this coming GE.'

Malaysiakini

DAP berates Kedah gov't over CNY guidelines

Geronimo: At the rate things are going, I doubt very much that PAS is ever interested in Putrajaya. These self-centred policies are definitely going to kill the support of the non-Muslims and I strongly urge DAP and PKR to review its stand with PAS very seriously.

It is no loss if DAP wishes to break rank with PAS and allow PKR to contest in all PAS seats wherever possible.

The GE is just around the corner and it is unthinkable for PAS to be pulling off such a stunt at this crucial time. After the fiasco in Kota Bharu and now Kedah, PAS certainly looks like a bad bet.

Shanandoah: This is not the first time that DAP has been at odds with PAS and it will not be the last. They must break ranks with PAS, which is a religiously-inclined party.

Malaysia is secular. PAS policies will never keep it that way. It's best for DAP to go at it alone, if necessary.

By joining Pakatan Rakyat, PAS wants to ride on the back of non-Muslims to gain control in both state and parliamentary elections. DAP, you have lost my vote if you don't leave. Many will do just that.

Abuminable: Kedah MB Azizan Abdul Razak is stuck in a time warp and totally out of sync with the 21st century. He is a serious liability to Pakatan.

PAS must replace him with somebody far more open-minded and in tune with the changing times or risk a massive voter backlash.

Proarte: PAS is showing itself to be unelectable. They speak with forked tongues and persist is displaying a penchant for 'ketuanan' and duplicity. How is this different to the Umno modus operandi? PAS is just the reverse of the Umno coin.

The 'Allah' issue with their vacillating positions or should I say blatant lies is a pointed reminded of what PAS would be like in government.

When Abdul Hadi Awang and Nik Aziz Nik Mat told Malaysians that non-Muslims have a right to use the word 'Allah' after their meeting with the Pakatan leaders, they then stab Pakatan in the back and have a syura council meeting which contradicts their earlier position adding to further confusion and leaving the matter unresolved.

The rakyat want a government which is honest and clear in direction which respects the constitutional rights of its citizens.

The Chinese New Year 'guidelines' underscore the sex obsession of PAS which is simply disgusting and paradoxically shows their immoral mindset, let alone their duplicity and intellectual bankruptcy.

Anti Umno: PAS really puncture the momentum of Pakatan. If they continue to act this way, I will not be surprised that Pakatan will lose to BN in the coming GE.

Please understand that Islamic law is only applicable to Muslims. Please do not force it onto other races. Indeed, PAS is behaving like Umno.

Myrights: We need to teach PAS a lesson in the upcoming GE13. They are acting like the Taliban. I hate to think what will happen if and when they come into power.

It saddens me that we have to choose between two evils in this country - a racist government versus a Taliban wannabe.

Anon1: I rather have a corrupt MP then a religious zealot who imposes his interpretation of scripts and morals on me.

If religion is so important to any politician, then quit as a politician and go join the church, mosque or temple. They'd be better suited there. Don't confuse the two.

An MP represents constituents, not to preach his individual or religious values. That was not the mandate given. Imagine where the urban votes are going if PAS continues imposing their values on everyone.

So, BN or Taliban? The choice is obvious. I'd prefer if PAS is kicked out of Pakatan and they contest on their own. Even if BN is unable to form a government, a coalition can still be made between Pakatan and PAS later, if need be.

Jiminy Qrikert: If we respect principles of fair play - and PAS being a religious party must therefore subscribe to fairness - then it needs to observe and respect the principle that the Pakatan party that wins the greatest number of Adun (state assembly) seats will form the state government.

In Perak, if Pakatan win, it will therefore be either PKR or DAP and not PAS. With that as a principle, it leaves PAS free to assign former Perak MB Nizar Jamaluddin to battle in Kedah and change PAS leadership style there.

Daseen: If PAS wants the Chinese votes, then it has to accede to the whims and fancies of young virgins running around clad in thin dress on the stage, as this seems to be amorous desire of many commentators here.

PAS logic of 'PAS for All' contradicts PAS demeanour and is an affront to the eventual kingmakers in the evolving Malaysian political landscape.

The current PAS logic is akin to a logic which is like a little tweeting bird, chirping in a meadow or a wreath of pretty flowers which smell bad.

Not My Real Name: I am Chinese and I say that those "stage performances" should be banned. These stage performances are no longer traditional Chinese operas. These days, they are just a cheap pop concert with bad singing and terrible performers.

They are all rubbish and they are all too loud. They are all held next to residential homes. And they run until midnight or after. They are a public nuisance.

As a Chinese, I find nothing cultural values about these modern performances. PAS has done well to stop this in Kedah. Penang should do the same.

WangMalaysia: PAS would do well to keep their guidelines and not extend it to anybody else. When would these holy folks know that, you cannot make others holy... you can only be a guide, and given that guidelines are guidelines, they are not enforceable.

It's all about free will, unless PAS would risk losing the votes of non-Muslims not only in Kedah but nationwide. So PAS, keep your holiness to yourself. I will be holy on my own accord and my own way.

Myop101: Time to not vote for PAS wherever they are. I think enough is enough. There is only so much tolerance for their moral policing antics.

While I believe their leaders are somewhat sincere, their low level of tolerance only tells us that they are also incapable of seeing forest for the trees.

It is unthinkable, but unless and until we have a credible alternative coalition, I have no choice but to just spoil my vote for this coming GE.

Louis: PAS has gone too far this time. It thinks that it could come to power in Kedah on its own. Most of the non-Muslim Kedahans are fed up with the way PAS and have resolved to give their votes to BN.

I am a supporter of Pakatan, but as far as Kedah goes, I am telling my family to vote against PAS.

Anonnona: DAP has shown its bravery by slamming PAS. Now let's see whether MCA has the guts to slam Umno for keeping silent on this matter. Shouting against DAP alone does not show MCA is fighting for Chinese rights.

If MCA dares to publicly scold Umno for not condemning PAS, then I will believe that it is really fighting sincerely for the Chinese rather than just trying to score political points.

Come on, MCA, show what you are truly made of, otherwise hide your tail between your legs and just disappear.

 

`Nik Aziz tidak pernah buat `U Turn’

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 03:50 PM PST

Menteri Besar Kelantan itu sebaliknya sejak awal lagi setuju orang bukan Islam boleh menggunakan nama Allah.

(FMT) - Mursyidul Am PAS, Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat tidak membuat sebarang `U Turn' (tukar kenyataan) dalam isu penggunaan kalimah Allah kepada orang bukan Islam.

Menteri Besar Kelantan itu sebaliknya sejak awal lagi setuju orang bukan Islam boleh menggunakan nama Allah, kata Setiausaha Akhbarnya Ahmad Fadhli Shaari.

Beliau membuat kenyataan itu bagi menjawab laporan dua akhbar – New Straits Times dan Utusan Malaysia – yang  mendakwa Nik Aziz telah membuat `U Turn' dalam isu tersebut.

"Suka untuk diingatkan bahawa tidak ada sebarang pusingan 'U-Turn' khususnya yang melibatkan Tuan Guru al-Mursyidul Am PAS dalam isu kalimah Allah ini.

"Ini dapat dilihat di dalam kenyataan awal beliau sebelum mesyuarat Majlis Syura berlangsung bahawa bukan Muslim perlu diberikan ruang untuk menggunakan kalimah Allah.

"Cuma (beliau) tidak bersetuju nama Allah menjadi terjemahan kepada perkataan God dalam Bible kerana ia tidak tepat, mengelirukan dan boleh membawa kepada silap faham.

"Inilah yang menjadi pegangan YAB Tuan Guru (Nik Aziz) dan beliau konsisten dengan pegangan ini.

"Dalam erti kata lain, tidak ada mana-mana pihak yang boleh menutup ruang golongan non (bukan) Muslim untuk menyebut nama Allah SWT dan merujuk nama tersebut sebagai Tuhan Semesta Alam dalam urusan seharian mereka," kata Ahmad Fadhli lagi.

Nik Aziz, tambah beliau  membuat penegasan awal bahawa ia akan dibincangkan dalam mesyuarat Majlis Syura atas sifatnya sebagai badan tertinggi parti.

Mesyuarat malah Ahad lalu memutuskan orang bukan Islam tidak boleh menggunakan kalimah Allah dalam Bible Bahasa Melayu.

 

Listen to Shahrifah Zohra

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 03:39 PM PST

Darren Nah, The Malaysian Insider

Malaysians all over the globe are pouring spiteful derision at an unknown, supercilious lady, Shahrifah Zohra, whose bubbling partisan affinities and inability to address the contentious issues posed by a contrarian student, Bawani KS (now an overnight sensation), led her to do what all noisome vixens do: Raise a whole lot of malarkey and hullabaloo about monkeys, cows, goats and, yes, even sharks.

Her bestial [pertaining to beasts] diatribe came in an interminable, rapid fire succession. Shahrifah Zohra went from calling Ambiga (a Malaysian public figure fighting for free and fair elections) an anarchist, to asking the student, Bawani, to leave the Malaysia given Bawani's dissatisfaction, and to then doling out Galaxy Notes gratuitously to a body of passive, browbeaten students who was indifferent to the whole Orwellian mis-en-scene, and merely parroted affirmatives and clapped in support of both sides. In Shahrifah Zohra's deluge of half-baked, quasi-educated Malay-English creole verbiage, many might mistake her fulmination to be a truculent message sponsored by the Selangor Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA).

However, Shahrifah Zohra does artfully credit Ambiga, the "anarchist," with one thing: enlightening Malaysians to human rights, which in this case, it so happens to be the right of free speech. Shahrifah Zohra, of course, in trumping the right of every individual to free speech, does not hesitate to remove her opponent's (Bawani's) microphone, and quickly proceeds to up the volume-ante to an audibly deranging holler.

Aside from the (hopefully) non-permanent ear damage that Shahrifah Zohra's twenty-minute harangue has caused, it is very odd that Shahrifah Zohra should undermine her own case by saying that "it is my human right to speak, and you to listen" (paraphrased).

Shahrifah Zohra's logic is a non sequitur. If everyone has a human right to speak, it does not follow that every human has a right to not speak when another speaks. In other words, you can't stop me from speaking simply by saying that you have a right to speak. We can both speak at the same time, though no one would be listening. (Bawani by this time has gone back to her seat, probably fatigued by her obtuse opponent. Stupidity can be very tiring!).

In fact, Bawani's real contention was with the lack of free education in Malaysia. Or more pointedly, the lack of quality education in Malaysia was her main complaint. Which good citizen does not complain about her own nation, not to bring it down, but to build it better?

Again, Shahrifah Zohra's non sequitur logic resurfaces, this time in international fury! She beseeches Bawani to leave Malaysia and go to Cuba, Libya and Argentina. Shahrifah Zohra does not mention the United States, the United Kingdom or Australia, but third-world nations. In her logic, we're meant to compare ourselves with Libya. Right. I'm sure you win a race by running with handicaps.

It is very sad (and here comes my plangent tone) that the Malaysians in the video were so indifferent. "All the students in this hall," Shahrifah Zohra vaunts, "are happy with whatever the government does for them." And to a great extent, this is very true. The government does too much, and the people too little, and this is how we're silenced.

People like Shahrifah Zohra can speak with such temerity at another co-citizen simply because, she knows (and we know) that the Malaysian government can take away whatever it has given; free education, petrol subsidies, free this and free that. One can even say that Bawani, by asking for free education, indirectly empowers people like Shahrifah Zohra!

No one stops to think about the larger picture. No one talks about the appropriate role of government. Everyone talks about democracy, but no one talks about mob rule. Everyone wants things free, but no one sees the hidden charges.

READ MORE HERE

 

The Christians are coming!

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 03:23 PM PST

Twenty years ago, he said, there were about 5 per cent of Christians in the country. The number has jumped to 9 per cent. We must not forget, too, Christians of other ethnicities.

Dina Zaman, The Malaysian Insider

Dr Chandra Muzaffar who spoke at the "Pathways Institute Seminar: Leadership Amidst Controversy" recently said, "It will be the Malaysian Christians who will make an impact at the upcoming general elections."

There is a political awakening among them, and many feel sidelined and discriminated against, he said. The Allah issue is just but one of the many issues they feel strongly about. Again, a reminder: They are highly educated and earn incomes many envy.

Twenty years ago, he said, there were about 5 per cent of Christians in the country. The number has jumped to 9 per cent. We must not forget, too, Christians of other ethnicities.

There is also another thing that I would like to add, and had volunteered at the seminar. When we talk about Muslims in Malaysia, the conversation is really about the Malays. We fail to take into account that there are other Malaysian Muslims: the Chinese and Indian Muslims, and the first generation of migrants who have made Malaysia their home. Let's not forget the Arabs! The Chinese and Indian Muslims, and Arabs are some of the economic drivers of the country. Their contributions to the country's GDP cannot be overlooked.

Don't forget the Shiites, too!

What is my point?

It would be that these very communities will not just make an impression at the polling booth, but are big huge billboards that should wake Malay-Muslims up.  They want to be heard, and their traditions, culture and mindset accepted, and not just tolerated. Add the numbers up ― they are significant.

Many times, I have encountered exchanges between Chinese-Muslims and Indian-Muslims, and the question asked often is why they aren't accepted as Bumiputeras?

"I don't get the Constitution. If you are Muslim, you are automatically Malay and vice versa. I'm Muslim, and I'm still ticking off Chinese/Indian on forms. My culture and heritage dictate a long history of Islam, longer than you Malays."

"We make more money than you. We drive the economy. Don't you dare say that we are insignificant!'

My response is usually silence. They're right.

It is obvious that the current politics and policies surrounding ethnicity and religions in Malaysia are outdated. It is also disheartening to hear, in this day and age the ever-oft complaint, that the non-Malays are going to take over. This coming even from the more exposed, educated Malay professionals.

Are we really under siege?

To some, yes.

Even if they are Muslim? I pointed out.

READ MORE HERE

 

Can Deepak bring down Umno?

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:53 PM PST

When Anwar and his Pakatan colleagues are in agreement that Deepak has the goods to topple the BN government, then Deepak can have whatever he wants.

CT Ali, FMT

The need, greed and obsessison for money, wealth and power at its most corrupt can all be seen in the trials and tribulations that Deepak Jaikishnan, with his supporting cast of Rosmah Mansor, Najib Tun Razak and Anwar Ibrahim, are going through now.

In Deepak we see the use of money not for good but for evil. He will have difficulty in finding friend as they see what he is now doing to his 'sister' and to those from whom he now seek help from.

Today he is toxic to the two people most able to get him out of the business predicament that he has got himself into. A predicament born out of cronyism and politics so flawed that it requires a political solution only Anwar or Najib can contemplate.

Najib and Rosmah have washed their hands off him – encouraged by no small amount, I am sure, by Deepak's threats to reveal Rosmah's and Najib's involvement in Altanatuya's murder.

After much circumspect consideration, Najib and Rosmah have decided that what Deepak has to say about their involvement in the retraction of PI Bala's first SD would not harm Najib's chances of winning the 13th general election.

So what is Deepak to do now?

Deepak traitorously goes to the other man who may be able to help him – Anwar. Anwar knows that Deepak comes to him because Najib and Rosmah has cast him off.

If Najib and Rosmah think that Deepak is not worth the money he is asking for, how much then is Deepak worth to Anwar?

What Anwar has to decide now is whether what Deepak has on Najib and Rosmah can win Pakatan Rakyat the general election and make him the prime minister.

Those are the only criteria that Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat will judge Deepak by.

Taking Najib and Rosmah out of the political equation is not enough. There are Muhyiddin Yassin and Dr Mahathir Mohamad eager to step into Najib's shoes.

Delivering a mortal blow to Umno

Not only must Najib go but also what Deepak reveals of Najib, the Umno president, must deal Umno a mortal blow from which it cannot recover – at least not in time to ready itself to battle Pakatan in the 13th general election.

Then, and only then will Anwar and Pakatan be able to consider 'working' with Deepak for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to come out.

It is not Deepak who decides. All this talk of telling the truth and getting immunity as a whistleblower is bull dust.

READ MORE HERE

 

SAPP: Tell us what’s our worth, Anwar

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:50 PM PST

The capability of local Sabah party SAPP, which has been in seat negotiations with Pakatan Rakyat Sabah since 2009, has suddenly come under question.

(FMT) - KOTA KINABALU: Opposition Sabah Progressive People's Party (SAPP) has thrown the ball back at Pakatan Rakyat over its demand for seats and wants to know what the coalition thinks the party is worth.

"If [Opposition Leader] Anwar Ibrahim said SAPP is contesting too many seats, and questions its strength, it is very simple: just tell me how many we should contest in state and or parliament?

"If they [Pakatan] think it is not agreeable to them… tell us how many they think we should contest in state and Parliament.

"I believe people expect Anwar [to give an answer]," said SAPP president Yong Teck Lee.

Considering SAPP, a Chinese majority pary, has been in negotiation with Pakatan since 2009, Anwar's sudden U-turn has irked Yong.

With a likelihood of a March general election, it is odd that Anwar should at this late hour wonder as to whether or not SAPP is as "formidable" a party as it professes.

Recalling the meeting in June 2009, Yong said current PKR deputy president Azmin Ali, who was then PKR Sabah liaison chief, had met with SAPP's deputy president Eric Majimbun and the perimeters of discussions were set.

"They spoke about the principle involved in seat distribution which is autonomy.

"Under the principle of autonomy as a state party, it means SAPP will contest in more state seats and Pakatan in more parliamentary seats.

"It was on that basis that we used Sandakan as the starting point of discussion. SAPP would defend Tanjung Papat and Elopura while Pakatan took the parliamentary seats including state Karamunting.

"We also said SAPP will contest in one other Bumupitera majority seat in Sandakan. This was an acceptable formula accepted by many people and the basis of further discussions," said Yong.

Lajim and Bumburing

Yong said at no point in the discussions then and subsequently was the issue of party "strength" raised.

"If we talk about which party is strong or not, everybody will have a subjective opinion. So the principle we use is autonomy, " he said, adding that Sabah Pakatan at that time only comprised PKR, DAP and PAS.

Yong was commenting on Anwar's sudden turn-around over negotiations with SAPP.

Anwar told reporters when launching former Umno MP Lajim's Ukin's new Pakatan-friendly platform Pertubuhan Pakatan Perubahan Sabah (PPPS) here last month that it is "difficult" to continue negotiations with SAPP and questioned the party's belief that it was a "formidable" entity in Sabah.

"If SAPP refuses to budge from its demand, then it is difficult for us to continue with negotiations that are being done in the spirit of cooperation.

"Each party should not demand too much… we have to be realistic as to the strength of each party. If SAPP, for example, wants half of the seats, it has to be a strong formidable party," Anwar said.

Anwar's "new found" uncertainty over SAPP is anchored in his faith in new recruits Lajim and Tuaran MP Wilfred Bumburing. Both have established their respective "independent" platforms.

Lajim helms PPPS while Bumburing has set up Angakatan Perubahan Sabah (APS).

Each has been assigned to look into the Muslims and KadazanDusunMurut (KDM) seats respectively.

Both these former BN leaders are assured of winning their respective parliamentary seats – Beaufort and Tuaran. They have each also rumoured to have pledged to Anwar several state seats.

READ MORE HERE

 

PAS anggap Anwar, Guan Eng setuju keputusan Majlis Syura

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:41 PM PST

Naib Ketua Dewan Ulama, Datuk Mahfodz Mohamed berkata, sehingga sekarang kedua-dua pemimpin itu belum memberi sebarang ulasan mengenai perkara tersebut.

Muda Mohd Noor, FMT

Dewan Ulama PAS menganggap Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim serta Lim Guan Eng menerima keputusan majlis itu yang tidak membenarkan orang bukan Islam menggunakan kalimah Allah.

Naib Ketua Dewan Ulama, Datuk Mahfodz Mohamed berkata, sehingga sekarang kedua-dua pemimpin itu belum memberi sebarang ulasan mengenai perkara tersebut.

"Setakat ini Anwar (Ketua Pembangkang) dan Guan Eng (Setiuasaha Agung DAP) belum menyuarakan bantahan mereka.

"Kata orang tua-tua, kalau diam maknanya setuju. Jadi saya anggap mereka setuju," katanya lagi.

Bagaimanapun, Mahfodz memberitahu, pihaknya  sedia memberi penerangan yang lebih mendalam kepada mana-mana pihak termasuk pemimpin dan ahli PAS yang tidak puas hati dengan keputusan  Majlis Syura tersebut.

Mahfodz, Pesuruhjaya PAS Johor menegaskan keputusan Majlis Syura tidak membenarkan orang bukan Islam menggunakan kalimah Allah dibuat sebulat suara.

Beliau yang juga ahli Majlis Syura berkata, " Dua belas ahli yang menghadiri mesyuarat itu semuanya setuju tidak membenarkan orang bukan Islam menggunakan kalimah Allah.

`Hadi sokong'

"Malah Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang (Presiden PAS) yang hadir dalam mesyuarat itu turut menyokong.

"Majlis Syura mempunyai 15 orang tetapi tiga tidak datang. Mursyidul Am PAS, Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat mempengerusikan mesyuarat yang turut dihadiri timbalannya Datuk Haron Din.

"Ketua Dewan Ulama PAS, Datuk Harun Taib hadir, begitu juga ahli yang lain," kata Mahfodz.

READ MORE HERE

 

Patrick Teoh in hot water over Facebook post

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:34 PM PST

Actor and famous radio presenter Patrick Teoh lands himself in hot soup after a Facebook posting insensitive to Muslims.

Alyaa Azhar, FMT

Actor and famous radio presenter Patrick Teoh landed himself in hot water today after a Facebook posting which has infuriated Muslims.

Teoh, who is also a blogger known for his crude language, posted the comment while reacting to the PAS-led Kedah state government's statement on Jan 9 that officials and singers for the 1Malaysia Chinese New Year celebration, scheduled in Alor Setar on Feb 15, must be properly attired and were encouraged to perform motivational songs.

The state government also said it would shut down the programme if there was "extreme singing and dancing".

Below is his Facebook posting posted yesterday:

"The 3rd most laughable statement discovered today…

The January 9 guidelines to the organisers of the 1 Malaysia Chinese New Year Celebration 2013 (by the PAS Kedah state government)… included, among other things, the appropriate attire for officials and singers. It also stated that performers are encouraged to sing motivational songs and that if extreme singing and dancing activities were to take place, the state government has the right to shut down the programme.

Encouraged to sing motivational songs!!! What kind of f**king motivation they want? Give up individuality and be sheep? Pray 5 times a day? Cover up all women? What???!!!

And while they are at it, please tell us what the f**k extreme singing and dancing is?

Quran-thumping mother f**kers!!!"

This comment has raised heckles among Muslims with many posting nasty replies.

However, about an hour ago Teoh apologised for the earlier comment.

His apology states:

'Whoa!!!… whoa… whoa… I now realise what I did that was wrong and why it generated so much hate-mail. I had thought that the criticism came from my use of the phrase, "Quran-thumping m***** F*****…" I was wrong. It came from my reference to "Give up individuality and be sheep? Pray 5 times a day? Cover up all women?" which was totally out of line. It didn't convey what I was trying to say in the post and came out like a bigoted selfish statement. For that I apologise sincerely to all Muslims. Minta maaf (Sorry). But I do not apologise for calling that person a…well you know what I mean. I hope."

READ MORE HERE

 

Mat Sabu: Himpunan untuk ‘gulingkan kerajaan’

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:27 PM PST

Tetapi dengan cara baik melalui Pilihan Raya Umum 13 (PRU13) nanti, kata Pengerusi HKR yang juga Timbalan Presiden PAS.

Jamilah Kamarudin, FMT

Penganjur Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat (HKR) mengakui himpunan yang diadakan di Stadium Merdeka 12 Januari lalu berniat untuk menggulingkan kerajaan tetapi dengan cara baik melalui Pilihan Raya Umum 13 (PRU13) nanti.

"Memang kami niat nak gulingkan kerajaan dalam PRU akan datang. Kalau tiada niat itu maknanya kami memang berbohong kepada rakyat.

"Kami nak gulingkan kerajaan melalui PRU jadi kepada Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad beliau boleh terus berada di Malaysia atau bercuti di mana-mana," kata Pengerusi HKR Mohammad Sabu yang juga Timbalan Presiden PAS dalam sidang media di Pejabat Agung PAS di sini hari ini.

Beliau mengulas kenyataan mantan Perdana Menteri, Dr Mahathir yang mendakwa HKR cuba meniru kebangkitan 'Arab Spring' kerana penganjur merasakan ia tidak boleh menang PRU13 nanti.

"Jadi mereka berharap dengan meniru dapat menjatuhkan kerajaan, sedangkan kerajaan negara ini bukan seperti di negara Arab, bukan kerajaan kuku besi, ia adalah kerajaan yang dipilih rakyat.

"Apa yang mereka tiru itu bukan cara demokrasi…jika nak adakan perhimpunan atau demonstrasi perlulah ada alasan, tetapi bukanlah demonstrasi mengenai Shamsidar (Taharin).

"Jadi seolah-olah bila ada sahaja kes mahkamah, kena adakan demonstrasi," katanya kelmarin.

Dakwa langgar tiga syarat

Mohamad lebih popular dengan panggilan Mat Sabu berkata, pihaknya setakat ini belum mengadakan pertemuan dengan polis kerana didakwa melanggar tiga syarat himpunan, namun berjanji akan memberi kerjasama sepenuhnya jika dipanggil.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kes saman Anwar-KJ selesai di luar mahkamah

Posted: 15 Jan 2013 02:24 PM PST

Mahkamah juga tidak mengeluarkan perintah untuk kos

(Bernama) - Kes saman fitnah RM100 juta yang difail Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim terhadap Ketua Pemuda Umno, Khairy Jamaluddin pada 7 September  2007 diselesaikan hari ini selepas kedua-dua pihak mencapai persetujuan.

Penyelesaian itu direkod Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi Datuk Su Geok Yiam semasa kes disebut di hadapan beliau.

Peguam Gobind Singh Deo, yang mewakili Anwar memberitahu mahkamah kes itu diselesai memandangkan defendan (Khairy) bersedia untuk mengatakan beliau tidak mengeluarkan perkataan yang menyinggung perasaan.

"Tiada perintah untuk kos," katanya.

Hakim Su turut berterima kasih kepada kedua-dua pihak kerana menjimatkan masa mahkamah.

Perbicaraan kes itu yang bermula semalam sepatutnya disambung hari ini.

Anwar dalam samannya mendakwa Khairy, yang ketika itu Timbalan Ketua Pemuda Umno, mengeluarkan kenyataan fitnah terhadapnya pada satu majlis politik di Kuala Kangsar pada Ogos 2007, yang disiar media cetak dan elektronik pada 3 Ogos tahun sama.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Lest we forget

Posted: 14 Jan 2013 10:58 PM PST

Nevertheless, the point is, that 'historical crowd' did not help the opposition do better. Instead, the opposition did worse. And we celebrated too early our 'success' in 2000 because we translated the crowd in that most historical demonstration into an election victory.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

What BN and Pakatan should be worried about

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily

Barisan Nasional (BN) probably had not anticipated that the January 12 rally could cause a stir at all.

Past records show that rallies initiated by Pakatan Rakyat, other than the Bersih rallies, could only manage under-10,000 attendance, at best 20,000 to 30,000 on full mobilisation.

The 10,000 to 30,000 that took to the streets could be easily seen as diehard supporters of the opposition pact that would remain loyal whether Pakatan had performed up to the mark or BN had put in any effort to change.

Such a figure could be easily digested by BN and so long as the attendance was placed within this bracket, the impact it would leave on the ruling coalition would be minimal.

BN laid its hopes on the silent majority. So long as these people adopted a wait-and-watch attitude, BN should be able to bring them into its fold.

BN has vast resources at its disposal and Pakatan can make mistakes at times. That explains why Najib prefers to wait instead of rushing to dissolve the Parliament.

The attendance of last weekend's rally far exceeded the estimates of the BN government. Whether it was the 50,000 estimated by the police, the 100,000 claimed by BN, or even the 150,000 some others have estimated, the figure was way higher than what the BN had anticipated.

Where did these additional participants come from? Why had so many answered Pakatan's call?

Could the moderate stance adopted by the police and government embolden the masses to take to the streets?

This is what BN was eager to find out.

If we take 100,000 as a reference, it shows that many erstwhile passive Pakatan supporters and political neutrals have indeed changed their minds. They refused to stay silent and chose to throw their arms around Pakatan.

Some of them did not have a firm or solid political inclination in the past but have now begun to care about social issues and national development.

They were led there by a plethora of factors ranging from dismal government policies, discrepancies in economic development, environmental concerns, widespread public sector corruption and lack of transparency in electoral procedures, among others.

They want a country with a bright future, a more promising society.

When they felt the government had failed them, or the government had slackened in implementing its reform agenda, they rose up to demonstrate their feelings.

The moment Pakatan's appeals met with their aspirations, they would walk out of their passivity and silent past to embrace Pakatan.

When they have become active opponents to the government, a snowballing effect would ensue, enticing more people to their camp. BN should become truly worried when more and more people have chosen to drop their silence, and the ruling coalition.

As for whether a tough crackdown could stop the people from going to the street, I would say no. People would still pour out onto the streets and if subjected to oppressive operations from the government, will be more enraged, bringing the anti-government sentiment way further and broader than anyone could cope with.

What BN did right was to respond with a peaceful gesture which has spared it from much more horrible eventualities.

Something that BN can do now is to expedite reforms to win over the rest of the silent majority.

As for Pakatan, it has to make sure not to commit even the slightest mistakes to sustain the momentum.

The policies of PAS-led Kedah state government have dealt a blow to the integrity of Pakatan Rakyat; so have the controversies over the use of the word "Allah." Improper handling of either could signal the start of its downfall.

***********************************************

THE 100,000 CROWD FIVE KILOMETRES LONG

On 5th November 2000, one year after the general election of 29th November 1999, one of the largest demonstrations in Malaysian history was held along the Kesas Highway, which was met with extreme show of force and brutality by the Malaysian police.

This got the government so worried that soon after that they detained without trial ten of those involved in its organisation, me being one of those ten.

According to the testimony of the Malaysian police during the RCI that was conducted to investigate the extreme force that was used, no less than 100,000 demonstrators took to the streets that day. For the first time in history both the police and the organisers agreed on the figure, 100,000.

That November 2000 demonstration, one year after the general election of 1999, was supposed to be the foundation for the 'big push' in the following general election expected around 2004 or so.

Due to that exceptionally large crowd of 100,000, against the backdrop of about six million voters, that gave the opposition great encouragement. Surely that 100,000 crowd turnout was going to help the opposition do better than it did in the November 1999 general election.

In the 1999 general election, the opposition won two states and 45 Parliament seats. In the following general election expected in 2004 or so, the opposition can easily increase this to five states and more than 80 Parliament seats.

But this did not happen. What happened instead was the opposition lost one state, Terengganu, and got reduced to less than half the Parliament seats, only 21. There is, of course, more than one reason for this disaster, partly the opposition's fault and partly because of what the ruling party did.

Nevertheless, the point is, that 'historical crowd' did not help the opposition do better. Instead, the opposition did worse. And we celebrated too early our 'success' in 2000 because we translated the crowd in that most historical demonstration into an election victory.

Let us not make that same mistake again -- as we have done so many times since then in Sanggang, Indera Kayangan, and so on, until the 2004 general election when the opposition got its arse whacked good and proper.

I suppose the English proverb 'don't count your chickens before they hatch' holds true here. And this time around the voter turnout would probably increase from just six million in 1999 to more than ten million.

 

So it’s settled then

Posted: 08 Jan 2013 07:57 PM PST

Malaya or Malaysia did not attend the conference because Malaya and Malaysia did not exist yet at time. Malaya was created only in 1957 and Malaysia in 1963. Hence Malaya/Malaysia is not a party to that treaty or a recipient of any compensation. The recipient would be Britain, the colonial masters of the non-existent Malaya/Malaysia at that time.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

So it's settled then. Pakatan Rakyat allows non-Muslims to us the Allah word. Barisan Nasional does not allow non-Muslims to use the Allah word.

MCA, the lead partner in Barisan Nasional after Umno, has no opinion about the matter. You use or don't use the Allah word they don't care. They are not going to comment about it.

MIC does not want to comment whether they are going to comment. They are just going to maintain an elegant silence. So you do not know whether MIC agrees or does not agree to non-Muslims using the Allah word. And MIC will soon be known as MINC, the acronym for 'May I Not Comment'.

His Highness the Sultan of Selangor does not agree to non-Muslims using the Allah word. The Church does not agree to His Highness the Sultan not agreeing to non-Muslims using the Allah word.

Some people in Pakatan Rakyat agree with Pakatan Rakyat's stand. Some people in Pakatan Rakyat do not agree with Pakatan Rakyat's stand. Some people in Pakatan Rakyat do not want to take a stand regarding Pakatan Rakyat's stand.

Some people in Barisan Nasional agree with Barisan Nasional's stand. Some people in Barisan Nasional do not agree with Barisan Nasional's stand. Some people in Barisan Nasional do not want to take a stand regarding Barisan Nasional's stand.

So it's settled then. Malaysian politics can no longer be divided between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional. Because there are supporters, opposers and abstainers from both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional, Malaysian politics must now be divided between the pro-Allah word and the anti-Allah word grouping.

Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional plus their 13 or so component party members will need to be disbanded and a new grouping of pro-Allah word and anti-Allah word be created to face the coming general election. The voters will then be able to vote along the lines of whether they support or oppose the use of the Allah word.

Once either the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping wins the general election and gets to form the new federal government, Malaysians can expect to see brighter days ahead of them. Maybe corruption, abuse of power and wastage of public funds will still be a problem and we will still not see transparency, accountability and good governance, but at least Malaysians would have resolved one extremely important issue -- whether the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping gets to run the country.

With either the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping running the country, foreign investors will flock to Malaysia and will pour billions into the country. More jobs will be created and no Malaysian will face unemployment. There will, in fact, be a huge problem of labour shortage, which will allow a few million Indonesians to migrate to Malaysia to fill up the many job vacancies. These Indonesians can then be given Malaysian citizenship and they will be able to vote in future Malaysian general elections.

Malaysia can then increase the minimum wage to RM1,500 a month, as what some people want, which can be further increased by 10% a year so that Malaysians can be ahead of the inflation rate and not find it hard to make ends meet.

In time, Malaysia's minimum wage can match that of the UK, which is roughly RM35 an hour. Then the one million Malaysians living and working overseas can return to Malaysia and seek employment at home since Malaysia is facing a shortage of workers and is paying high wages, comparable to that of the UK.

Malaysia's political culture would also see a revolutionary change that it much needs. No longer will politics be about who makes a better Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak or Anwar Ibrahim. It will also no longer be about Ketuanan Melayu, the New Economic Policy, Article 153, Bahasa Malaysia, Malaysia's poor education system and poor health service, etc. It will be about whether you support or oppose the use of the Allah word.

Malaysians of all races and religions will no longer be divided like they are now. Malaysians of whatever race and religion will be united under one of two umbrellas. And these umbrellas would be either you support or you oppose the use of the Allah word.

Now, on the second issue of the so-called RM207 billion from Japan, the Treaty of San Francisco or the San Francisco Peace Treaty between Japan and the Allied Powers was officially signed by 48 nations on 8th September 1951 at the War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco, United States. It came into force on 28th April 1952.

The countries that attended the Conference were Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the Soviet Union, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Syria, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

This treaty served to officially end World War II, to formally end Japan's position as an imperial power, and to allocate compensation to Allied civilians and former prisoners of war who had suffered Japanese war crimes. This treaty made extensive use of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to enunciate the Allies' goals.

Malaya or Malaysia did not attend the conference because Malaya and Malaysia did not exist yet at time. Malaya was created only in 1957 and Malaysia in 1963. Hence Malaya/Malaysia is not a party to that treaty or a recipient of any compensation. The recipient would be Britain, the colonial masters of the non-existent Malaya/Malaysia at that time.

So that is also settled then, just like the use of the Allah word has been settled. And the Japanese Embassy has just confirmed that the RM207 billion does not exist just like Malaya/Malaysia did not exist when the treaty was signed.

So now Malaysians can get back to the business of choosing their next government in the coming general election. And you will choose your government not on whether you support Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional but on whether you support or oppose the use of the Allah word.

And once the election is over and the winning grouping gets to form the next government, Malaysia is going to prosper and is going to grow in leaps and bounds and in no time at all Malaysia is going to move from the bottom of the list of ASEAN countries to the top of the list, beating even Singapore and Indonesia, who are yet to resolve the issue of whether non-Muslims can or cannot use the Allah word.

Malaysia is going to be remembered as the first of almost 200 countries all over the world that has officially decided on the matter of whether non-Muslims can or cannot use the Allah word. Malaysia has made history and in time will be hailed as a world leader poised to take over the leadership of the United Nations.

Malaysians who used to be ashamed of their country will now be proud to be Malaysian. The United Nations may even consider shifting its headquarters from New York to Putrajaya in honour of the great progress the country has made in resolving the issue of the use of the Allah word.

PROUD TO BE MALAYSIAN

mAV7OM7jVac

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAV7OM7jVac

 

Looking at things realistically

Posted: 07 Jan 2013 04:53 PM PST

Hence with 10 seats in the FT, 10 in Johor, 25 in East Malaysia, 11 in Kedah, 12 in Kelantan, 11 in Penang, 18 in Perak, 17 in Selangor, 1 in Terengganu, 1 in Melaka, 3 in Negeri Sembilan, 5 in Pahang and 0 in Perlis, Pakatan Rakyat can just scrape through with the majority that it needs to form the new federal government -- 124 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 98 seats for Barisan Nasional.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In the March 2008 general election, Pakatan Rakyat won 80 Parliament seats in Peninsular Malaysia and only two in East Malaysia -- one each in Sabah and Sarawak. Barisan Nasional won 140 Parliament seats in total.

Let's say this time around Pakatan Rakyat manages to retain its 80 Parliament seats in Peninsular Malaysia. It does not lose any of its seats and neither does it increase its seats in Peninsular Malaysia. That would mean Pakatan Rakyat would need to win at least 32 seats from East Malaysia (or an increase of 30 seats from the current two) to form the new federal government.

The first question would be: would an increase from two to 32 be a realistic aim? Is that not too large a jump to expect?

Nevertheless, 32 seats from East Malaysia would give Pakatan Rakyat a mere two-seat majority -- 112 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 110 for Barisan Nasional. That is too risky, as Barisan Nasional needs to buy over only one Pakatan Rakyat Member of Parliament to trigger a hung Parliament -- or two Pakatan Rakyat MPs to take over the government.

Hence Pakatan Rakyat needs more than just an additional 32 seats. Preferably it should be at least 42 seats to make it safe for Pakatan Rakyat so that Pakatan Rakyat wins 122 Parliament seats versus 100 for Barisan Nasional.

However, East Malaysia has only 56 Parliament seats -- 25 in Sabah and 31 in Sarawak. So 42 seats would not be a realistic target. At best Pakatan Rakyat may be able to win between 3-8 Parliament seats in Sabah and 7-11 in Sarawak.

That would give Pakatan Rakyat only 10 to 19 Parliament seats in total -- far short of the 32-42 that Pakatan Rakyat needs to form the new federal government (or form the new federal government with a safe majority of 22 seats).

Let's average those worst (11) and best (19) case scenarios for East Malaysia and put it as 15 seats in total. Added to the 80 seats from Peninsular Malaysia, that would give Pakatan Rakyat only 95 seats. And that would mean Barisan Nasional would still form the federal government with 127 Parliament seats.

Hence 11-19 seats from East Malaysia are not enough. From the total of 56 seats for East Malaysia, Pakatan Rakyat must win at least 25. And this would mean Pakatan Rakyat must cooperate with other East Malaysian parties because on its own Pakatan Rakyat can never win 25 of the 56 seats from East Malaysia.

On top of that, Pakatan Rakyat would need to win an additional 15 seats from Peninsular Malaysia from its current 80. I am assuming, of course, that Pakatan Rakyat can retain every single one of its 80 seats from Peninsular Malaysia. This would then give Pakatan Rakyat a total of 120 Parliament seats versus only 102 for Barisan Nasional.

We are, of course, working on the assumption that Pakatan Rakyat can retain all its 80 Parliament seats from Peninsular Malaysia and then it wins an additional (new) 15 seats from Peninsular Malaysia plus 25 seats from East Malaysia (which would include some 'joint venture' arrangements with other non-Pakatan Rakyat parties). If not then it will not work.

But where are these seats going to come from?

Well, in the 2008 general election, Pakatan Rakyat won only 1 seat in Johor from the 26 seats in total. Hence Pakatan Rakyat would have to increase its seats in Johor to at least 10.

In Pahang, Pakatan Rakyat won only 2 of the 14 seats. It would need to win at least 5 seats this time around.

In the Federal Territory, Kedah, Penang and Selangor, Pakatan Rakyat may have already peaked. Hence it needs to look at Perak where it won only 13 of the 24 seats and try to increase this to 18 -- or an additional 5 seats.

Hence with 10 seats in the FT, 10 in Johor, 25 in East Malaysia, 11 in Kedah, 12 in Kelantan, 11 in Penang, 18 in Perak, 17 in Selangor, 1 in Terengganu, 1 in Melaka, 3 in Negeri Sembilan, 5 in Pahang and 0 in Perlis, Pakatan Rakyat can just scrape through with the majority that it needs to form the new federal government -- 124 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 98 seats for Barisan Nasional.

Of course, if Pakatan Rakyat can win 1 seat in Perlis, 2 in Melaka, and 3 in Terengganu, then it will sail in with 128 seats versus Barisan Nasional's 94.

The earlier question I asked was: but where are these seats going to come from? The next question to ask, I suppose, is: can this be done?

Pakatan Rakyat is confident that it can win at least 122-127 seats, leaving Barisan Nasional with only 95-100 seats. Barisan Nasional, on the other hand, is confident it can win 130-135 seats, leaving Pakatan Rakyat with only 90 or so seats.

Only one can be right. Both cannot be right. Hence the other must be wrong. Which one do you think is right?

 

The ‘third party’ whom Rafizi Ramli spoke about

Posted: 06 Jan 2013 12:00 AM PST

So Rafizi did not lie, and neither did Deepak. Rafizi admitted that Deepak did not give him any documents, as what Deepak claims. And that is because the documents came from Datuk Ravi, Anwar's Shaman, the man who decides on auspicious dates for Anwar to make his moves, although 16th September 2008 did not quite happen the way it was supposed to have gone.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Four years ago, on 1st January 2009, Malaysia Today published a story regarding Datuk Ravi Dharan, which was lifted from The Malaysian Insider. Unfortunately, not many people took much notice of this story. Hence we are publishing it again, which you can read below.

Now, recently, Rafizi Ramli spoke about a 'third party' giving him some documents regarding the alleged RM13 million jewellery that Deepak Jaikishan was supposed to have bought for First Lady Rosmah Mansor. Rafizi never named this third party, though, who is Datuk Ravi Dharan.

If you refer to Deepak's latest interview of a month ago, which is on Youtube (SEE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWWgqWpYRIw), he mentioned that he is related to Datuk Ravi by marriage and was, in fact, introduced to Anwar Ibrahim through Datuk Ravi.

Datuk Ravi has been acting as the secret 'adviser' of Anwar since way back before the party was formed in 1999. In fact, the party headquarters at Phileo Damansara is owned by Datuk Ravi -- a man who made his millions through Samy Vellu in the days when he was a Barisan Nasional crony-businessman.

Datuk Ravi, who has a panel of bomohs (witch doctors) on his payroll, is in a way Anwar's 'spiritual adviser'. He advises Anwar on 'auspicious' dates (based on feedback from the bomohs). And one such auspicious date was 16th September 2008, the day Anwar was supposed to have taken over the federal government.

Within PKR circles Datuk Ravi is known as 'Shaman' and the PKR leaders know that Anwar will never embark on anything unless first armed with advise from Datuk Ravi's bomohs.

And what Rafizi refused to mention is that Datuk Ravi is the man who gave him the documents and hence what Deepak said is true -- that he never met Rafizi or gave him any documents.

Datuk Ravi is on the Malaysian government's 'watch list'. The Malaysian government suspects that Datuk Ravi, who has links to the very top in the Indonesian government, is instrumental in the 'bad blood' between the Indonesia and Malaysian governments that seems to have become worse of late.

So Rafizi did not lie, and neither did Deepak. Rafizi admitted that Deepak did not give him any documents, as what Deepak claims. And that is because the documents came from Datuk Ravi, Anwar's Shaman, the man who decides on auspicious dates for Anwar to make his moves, although 16th September 2008 did not quite happen the way it was supposed to have gone.

******************************************************

As Hindraf spat worsens, a new Anwar ally emerges

First published in Malaysia Today on 1st January 2009

When the bushfire of Indian dissatisfaction in the PKR threatened to turn into an inferno, party supremo Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, holidaying in the Middle East, called from Dubai and urged a man he trusted to investigate what was really going on, how big it was and why it was happening.

Shadowy businessman Datuk Ravi Dharan (picture above), chairman of the Daya group of companies, has always been in the shadows of the PKR, serving only Anwar before and after the March 8 polls and during the run-up to the abortive September 16th plan to topple the Barisan Nasional government via defections.

He was close to Anwar when the latter was the finance minister and like other tycoons in Anwar's circle, he suffered after Anwar was sacked and jailed in 1998.

Ravi, 59, went abroad and soon settled down in Indonesia where he has interests in several areas, including coal mining in Kalimantan.

Raja Petra Kamarudin, Datuk Ravi and Gus Dur

However, unlike Anwar's other former friend Datuk K.S. Nallakaruppan, Ravi remained loyal to the former and was a big supporter — personally and financially — of the opposition leader during the March 8 general election campaign.

Anwar has now become worried that Indian dissatisfaction with his party, centred on the resignation of Kapar MP S. Manikavasagam as the party's Selangor deputy chief, will flare up, and he has sought out Ravi to quell the rebellion.

This will be the political coming out for Ravi who had always remained in the shadows.

It is significant that Anwar did not task any of the more senior party leaders such as deputy president Dr Syed Husin Ali, vice-president S. Sivarasa, seen as the nominal Indian head of the party, Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, Selangor exco member Dr Xavier Jeyakumar or even PKR Padang Serai MP M. Gobalakrishnan.

"It was to Ravi that Anwar turned too," said a PKR insider, adding that Anwar was worried that a "hidden hand" was manipulating the "rebellion" and splitting the party especially in light of speculation reported in online news website Malaysiakini that PKR rebels together with Hindraf leader P. Uthayakumar and chairman P. Waythamoorthy were in alliance with MIC rebels to oust embattled MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu.

Manikavasagam's relationship with Sivarasa and Dr Xavier and possibly Khalid, whom he has accused of betraying the people's trust by not fulfilling election promises, is now beyond repair, PKR insiders said.

Under these circumstances Anwar relied on Ravi as a trusted ally, in the same role once played by Nallakaruppan before their dramatic falling out, to help contain or extinguish the Manikavasagam fire.

Ravi attended a meeting of over 100 Indian supporters of Hindraf/Makkal Sakthi yesterday that discussed the problems raised by Manikavasagam and former PKR deputy secretary-general P. Jenapala.

Datuk Ravi settling the 'Indian problem'

Both Manikavasagam and Jenapala also attended the closed-door meeting.

"Ravi listened carefully, watched their body language and never uttered a single word," said a PKR supporter who attended the meeting.

Later at the press conference Ravi moved in to take charge, admitting there were differences over issues among the PKR leaders. "This is a democratic process, we meet, we discuss, tell our differences and we seek consensus," Ravi told The Malaysian Insider after the meeting.

"We all have one aim — to make Anwar prime minister — and until then we should remain committed and united," said Ravi.

Datuk Ravi's aim, to make Anwar Ibrahim the Prime Minister

He was worried PKR's political enemies would exploit the differences.

"We should not give them that opportunity," he told the people gathered. "I don't think there is a hidden hand behind the open airing of differences in PKR."

The meeting resolved that Manikavasagam and others would meet Anwar on his return and lay their unhappiness at his feet for a resolution of the differences.

Nevertheless the discontent is too fundamental to be resolved without upsetting the PKR's delicate racial balance.

The animosity between Manikavasagam and the rest of the PKR Indian leadership cannot be ignored.

The others — Sivarasa, Dr Xavier, Khalid and others — control Selangor PKR and are big names in the PKR setup although at the Makkal Sakthi grassroots level they are lightweights compared with Manikavasagam.

While Manikavasagam sees himself as a Makkal Sakthi founder, he accepts Uthayakumar and Waythamoorthy as his real mentors, and he also has the highest regards for Anwar.

It is left to Anwar to see how best to balance the demands of the big names in the PKR who are all for sacking Manikavasagam and satisfying the Makkal Sakthi grassroots who have adopted PKR as their new political home but want a bigger slice of the largesse.

What Ravi recommends to Anwar will play a crucial role in the balancing act.

 

Can we just have the truth?

Posted: 05 Jan 2013 06:52 PM PST

Although the 'loss' of this RM207 billion is a good election issue and very favourable to the opposition, the opposition faces the danger that if this allegation is, in fact, true and if the government were to release information or documents to prove that Anwar had a hand in the matter or had knowledge of what happened to the money and yet he chose to remain silent then this issue could backfire badly on the opposition.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Ex-Health Minister Chua Jui Meng has raised a very pertinent point in his letter/statement published in Free Malaysia Today (which you can read below). What happened to the RM207 billion that Japan paid Malaysia back in the 1990s?

As what Lim Kit Siang, the Opposition Leader in Parliament in the 1990s said, both the Finance Minister as well as the Prime Minister need to be accountable for any wrongdoings and transgressions.

This statement is consistent with the call by the opposition that Tun Daim Zainuddin, the one-time Finance Minister of Malaysia, should be held accountable for wrongdoings and transgressions during his watch and he can't just wash his hands and shift the blame solely to the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

As what Lim Kit Siang said in Parliament in 1994, Anwar Ibrahim, the Finance Minister from 1991 to 1998, has to be accountable for whatever happened during his watch. Prior to that, from 1984 to 1991, Tun Daim was the Finance Minister and was reappointed Finance Minister in 1998 after Anwar was sacked.

Hence three people would be privy to what happened to the RM207 billion -- Dr Mahathir, Daim and Anwar. Hence, also, one of these three people must explain what happened to this RM207 billion.

The question of who authorised the 'mismanagement' of this money is one issue. The more important question is: does any of the three -- Dr Mahathir, Daim and Anwar -- have knowledge about the matter?

Anwar can settle this easily by stating that he has absolutely no knowledge of this matter or, if he does, that the money was 'hijacked' at the behest of Dr Mahathir and that the matter was totally beyond his control although he was the Finance Minister.

Although the 'loss' of this RM207 billion is a good election issue and very favourable to the opposition, the opposition faces the danger that if this allegation is, in fact, true and if the government were to release information or documents to prove that Anwar had a hand in the matter or had knowledge of what happened to the money and yet he chose to remain silent then this issue could backfire badly on the opposition.

From my dealings with the Finance Ministry since 1977 -- soon after Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah became the Finance Minister in 1976 -- I am aware that the Finance Ministry has certain autonomy and has been known to override the wishes of the Prime Minister. Maybe Ku Li can confirm this because he knows what I am talking about (and he was once the President of the Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry).

I remember back in the days when I was a central committee member of the Malay Chamber of Commerce and we had a meeting with Dr Mahathir to complain about Bank Negara. We felt that certain policies of Bank Negara were not favourable to the Bumiputera businessmen and actually dampened the investment climate.

Dr Mahathir replied that the Bank Negara Governor then, who was Dr Mahathir's brother-in-law, never listens to him and reports to the Finance Minister and not to the Prime Minister. Hence the PM was having a big 'headache' with Bank Negara. Dr Mahathir then suggested we meet up with the Finance Minister and try to get them to make Bank Negara more receptive to the Malay Chamber of Commerce.

In one meeting we had with the Secretary General of the Finance Ministry, the Sec-Gen related the story of a meeting he and the Governor had with Dr Mahathir where the Governor 'scolded' the Prime Minister regarding certain policies that were not favourable to the country.

My personal experience in dealing with the Prime Minister's Department, the Finance Ministry, and Bank Negara, back in the 1980s was that each unit was very protective of its turf and they were very careful about infringing each other's territory.

In the many meetings we had in the late 1980s to thrash out the Tabung Pemulihan Usahawan (TPU), it was clear that Bank Negara was quite independent of the Prime Minister's Department (by virtue of the 'strength' of the Governor) and the Finance Ministry would override certain things that the Prime Minister wanted.

In one meeting that we had with the Prime Minister where we raised certain displeasures concerning government policies, Dr Mahathir was exasperated and told us to go meet the Finance Minister because this was a Finance Ministry decision and he cannot interfere in the matter.

I am speaking from my 20 years experience in dealing with the government as a businessman and central committee member of the Malay Chamber of Commerce. Our frustration was about after meeting the Prime Minister and getting him to agree to a certain matter, the Finance Minister would not 'play ball'. We had to, again, try to get the Finance Minister to agree to what we wanted although the Prime Minister had already agreed to the matter.

Our experience with Tun Daim was even worse. While Anwar was a politician and would be more diplomatic in how he handled us, Tun Daim, who was not a politician, would tell us that if the Prime Minister had agreed to it then ask the PM to approve it because he refuses to do so.

In one meeting we had with Tun Daim, he pulled out a letter from his drawer and waved it in front of us. "This is my pre-signed and undated resignation letter," he told us. "If the PM is not happy with me he can have my resignation."

That was a clear message that the Finance Minister decides and he will not take instructions from the Prime Minister and if the PM is not happy with that he (Tun Daim) is prepared to resign. We even met the Prime Minister to complain about this but Dr Mahathir told us that we had to sort it out with Tun Daim.

In another meeting that we had with Tun Daim where we raised a certain issue and told him that Dr Mahathir does not agree to what we want, Tun Daim phoned Dr Mahathir in front of us and told the PM that he has agreed to what the Malay Chamber of Commerce wanted. Tun Daim overrode Dr Mahathir and not the other way around.

In one meeting that we had with Anwar, who was by then the Finance Minister, Anwar phoned Tun Daim in our presence to ask Tun Daim to inform Dr Mahathir that he has agreed to what we wanted.

From my personal experience, the relationship of the Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Economic Adviser to the government, and Bank Negara Governor, was a very complicated relationship and we never knew at each point of time who we should be talking to if we wanted things done.

One thing that was very clear, though, was that each was the boss of his own turf. And Chua Jui Meng and Anwar Ibrahim both know this and hence should go public on this so that Malaysians can get to the truth of the matter because RM207 billion is a lot of money and the truth should not remain hidden.

*******************************************

Who hijacked the Death Railway money?

The money - RM207 billion - is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. What has happened to it?

By Chua Jui Meng, Free Malaysia Today

Is Dr Mahathir Mohamad going to take the same "silence is golden" stand as Najib Tun Razak and his infamous diamond-loving wife Rosmah Mansor when cornered by an issue?

The revelation by the Japanese Embassy that it had paid compensation to the Malaysian government for families of victims of the so-called "Death Railway" project in the 1940s is shocking.

The sum of RM207 billion or whatever the amount must be revealed by Mahathir. He was close to the Japanese government and corporate sector when he promoted his Look East Policy aimed at enhancing trade with Japan.

The money, believed to be amounting to RM207 billion, was meant to be distributed to some 30,000 Malaysians who had been recruited as forced labourers by the Japanese to build the Thai-Burma rail link.

This means each affected family is entitled to receive between RM2.8 million and RM3 million as compensation.

The stinking part of the Umno-led Barisan Nasional federal government is that the public is today unaware of the compensation payment by the Japanese.

We would have thought Mahathir would have brought the money back from Japan in triumph, like a victorious Roman general.

Umno would have organised a huge gathering of the victims or their families and distributed the money. No, it was all covered in secrecy.

National probe needed

The money rightfully belongs to the victims of the "Death Railway" project and their families and to rob them is despicable.

The money is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. This means it happened during Mahathir's 22-year reign.

Who then has hijacked or stolen the money?

It is no small sum and surely Mahathir cannot expect us to accept his infamous "I cannot remember" or "I am unaware of such compensation money from Japan"?

This time, Malaysians cannot accept his "selective loss of memory" or "selective amnesia".

Whoever stole the money from the 30,000 dead Malaysians is/are worse than animals, hitting the depths of greed.

The government must immediately set up a national probe team to track down the thief/thieves to recover the money and for prosecution.

Surely there are paper trails, beginning with the transfer/s from the Japanese to the Malaysian government.

Meanwhile, Japan can do further justice to the 30,000 Malaysian forced labourers who died in the "Death Railway" project by revealing their identities so that their families are traced.

Ultimate danger

And, as for Mahathir who said five years of Pakatan Rakyat-rule is dangerous because BN will have no chance to return to power, I say, "Good riddance". After 55 years of misrule, it is time to retire Umno permanently.

With mounting and rising federal debts at RM620 billion or 74% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), meaning the BN is operating way above the 55% federal debt ceiling, that is more dangerous to Malaysians and the country.

If, for some reason, our oil wells suddenly run dry, we will immediately be deemed a bankrupt nation and untold misery would befall all Malaysians.

Also, a point to show why Pakatan is more dependable is that the financial management of the Pakatan states, debuting in 2008, has been acknowledged by the Auditor-General as more superior than the states governed by the BN.

And Mahathir's silence over reports of his allegedly US$44 billion (more than RM132 billion) in accumulated wealth is even more dangerous.

And with him now seemingly trying to engineer his son, Mukhriz, to rise as prime minister by or before the 14th general election, it is the ultimate danger for Malaysians and Malaysia.

 

Seeing things from the right perspective

Posted: 02 Jan 2013 07:42 PM PST

 

Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party -- although he also appears to be reluctant to do so.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Over the last few days I have read a few comments calling Rafizi Ramli a liar and accusing him of politicising the Deepak Jaikishan issue. First of all, so what if Rafizi is politicising issues? Is that not what politicians are supposed to do? You mean all those others in Pakatan Rakyat are not also politicising issues? You mean all those Umno and Barisan Nasional people are not also politicising issues?

Accusing Rafizi of politicising issues is so stupid. It is like accusing a fox that is hanging around the chicken run of trying to whack the chickens. That is why God made foxes, to whack chickens. Whacking chickens is in the job specification of foxes. Why else do you think God made foxes? Do you think God made foxes so that sugar daddies can buy a fox fur coat for their mistresses?

Foxes were created so that they can whack chickens. And politicians were created so that they can politicise issues. And all this talk that politicians are the result of anal sex is utter bullshit and very unfair because you cannot get pregnant from anal sex and for sure no one can get born through the arsehole.

Politicians are born just like you and me, the normal way, and politics is a career just like any other career.

In fact, politics allows postmen and railway crossing guards attain career heights that postmen and railway crossing guards could never attain if they did not become politicians. It is like going to America, the land of opportunity. Where else can simple farmers or descendants of slaves become 'big people' if not in America? And if you can't migrate to America to become a 'big person' then you become a politician and get called Yang Berhormat or The Respected One.

We must remember that everything in Malaysia is politicised. Even the Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, etc., God is politicised. Even with all that power that God possesses He cannot prevent his name from being politicised. And if the all-powerful God cannot stop his name from being politicised do you think Deepak Jaikishan can prevent his name from being politicised even if he imagines himself as a Sex God?

Now, why do you say that Rafizi Ramli lied? What did he say that makes you come to a conclusion that he lied? Did Rafizi say he was there, say, when Deepak Jaikishan was alleged to have bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for First Lady Rosmah Mansor? Did Rafizi say he personally saw the jewellery and/or held them in his hand?

He never said that. What he said was he has seen the documents and the documents were handed to him by someone he personally knows. He apparently trusts this person and probably has a relationship of sorts with this person. And this person handed him some documents that were supposed to be evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah. So, based on this, he held a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and that these documents are evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah.

And the purpose Rafizi held that press conference to reveal the existence of these documents is so that the MACC or PDRM can investigate the matter and find out whether all this is true or false. It could be true or it could be false. But Rafizi would not know whether it is true or false. He can only hold a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and leave it to the authorities to authenticate the documents and tell us whether the allegations are true or not.

Some of you ask: why hold a press conference? Why not make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration instead? If you are really sincere about seeing justice done then you should make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration. Holding a press conference makes it appear like all you want to do is to politicise the issue.

True, a police report or Statutory Declaration would be better than a press conference. A police report or Statutory Declaration looks less political than a press conference. But maybe you have forgotten that back in 1998 Anwar Ibrahim made a police report and he ended up getting arrested and was sent to jail for a long time. Ten years later, in 2008, I signed a Statutory Declaration and I too was arrested and charged for that. I was also detained without trial.

So, do you really think a police report or Statutory Declaration is wise? So far no one has been arrested and sent to jail for holding a press conference. At worse you may be subjected to a civil suit. However, since the press conference is a party press conference, then when you get sued the party will come out with the money to pay for a lawyer to represent you in court.

Can you remember that I was sued by many people -- UUM V.C. Nordin Kardi, Umno lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Lt Col Abdul Aziz Buyong and Lt Col Norhayati Hassan, etc. And I was sued because I made allegations against them.

Now I have been declared bankrupt and yet still more civil suits are piling up against me. Has any Malaysian from 28 million Malaysians offered to help me out financially?

When you write bad things about the government or about those who walk in the corridors of power everyone will clap and cheer you on. But when you get sued you have to carry that problem all by yourself. No one from all those people who clapped and cheered you on is going to come forward to volunteer to help you out financially.

I am fortunate that I have some friends who are lawyers who volunteered to help represent me free of charge. In the Nordin Kardi case, however, no one came forward to help me out. So the court awarded him an uncontested win and I now have to pay Nordin Kardi RM2.5 million. But I do not have RM2.5 million and can't pay that amount. So I have to be declared a bankrupt, as I was in the earlier case involving an Umno Minister where the court asked me to pay RM1.3 million.

Actually, it is now no longer worth anything to help me out unless you can afford to pay RM60 million, which is what I have hanging over my head -- and which is increasing every time I lose a case.

Do you know I recently had to pay the government RM215,000 to get my house released? In the end, with tax and legal fees included, I had to pay about RM250,000 or else I would lose my house.

And none of those people who clapped and cheered when I whacked the government came forward to help me settle that RM250,000. So my daughter had to go to the bank to borrow the money to help me out. Luckily I have a daughter who can qualify for a bank loan of RM250,000 or else my house would be gone.

So you face a great risk when you whack the government. No doubt people will clap and cheer when you whack the government. But that is all you receive -- claps and cheers. If you make a police report, sign a Statutory Declaration, or write an article in your Blog, you will get arrested and will get sent to jail. And you not only get arrested but will get sued as well and then will be hit with millions in damages. Hence the safest thing to do would be to do what Rafizi Ramli did -- hold a press conference in the party's name.

So I think you have to be a bit fair with Rafizi. He has no choice but to politicise the issues so that he can get the protection of the party when people sue him. If not Rafizi would end up like me if he does things outside the party. And he did not lie. He never said he was there or that he saw everything. What he said was that he was reliably informed, like what I said on my Statutory Declaration.

And I know it appears like Rafizi has done a U-turn. Yesterday he never said that the information or documents he received came from a third party. But now that Deepak has denied meeting him and/or denied giving him any documents, Rafizi turns around and says that the evidence came from a third party.

Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party -- although he also appears to be reluctant to do so.

Maybe Rafizi is worried that if he declares that he was not actually a witness but that the evidence was given to him by a third party then people will accuse him of doing a U-turn. Rafizi knows that that happened to me when I explained during my TV3 interview that I was not a witness but was informed about the matter by a third party. Everyone accused me of doing a U-turn even though I did not. Hence, understandably, Rafizi needs to be very careful here or else he will suffer the same fate that befell me.

Rafizi is not only a product of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK). He is also a product of a UK university education. That makes him very clever. Most MCKK cum UK educated people are very clever. And, being very clever, he would most certainly be aware that most Malaysians are not very bright. In fact, some Malaysians -- those not from MCKK and a UK education -- can sometimes be downright stupid. Hence Rafizi has to be very careful with what he says. People will even accuse him of saying what he never said -- unless you are from MCKK and armed with a UK education (then you will not be stupid enough to accuse people of saying what they did not say).

I am sorry if I sound like I am defending Rafizi. Even if I am defending Rafizi so what? Is it a crime to defend someone from your alma mater? Yes, I am defending Rafizi. I do not deny that and I am not apologetic or embarrassed about it. When someone deserves defending then you must defend that person.

And if you are not happy with that then sue me. It is, after all, a free country. Anyone can sue anyone.

Even the Christians are free to sue the government for not allowing them to use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat comes out with a statement next week also agreeing that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible then the Christians should sue Pakatan Rakyat as well.

But wait first until next week and see what Pakatan Rakyat has to say because they will be meeting only next week to make a decision as to whether Christians can use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat were to agree with the government that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible only then sue them. But I am confident Pakatan Rakyat will not agree with the government.

 

Claiming credit for other people’s work

Posted: 31 Dec 2012 07:18 PM PST

 

Sure, we fight for freedom of speech. And that is one of the reasons why we oppose Umno and Barisan Nasional -- because we want freedom of speech. But freedom of speech means you are free to talk about what we like but should not talk about what we don't like. And PAS talks about Islam, which is something we don't like. Hence we are angry with PAS for talking about what we don't like even if under freedom of speech they have a right to talk about whatever they want to talk about.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

JAIP nabs 13 couples for 'khalwat' in New Year's Eve

(Bernama) - The Enforcement Division of the Pahang Islamic Religious Department (JAIP) caught 13 unmarried couples between 18 and 25 years old in a Syariah crime prevention operation after the 2013 New Year Eve celebrations.

JAIP chief enforcement officer Mohd Raffli Abd Malik said the couples were nabbed for committing khalwat at several budget hotels in town from 9pm Monday to 6.30am Tuesday.

"Most of the couples were between 18 and 25 and were picked up from budget hotels around town where they had checked in after the New Year celebrations."

"They will be charged under the Islamic Religious Administration and Pahang Malay Customs 1982 Enactment," he told reporters after the operation.

*********************************************

Last night/early this morning, 13 unmarried couples were arrested in the state of Pahang, a state under Barisan Nasional, the same government that is in power at federal level. These unmarried couples were arrested under Islamic laws, also known as Syariah laws.

Malaysia, however, is not an Islamic State. It is a Constitutional Monarchy with a Westminster system of government. In other words, Malaysia is almost similar to the UK and considering that our system is a legacy of the British Colonial Government that is not too surprising.

Pahang is not only under Barisan Nasional. It is also the state were a Muslim woman was arrested and convicted for drinking beer and was sentenced to a punishment of whipping. Furthermore, Pahang is where a PKR leader who is also an ustaz (religious scholar) was arrested for being alone in a hotel room with a married woman, not his wife obviously.

Looking at the track record of Pahang, it appears like Barisan Nasional is more Islamic than Pakatan Rakyat and is very serious about the implementation of the Islamic Syariah laws.

None of the other states have sentenced a woman who drinks beer to a punishment of whipping. None of the other states arrested unmarried couples celebrating New Year Eve in a hotel room last night or early this morning. Only the Barisan Nasional run state of Pahang did this.

Note that these unmarried couples were arrested under the Islamic Religious Administration and Pahang Malay Customs 1982 Enactment. Yes, it was under a 30-year old law that was passed back in 1982.

1982 was the year I did my first Haj. 1982 was also the year that Anwar Ibrahim left ABIM to join Umno so that, as he himself claimed, he can change Umno from the inside and make it more Islamic.

Also very important, 1982 was when the Sixth General Election was held and Barisan Nasional won 132 of the 155 Parliament seats (or 86% of the seats in Parliament) on 61% of the popular votes while DAP won only 9 seats and PAS won 5 seats (with 8 seats going to independent candidates).

And that was the law used to arrested these 13 unmarried couples in Pahang last night/early this morning, a law that was passed by the Barisan Nasional government in 1982 soon after Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad took over as Prime Minister and Anwar Ibrahim left ABIM to join Umno so that he can make Umno more Islamic.

Many of us are very angry with PAS. We are very angry with PAS because they are trying to make Malaysia more Islamic. We are very angry with PAS because they are trying to remove Malaysia's secular system (or partial secular system) and turn Malaysia into a fully-fledged Islamic State (from the partial Islamic system that we have now).

The weird thing is, while PAS talks about making Malaysia more Islamic (and which is the reason of our anger, because they talk about it) none of the PAS run states like Kedah or Kelantan arrested anyone last night or early this morning (and not because no one in Kedah and Kelantan were engaged in 'illicit' sex to usher in the new year, mind you).  It is a Barisan Nasional state like Pahang that arrested unmarried Muslims for checking into a hotel room.

What is of special interest to me is that this law that they used to arrest these unmarried couples is a 1982 law. And in 1982 Dr Mahathir had just become the Prime Minister and Anwar joined Umno to make it more Islamic. And in 1982 the Malaysian voters gave Barisan Nasional a resounding win in the Sixth General Election while the Islamic party, PAS, won only five seats.

I think PAS is a fake. They talk about Islam. However, in states under their control, such as in Kedah and Kelantan, no one was arrested for illicit sex. Those who were arrested were arrested in a Barisan Nasional state like Pahang. And what I find even weirder is that the Menteri Besar of Pahang in 1982 was current Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

I wonder whether we should continue being angry with PAS. It looks like the culprits who 'Islamised' Malaysia were Dr Mahathir, Anwar and Najib. And these laws were enacted in 1982 when Dr Mahathir first became Prime Minister, Anwar left ABIM to join Umno, and Najib was the Menteri Besar of Pahang.

Maybe we should just let PAS keep talking about Islam. After all, it is the Barisan Nasional government and not the PAS government that appears to be overzealous about implementing Islam. It is those who do not talk about Islam who appear to be the dangerous ones.

In 1982, PAS was not in power in any of the states (not even in Kelantan). In fact, in 1982 PAS won only five Parliament seats. The people in power then were Dr Mahathir and Anwar at federal level and Najib in the State of Pahang. And the 13 unmarried couples arrested last night/early this morning were arrested under a 1982 law that was the product of Dr Mahathir, Anwar and Najib.

Well, did I not say that politics is all about perception? And reality and perception are two different animals. We are angry with PAS because they talk too much about Islam. But it is not PAS that arrested these people last night/early this morning.

Sure, we fight for freedom of speech. And that is one of the reasons why we oppose Umno and Barisan Nasional -- because we want freedom of speech. But freedom of speech means you are free to talk about what we like but should not talk about what we don't like. And PAS talks about Islam, which is something we don't like. Hence we are angry with PAS for talking about what we don't like even if under freedom of speech they have a right to talk about whatever they want to talk about.

Or maybe PAS should stop talking about Islam. After all, last night/early this morning it was not the PAS run states but a Barisan Nasional run state that arrested 13 unmarried couples for celebrating New Year's Eve in a hotel room. And this law that they used to arrest these people was a law that was enacted in 1982 when Dr Mahathir first became Prime Minister and Anwar left ABIM to join Umno and Najib was the Menteri Besar of Pahang.

Hence how can PAS claim credit for something that other people did back in 1982 when PAS was not running even a single state in Malaysia and won only five seats in Parliament?

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved