Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- What’s the beef?
- So, who calls the shots then?
- Now write your election manifesto
- What is ethics?
- What are you looking for?
- Iqraq
- Not talking about the budget
- Allow me to respond
- So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then!
- The chicken and the egg
| Posted: 13 Oct 2011 06:32 PM PDT
Now, the Christians condemn Islam for being barbaric (in particular reference to Hudud). But these are the same laws in the Bible. And the fact that Christians and Christian countries no longer follow these laws does not mean that the Bible has abolished these laws. These laws are still in the Bible. In fact, it says very clearly in the Bible that you are to kill your own children if they become apostates. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
I remember back in the 1980s (if I'm not mistaken) when Malaysia introduced the RM1,000 fine for littering. We joked that if you smoke a cigarette during the fasting month of Ramadhan and you see a policeman, keep smoking. If you were to throw the cigarette onto the road you would get fined RM1,000 for littering. If you keep smoking you would get arrested for smoking in public when you are supposed to be fasting. The fine is only RM300 -- so it is cheaper. What has that joke got to do with what I am going to say today? Nothing, really, I just wanted to get your attention. Well, actually it is linked in some small way. I wanted to demonstrate that Islamic laws or Shariah laws have existed for a long time in Malaysia. It is not something new or something that is just about to be implemented. And there are many laws under the Shariah, the only one that is yet to be implemented would, of course, be that very controversial law called Hudud, which deals with 'serious crimes' (at least from the Islamic perspective). However, Shariah laws have always been imposed only on Muslims (or those perceived to be Muslims or suspected to have converted to Islam: hence the body snatching cases). Non-Muslims are exempted or immune from these laws. We once discussed a hypothetical situation. What if a man (or woman) was arrested for khalwat (close proximity: which means being in a secluded place with someone you are not married to) and he (or she) was dragged before the Shariah court to face charges? The charges are read to him/her and he/she responds by asking the court to prove that he/she is a Muslim. You see; close proximity is only a crime if you (or both of you) are a Muslim. If you are not a Muslim then no crime has been committed. So this man (or woman) asks the court, "How do you know that I am a Muslim?" That is a valid question. He/she may have been born from Muslim parents and may even have a Muslim name on his/her birth certificate and identity card. So, 'constitutional speaking', he/she is a Muslim. But what are the criteria for one to be regarded as a Muslim? Aren't there certain doctrines you have to believe in (beyond any shadow of doubt) to be a Muslim? And aren't there certain fundamentals you have to believe in plus certain rituals you have to perform to be a Muslim? What if you doubted that Prophet Muhammad was really a Prophet? What if you suspected (but are quite not sure) that he learned 'Islam' from Khadijah's cousin Warakah Nawfal, who was a Christian Ebionite priest -- considering that there is a lot of overlapping between Islam and the Old and New Testaments? (Khadijah was Prophet Muhammad's first wife). What if you suspected (but are quite not sure) that the Koran may not have come from God but was actually drafted by Prophet Muhammad from what he had learned from Warakah? If you start thinking like this then never mind if you were born from Muslim parents and have a Muslim name in your birth certificate and identity card. You are NOT a Muslim. You doubt the prophethood of Muhammad and you doubt that the Koran is God's word. That means you are not a Muslim. So, if you were to tell the Shariah court this -- about your doubts and that you do not think what Islam says about Prophet Muhammad and the Koran are correct and maybe are just myths -- then the court cannot try you as a Muslim. And since the Shariah court can only try Muslims, then it would have to stand down. Of course, then the religious department can arrange to send you for 'religious rehabilitation'. But that is another matter. The point is, they can't try you for khalwat since you have professed to not believing in the doctrine of Islam and that you doubt its veracity and suspect that these stories are mere myths and old wives' tales. Say, after many months in the detention camp and they still can't 'rehabilitate' you. You still insist that you do not believe in what you consider myths. Well, they can't put you to death because Hudud laws have not been implemented yet in Malaysia. So they will eventually have to let you go (which is what happened to one of my friends after two years of detention). Now, if they had implemented Hudud, and if the Hudud law for apostasy is death, then they can cut off your head. Actually, if you were to analyse the Hudud laws carefully, you can see that they are actually similar to the old Judeo-Christian laws. So one would not be faulted if one were to say that Islam was 'hijacked' from earlier religions (although Muslims would get very upset with you for saying this). Now, the Christians condemn Islam for being barbaric (in particular reference to Hudud). But these are the same laws in the Bible. And the fact that Christians and Christian countries no longer follow these laws does not mean that the Bible has abolished these laws. These laws are still in the Bible. In fact, it says very clearly in the Bible that you are to kill your own children if they become apostates. This is still in the Bible and has never been amended. And the fact that Christians and Christian countries today no longer implement these laws is for no other reason other than that Christians are bad Christians. The Christians have defied God and have rejected the Bible. There are very few Christians who still listen to God and follow God's word as laid out in the Bible. If they were true Christians, they too would kill apostates -- people who leave Christianity to become Muslims. Anyway, some Muslims want Islamic laws to be implemented. I am of the opinion that we let the Muslims work this out amongst themselves. Today, hardly any Christian would agree to be subjected to 'barbaric' Bible laws although this would mean they are violating the Bible. I suspect that the majority of Muslims would also decide to do the same. But it is up to the Muslims to decide this matter, not for non-Muslims to decide on behalf of the Muslims. The only thing the non-Muslims should be concerned about is that these Islamic laws would only be imposed on Muslims and not on non-Muslims, like what has been the case thus far. How these guarantees would be put in place is a matter that can be discussed and agreed upon. And once the non-Muslims are satisfied that they would be immune or exempted from ALL forms of Islamic laws, then let the Muslims do what they want. After all, in a democracy, everyone has a right to his/her religious beliefs and practices as long as it does not affect other people. |
| Posted: 12 Oct 2011 03:38 PM PDT
Two days ago, it was announced that Gadang Holdings has been awarded the Shah Alam hospital contract for a price of RM410.87 million. This is RM60 million above the approved price of RM352 million. The Ministry of Finance actually rejected Gadang Holdings as well as the price increase but the Ministry of Works went ahead and awarded the contract to Gadang Holdings and at a higher price as well. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
Gadang subsidiary gets RM410.87m Shah Alam hospital job (The Edge, 11 Oct 2011) -- GADANG HOLDINGS BHD has accepted a RM410.87 million contract from the Public Works Department to undertake the completion of the abandoned works at the Shah Alam Hospital. It said on Tuesday, Oct 11 that its wholly owned subsidiary Gadang Engineering (M) Sdn Bhd had accepted the letter of acceptance for the project at the 300-bed hospital. Gadang said the contract was to be completed within a period of 24 months from the date for possession of site and was expected to contribute positively to its future earnings. **************************************** Now read the exchanges of letters below between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Health. It appears that the contract was awarded to Gadang Holdings at this higher price even though the Ministry of Finance rejected BOTH Gadang Holdings and the application for a price increase.
|
| Now write your election manifesto Posted: 11 Oct 2011 02:45 AM PDT
We have discussed what we want to see in a government and what we want to see implemented in Malaysia. We have also discussed about our understanding of ethics. Assuming a political party appointed you to be in charge of drafting its election manifesto, what will this election manifesto look like? Now let's see you write your election manifesto. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin POST YOUR COMMENTS HERE
|
| Posted: 10 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT
Okay, in the posting yesterday (What are you looking for?), many comments have been posted as to what Malaysians would like to see in their government and what they would like to see implemented in Malaysia. But would not all this be possible and realised if we had a government (and politicians) that put ethics above politics, economic growth, development, etc? Would not what we want be automatically achieved through an ethical government? What, in your opinion, is ethics (from your understanding of the concept)? NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
POST YOUR COMMENTS BELOW As a guide, maybe you would want to address the issue of RELATIVISM -- where what is ethical within one society may not be in another. Also consider what is 'morally acceptable' against the backdrop of Malaysian society and norms. Also note that 'morals' is subjective and depends on your upbringing and the community you live in plus your religious persuasion. Therefore, when you talk about ethics, you may want to qualify it as ethical relativism and not ethical absolutes. This discussion may help you understand how far you are prepared to go and whether you have set limitations and boundaries into achieving what you aspire to see and also how much compromises you are prepared to make on ethics as long as it achieves the end. |
| Posted: 09 Oct 2011 03:52 PM PDT
Over the last month or so, since Malaysia Today opened up the comments section to all and sundry and allowed readers to post 'no-holds-barred' comments -- even when they were stupid, bigoted, out of topic, bad language, etc. -- we have read many views, some of them warped as well. But we are yet to read about THE most important view of all, and that is what it is that you are looking for. Today, we shall discuss that. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
POST YOUR VIEWS BELOW As a guide (but not necessarily you MUST touch on all these issues), you may want to take into consideration the present state of affairs in Malaysia, what in your opinion is wrong with the country, and what you would like to see as the NEW DEAL (New Deal meaning changes, reforms, better system, etc., and could be about the health, education, economic, judicial, etc., system(s)). You may also want to touch on what you view as the limitations or obstacles (such as cultural, religious, economic, historical, legal, etc.) that the government would face if it wanted to implement some of these proposals and therefore what kind of compromises and how far these compromises would have to go to at least meet these aspirations part of the way. I have used the word 'government' not in the context of the present Barisan Nasional government or the 'future' Pakatan Rakyat government but as government in general (meaning that we should not concern ourselves about who forms that government but that whosoever does form the government would have to do all this -- a hypothetical government of sorts). A short 500-word essay would be good rather than one-liners, but it is crucial that your essay is not out of topic or flies off tangent. |
| Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:38 PM PDT
The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
There are some who say that those who know nothing about a subject matter should not be talking about it. I can agree with that. But then it all depends on what you mean by 'know nothing'. Maybe there are some who don't know how the Islamic Shariah laws should be applied or interpreted. This is because they are not judges or lawyers. But then, they could be historians and they know their history very well. And because of that, they know the HISTORY of the Shariah. Which means they are certainly qualified to talk about the Shariah from the historical aspect of those laws. Therefore, to tell a historian to stop talking about the Shariah because he or she is not trained in Islamic laws is not quite correct. If this historian not only knows the history of the Shariah but is also lecturing about it in one of the universities, this makes him or her more than qualified to talk about it. For Muslims and non-Muslims alike, I would like to recommend you to buy and read just three of the many books I have in my library. These books are: ISLAM AND THE SECULAR STATE (NEGOTIATING THE FUTURE OF SHARI'A) by Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im (Harvard University Press)
THE MANY FACES OF POLITICAL ISLAM (RELIGION AND POLITICS IN THE MUSLIM WORLD) by Mohammed Ayoob (National University of Singapore)
A HISTORY OF ISLAMIC LAW by N. J. Coulson (Edinburgh University Press)
These three books will suffice for now to be able to make you an 'expert' on the Shariah. I can recommend another dozen more books if you are still 'hungry' for more knowledge. The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above.
