Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- The question of cowardice (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
- The consistency of change (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
- The great political debate (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
- What me worry? (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
- Mengupas hujah (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)
| The question of cowardice (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 11 Apr 2013 07:08 PM PDT
The problem is: they disparage me for refusing to return to Malaysia. However, if I do return to Malaysia and nothing happens, they will say I have made a deal with Umno. And if I return to Malaysia and I get arrested, they will say that it is merely wayang to stop people from saying I have made a deal with Umno. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin According to Haris Ibrahim's blog, I am a coward for living in exile in the UK. It is interesting that Haris came out with this anti-RPK campaign at the same time that I published my article 'The consistency of change'. It looks like Haris, too, has changed his stance. He now feels I should be in jail rather than in Manchester. I suppose he is of the opinion that if I support Pakatan Rakyat then I should be in Manchester but if I do not support Pakatan Rakyat then I should instead be in jail. I thought justice was about getting a fair trial and about being spared selective prosecution cum political persecution and not about you should be free only if you are anti-government but behind bars if you are not anti-government. Anyway, laws are always subject to one's interpretation and most times people twist laws to conveniently suit their political agenda. The government does it and so does, it appears, the opposition as well. I remember that Haris was one of those who disagreed with my plan to stay in Malaysia and risk a third detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA). He was also one of those who disagreed with my plan to refuse bail and instead serve time in the Sungai Buloh Prison while awaiting trial. He, together with my wife who was in tears, pleaded with me to accept bail because, according to Haris, I would be more useful as a free man running Malaysia Today rather than behind bars with no one to manage the website. Haris was also the one who almost had a punch-up in Bangkok with the police officers from Malaysia because they wanted me to follow them to the Malaysian Embassy in Bangkok. Haris felt that it may be a trap to arrest me and smuggle me back to Malaysia and he was adamant that I stay in the hotel than risk getting trapped in the Malaysian Embassy where the Thai government would be powerless to help me. I was prepared to take that risk but Haris told my wife to lock me in the hotel room and not allow me to leave while he and another lawyer, Amarjit Sidhu, follow the police officers to the Embassy to establish what was going on. Later that night they returned to the hotel and told me that they smelled a rat and that I should not go to the Embassy. I am not blaming Haris for me being here in Manchester but he made it very clear, and even publicly stated so, that he was dead opposed to me spending my days in jail. Now he has changed his mind and feels that I am a coward for refusing to go to jail. So what I wrote in my article 'The consistency of change' that people do change has been proven right after all. Anyway, I think it is an insult to Sun Yat-sen to say that those who choose exile over jail are cowards. Sun Yat-sen, too, spent time in exile in Japan and was financially supported by a democratic revolutionary named Miyazaki Toten. Sun Yat-sen also spent time in exile in Europe, the United States, and Canada where he raised money for his revolutionary party and to support uprisings in China. Sun Yat-sen is definitely not considered a coward for refusing to go back to China to spend the rest of his days in jail. In fact, in 1896, Sun Yat-sen was detained at the Chinese Legation in London. He was released after 12 days through the efforts of James Cantlie, The Times, and the British Foreign Office, resulting in him becoming a hero (not a coward) in Britain. Sayyid Ruhollah Mostafavi Musavi Khomeini, too, spent 14 years in exile and only returned to Iran in 1979 after the Shah had been toppled. Joseph Stalin was also in exile and only returned to Russia in 1917 when the Russian Revolution succeeded, as did Vladimir Lenin -- both heroes, and not cowards, of the Russian Revolution. I do not like to use Prophet Muhammad as another example lest people misinterpret this as me comparing myself to the Prophet but he too spent eight years in exile until he had a large enough army to return to Mekah unmolested in 630. In fact, history is rife with political exiles -- Englishmen exiled in France and Frenchmen exiled in England. Voltaire, Norodom Sihanouk, Bahadur Shah II, Alberto Fujimori, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Erich Honecker, Alan García, Jean-Bédel Bokassa, King Zog, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, Napoleon Bonaparte's nephew Louis-Napoléon, and many, many more all spent time in exile -- the list is just too long. Anyway, what I had commented on was the call for Malaysians to kill and/or die to prevent phantom voters from casting their votes on 5th May 2013. My contention is that Malaysians would be the last one to put their life on the line when even getting them to register to post comments in Malaysia Today is impossible. Hardly 1% would dare do that because they fear that their identity may be known. If they do not even dare reveal their identity how can we expect these people to kill and/or die to prevent phantom voters from casting their votes? Do you know that many people do not even dare vote because they are worried that their vote is not secret and the government or police would know whom they voted for? There is even a protest because the ballot papers are marked with serial numbers. So what if people know who you vote for? What is wrong with that? Whenever I vote I proudly hold up my ballot paper for all and sundry to see and to make sure that they can see that I voted for the opposition before I put it into the ballot box. And here people refuse to vote in case others get to know whom they voted for. And these same people call me a coward? If I am a coward for showing everyone my ballot paper then what do we call those who refuse to vote because they fear people will find out who they voted for? Malaysians are real strange creatures indeed. And they don't realise that when they insult me they also insult Prophet Muhammad, Sun Yat-sen, Khomeini and thousands of other people whom history has labelled as great people and heroes because they went into exile. The problem is: they disparage me for refusing to return to Malaysia. However, if I do return to Malaysia and nothing happens, they will say I have made a deal with Umno. And if I return to Malaysia and I get arrested, they will say that it is merely wayang to stop people from saying I have made a deal with Umno. And the question is: why do they now want me to return to Malaysia and go to jail whereas in the beginning they were adamant that I stay free and out of jail? Only an idiot would require me to answer that question. *************************************** 懦夫的問題
|
| The consistency of change (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 11 Apr 2013 06:17 AM PDT
Today, I oppose everything I propagated back in the 1990s. Today, I believe in sexual freedom and your right to a gay lifestyle. Today, I believe in your right to atheism and your right to turn your back on religion. Today, I no longer believe in many things I used to believe in even as recent as when I first stated Malaysia Today back in 2004. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin 'The consistency of change' is itself an oxymoron. It is like military intelligence. Since when is killing an intelligent thing? Or new politics! The 'struggle' between Cain and Abel was a political thing. Hence politics is so old how can there be such a thing as new politics when politics itself is about power that resulted in humankind's first act of murder? But that is what I want to call my piece today -- The consistency of change -- mainly because if you change then you would not be perceived as consistent. And that is what I want to talk about today, that I am consistent about change. And I want to talk about that issue because of the comments posted in Malaysia Today about how inconsistent I am for having changed since pre-2008. You may have known me only since 2007, as most of you would have. If you had known me in 1963 when I first entered MCKK you would have known a different Raja Petra Kamarudin. In 1963 I was reserved and aloof. I never spoke much and remained very silent. I never mixed and did not have any friends. I eventually left MCKK three years later because I was so lonely and unhappy and could not fit in to the all-Malay environment. I cried like a baby and begged my father to allow me to go home. I lived in a world of my own. I walked around with a radio in my hand and slept with my headphones long before such a thing became fashionable more than 20 years later. I surrounded myself with music from The Beatles and The Rolling Stones. That was in 1963 and I was just 13 at that time. Then, three years later, I broke out of my shell and 'ran' with the bad boys of the Long Fu Tong of Petaling Street. I learned how to fight and carried a knife in my pocket. I even got arrested at 17 for my gang activities. I was never charged for any crime, though, but that woke me up. I realised I did not want to spend the rest of my life in jail. I then started dating and went steady with the girl who is now my wife, Marina. Nevertheless, Marina had to share me with my other love, my motorcycle. Marina did not like motorcycles but she knew she had to accept my motorcycle as part of her life if she wanted to be with me. And soon after that she climbed onto the back of my motorcycle and we became the terror of Kuala Lumpur. Then, in August 1971, my father died. I was just 20 going on 21 and the world that I had known shattered. Less than two years later Marina and I got married and soon after that we got our first child, a daughter. Within a short space of two years I saw the death of my father, got married, and got a child. And, yet again, my life changed. By then, of course, I had sold off the motorcycle that I loved so much and had 'settled down' to what I would consider a stable life. Soon after our daughter was born, we migrated to Kuala Terengganu and started a business. That was during the 1974 recession and life was very difficult then. Three years later, I made my first million and, yet again, my life changed. I now had only one interest in life, which can be summed up in three words -- money, money, money. I just wanted to make more millions, and I did, though not necessarily the moral or legal way. I discovered the world of corruption and how you can make plenty of money by bribing your way through life. But the euphoria of making money did not last. I suppose once you make it then it is not that enchanting any longer. I drank, I gambled, I partied -- and I made even more money by 'donating' large sums to Umno to win huge government contracts. At least five million flowed through my hands into Umno's coffers in exchange for RM120 million in contracts over 20 years -- which I already wrote about in my 20-series episode about my journey in life not being a straight line. Along the way I got infected with a serious case of conscience. That was in the days of Anwar Ibrahim and ABIM and the Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1979 -- which I have also written about in my 20-series episode. My drinking, gambling and partying ended abruptly. I studied the Qur'an, the entire collection of Hadith Sahih Al Bukhari and the whole series of Tafsiran Al Qur'an by Haji Abdul Malik Karim Amrullah a.k.a. Hamka, who died in 1981 at age 73. In 1981 I did my first of ten trips to Mekah to do my Haj and became a Muslim fundamentalist in love with the Islamic Revolution. I wanted the same Islamic Revolution to happen in Malaysia and for Malaysia to be turned into the Islamic Republic of Malaysia. I wanted to see the end of Western-style democracy and the English Westminster system of Parliament and for the corrupt Monarchy to be abolished. That journey did not last as well. I soon gave up business because I could not be a successful businessman in Malaysia without also indulging in corruption. But I did not find solace in the aspirations of the Islamic Revolution either. I began to see the Revolution not as the saviour of the people but the enemy of free will. I began to hold to the ideals of free will and could no longer accept the doctrine of enforcement. Heaven and hell may exist. Maybe even God does exist. But you should have free will as to whether to accept the existence of God and, if you do, whether you wish to choose heaven or hell as your final resting place. Free will means free will and religion denies you this free will. In 1995, if you had asked me whether I believed in the Islamic State and the Islamic Sharia law of Hudud, I would have said yes. Those of you who have read what I wrote back then would know this, especially those DAP people who used to whack me in Sang Kancil back in the mid-1990s. Today, I oppose everything I propagated back in the 1990s. Today, I believe in sexual freedom and your right to a gay lifestyle. Today, I believe in your right to atheism and your right to turn your back on religion. Today, I no longer believe in many things I used to believe in even as recent as when I first stated Malaysia Today back in 2004. So, yes, the Raja Petra Kamarudin of today is different from the Raja Petra Kamarudin of 2004 or of 1994 or of 1984 or of 1974 or of 1964. And if you can't accept that then that is your problem, not mine. So stop posting comments in Malaysia Today about how I have changed. I have changed. So what? I change all the time. I have changed many times. Change is the only thing consistent about me. Change is called hijrah. In Islam, hijrah is the most important thing. Prophet Muhammad also did his hijrah. Hijrah is so important in Islam that the Islamic calendar is called the Hijrah calendar and starts from the date of the hijrah. And hijrah means change. You hijrah from one lifestyle to another and from one doctrine to another. And you hijrah with your conscience as your guide. And my conscience is clear. My conscience guides me as to what is right and what is wrong. And I know what is right and what is wrong. And just because you want to do the wrong thing because you think it is the right thing does not make you right and me wrong. ******************************************* 不變的改變 |
| The great political debate (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 06 Apr 2013 06:35 PM PDT
The estimated one million (or 700,000, according to the official statistics) Malaysians living and working outside Malaysia should be allowed to vote by postal voting. The estimated one million (or 700,000, according to the official statistics) Malaysians living and working outside Malaysia should not register to vote in case the EC uses these names to stuff the ballot boxes with 'phantom' votes. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin I have detected some interesting arguments being posted in the Blogs that you can probably use to convince people why they should vote opposition. These arguments come from Malaysia Today's readers and I present them here not necessarily in order of priority. We should vote for Pakatan Rakyat even if they field monkeys and donkeys as candidates as long as Umno and its stooges are kicked out. (This gem came from Li Xiang Lan). Barisan Nasional's Election Manifesto will bankrupt the country if implemented. Barisan Nasional's Election Manifesto is not original -- it is a copycat Election Manifesto that was stolen from Pakatan Rakyat. Hindraf will not support Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional unless both agree to Hindraf's demands. Pakatan Rakyat's Election Manifesto is stolen from Hindraf, which Barisan Nasional then stole from Pakatan Rakyat. Senile old men like Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who is in his 80s and ruled Malaysia for 22 years, should just retire and no longer talk about politics. Nik Aziz Nik Mat, who is also in his 80s and has ruled Kelantan for 23 years, should serve at least another term. Dr Chandra Muzaffar is being punished by God for opposing the opposition and that is why he is condemned to a wheelchair. Karpal Singh who supports the opposition and is also confined to a wheelchair is not being punished by God. Those who used to be in the opposition and have now left the opposition are traitors who should shut up and not criticise the opposition. Those who used to be in the government and have now joined the opposition are patriots who should go all over the country and whack the government. Non-Muslims must be allowed their democratic right to criticise Islam, as this is considered freedom of speech. Non-Christians must not be allowed to pass comments regarding Christianity, as this is considered mocking Christianity. If Pakatan Rakyat takes over there will not be any witch-hunt. However, jobs and contracts given out under the Barisan Nasional government will be terminated wherever possible. If Pakatan Rakyat takes over, all those who have committed misdeeds will be hounded and punished for their crimes. However, those who have committed misdeeds but cross over and join the opposition will not be hounded and punished for their crimes. If Barisan Nasional wins the general election, Pakatan Rakyat will not accept the result because of the rampant and blatant election fraud and gerrymandering. If Pakatan Rakyat wins the general election then Barisan Nasional must respect the wishes of the voters although the general election is rife with election fraud and gerrymandering. Bersih is non-partisan and just wants to see a clean and fair election, never mind which party may end up winning the election. Bersih wants the voters to vote for Pakatan Rakyat and kick out Barisan Nasional. Pakatan Rakyat guarantees the people of Sabah and Sarawak full autonomy. Pakatan Rakyat will determine who gets to contest in Sabah and Sarawak. The local Sabahans and Sarawakians have no say in the matter. The estimated one million (or 700,000, according to the official statistics) Malaysians living and working outside Malaysia should be allowed to vote by postal voting. The estimated one million (or 700,000, according to the official statistics) Malaysians living and working outside Malaysia should not register to vote in case the EC uses these names to stuff the ballot boxes with 'phantom' votes. Why is Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak delaying the general election? Why is Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak rushing the general election by allowing a short campaign period? Why is Barisan Nasional putting up flags and banners before Nomination Day, in breach of the election rules? Why is the government removing the flags and banners that the opposition has put up? This general election is about whom you want as Prime Minister -- Anwar Ibrahim or Najib Tun Razak. This general election is not about personalities but about change. This general election is not about mere promises but about track record, and Barisan Nasional's track record is dismal. This general election is about what Pakatan Rakyat promises to do for you if you allow the opposition to form the federal government. Lim Kit Siang is scared of losing his seat in Perak. That is why he is cowardly leaving Perak to contest in a safe seat in Johor. Lim Kit Siang is brave. That is why he is leaving his safe seat in Perak to contest in an unsafe seat in Johor. Anwar Ibrahim is a coward. He does not dare contest in a seat in Perak. Anwar Ibrahim is loyal to his supporters. That is why he is staying in his seat in Penang. I think those are enough arguments that you can use to campaign in the coming general election. Happy campaigning! ************************************************ 重大的政治辯論
|
| What me worry? (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 05 Apr 2013 11:37 PM PDT
Alfred E. Neumann then talks about my loyalty. He did not, however, talk about loyalty to whom. In Judas' case it was loyalty to Jesus that came into question. Hence, again, who is the 'Jesus' meant in Alfred E. Neumann's analogy? Loyalty has to be to a person, country, cause, organisation, etc. And if I have been disloyal then Alfred E. Neumann has to make clear to whom or to what I have been disloyal. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Everyone has a price, eh Pete? — Alfred E. Neumann Thirty pieces of silver was all it took for Judas to betray Jesus Christ. One can only wonder the price for Raja Petra Kamarudin's loyalty. Or is he priceless and can't be bought? The blogger-on-the-run who delighted us with many tales has published links to a video-clip, ostensibly showing how famed jewellers Jacob & Co have denied that they sold a RM24 million ring to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor. The First Lady has already denied the allegations in her book. So why the need to reinforce that denial? Pro-Umno bloggers and cybertroopers have been doing the denial for the past two years and now the famous or is it infamous RPK has joined that bandwagon. One can only wonder why it took Jacob & Co almost two years to actually deny this tale. Or that someone took great pains to get their representative on camera to deny the allegations that have been swirling the past couple of years. One has to be careful with Jacob & Co. They were linked to the Detroit Black Mafia in 2006 for suspected money laundering, according to Vanity Fair. Can we take their word then that there wasn't a sale? Why even bother unless it is an issue for the general elections. So much an issue of the haves and have-nots that the Barisan Nasional (BN) thinks are eager for another round of cash handouts. So much an issue that RPK had to show us the links to the Jacob & Co video-clip that was only uploaded yesterday showing a man clearly ill at ease about denying a sale. So much an issue that a lot of energy, effort and money has gone into denying the sale. Fine, there was no sale and a denial was issued two years later. We believe you, Jacob & Co. And thank you, RPK, for reporting the video-clip. The issue has been settled then, no pricy diamond rings bought by VIPs at a time when we were told to tighten our belts. No sirree, no. We'll take your word for it then, while others take their share of pieces of silver. Alfred E. Neumann reads The Malaysian Insider. ********************************************* Alfred E. Neuman is my favourite Mad character -- famous for his saying 'What me worry?' The Mad Alfred E. Neuman, however, has only one 'n' in his name, while the other Alfred E. Neumann -- who wrote the letter above to The Malaysian Insider -- has two 'n's in his name. Alfred E. Neumann of The Malaysian Insider started off by saying that Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. I don't know where Alfred E. Neumann got that story from, which some may regard as folklore. In the first place, did Judas and Jesus even exist? Alfred E. Neumann did not offer any evidence of their existence so we have to assume that he is the propagator of folklore and fairy tales. In fact, some even say that Judas did not betray Jesus but that it was a conspiracy between Judas and Jesus. It seems Jesus was meant to die for the sins of mankind. That was part of God's grand design. And it seems, also, Judas, being one of the conspirators, was informed of this. Hence Judas played along with the wayang and 'sold out' Jesus so that Jesus could die, as what God had planned from the very beginning. Hence did Judas really betray Jesus or was Judas one of the actors in the wayang that God had planned? Were Judas and Jesus both fellow conspirators in this little conspiracy hatched by God? We must understand that Christianity was founded on the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. Without the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ Christianity would not exist. Hence Jesus had to die and Judas had to 'betray' Jesus for that plan to succeed. Anyway, if Alfred E. Neumann is using the analogy of Judas to describe me, who is 'Jesus' supposed to be? Is it Anwar Ibrahim? For there to be a Judas, there must also be a Jesus. So I am very curious to know who this 'Jesus' is. I can only assume that Alfred E. Neumann means that Anwar Ibrahim is Jesus, the Son of God, the Holy Spirit, and all that nonsense. Alfred E. Neumann then talks about my loyalty. He did not, however, talk about loyalty to whom. In Judas' case it was loyalty to Jesus that came into question. Hence, again, who is the 'Jesus' meant in Alfred E. Neumann's analogy? Loyalty has to be to a person, country, cause, organisation, etc. And if I have been disloyal then Alfred E. Neumann has to make clear to whom or to what I have been disloyal. I used to be a member of PKR. I never became a member of DAP or PAS because you cannot be a member of two political parties. I also used to work for PKR's newspaper until 2004, after which I left to manage Malaysia Today fulltime. I never renewed my membership in PKR since 2001. Hence Alfred E. Neumann cannot mean I am disloyal to PKR, DAP or PAS. I am not a member of any of those parties. I am, however, a member of the Liberal Democratic Party in the UK and I voted for them in the last general election (I became a LibDem member before the general election). And I am still a LibDem member until today. Now, LibDem is a coalition member in the present ruling government. In the most recent by-election in Eastleigh, LibDem competed against its coalition partner, Conservative, and won that by-election. In fact, 14 political parties in total contested in that by-election. Hence LibDem and its coalition partner, Conservative, fought against each other. And LibDem defeated its coalition partner. But that is not seen as a betrayal. It is considered quite normal and acceptable. It is just like PKR and PAS or PKR and DAP competing against each other in the elections. So you see, your interpretation of betrayal is not the same as my interpretation of betrayal. To you, PKR and PAS or PKR and DAP contesting against each other is considered a betrayal. To me, LibDem competing against Conservative is not a betrayal but democracy being practiced. My loyalty would be to the voters, not to Anwar Ibrahim, PKR, DAP or PAS. If I were to lie to the voters, that would be a betrayal. Hence when I received a video that explained what really happened regarding the diamond ring controversy, it is my duty to reveal this to the voters. The thing is, I may not personally like Rosmah Mansor. However, booklets are being distributed alleging that Rosmah bought a diamond ring when actually she did not. In fact, the story of her buying the ring came out after the ring had been sent back to the US. My loyalty is to the truth. And the truth is the ring was sent to Malaysia and was later sent back to the US. Then, after it was sent back, the story emerged. My job is merely to reveal what the people who had sent the ring to Malaysia have to say about the whole episode. And this I have done. Hence I have not betrayed the voters or the truth. Of course, many people are not going to believe this story. That is to be expected -- as many people too do not believe the story of the 30 pieces of silver and of Judas betraying Jesus or even the story of the existence of Judas and Jesus. In the end, you believe what you want to believe if you think that believing so will guarantee you a place in heaven. If I had revealed a video of Jacob and Co. confirming that the ring had been sent to Rosmah because she wanted to buy it would Alfred E. Neumann call me a Judas and question my loyalty? Of course not! Instead he would call me Jesus rather than Judas. That is what this whole thing is really about. ********************************************** 什麽，我在擔心？ Alfred E. Neumann 之後談及的是我的忠誠，但他沒有講到是我對誰的忠誠。我們知道猶大效忠的人是耶穌， Alfred E. Neumann 把我當成猶大的話，那就必須得有個耶穌。忠誠是對個人，國家，理念，社團。。。。等等的，Alfred E. Neumann必需闡明我所效忠的對象。 原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin 译文：方宙 Alfred E. Neuman 是我在 Mad 裏最喜歡角色。他的經典口頭禪是"什麽，我在擔心？" 'What me worry?' 。Mad 的Alfred E. Neuman在他名字裏只有一個'n' 而寫了以上這封信的Alfred E. Neumann 則有兩個'n'。 這個Alfred E. Neumann 在信中提到了猶大因30塊銀片而出賣了耶穌，而很多人都認爲這只是個傳説故事。到底歷史上猶大和耶穌是否存在呢？而既然Alfred E. Neumann沒有提出他們存在的證據我們只能設想他是個相信傳説的'講古人'。 事實上，有人認爲猶大根本沒有背叛耶穌而是耶穌的同謀。耶穌必須為世人的罪而死，這是上帝的指使，而猶大這個同謀他是知道的。所以，猶大他配合演出了這場wayang來背叛耶穌以便耶穌正如上帝所策劃般地死去。 那猶大真的背叛了耶穌嗎還是猶大是上帝計劃中的一員呢？猶大和耶穌是否又有合作執行了上帝的計劃呢？我們必須了解基督教是在耶穌受罪和復活后才建立的。若耶穌沒有被釘在十字架上和復活的話那基督教根本就不會存在。所以說耶穌必須死亡而猶大必須反叛才能讓計劃成功。 話説回來，如果Alfred E. Neumann 把我比喻成猶大的話，那誰是耶穌呢？安華嗎？有猶大就必須要有耶穌，而我真的很好奇他指的耶穌到底是誰。我現在只能猜想Alfred E. Neumann 的耶穌指的正是安華。 Alfred E. Neumann 之後談及的是我的忠誠，但他沒有講到是我對誰的忠誠。我們知道猶大效忠的人是耶穌， Alfred E. Neumann 把我當成猶大的話，那就必須得有個耶穌。忠誠是對個人，國家，理念，社團。。。。等等的，Alfred E. Neumann必需闡明我所效忠的對象。 我曾經是公正黨黨員，但我從來沒參與過行動黨和伊斯蘭黨，因爲沒有人可以成爲兩個黨的黨員。我也曾經為公正黨的黨報工作直到2004年，之後我就辭職為MT全職工作。而自從2001年起我就再沒更新我的公正黨黨籍。 所以 Alfred E. Neumann 不能講我背叛民聯三黨，因爲我根本就不是他們的黨員。無論如何，我是英國自由民主黨員，且在上個大選中有投票（我在大選前就入黨了）。到今天我還是自由民主黨員。 自由民主黨是現今英國執政聯盟政府中的其中一個聯盟黨。在最近Eastleigh的補選中（有14個黨參選），自由民主黨和它的聯盟黨友保守黨相互競爭。而在這次的補選中，自由民主黨打敗了它的盟友保守黨。但沒有人把這看成是背叛，他們都把這看得很正常且被允許的。在馬來西亞的話，我們可以把它看成是公正黨在大選中對壘伊黨或行動黨。 在這我們就能看出你和我就'背叛'上的不同看法。對你來説，民聯三黨自相競爭就是背叛彼此，但對我來講，自由民主黨和保守黨相互競爭並不是背叛彼此而是在展現民主精神。 我效忠的是廣大的選民，而不是安華或民聯。如果我欺騙選民的話，那我就犯了背叛罪。所以儅我把影片公諸於世以解釋'鑽石案'的背後真相時，我其實是正在執行著我對選民的義務。 我自己本身可能很不喜歡儸斯瑪，但那些小冊子指控的是儸斯瑪買了那枚鑽石戒指，而現實裏儸斯瑪根本就沒那麽做。事實上，那個故事是在那鑽戒被送囘美國才散播出來的。 我的忠誠是在於陳述事實的理念。而事實是，那枚鑽戒是在被送來馬來西亞后就被送囘美國，而那個故事是在以後才傳出的。我的義務是把那位送鑽戒到大馬的人要解釋的東西公諸於世，而我所做的正是如此。所以說，我並沒有背叛選民和我對陳述事實的理念。 當然，很多人都不會相信我所揭開的那個故事。這是很正常的----就如會有人不相信猶大和30銀片的故事，或猶大背叛耶穌的故事，甚至是猶大和耶穌存在的事情。 總歸而言，你會相信那些你要相信，那些可以讓你死後上天堂的事情。 如果說我發佈的影片是指認儸斯瑪想買那枚鑽戒的，那Alfred E. Neumann 還會稱我為猶大進而猜疑我的忠誠嗎？當然不會！他有很大可能會把我捧為耶穌呢！ 而 這就是所有事情的根基所在。 |
| Mengupas hujah (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 31 Mar 2013 08:33 PM PDT
Now, using what many of you will now say is my warped logic (and you say so only because you cannot find any argument to counter this argument), if the NEP should be abolished because, as you say, it is being abused by those people in high places to benefit themselves, should not other things be banned as well for that very same reason? NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin I am sure, as a Malaysian citizen who should be able to speak the national language, Bahasa Malaysia, you know what 'mengupas hujah' means. If you don't then you really do not deserve Malaysian citizenship. I mean, even here in the UK, before you are given British citizenship, you need to first pass your English test. And if you can't speak English then you do not get British citizenship. Anyway, I would like to kupas some of your hujah that you have bandied about the last few weeks. One of these hujah, of course, is regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP) where you have concluded that the NEP is being abused by certain people in power and hence should be abolished. Actually, that is not something new. I and other members of the Malay Chamber of Commerce have said the same thing 30 years ago back in the mid-1980s. Some of you who are younger than 30 were not born yet at that time while you who are in your 40s were still in primary school in the 1980s and, as the Malays would say, belum sunat lagi. So perish the thought if you feel clever about coming out with that statement. You are not the inventor of that statement and neither are you the first to utter it. It is an old and expired statement that we used to throw into Umno's face and is now as basi as the word Umnoputera, which I can proudly claim to have been the inventor of during a seminar around the same time, the mid-1980s, that I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. So you want the NEP to be abolished and your reason for wanting so is because it is being abused by certain people in high places. That is the same reason being applied by the anti-gun lobbyists in the United States. They want guns banned because they say that the US has a very high rate of deaths/murder due to guns. The pro-gun lobbyists, however, oppose this and say that it is their right to bear arms, as guaranteed in the American Constitution, and that it is not guns but people that kill. In other words, their argument is that people and not guns are bad. And it is people and not guns that kill. So why should guns be banned because of the fault of the people. You should not punish guns for the crime committed by people. Cars kill more people every year than guns do. Hence should not cars be banned for causing the death of people? Why should guns be banned but cars are not banned? Incidentally, in the US, there are 12.3 road fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants compared to only 3.59 per 100,000 inhabitants for the UK. In Malaysia it is 24.1 per 100,000 inhabitants, twice that in the US and about seven times that of the UK. By 2015, it is expected that traffic accident related deaths would be lower than gun related deaths in the US because of a large drop in traffic accident deaths. (SEE CHART BELOW). Okay, in the US, cars kill more people than guns do and yet you want to ban guns but not cars. And since your argument for wanting to ban guns is because guns kill, then cars should also be banned for that very same reason. Now, using what many of you will now say is my warped logic (and you say so only because you cannot find any argument to counter this argument), if the NEP should be abolished because, as you say, it is being abused by those people in high places to benefit themselves, should not other things be banned as well for that very same reason? Many of you say that the Malaysian Election Commission (SPR) is being abused by people in power to remain in power. The general elections are not fair, you say. There is rampant fraud and blatant gerrymandering. Chinese-majority seats see voters as high as 120,000 while Malay-majority seats see voters as low as 5,000. Hence 70% of the seats are Malay-dominated seats while the non-Malay seats are in the minority. The ruling party needs to win only 45% of the votes to remain in power while the opposition needs to win 60% or so of the votes to form the federal government. That is what you say and you are not terribly wrong. The election process is being abused, just like the NEP is, by those in power to immorally and unfairly stay in power. The people/voters are being cheated by those who walk in the corridors of power. The election process merely legitimises an illegitimate government. Hence, since there is rampant and blatant abuse of the election process, just like in the case of the NEP, should not general elections be abolished, just like what you propose for the NEP? Anything that is being abused by those in power for their own benefit should be abolished, as what you argue. We all lament about the Malaysian Cabinet. Those members of the Cabinet, the Ministers, abuse their power and perpetuate corruption to enrich themselves, their families, and their friends. Malaysia, it seems, has lost billions because of this corruption and abuse of power. And it is still going on even as you read this. The latest is the 'nationalisation' of the IPPs to the tune of tens of billions of Ringgit. Do we, therefore, need a Cabinet? Should we not abolish the Cabinet and save the country hundreds of billions of Ringgit? If we abolish the Cabinet and there are no more Ministers, who is going to run the country? I do not know who is going to run the country but for use we will be saving hundreds of billions because there will be no more Ministers to abuse their power and corruptly spend the country's money. Another two very abused agencies are the PDRM and MACC, Malaysia's police force and anti-corruption commission. As what many of you have said, these two agencies appear to be serving Umno's interest rather than serving the nation. Hence these two agencies serve no purpose other than to keep Umno in power. If Malaysia did not have any PDRM and MACC then there would be no one to serve Umno. And maybe then we will be able to kick Umno out. So it is in the interest of the ABU movement that we abolish the PDRM and MACC. What will Malaysia do if it did not have a police force or an anti-corruption commission? I am not sure what we would do but for sure it may be easier to kick out Umno without a police force and an anti-corruption commission that props up Umno. And now we come to the legal system (the courts and the AG Chambers) and all those other agencies that serve Umno's interest...and not forgetting the worst one of all, religion. **************************************** @font-face @font-face @font-face p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal a:link, span.MsoHyperlink a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed div.Section1 Mengupas hujah 现在，应用回这个你们称之为'有漏洞的逻辑'（你们会这样讲，是因为你们根本就找不到论点来反驳我以上讲的），NEP因被滥用而应该被废除，那是不是代表其他被滥用的政策也应该被废除呢？ 原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin 译文：方宙 我相信，身为马来西亚人的你应该精通马来文，所以你应该懂'mengupas hujah'是什么意思。 但如果你不懂，那你根本没资格自称是大马公民。在英国，如果你没通过英文考试的话，你是拿不到英国公民权的。 话说回来，我在此想kupas 你们在过去几个星期的hujah。其中一个hujah就是有关NEP的；你们争议NEP因被有心人骑劫而应该被废除。 早在30年前我就和其他马来商会会员提起这点了。你们当中有人当时根本还没出生，而对于现在40岁的读者，你们当时还是，套一句马来文，'belum sunat lagi '的小学生呢。 所以说，如果你因这个论点而洋洋自喜，那就得了吧！你们根本就不是第一个提出那个论点的人。那个论点基本上已经'过期'了，就如Umnoputera这个词一样（我上个星期就提起了，我是这个词的发明者，而我为此感到很骄傲）。 你们现在呼吁NEP因被高层人士骑劫而应该被废除。这个论点和美国的反拥枪主意是一样的。他们认为美国现时的高死亡/谋杀率是和枪械有直接关系的。而赞同拥枪主意的则说拥枪权是美国宪法所保障的，再者，杀人的是人，不是枪。 换句话说，他们争议的是人，而不是枪械的错，那为什么我们就应为人的错而去抵制枪械呢？车子每年比枪械致死更多人，那是不是我们就应该抵制用车呢？为什么我们要抵制拥枪而不是汽车呢？ 在美国，每年每10万人内就有12.3人在公路上死亡，英国则是3.59。大马的死亡率是24.1人，是美国的两倍，英国的七倍。预测显示，在2015年，车祸死亡的个案总数会将会低过因枪械死亡的个案总数（请看以上英文版内的图表）。 在美国汽车每年比枪械致死更多人，然你要抵制枪械而不是汽车。你的论点是，因为枪支会致死所以我们必须抵制枪支。那照理来说，汽车也应该被抵制，因为因汽车致死的人更多。 现在，应用回这个你们称之为'有漏洞的逻辑'（你们会这样讲，是因为你们根本就找不到论点来反驳我以上讲的），NEP因被滥用而应该被废除，那是不是代表其他被滥用的政策也应该被废除呢？ 你们讲说选举委员会（Malaysian Election Commission，SPR）是在权人士滥用来巩固自己地位的。大选是不公平的，贿选和傑利蠑螈是司空见惯的。华人选区的选民数可以高达12万人，而有些马来人选区的选民数可以低达5千人，所以，有70%的议席都是来自马来人选区。而执政党只需45%的选票就能进驻布城，但反对党则需60%以上才能。 你所讲的没错，我们的选举制度，正如NEP，是被在权人士滥用。人民/选民都被那些走在权利走廊上的人欺骗。我们的选举制度所做的只是在合法化一个不合法的政府。 所以，既然我们的选举存在着显而易见的，猖獗的滥用（正如NEP），那我是不是应该废除选举呢？所有被在权人士所滥用的东西应该被废除，这正是你所争论的。 我们也为我们的内阁哀叹。我们的部长们都通过滥权和贪污而让他们自己，家人，朋友等暴富。我国为此损失了上百亿。最新的就是牵涉上百亿的独立发电厂的国有化课题。 所以我们需要内阁吗？我们是否要摒弃内阁以便国家可以不用花那上百亿的冤枉钱呢？但如果我们放弃内阁的话，请问我们该找谁来打理国家呢？我不知道这个问题的答案，但可以肯定的是，我们会因那些贪官的不存在而为国家省下了很多钱。 还有两个经常会被滥用的是我们的警队和反贪局。你们说这两个机构是为巫统而非国家服务的，所以他们是没有存在的必要性，因为他们只会巩固巫统的权利。只要没有了警队和反贪局那巫统就没了'走狗'，而我们就会有机会把巫统踢出局。 即是说，解散警队和反贪局将会对ABU（Asalkan Bukan Umno）运动大大有利，但一个没有警队和反贪局的大马将是个怎样的国家呢？我也不知道这个问题的答案，但也可以肯定的是，没了这两个机构的保护，我们将会更容易得铲除巫统。 我们将进而谈到废除我们的司法和其他被巫统滥用的机构。。。。到最后，我们将会碰到最为棘手的问题----宗教。 |
| 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