Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Ex-Perlis Mufti agrees with my views on Islam
How politicians hijack revolutions
The Ninth of July
When the shoe is on the other foot
Give me one reason why I should march on 9th July 2011 (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
Stop bitching
Feudalism rules
Your Friday sermon
How it all began
Understanding the Malay mind (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)

Ex-Perlis Mufti agrees with my views on Islam

Posted: 21 Jun 2011 08:30 PM PDT

No, this is NOT my normal cheong hei article. I have nothing more to add to what the ex-Perlis Mufti said other than I have been saying the same thing myself for years. But then I am a 'western educated' person and not an 'Islamic scholar'. So my views on Islam are insignificant unless someone the level of a mufti says the same thing. Hah! It feels good to be able to say: I TOLD YOU SO!

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Ex-Perlis mufti Asri backs Bersih's intentions

(Malaysiakini) - Former Perlis mufti Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin said after hearing and evaluating the briefing given by the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections (Bersih), he found its intentions to be good.

Asri said he had been swarmed with questions over the Bersih campaign and for him to take a stand on the issue of demands for just elections.

He explained that any life dealings should be assessed in two ways: its purpose and method.

"If the purpose and the method used is good then it would be considered a good practice. If it is meant well, but the method deployed is wrong, it's like theft for the purpose of giving charity, it is deemed wrong. If the purpose is wrong or is a sin, then any move towards it would be considered likewise."

"Any individuals who participate in the activity must ensure its purpose is halal and noble and the method deployed is also halal," he said.

After hearing Bersih's briefing, Asri said he found its intentions are good, that is to claim the rights which should be accorded to the rakyat or people as promised in the constitution.

If the demands are successful, the former Perlis mufti said it would not only help alleviate the problems faced by political parties in seeking a just campaign but also improve the way we embark on politics without having a notion of where the party is from.

"I do not dispute Bersih's noble intentions. However, I am worried if a certain political party's agenda is realised and not the rakyat's aspirations in general. Whereas the demands are good to ensure justice in managing elections," he said.

As to holding a rally, Asri said in principle it is required unless it is accompanied by haram actions like destroying public property, fights and actions leading to bad behaviour.

Citing Prophet Muhammad's sayings, Asri said street demonstrations to protest transgression can be held.

"In today's context, peaceful demonstrations to prevent political misbehaviour could be held as it has been successful in many countries."

"However, demonstrations would be open to dangers and causing chaos and they should be used as a last resort if the demands for justice are not met," he added.

"Discussion, negotiation or writing in protest are preferred. I understand all this had been done and the Election Commission should adhere to these demands to prevent the people from going to the streets which would result in untoward eventualities," he said.

He warned that if the EC fails to adhere to the demands, it is the rakyat's right to demand them peacefully.

"A peaceful rally is an important pre-condition and if it turns violent then it becomes haram. Those who want to attend the Bersih rally must work towards ensuring that they do not destroy public property, injure someone or shout vulgarities at anyone but only shout their demands and slogans to show their dissatisfaction," he said.

"It is haram for the demonstrators or the police to provoke anyone, resulting in riots. The police should also realise that the demands are good for the country and not only for the betterment of the people but also the police."

"The demonstrators should realise the police are out to ensure peace and there should not be any provocation," he warned, adding that those who provoke would be considered to have sinned.

How politicians hijack revolutions

Posted: 21 Jun 2011 12:41 AM PDT

Never mind which revolution you are talking about, the stories are all the same. Politicians are not capable of starting revolutions. The people start revolutions and then politicians hijack the revolution. The politicians hijacked the people's revolution of 10th November 2007 and they will hijack the 9th July 2011 revolution as well if we are not careful.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The French Revolution, the Russian Revolution and the Iranian Revolution are the more interesting revolutions to look at. Most of its leaders were in hiding or were not in the country and living in exile. They were not capable of organising anything in the country (especially back then when there were no mobile phones or internet like now).

Most of what happened was unplanned and took even the revolutionaries by surprise. Nevertheless, when the revolution did happen, this created a vacuum, which made it possible for the politicians to just walk in and take over.

Of course, once they took over, they rewrote the history books and painted a different picture of what really happened. Those who were in hiding or in exile overseas suddenly became the heroes of the revolution. And most times these 'hijackers' arrested and imprisoned or assassinated the real revolutionaries.

Let me quote some excerpts from Alan Bullocks's 1,000-page book: Hitler and Stalin, Parallel Lives.

Contrary to later legends, the Bolsheviks played only a marginal role in the development of the revolution before August 1917. On the eve of the February events, their membership was less than 25,000 and, although this was soon expanded, they continued to have much less support than either of their rivals, the Mensheviks and the Socialist Revolutionaries, the two parties that dominated the Soviets.

Neither Lenin and the Bolsheviks nor the other socialist parties 'made' the revolution; they did not create the grievances of the peasants about the land, the more recent anger of the workers against their exploitation, or the war-weariness of the army and the nation.

The outbreak of the revolution of February 1917, like that of 1905, took the Russian revolutionaries by surprise. Some weeks before that, Trotsky, despairing of developments in Europe, had moved to the United States, and in January, Lenin told a group of young socialists in Zurich: "We of the older generation may not live to see the decisive battles of the coming revolution".

February 1917 was no more a spontaneous revolt of the masses than October was to be. October was a coup d'etat, its predecessors in February the sudden collapse of the Tsarist regime, which had lasted for 300 years but proved incapable of coping with long-standing economic and social problems made intolerable by the strains of an unsuccessful war.

As the regime's authority crumbled it left a vacuum which was filled by mutinous soldiers demanding an end to the war, by factory workers demanding food and labour, and by peasants demanding land.

As in 1905, what released these pent-up forces was not a revolutionary conspiracy but the order given to the troops to fire on demonstrators in Petrograd which this time led to a mutiny among the soldiers.

The mutiny rapidly spread to the rest of the capital's garrison, and the government was unable to regain control.

The revolutionary parties were as divided as they were surprised -- divided about their attitude to the provisional governments; to the Soviets, which sprang up all over the country; to peace negotiations; to a unification of radical forces.

This confusion at the top, the lack of authority in face of anarchical conditions in the country and the continuation of the war, persisted until autumn.

Stalin's part in 1917 was neither as prominent as portrayed by official accounts later, nor as insignificant as Trotsky and his other enemies claimed.

There are three reasons why 1917 is a key to the understanding of Stalin's psychological development. The first is his failure to play the leading role he had dreamed of inflicted a deep and lasting trauma.

As soon as he was in a position to do so, from the end of 1929, he took extraordinary steps to heal it. Records were altered or withheld; memoirs suppressed or censored; editors, court painters and film-makers pressed into service to create a 'revised' version of events in the history of the Soviet Union.

The figure of Trotsky, who had unquestionably played a role second only to that of Lenin -- the leading role in the actual seizure of power -- was expunged and replaced by that of Stalin. Lenin remained the great leader who returned to Russia from abroad; Stalin was now elevated to the same level with him, as the leader who never left Russia, and greeted Lenin on his return.

In practice the seizure of power turned out to be relatively easy: the difficult part began only when the Bolsheviks had taken over the government, with a lost war on their hands, with a social upheaval still in progress, with an economy which had virtually collapsed and with the prospect of civil war.

Astonishingly, the revolution was over in less than forty-eight hours and with little bloodshed. Having set the policy, Lenin took little part in its execution. At the last moment he emerged from hiding and reached Trotsky's headquarters at the Smolny Institute in disguise just before midnight on the 24th.

At 2 a.m. on the 25th Trotsky pulled out his watch and said, "It's begun," to which Lenin replied: "From being on the run to supreme power, that's too much."

The Mensheviks and some of the Socialist Revolutionary delegates withdrew in protest at the Bolsheviks' seizure of power. They were assured by Trotsky as they left: "You have played your role. Go where you belong: to the garbage heap of history".

The Ninth of July

Posted: 20 Jun 2011 09:58 PM PDT

If they can pay RM1.8 million just for a 'free' Facebook website, surely the Government of Malaysia can pay that much for a Made-in-Malaysia movie. Let us imagine the dialogue between a local movie producer and the Minister of Arts and Culture when the local producer applies for a government grant to produce a Made-in-Malaysia movie. This is just imagination, mind you, and never happened nor could ever happen.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Rice: Will you be showing how well Malaysia has developed under the Barisan Nasional government?

Producer: I did not plan on that but I suppose I could if you want me to. I could show scenes of Selangor and Penang.

Rice: No, Selangor and Penang cannot. Those are opposition states. You can only show scenes of the states that are under Barisan Nasional rule. You must also show the Petronas Twin Towers. We are very proud of our Twin Towers.

Producer: But isn't the Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur, which is also under opposition control?

Rice: The opposition won only ten seats in Kuala Lumpur. We still won one seat, even though we cheated with the army votes. So Kuala Lumpur is not totally under opposition control, only 91% opposition.

Producer: Okay, if you say so. I can try to include the Twin Towers in the movie.

Rice: But make sure you show the Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur and not in Melaka like that other movie that they made…can't remember what it was called now.

Producer: Oh, you mean that movie 'Entrapment' starring Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Rice: Yes, that's the one. Our Prime Minister was very angry about that.

Producer: Najib?

Rice: No, Dr Mahathir.

Producer: Oh, you mean the Prime Minister back in 1999 when the movie was first released.

Rice: No, I mean the Prime Minister now. He is still the Prime Minister…de facto Prime Minister.

Producer: I thought Rosmah is the de facto Prime Minister.

Rice: Rosmah is de facto 2. Dr Mahathir is de facto 1.

Producer: We have two de facto Prime Ministers?

Rice: Why not? After all we have two Finance Ministers…Finance Minister 1 and Finance Minister 2.

Producer: I see, so what does that make Najib then?

Rice: A very confused man…but never mind…please explain the synopsis of your movie…very briefly though. Your detailed paper can follow later.

Producer: It is basically a conspiracy theory movie.

Rice: Ah, I just love conspiracy theories. All Malaysians love conspiracy theories. Dr Mahathir talks about the Western capitalist conspiracies. Anwar Ibrahim talks about the Sodomy 1 and Sodomy 2 conspiracies. Everyone talks about conspiracies, especially that Blogger-in-Exile, Raja Petra. He is the biggest spinner of conspiracy theories. That's why the people love to read Malaysia Today. They love fantasies involving conspiracy theories. Do you read Malaysia Today?

Producer: I'm afraid I don't.

Rice: Never mind, even if you do you will say you don't. Nobody admits that they read Malaysia Today. So what is this conspiracy theory about?

Producer: It is about the Opposition Leader being behind one politician named Abraham the Frog. The Opposition Leader sends Abraham to join the ruling party as a Trojan horse. Abraham then launches a Malaysian version of the Ku Klux Klan that we shall call Rogol or Perkosa or something like that…I have not decided yet.

Rice: Interesting. Frogs becoming horses.

Producer: Rogol or Perkosa is secretly a Brown Power Movement. They want all the non-brown people to be kicked out of the country and for power to be back in the hands of the brown people. It is like the Black Power Movement of the 1960s in America, except in this case the Black Power Movement and the Ku Klux Klan are one and the same.

Rice: Isn't that a bit confusing?

Producer: No, we shall call it 1Malaysia. Both the Brown Power Movement and the Malaysian Ku Klux Klan become one…1Malaysia.

Rice: Sounds reasonable.

Producer: Abraham then creates trouble and the people become very angry with the government. Actually the government is not behind Abraham. The real mastermind is the Opposition Leader whom Abraham works for.

Rice: But don't the people suspect anything?

Producer: No, because the previous Prime Minister is financing Abraham. So the people think that the government is behind Abraham. They don't suspect the Opposition Leader.

Rice: So the previous Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader are working together then?

Producer: No, that is just the thing. The previous Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader are enemies.

Rice: But you said they are working together.

Producer: They are not. Abraham is secretly working for the Opposition Leader but openly working for the previous Prime Minister. He is like a double agent.

Rice: I see. So Abraham is secretly sabotaging the government then?

Producer: Yes, that right.

Rice: Ah, so he wants to bring down the government to allow the Opposition Leader to take over.

Producer: Not exactly. This is where the conspiracy theory gets more interesting and Abraham's role as a double agent gets more complicating.

Rice: I see.

Producer: Actually, Abraham is pretending to work for both the Opposition Leader and the previous Prime Minister. He is really working for the Prime Minister.

Rice: I don't get it.

Producer: The previous Prime Minister is secretly trying to bring down the Prime Minister so that his son can take over. So if Abraham can be linked to the previous Prime Minister that will get his son into trouble and he can't take over as Prime Minister.

Rice: I see. So Abraham is suspected of secretly working for the Opposition Leader but is seen to be working for the previous Prime Minister whereas he is actually secretly working for the Prime Minister to sabotage the previous Prime Minister?

Producer: That's about it.

Rice: So who wins in the end?

Producer: Ah, that is the real twist, which no one is going to suspect. You see, the Prime Minister's wife is the real mastermind behind all this.

Rice: So now we have the Prime Minister's wife also involved in the conspiracy?

Producer: Yes, but the previous Prime Minister is aware of this so he too sabotages the Prime Minister's wife.

Rice: Ah, and how does he do this?

Producer: He asks all his cronies, the Chinese tycoons, to get close to the Prime Minister's wife and to give her very expensive presents. So they buy her millions of dollars worth of Hermes Birkin handbags and eventually she has all the colours and more bags than Victoria Beckhem.

Rice: Is that enough to sabotage her?

Producer: Yes, then the mainstream newspapers show pictures of all her handbags and she is eventually dubbed as Malaysia's Imelda Marcos and the people rise up in anger and march to the King's palace and Kuala Lumpur becomes just like Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Yemen, Sudan, Syria and so on.

Rice: So the government falls and who takes over then? The Opposition Leader or the previous Prime Minister?

Producer: None of the above. The person who takes over will be Abraham. The people become fed up with both the government and the opposition so they reject both. They want an independent Member of Parliament to take over and since Abraham is an independent Member of Parliament he becomes the new Prime Minister.

Rice: A very interesting twist indeed. And what are you going to call this movie?

Producer: 'The Ninth of July': the day the people took to the streets to make Abraham the Frog the new Prime Minister of Malaysia.

When the shoe is on the other foot

Posted: 20 Jun 2011 07:30 PM PDT

Ibrahim was later interrupted by a man claiming to be a member of the "rakyat" who accused him of "threatening" the Chinese with his statement. "I am talking to the reporter. You want to talk to me, you talk to me after this. Do not interrupt me. I can see you after this... bloody idiot," he said.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Be fair to me, Ibrahim Ali tells media

(The Malaysian Insider) - Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali today appealed to the media to be fair to him and to stop spinning his statements out of context.

The Malay rights leader claimed his words were often misreported, particularly by media organisations like The Malaysian Insider and Malaysiakini.

"I hope all the newspapers report all the statements correctly and be fair. There are good statements from us. It does not appear so but if there are statements that are a little bit controversial, they spin off and people get the wrong message of what I said," he told reporters today.

The Pasir Mas MP caused an uproar earlier today when he was heard yelling at a group of reporters who approached him for a statement.

"I do not speak to The Malaysian Insider. Why should I? You only spin," he shouted while gesticulating.

MAYBE IBRAHIM ALI WOULD NOT LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE FOLLOWING

NPQsZZZnXW0

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQsZZZnXW0

4jA88gmFgMI

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jA88gmFgMI

adxPYoaIPAE

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

Give me one reason why I should march on 9th July 2011 (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)

Posted: 19 Jun 2011 04:39 PM PDT

Actually I can give you more than one reason. But knowing that many Malaysia Today readers tend to focus on the 'wrong' part of the article rather than what they should be focusing on (just read the comments to see what I mean) maybe I should focus on just one reason. That is easier for most of the smaller brains.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Now, look at the chart above and tell me what you see. Yes, that's right, Malaysian elections are won through gerrymandering.

Okay, in case you are not sure what you should be looking at, look at the figures under the column 'GOVERNMENT' and compare the % seats and % votes columns.

Can you see that in terms of votes the Alliance Party of 1959, 1964 and 1969 and Barisan Nasional since 1974 till 2008 never really did that well? The best was in fact during Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's rule in 2004 when Barisan Nasional garnered 63.9% of the votes and again in 1995 (65.2%) just before the 1997 financial crisis and the 1998 political crisis that followed.

Nevertheless, even this did not give them two-thirds of the votes (66.67%).

The rest of the time, Barisan Nasional (or the Alliance Party) won only 50% to 60% of the votes (except in 1969 when they won less than 50%).

However, as you can see, it is seats and not votes which has been giving them the government time and time again. And, as I said, this is because of gerrymandering.

The Parliament seats vary from a mere 5,000 voters to over 100,000 voters. Invariably, all those 'smaller' seats are Barisan Nasional seats, in particular Umno, while the 'bigger' seats are those which Barisan Nasional has no hope of winning and which will certainly fall to the opposition.

Okay, to make you understand the issue better, it works like this. The opposition can win 100,000 votes and it will be just one seat. Barisan Nasional, on the other hand, also wins 100,000 votes but it will be two or three seats.

Now, that is why the opposition wins 50% of the votes but only 40% of the seats while Barisan Nasional's 50% of the votes gives them 60% of the seats.

In short, dear readers, this means, based on the present system, the opposition will NEVER form the federal government because it will NEVER win more than 50% of the seats in Parliament (unless it can win more than 60% of the votes, which is quite impossible with that many phantom and postal votes floating around).

And this also means we need electoral reforms. We need a law passed that says the variance in Parliament seats should be plus-minus 20%. This means, if the benchmark for Parliament seats is, say, 50,000 voters, then the variance of 20% translates to 40,000-60,000 voters per seat (not 5,000-120,000 like now).

Only when this happens would the opposition have a fair shot at forming the next federal government. If not it will never happen (unless the opposition can garner more than 60% of the votes).

In some countries this is the law. Some countries make it law that the seats must be plus-minus 15%. In others it is plus-minus 20%. (In fact, in some countries the law says that not less than 30% of the candidates must be women). Only in Malaysia it is plus-minus 95% (gila babi sungguh).

So now you know why we need electoral reforms. And now you know why we need to march on 9th July 2011. And this is not about the opposition. It is not about Anwar Ibrahim either. It is about the rights of the people of one-man-one-vote.

If Malaysia had direct elections (like in the United States) to elect our Prime Minister, then Najib Tun Razak would never become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Then, like in America, a non-white (in Malaysia's case a non-Bumiputera) could become the Prime Minister.

Alas, in Malaysia we have a system that ensures the Prime Minister will always be someone from Umno and the government will always be an Umno-led coalition.

The next question would be: why bother to vote then?

Good question. I would urge you to vote so that we can see a strong opposition in Parliament and the emergence of a two-party system in Malaysia. That in itself is reason enough to vote. However, if we can see electoral reforms, then that is another matter. Then we can vote to see a change in federal government.

And that is why we need BERSIH and also why we need to support Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan. Electoral reforms will never happen unless the people make it happen.

And 'the people' are you and I. We can't depend on just the politicians.

Don't forget, at one point of time many now in the opposition were once in the government (and many now in the government were once in the opposition). And when they were in the government did they push for electoral reforms? Or did they take advantage of the unfair system to hold on to power and only now that they are in the opposition they make so much noise about electoral reforms?

Trust me, if the opposition takes over the federal government they too would not want to change the system. They will maintain the present system to ensure they remain in power. Why change the present system to one that allows an easy change of government? And many in the opposition who were once in the government exploited the present system and did not utter a word of protest until they found themselves in the opposition.

Then only they bising tak habis-habis.

Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/06/201179.html

Stop bitching

Posted: 18 Jun 2011 12:35 AM PDT

This is my response to the Penang mosque committee fiasco where the opposition was forced to do a 'U-turn' after adamantly stating that it would go ahead with the elections of the mosque committees. This is also my response to HINDRAF's announcement that it is boycotting the BERSIH rally to punish Pakatan Rakyat.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Aziz Bari is grumbling because Umno has dragged the Monarchy into politics and is using the Palace against the opposition (read his article in Bahasa Malaysia below). My response to that is: so what? Isn't this what Umno normally does? Isn't this what Umno always does? So, what else is new? It's the same old story.

You mean the opposition did not suspect this would happen? You mean this is the first time this has happened and the opposition was caught off guard? How come the opposition was caught off guard? You mean Umno is cleverer than the opposition?

The opposition always seems to get caught off guard when it comes to issues concerning the Monarchy or the Palace. There must be some very stupid people in the opposition if they can get caught on the same issue again and again. There is saying: once bitten twice shy. Only fools get bitten 25 times and are still not shy.

Next time plan your strategy. Use preemptive strikes. Don't get into a situation half-cocked like you always do. And stop complaining about Umno this and Umno that, especially when it comes to the Monarchy or Palace.

And to those Chinese and Indian readers, stop falling into Umno's trap. Umno wants you to whack the Monarchy and Palace so that it can prove to the Malays that Pakatan Rakyat, in particular the non-Malays in Pakatan Rakyat, are anti-royalty. That will ensure Umno can win back Malay support. And you are doing exactly what Umno wants you to do.

Now, to the issue of HINDRAF. They want to boycott the BERSIH march because they are angry with Pakatan Rakyat. Why boycott BERSIH when it is Pakatan Rakyat you are angry with? I do not get that logic.

BERSIH is about the rakyat, not about Pakatan Rakyat. So, are you trying to punish the rakyat or punish Pakatan Rakyat?

The signal that HINDRAF is sending to the rakyat is that Pakatan Rakyat is behind BERSIH. Since Pakatan Rakyat and not the rakyat is behind BERSIH then this gives the government the justification to ban the BERSIH rally.

The government is saying that the opposition is the one really behind BERSIH. Now HINDRAF is confirming this. This means the government can legitimately clamp down on BERSIH and arrest or detain its leaders.

Maybe, after this, HINDRAF can proudly announce that it was they who made it possible for the government to take action against BERSIH and ban its planned march on 9th July 2011.

It would be good if the HINDRAF people can look at the two videos below. This is what I would call a quality Tamil leader. These are the kind of Tamil leaders that we want to see. Can you just visualise some of the HINDRAF leaders acting like this and demonstrating this type of class and quality?

**************************************
P'raya masjid: Nama Agong diheret, kata Aziz Bari

Meskipun mengakui Yang di-Pertuan Agong mempunyai kuasa dalam hal-hal berkaitan agama Islam di negeri-negeri yang tidak mempunyai Raja-raja Melayu, namun pakar perlembagaan Profesor Abdul Aziz Bari mempertikaikan cara nama Seri Paduka diheret setiap kali bagi membidas dasar-dasar kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang.

NONE"Hanya selepas Pakatan Rakyat mengambil-alih Pulau Pinang, tiba-tiba peranan Agong menjadi tokoh yang signifikan.

"Nama Baginda digunakan bagi menghalang sebarang tindakan yang diambil oleh kerajaan negeri," kata pensyarah Universiti Islam Antarabangsa (UIAM) itu kepada Malaysiakini.

Abdul Aziz berkata prosedur atau peraturan yang betul mengikut perlembagaan adalah bagi pihak Istana Negara atau setiausaha sulit Yang di-Pertuan Agong bagi mengeluarkan kenyataan berhubung kedudukannya sebagai ketua agama dan bukannya oleh pihak-pihak yang lain.

"Pastinya bukan Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, yang merupakan sebahagian daripada kerajaan.

"Jadi beliau harus diam. Biarkan Baginda melaksanakan tanggungjawab yang diperuntukkan oleh perlembagaan - bebas daripada kerajaan sama ada peringkat persekutuan mahupun negeri," kata Abdul Aziz.

Beliau juga membidas dakwaan 'mengarut' oleh kumpulan pendesak Melayu, PERKASA yang berkata adalah salah bagi mengadakan pemilihan jawatankuasa kariah masjid diadakan.

"Pertama, tidak ada fatwa mengatakan pemilihan itu adalah haram mengikut Islam," katanya.Fatwa

Lagipun menurut profesor itu lagi, umat Islam, sama ada dari Umno, PAS dan PKR, semuanya pernah terbabit dalam pemilihan parti masing-masing.

azlan"Jika ini tidak mengikut Islam, majlis fatwa sepatutnya mengeluarkan hukum berhubung perkara itu," katanya.

Semalam, hasrat Majlis Agama Islam Pulau Pinang (MAIPP) bagi mengadakan pemilihan jawatankuasa kariah masjid bagi sesi 2012-2013 dengan kaedah pilihan raya terpaksa dibatalkan.

Keputusan itu dibuat di Istana Negara di Kuala Lumpur apabila Yang di-Pertua Negri Abdul Rahman Abbas dan Yang Dipertua MAIPP Ellias Zakaria menghadap Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin.

Mesyuarat agung masjid-masjid di Pulau Pinang yang dijadualkan hari ini dan esok itu sepatutnya memilih jawatankuasa kariah di 151 daripada 200 masjid tetapi kini ditangguhkan sehingga notis lanjut.

Pemilihan ala pilihan raya yang dicadangkan itu bagi membolehkan anak kariah mengundi secara sulit untuk memilih pemimpin kariah yang sebelum ini dipilih oleh MAIPP.

Bantahan pelbagai pihak yang didalangi Umno begitu lantang kerana gusar pilihan raya kariah masjid akan menghakis sokongan kepada parti itu yang kini gagal menguasai kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang setelah ditumbangkan pada pilihan raya umum 2008.

Umno mendakwa pemilihan secara demokrasi itu akan hanya membawa perpecahan di kalangan umat Islam selain mengheret masjid ke kancah politik kepartian.

THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY A TAMIL LEADER HAS BEEN ELECTED INTO THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT

K9yqU37MhT4
SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9yqU37MhT4

6TjlgBs_k0U
SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TjlgBs_k0U

Feudalism rules

Posted: 16 Jun 2011 07:11 PM PDT

But if you want to retain the Monarchy and continue with Malaysia's system of Constitutional Monarchy then learn how to work with the Rulers. Talk to them. Dialogue with them. Learn how to get their blessing before you embark on anything. Don't act first and make announcements before you get the blessing of the Rulers.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Penang to go ahead with mosque polls

(Bernama) - The Penang government will not budge from its decision to carry out the election of mosque officials as it is accordance with the laws, said its Religious Affairs, Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Committee chairman Abdul Malik Abul Kassim.

He said the proposed election adhered to Section 104(a)(b) of the State of Penang Enactment 2004 and 4(1) Congregation Committee and Mosque Officials Requirements (Penang).

"The new procedure introduced by the Penang Islamic Religious Council is an improvement of existing regulatory procedures adopted by the previous state government," he told reporters Monday.

Commenting on calls for the state government to get the consent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong before holding the mosque polls, Abdul Malik, said the new procedure accorded congregators the right to nominate candidates through mosque committees to the council before getting the consent of the king.

Abdul Malik said the mosque congregation committees would decide whether the congregators were eligible to vote and the state government would set up the congregators' database after the election.

After nomination was closed last Tuesday, 193 out of 200 mosques had sent the nomination lists, he said, adding that this showed the proposed election had received an overwhelming response from congregators.

Meanwhile, Penang Umno Liaison Committee chairman Datuk Zainal Abidin Osman said the state Umno had sent an appeal letter to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong through Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, to oppose the move.

"I hope the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the head of Islam will prevent the mosque polls from taking place as it could divide the Muslims," said Zainal.

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

King orders halt to Penang mosque polls

(The Malaysian Insider) - Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin has ordered Penang to call off its controversial mosque elections, the state government said today.

Penang religious affairs, domestic trade and consumer affairs committee chairman Abdul Malik Kassim said the decision was relayed to him by Penang Islamic Council (MAIPP) head Ellias Zakaria earlier today.

"The Yang di-Pertuan Agong has ordered the state mosque elections to be postponed," Abdul Malik said in a statement.

The mosque elections were supposed to be held this weekend.

Abdul Malik said an official statement would be made after a meeting with the MAIPP.

Penang announced earlier this month that the selection of mosque committees in the state would be made through elections this year, in place of the previous method.

Malay rights groups like Perkasa has opposed the move, saying it would only divide the Muslim community in the state.

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

Itulah, jangan cakap besar. Kan dah kena tarik balek kenyataan awal?

When the Penang State Government, or more accurately EXCO Member Abdul Malik Abul Kassim, made his announcement earlier this week, I was quite amused. I said to myself: let us watch what happens. I bet he will be made to eat his words and would have to 'tarik balek' what he initially announced.

We may think that Malaysia is a Constitutional Monarchy. We may think that the Agong acts on the advise of the Prime Minister and the State Rulers on the advice of the Menteri Besar (Chief Minister). The truth is, the State Rulers and Agong do have certain powers that the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, or even Umno cannot take away from them.

Okay, you may say that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is using the Agong. You may say that the Agong is just doing what Umno wants him to do. You may say that this is not really what the Agong wants but what Umno wants. Well, in that case, if this is Umno talking and not the Agong talking, then defy His Majesty. Refuse to comply with what the Agong wants and just go ahead with the mosque elections.

The bottom line is, the opposition should stop cakap besar. Don't think that all this sabre-rattling can frighten the Monarchy. The opposition needs to learn how to engage the Monarchy instead of trying to threaten it.

Take Selangor as an example. I told some of the DAP Selangor leaders that they should stop acting like 'Communists' by demonstrating anti-Monarchy tendencies. I even introduced them to some members of the Selangor Royal Family and arranged a few dinners so that they could develop some fellowship.

This anti-songkok thing is stupid, I told them. If the dress code when entering the palace is to use a songkok then what is so wrong in using it? A songkok has nothing to do with Islam. Christians in Indonesia also use songkoks, as do some Hindus in India (which was where the songkok came from in the first place).

DAP must learn to accommodate the palace. They must not be too antagonistic towards the palace. If the palace offers DAP leaders awards (pingat and gelaran) or even datukships just accept them. Don't decline them because you are opposed to symbols of the Monarchy. That would be like telling the Rulers to go to hell. And that is not how you develop a good relationship with the Rulers.

I hope this Penang mosque election fiasco has taught the opposition a lesson. If you wish to defy the Agong by going ahead with the Penang mosque elections then go ahead. No problem. You can even declare that if Pakatan Rakyat takes over the federal government the Monarchy will be abolished and Malaysia will be turned into a Republic.

But if you want to retain the Monarchy and continue with Malaysia's system of Constitutional Monarchy then learn how to work with the Rulers. Talk to them. Dialogue with them. Learn how to get their blessing before you embark on anything. Don't act first and make announcements before you get the blessing of the Rulers.

This piece is not about me being pro-royalty. Yes, I know, many are going to say I am talking this way because I am also a member of the royal family. But it is not that at all. It is about what I wrote earlier with regards to politics being about perception.

The perception being created is that the opposition has no respect for the Monarchy and is defying the Rulers. The perception being created is that the opposition is at odds and is in conflict with the Rulers. Considering that the majority of the voters are Malays and the majority of the seats are Malay seats and without Malay support the opposition can't form the next federal government, this is a perception that does not help the opposition cause.

That is the bottom line. That is the message I am trying to send to the opposition.

Don't give Umno ammunition to use against the opposition. Don't allow Umno to swing the Malays on the basis that the opposition is anti-Monarchy and pro-Republic. Don't allow Umno to capitalise on this perception.

In Perak, the Malays already think that the opposition is anti-Sultan. And that may hurt the opposition in the next general election.

Your Friday sermon

Posted: 16 Jun 2011 05:52 PM PDT

The government is worried that the BERSIH march of 9th July may end up like the historical Tahrir Square of Cairo incident. I doubt it. The Egyptian government of Hosni Mubarak was evil. The Malaysian government of Najib Razak is not. Only evil governments can fall through street action. Just governments do not fall that way.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Himpunan Bersih bercanggah nilai, etika Islam

Menurut Yadim, usaha untuk mengadakan perhimpunan itu adalah percubaan untuk mengheret rakyat ke kancah kemelut politik yang lebih besar.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Yang Dipertua Yayasan Dakwah Islamiah Malaysia (YADIM) Datuk Aziz Jamaludin Mohd Tahir mendakwa perhimpunan Gabungan Pilihan Raya Bersih dan Adil (Bersih 2.0) pada 9 Julai ini merupakan sesuatu yang bertentangan dengan nilai dan etika Islam.

Read more here: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/06/17/himpunan-bersih-suburkan-anarkisme-bercanggah-nilai-etika-islam/

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

YADIM, an Islamic missionary movement, said that the planned BERSIH march of 9th July 2011 violates Islamic values and ethics. But then what are Islamic values and ethics?

In chapter Ali Imran, verse 104 of the Quran, it says: "Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones to attain felicity."

Datuk Aziz Jamaludin Mohd Tahir of YADIM just gave his personal opinion and view. And this personal opinion and view echoes that of Umno and the government.

Incidentally, 500 to 600 police reports have already been made against BERSIH with regards to the 9th July rally.

Aziz Jamaludin, however, did not offer proof or quote any verses from the Quran to support his opinion. And, as they say, opinions are like arseholes -- everybody has one.

Well, I have quoted a verse from the Quran -- chapter Ali Imran, verse 104 above -- and it appears that what the Quran says is opposed to what Aziz Jamaludin says.

So, is the Quran wrong or is Aziz Jamaludin wrong? If Aziz Jamaludin is right then definitely the Quran must be wrong.

The Quran, in the verse above, has clearly defined what are Islamic values and ethics. And these values and ethics are amar makruf, nahi munkar.

This means a group of us must arise to uphold what is right and oppose what is wrong. This is our duty as Muslims. Anywhere that we may see violations, transgressions, evil, fraud, abuse of power, corruption, persecution, racism, or whatever, we must expose it, shun it, avoid it, oppose it, fight it, eradicate it, etc. There is no compromise on the matter. There are no two ways about it. We must become an enemy of the enemy of the people.

Denying the people their right to free, clean and fair elections is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Denying the people their right to a government of their choice is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Denying the people their right to a just and corrupt-free government is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Violating the Federal Constitution of Malaysia is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Imposing Rule by Law instead of Rule of Law is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Persecution, selective-prosecution, racism, cronyism and nepotism are a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

Manipulation of the judicial system is a violation of Islamic values and ethics.

And the list goes on and on.

Is Aziz Jamaludin saying that all those Muslims who rose up to oppose their governments in the Middle East are un-Islamic?

Is Malaysia going to now declare that all those new governments in the Middle East are tahud governments and Malaysia will not recognise them and will not enter into any diplomatic relations with them?

Will the Ambassadors of the these countries be summoned to Wisma Putra to be told that they will have to close their embassies and their staff given 24 hours to leave Malaysia?

Will Malaysia close all its embassies in these countries and recall its diplomatic staff?

Will Malaysians be banned from travelling to these countries just like they are banned from travelling to Israel?

Note that these Muslim countries also had their own 'BERSIH marches' when they realised that the election system had failed and change can no longer come through the ballot box but only through taking to the streets.

The government is worried that the BERSIH march of 9th July may end up like the historical Tahrir Square of Cairo incident. I doubt it. The Egyptian government of Hosni Mubarak was evil. The Malaysian government of Najib Razak is not. Only evil governments can fall through street action. Just governments do not fall that way.

How it all began

Posted: 15 Jun 2011 07:30 PM PDT

Is demonstrating part of Malay culture? Umno says no. Maybe it used to be no 500 years ago. But it became Malay culture back in 1946 when they opposed the Malay Union. And if not because of this demonstration there would not be an Umno around today. Umno was born against the backdrop of the 1946 demonstration. So a demonstration is the father of Umno.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

SCENE ONE: British Malaya. Kampong Baharu, Kuala Lumpur. 1946.

Said: Assalamuailakum!

Rahman: Mualaikumsalam. Ah, Said, what brings you here? Come in.

Said: Ay Rahman, are you going to the demonstration tomorrow?

Rahman: Demonstration? What demonstration?

Said: We are getting together to demonstrate against the government. We are going to oppose the plan to set up the Malayan Union.

Rahman: But I thought the Malayan Union is a fait accompli. Haven't the Rulers already endorsed it?

Said: Yes, but the Rulers were tricked by Sir Harold MacMichael. They did not know that the setting up of the Malayan Union will not only erode the powers of the Rulers but that of the Rakyat as well. So we are going to oppose it.

Rahman: But won't that mean we shall also be demonstrating against the Rulers?

Said: No, we shall in fact be defending the powers of the Rulers. We are not trying to accuse the Rulers of selling out the Rakyat. We are taking the position that MacMichael tricked the Rulers. So the Rulers are as much victims as the Rakyat. Raja Uda, Datuk Panglima Gantang, Nik Kamil and Datuk Kamaruddin have already spoken to the Rulers and Their Highnesses have sanctioned the demonstration. The Istana is also sending representatives to join the demonstration. The Rulers are with us, Rahman.

Rahman: I'm not sure, Said. Demonstrating is not our Malay culture. And I am wary about opposing the government.

Said: Alamak, Rahman, we can no longer be feudalistic. All over the world the people are opposing their governments. Our neighbours Indonesia and the Philippines have already gained independence. India is soon going to be independent. And they are gaining independence because the Rakyat dared oppose the government. Malaya will never gain independence unless we dare oppose the government.

Rahman: But still, Said, demonstrations are a show of defiance and dissent. We Malays are not like that. Malays are a tolerant and subservient race. We never oppose the powers-that-be even if they are evil and unjust. That is not what Hang Tuah taught us.

Said: Rahman, Hang Tuah is outdated. That is something that is 500 years old. Today Malays must be like Hang Jebat.

Rahman: I am shocked that you say this, Said. Are you saying that Hang Jebat is the hero and not Hang Tuah?

Said: Exactly! Look, Rahman, tomorrow is going to be the beginning of the New Malay, the Melayu Baharu. Don't you want to be a part of history? We are going to see history being made tomorrow. Do you want to just be a spectator and watch history being made rather than be a participant in the making of history?

Rahman: Said, I work for the government. You sell nasi lemak. You have nothing to worry about. I have to think of my job and my family.

Said: If we all just think of ourselves and not of the nation when is Malaya ever going to see self-rule? We all need to make sacrifices. I sell nasi lemak because I refuse to work for the government. I don't recognise this government so how can I work for it? I choose to sell nasi lemak although I can take the easy way out and work for the government like you.

Rahman: You are different Said.

Said: What is so different between you and me? I also have a family to feed just like you. But I refuse to collaborate with the government. If I work for the government that means I agree with what the government is doing. I will never work for the government unless we first see a change of government. I would rather suffer and earn pittance by selling nasi lemak than live a comfortable life on a salary earned from a government I am opposed to.

Rahman: (sighs)…You are always the dissident, Said.

Said: That is because I am a Muslim, Rahman. But I follow the true principles of Islam. In Islam if we collaborate with evil then we are also evil. We must oppose evil, Rahman. That is what Islam asks us to do. If you are a true Muslim at least join us for the demonstration tomorrow. Maybe you are not yet ready to resign from your government post. Never mind. But at least oppose the government by joining us tomorrow. Be a true Muslim.

Rahman: Okaylah Said. You have convinced me. I will be there. And let whatever happens happen. If I get sacked from my post I will accept that as God's will.

Said: Rahman, you will not regret it. Tomorrow is the beginning of Malay Nationalism. After this we need to talk to the Chinese and Indians to ask them to join us in the fight for Merdeka. We can't do it on our own. We need the support of the Chinese and Indians as well. That has to come.

SCENE TWO: British Malaya. In front of the Majestic Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. 1946.

AND AS A DIGRESSION: TO REMIND YOU HOW IT ALL BEGAN IN AMERICA

CRNciryImqg

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

Understanding the Malay mind (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)

Posted: 14 Jun 2011 10:49 PM PDT

In the minds of these people, if you whack the government then you are taking money from Anwar and if you whack the opposition then you are taking money from Najib and if you whack both sides: WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TAKING MONEY FROM? I'M CONFUSED!

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Back in the 1960s life was simpler and less complicated. That was of course in the days before May 13, the infamous Umno-engineered race riot of 1969. I was then in the Victoria Institution in Kuala Lumpur, a mixed-race school.

Honestly, I can't remember whether there were more Malays or non-Malays in that school. It is not because my memory is bad but because we did not stop to think about it. We did not care a damn. That is why I can't remember whether we had more Malays or non-Malays in that school.

Our jokes back then were very racial. But that did not bother anyone. Never mind whether we were Malay, Chinese or Indian. We would roar with laughter at the jokes even though the brunt of that joke was our own race.

I remember one joke about someone needing a brain transplant and he was asked what brain he wants -- Malay, Chinese or Indian. He was told that the Chinese brain is the cheapest because it was overused -- banyak guna otak memikir macam mana nak tipu orang. The Indian brain was a bit twisted so they would not recommend it. The Malay brain is the most expensive because Malays seldom use their brains.

Back then, in the 1960s, we thought that was very funny. Today, they would make a police report against you if you told that joke in public.

But don't they say that many a true word is said in jest? Is it really a joke or for real? If you read and hear what Malays say you would imagine that it is not really a joke after all but very true.

I get pro-government Malays asking me how much Anwar Ibrahim is paying me to whack the government. Then I get anti-government Malays asking me how much Najib Razak is paying me to whack the opposition. Then a third group of Malays tell me that they are confused because I whack BOTH the government and the opposition. So which side am I taking money from?

You see, to most Malays, it is all about money. Whatever you are doing in life must be about money and cannot be for any other reason. So they want to know how much you are being paid and who is actually paying you.

Most Malays scream "Allah Akbar!" But that is only what is on their lips. In their hearts it is something else. Their hearts are not synchronised with their lips. In their hearts they scream "Ringgit Akhbar!" They sujud (prostrate) to money.

That is why they always look at things from the aspect of money. And that is why they ask you how much you are being paid. The Umno Malays will ask you how much Anwar is paying you. The opposition Malays will ask how much Najib is paying you.

Most Malays are not capable of looking beyond money. To look beyond money is too complicating and sakit otak nak memikir (it hurts the brain to think). So they simplify it. They conclude that it must be about money and that solves the problem. No need to sakit otak to think beyond that.

That is why the otak Melayu is more expensive than the otak Cina or otak India. The otak Melayu is very seldom used. So goes the joke from the 1960s.

What went wrong with the Malays? In the 1960s and earlier, if you study history and research the Malays of that era, many sacrificed and contributed to society without being motivated by money. They fought for the good of society and died poor. Many could not even afford a tombstone (batu nisan) when they died. That was how poor they were. And these were people who did so much for their race and country.

No one asked them how much they were being paid. The British never asked those Malays who fought for Merdeka how much Umno was paying them.

People like Tunku Abdul Rahman, Bapa Merdeka (the Father of Independence), could not even afford to pay his income tax when he retired. Being a member of the Kedah Royal Family, he was reasonably wealthy in the beginning. But he sold most of his property to finance Umno. So he died a poor man.

No one asked the Tunku how much he was being paid. No one asked him how much money Umno was giving him. In fact, not only was Umno not giving him any money, he was the one who gave Umno money. And he spent all his money in the struggle for independence for his country.

But that has since changed. Today, no Malay would do what Tunku Rahman did. They will only do something if they get paid. They would only act if they were rewarded with money.

And that is why most Malays just can't believe that you are not motivated by money. If you do something it must be for money. If you whack the government then Anwar must be paying you. If you whack the opposition then Najib must be paying you. And if you whack both the government and the opposition then these Malays would get very confused because they are not sure who is paying you.

To be fair, however, it is not just the Malays who think this way. Even the Chinese and Indians (and 'lain-lain') have caught this very contagious Malay disease. I have friends (or those who used to be my friends) in England who also think like Malays. One-time friends of mine (Chinese, Indians and 'lain-lain' included) in Malaysia, Australia and many other places have also caught this Malay disease.

In the minds of these people, if you whack the government then you are taking money from Anwar and if you whack the opposition then you are taking money from Najib and if you whack both sides: WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TAKING MONEY FROM? I'M CONFUSED!

Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/06/blog-post_17.html

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Rabu, 22 Jun 2011