|
| Posted: 07 Oct 2011 05:20 PM PDT
So, we will eventually lose these people when Malaysia is no longer lucrative. And we have already lost many Malaysian citizens who have sent their money overseas to invest in other countries. And this is not only of late but has been happening over the last 20 to 30 years, but has become more critical over the last five years or so. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
No, I am not going to talk about the budget. So many others have analysed the budget in detail so you can read what they have to say. What I do want to talk about is: how is Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak (or even Anwar Ibrahim for that matter, if he happens to become the next Prime Minister) going to stop Malaysia from continuing down the slippery slope? First we had the brain drain. More than one million Malaysians, the majority of them non-Bumiputeras, of course, live and work overseas. These are people with education, qualifications, and/or skills/abilities (and in many cases, money as well). I met many waiters/waitresses and restaurant workers all over the UK (all Chinese, of course) who were from Ipoh, Penang, Sungai Siput, Bukit Bintang, Jalan Ipoh, and so on. And now they work all over London and in Nottingham, Manchester, Liverpool, etc. And you know what? The minute I walk into the restaurant they start whispering. Then, one by one, they come over to our table to talk to me. They recognised me the minute I walked into the restaurant -- and this is because they read Malaysia Today. Yes, they may be merely waiters/waitresses or restaurant workers, but they are internet-savvy and loyal Malaysia Today readers -- even though you may think they are merely 'labourers'. And they are not here in the UK working in restaurants because they are stupid, unqualified, uneducated, etc. It is because they have lost confidence in Malaysia -- plus they get more money working in the UK than in Malaysia. You may think that the cost of living in the UK is higher. Maybe it is higher in some areas but not in everything. You can buy a house for 100,000 pounds (which will cost RM1 million or more in Malaysia for the same type of house) and a car for 8,000 pounds (which will cost more than RM150,000 in Malaysia for the same car). You earn ten times or more in the UK than what you earn in Malaysia for the same job but the cost of living is not ten times higher, especially outside London. Anyway, we have more than one million talented Malaysians serving foreign countries when they could be serving their mother country instead. And they spend their money here. They don't send it home to Malaysia. How are we going to convince them to come home to Malaysia and serve Malaysia? Then we replace these one million Malaysians with four million 'imported' workers. For every one 'quality' Malaysian we have lost we replace him or her with four 'lower quality' foreign workers. Is this a good exchange, quality for quantity? Then these four million foreign workers (many now given citizenship so that they can vote for Barisan Nasional) send more than half their earnings home. They don't spend their money in Malaysia. So Malaysians don't get to see any trickle-down affect. They send their money home. So billions of Ringgit leaves the country every month. Go check with Bank Negara if you want the details (which is what the opposition should be doing instead of arguing about hudud). Okay, that is about the brain drain. Now what about capital flight? Do you know that for the last 20 to 30 years, Malaysian tycoons have been quietly investing overseas? Some have even wound down their businesses or sold off their investments in Malaysia to transfer their operations and investments to other countries. The government screams about how great Malaysia's FDI is. It is like screaming about how much money I earn every month. Yay, I earn RM5,000 a month! But I do not tell you that I spend RM10,000 a month. So what's so great about my RM5,000 earnings a month? Sure, we have FDIs. But the foreign investors are only here because they can make money. Many foreign companies even have a policy of not buying property in Malaysia. They would rather rent, even if they have to pay more for rental compared to if they bought this property. This is so that they can wind up their operation and go home super-fast if they need to. If they own property, it takes longer to get out of Malaysia because they need to sell of their assets first. So rent, don't buy. So you see, they do not intend to become Malaysian 'corporate citizens'. They just want to make money and then go home when they can't make money any longer. They are not loyal to the country. They are just loyal to money. So, we will eventually lose these people when Malaysia is no longer lucrative. And we have already lost many Malaysian citizens who have sent their money overseas to invest in other countries. And this is not only of late but has been happening over the last 20 to 30 years, but has become more critical over the last five years or so. As I said, I do not want to talk about the budget. That's because I am not impressed. I want to know how the government (and the opposition if it becomes the government) is going to stop Malaysia from continuing down this slippery slope of brain drain and capital flight. Please also read this: After brain drain, now capital flight? |
| Posted: 06 Oct 2011 06:26 PM PDT
Below are just some of the many comments in my article 'So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then!' I would like to respond to them as I feel further debate or clarification is required so that we can 'clear the air' on this matter that appears to be dividing us and threatens to break up the opposition like it did once before about a decade ago. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
Dear RPK Recently your posts have become more convoluted with everything ending up in a paradox. Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset, If they weren't they won't even bother visiting. I'm afraid if this continues, such tedious yet complex arguments may deter the growing viewership might plummet to the depth of the ocean. Malaysia Today is the instrument of the third force as you claim so cater to the third force. Stop this nonsensical bashing and continue to direct people to the right path. I feel that Malaysia Today has entered another stage of in its struggle for freedom. I'm pretty much aware that most of the people that visit have realized the Injustice that they are living in yet we are still confused on what to do. Yes, we know the system is corrupt, so what do we do? Do we just quit our jobs and protest everyday on the street or just keep on and increasing our political bashing on the net. Therefore I hope you could focus your efforts on the next step, which is showing the people what to do next. written by Almassy, October 07, 2011 05:39:22
MY RESPONSE: The fight for reforms or change is not a 'single-focus' job. It is 'multi-prong' job. We have to do, as what in the IT world they would say, multitasking. So we do not talk about just one issue. We take about many issues because there are so many things that ail Malaysia. We continue to reveal the transgressions of those in the corridors of power -- although due to the 'selective prosecution' policy that is being practiced in Malaysia (where those close to the powers-that-be are 'immune' from the long arm of the law) very little is going to come out of this effort other than merely 'educating' the Malaysian public so that at least they get to know their government better. To you, getting to the bottom of the hudud matter may be nonsense. As you said: 'Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset….' I suppose this also means you. However, judging by the quality of the comments that you read in Malaysia Today, does this give you the impression that 'the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset'? The impression I get is that the reverse is true. Anyway, we should not just focus on the comments to form our opinion. Can 100 readers who comment give you a good yardstick when more than a million others who read Malaysia Today do so quietly without commenting? What about the private e-mails and phone calls I receive from readers who express their opinion and their opinion is they are not sure yet whether they are going to vote for Pakatan Rakyat come the next election? So we need to respond to what people say. This is because other people may get influenced by what is being said. For example, some are of the view that if hudud is implemented, pork, gambling, liquor, etc., will be banned. So we have to counter that. Some are of the view that if they vote Pakatan Rakyat then for sure hudud is going to be implemented. Again, we have to counter that. So we need to constantly rebut and reply to negative comments because, if we don't, then people might believe these comments to be true and Pakatan Rakyat is going to suffer a serious erosion of support come the next election. We are not talking religion here. We are talking about politics and reforms. But when religion is being dragged into politics, then we have no choice but to face it head on and address the issue. And that is what I am doing: engaging the religionists who want to treat this matter as if it were a religious issue when in fact it is a political issue. ****************************************** Pete, You are learned man and I sense that as you are getting old and perhaps been 'exile' for such a long time you are getting 'religious' in your posting. Also most of the posting are for argument. When one gets older he tends to be closer to his God or his beliefs. But Pete, MT is getting too 'religious'. Its time you go to Malaysian politics and as our election is looming you may have to use your MT to drive in some message of changes so that readers will be more updated about what is going on with our political parties. You have deep throat around and of course you always get the wind first. written by neilahmad, October 07, 2011 08:10:55
MY RESPONSE: I think I have covered most of the points in your comment in my response above. I just want to add one more point. Malaysia Today is not getting more religious. Religion is being used more now than before to gain political mileage. And this hudud issue has set the opposition back a wee bit and has given Umno a slight upper hand (which can escalate if we are not careful). So we avoid addressing this matter at our own peril. ****************************************** RPK, I would like to say that even you are not in the position to comment about Hudud unless you know more than the others. Why not we let people know what hudud is all about. Its not merely chopping off people hands... written by monty, October 07, 2011 09:29:10
MY RESPONSE: Hudud is not about religion. It is about the law and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. And people well versed in the law and the constitution ARE addressing this matter. (See here: 'Right to question hudud law' and 'At variance with the Constitution') But then the religionists (in this case the Islamists) are shouting them down and telling them that they should not talk about hudud and that only religionists should talk about it. This is where we have to 'out-shout' them. Is hudud a religious issue or a legal cum constitutional issue? I say it is a legal/constitutional issue and it not only affects the constitution but democracy as well (if the minority pushes it down the throat of the majority). ****************************************** RPK, I think you should stop wasting time in changing or bashing the Malay Muslim. They are not going to change since they are brought up in such narrow minded. Don't talk about ordinary people even the educated Malays also sometimes act very funny when comes to religion. You should continue write about Islam because I believe more non-Muslim are starting to understand the beautiful of Islam and how open is Islam is. written by DR Politics, October 07, 2011 09:35:13
MY RESPONSE: Ah, this is my favourite topic. The non-Malays and non-Muslims lament that the 'noisy minority' is screaming their heads off while the 'silent majority' is keeping quiet. "Where is the silent majority Malays-Muslims?" they ask. "Why are they keeping quiet? They should speak up!" Well, I am one of those in the 'silent majority' that you are talking about -- only that I am not silent but I speak up. Do you want me to keep quiet and just let the noisy minority go on screaming? I can, if you wish. At least the Malays would not become so angry with me, like now. ****************************************** Most of the Malays can't even understand Arab language, what more to say understanding Hudud? They are depended to Ustaz, Imam and etc. Ask that particular Malay, does he fully understand Islamic law or the Quran? written by Meh, October 07, 2011 10:49:02
MY RESPONSE: There is nothing complicated here. Hudud laws, as the name implies, are about the law. The question is: which laws do we want for Malaysia? My answer is: parliament makes the laws. That is why we call them lawmakers. So, can we let parliament do its job? Now, if you are not happy with parliament, then vote the parliamentarians out of office. Install a new parliament. Just hope that the new parliament is better than the old parliament. And that is our job as voters. ****************************************** Conclusion : All Muslims are taught to think that way, but some like Azmi dare to risk his life and question the religious teachers and the Quran. That is the argument about. If no one question Islam, then the nation will be like Somalia and the Islamic nations. Saudi and Brunei had the money and their countries are built by infidels or kafirs or using kafir's technologies. What is there to be proud of? And for the information, today a Nobel peace prize may be awarded to a Muslim, but a woman, for questioning the Islamic authorities. Are you going to say that the Nobel committee had intended to insult Islam? In a democracy, we question all things and are free to think and follows our faith or believe in anything we want to believe. Sadly Malaysia is a false democracy - a semi theocratic and racist nation. How much longer are we going to lie to the world? written by earthman, October 07, 2011 11:09:43
MY RESPONSE: And this is the crux to the whole matter. In a democracy, we have a right to question and to express our views. However, when it comes to hudud, suddenly we have lost that right. Why is that so? Because, according to the Islamists, hudud is God's law so we cannot question it. So, are you saying that we need to suspend democracy? PAS introduced the slogan 'PAS for all'. 'All' would mean non-Muslims as well, right? Or is PAS going to change its slogan to 'PAS for all-Muslims only'? Malaysians have a right to defend their democratic right to question and to disagree. PAS should be the first to recognise this since it is accusing Barisan Nasional and Umno of being undemocratic. ****************************************** There are highly intellectual Muslims who support Hudud. Not just narrow minded ones. Why we support? We have digested in our mind that Islam is the correct religion. Then it follows the Quran is the word of God. And since the Quran says Hudud is just as wajib as solat and fasting we support Hudud. A lot of people do not even understand Islam how do we expect them to understand Hudud. The least they could do is to follow Dr Tan the Catholic Archbishop and study the Quran. Dr Tan after studying the Quran supports Hudud. But these people think they are cleverer than Dr Tan, the Catholic Archbishop. He is a well read intellectual with a PhD! I rest my case. written by johann, October 07, 2011 11:33:48
MY RESPONSE: I have already responded to this above. Hudud is about the law and the constitution, not about religion. You don't need to understand Islam to understand that. ****************************************** Generally it is true that an expert of any subject or skill is more knowledgeable than the non-expert. That is true for a Hudud expert when compared to the layman. However, in this case and the main point of Azmi Haron's contention is not about the contents of Hudud but rather 'In a democracy, EVERYTHING can be questioned'. If Hudud and its limits cannot be questioned because it is divine and God's law, then it should not be proposed for implementation in a democratic nation like Malaysia. Even if it is not democracy, normal human rights should grant permission to any human to question everything as a critical thinker. To demand that one should not question Hudud because one is not a Hudud expert is beside the point, irrelevant and a 'strawman' to the point debated in that article. As normal human beings with basic human rights, we need not be an expert on Hudud to question its effectiveness and impact on society. One need not be a professional engineer, theologian, drug scientist or gambler to raise questions when there are negative impacts arising from their activities. One can apply out-of-the-box critical thinking techniques besides employing other experts to handle the in-the-box questions. It is very easy to tackle the Hudud question. If one must insist on God-commanded-Hudud, prove God exists first. If one cannot prove God exists, then one should keep God & Hudud private for psychological/emotional reasons and not bring it into public where it can effect (in grey cases) non-believers negatively. No immutable laws carved in stone tablets for 2011 onward pls written by TMT, October 07, 2011 14:57:09
MY RESPONSE: I doubt I need to add anything more to the above. He/she took the words right out of my mouth. |
| So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then! Posted: 06 Oct 2011 03:31 AM PDT
Next, he or she assumes that the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, is not knowledgeable about the subject matter that he wrote about. And he or she made this assumption merely because the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, has a different view. Therefore, if you have a different view, then this means you are not knowledgeable about the subject. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Saudara azmi anda kena jelas betul2. Anda Muslim Dan org yg berpelajaran tinggi Dan ramai pengikut....jgn samapi kita bawa mereka ke Jln yg sesat.....sy tk kata u sesat....tp rujuklah dulu pd mereka yg lebih mahir dlm bab Hudud. Yg u baca bukan maknanya u faham...u faham cara u...maybe betul maybe tak betul!!!! Innalillah...... ******************************** The above comment was posted by Eshmaelajenoor in the news item 'Right to question hudud law' by Azmi Sharom, originally published in The Star. |
| Posted: 05 Oct 2011 07:38 PM PDT
I believe we are moving towards better system like UK. We are in the move to balance up two-party system. But first, we have to win the election and PR to enforce MCLM as third force and act as referee for two-party system. Since both parties are not as mature as UK, they might use dirty tricks to kill each other. MCLM will be used to monitor both parties come clean and fair (written by jacko2012, October 06, 2011 13:44:29). NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin
I want to write just a short piece today. I am busy with my studies so that means I can afford little time with cheong hei articles. (Someone asked me what cheong hei means. It means long-winded). The comment above by jacko2012 is just one example of many such comments (and I mean MANY). I thought I would pick that one up (not that that one is special or above the rest) to demonstrate what many -- and I mean MANY -- readers like to comment. It is always: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that. But that is just it. We are looking at the chicken and the egg syndrome. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? While you may argue: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that. I would like to argue: we must first do all that BEFORE we have any chance of seeing the government change. For example, I am saying that we need electoral reforms. You then say: forget it. This will not happen under Barisan Nasional. Wait till we change the government. Then we can talk about electoral reforms. But then that is just it. Without electoral reforms we shall have no chance in hell of changing the government. Barisan Nasional, which has been in power for almost 54 years (earlier as the Alliance Party), will continue to be in power for another 54 years. So which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do we push for electoral reforms NOW or wait until after Barisan Nasional is kicked out and Pakatan Rakyat comes into power? Can Pakatan Rakyat win the election without electoral reforms? If we can change the government without electoral reforms, then why do we need to embark upon electoral reforms after successfully changing the government? Do you get my point? And the same applies for all the other issues as well. We can't wait until Barisan Nasional is kicked out before talking about it because ONE of the criteria to see a change in government is to talk about this NOW. For example, how many voters (who are not happy about Hudud) are prepared to vote for PAS first, and then later, after Pakatan Rakyat becomes the federal government, we will argue and fight about Hudud? They will want the Hudud matter resolved BEFORE they decide whether to vote for PAS or not. So you might say: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that. However, one million other voters will say 'no way!' and will either vote for Barisan Nasional or will boycott the election and not come out to vote at all. And this applies not only to the Hudud issue but to many other issues as well. So don't be shiok sendiri. Just because you place ABU (anything but Umno/asal bukan Umno) above all else, and are prepared to 'talk only after PR comes to power', does not mean that 10 million other voters also share your view. They would rather tread carefully. And if they are not sure, they would rather not vote for you. So that is my very short article for today. And yes, I know, 80% of the comments will be about whether it is the chicken first or the egg first while they ignore the more important message in my article. I have grown accustomed to readers who argue about the colour of the rope rather than whether so-and-so committed suicide by hanging or was murdered. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan