Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- “Burkas for babies”: Saudi cleric’s new fatwa causes controversy
- Brunei, Sulu sultans had no territory to cede to British North Borneo Chartered Company
- Has Najib let rakyat down?
- Meet Abdul Rahman Kasim, the man behind the Muslim-Christian ‘cake’ diplomacy
- A Psychotic-Islamic preacher?
- Will Pakatan tighten its grip on Penang?
- Malaysia secretly deported six Chinese Muslims to face uncertain fate under Beijing
- RPK: Get Mahathir, Anwar to testify
- Sudah jatuh ditimpa tangga
- An obscene political show
- Dompok scares Christians with hudud
- On Gangnam Style, Malaysia's Gangsta Politics, and the Glory of Neo-Romantic Asian Vulgarism ...
- Tunku Aziz: Hero or demon?
| “Burkas for babies”: Saudi cleric’s new fatwa causes controversy Posted: 04 Feb 2013 12:52 PM PST
(Al Arabiya News) - Sheikh Abdullah Daoud, stressed that wearing the veil will protect baby girls. A Saudi cleric has called for all female babies to be fully covered by wearing the face veil, commonly known as the burka, citing reports of little girls being sexually molested.
|
| Brunei, Sulu sultans had no territory to cede to British North Borneo Chartered Company Posted: 04 Feb 2013 12:28 PM PST
The Brunei and Sulu sultans did not cede any territory in Sabah to the Company because they had no such land to cede. Joe Fernandez It's interesting that reader Mr Chong Tet Loi should write in the Daily Express Forum on Sunday 3 Feb, 2013 -- "Ancestors of Migrants came via front door" -- that the Brunei and Sulu Sultans ceded territory in Sabah to the British North Borneo Chartered Company and/or its predecessors. I beg to differ. The westerners found early on that their idea of territory and land ownership was not as practised by many other cultures especially the Islamic, the Maori and Indians (America). The Indians in Manhattan probably thought that they had gone one up on the Palefaces when the latter agreed to give them a handful of coloured glass beads for the island. Coloured glass beads were valued in all tribal societies. In American Indian culture as in other tribal nations, no one could possibly own land since it could not be carted away like other material and worldly posessions. So, land could only be owned by the people. The situation was similar in New Zealand, another example. It was only when the whites began fencing off land that they had "bought" from the Maoris that the troubles began. In Maori culture it was unthinkable to deny anyone access to land. The whites also had trouble with the Indians in America when they began fencing off land which they had "bought" or "stolen" from the Natives and began killing off the bison which was life itself to them. The entire land area of America belonged to the Indians, based on their Adat, but in a collective (families) and/or communal (people) sense. This is similar to the situation in Sabah. Hence, the decision by the Government to issue Communal Titles and not individual titles. The Government should issue Collective Titles as well to eligible claimants. If I am ventilating any ignorance at all here on individual NCR titles, I would welcome an explanation from subject matter experts. The Palestinians, especially those in the west, sold land they did not "own" to Jewish settlers. The Ottoman Empire did not recognise land in Palestine as belonging to the Palestinians or individuals. They had no titles to the land, whether collective, communal or individual. They were defenceless in the face of British colonialism which was publicly supportive of the Palestinians in some sort of vague undefined way but either did not or could not stand in the way of returning Jews determined to build the world's only theocratic state. It was only when the Jews moved towards setting up a state that the Palestinians demanded "their land" back. Then the troubles began with the birth of Palestinian nationalism, defined by opposition to Jews owning land in the Holy Land. The Jews pointed out that they were the original owners of the land before they were expelled by the Roman Empire and cast into the Diaspora. In Sabah, what the Brunei and Sulu sultans reserved for themselves was the right to collect toll along the waterways. Their respective Kerajaan Sungei was not defined by secure borders with territory. What the Brunei and Sulu sultans transferred to the Company in Sabah was the right to collect toll along the waterways. In the case of the Sultan Sultan, the transfer was not free. The Sultan is entitled to collect RM 5,000 per annum in perpetuity in return for the Company collecting the tolls. This is a sum still being paid every year by the Malaysian Government to the nine heirs of the last Sulu Sultan although no tolls are being collected. The Brunei and Sulu sultans did not cede any territory in Sabah to the Company because they had no such land to cede. The land area of Sabah and its waters belonged to the Orang Asal Nation collectively and communally. In Peninsular Malaysia, the British found it unthinkable that the Bugis Sultans had no territory to rule and confined themselves to collecting toll along the waterways. The British stopped the toll collection in return for a yearly purse, drew territorial borders for the Sultans and defined their "new" sultanates after the main waterways. Hence, Selangor after Sungei Selangor, Perak after Sungei Perak, Pahang after Sungei Pahang, Johore after Sungei Johor etc etc. The British also stopped the payment of bunga mas and perak to Bangkok after fighting two wars with Siam to hack away the southern half of the Kra Peninsula -- or the Malay Peninsula -- from the Thai kingdom. The bunga mas and perak were rent payable by the people, represented by the Sultans, to the Thai king for squatting on his land which stretched all the way to Tumasik (Singapore). It's pointless for Mr Chong to get into rhetoric and polemics with "Pro Peace" on his take, "The other side of Sabah's illegals" in the DE Forum dated Sun 20 Jan, 2013. We should be guided by the Constitution which is based on history, Adat, politics and constitutional documents. Any Government policy on illegal immigrants in violation of the Constitution is unconstitutional and therefore unlawful and hence illegal. The reason for such errant policies may be treasonous activities, a crime against the state. One case in point is the decision by the Sarawak Government to bring in 600,000 foreign workers into the SCORE energy-intensive industries area in Sarawak. Already, there are 600,000 foreign workers in Sarawak. Of these 260,000 are illegal immigrants. The 1.2 million foreigners in Sarawak will change the demography in the state as the 1.7 million (2005 estimate) refugees, illegal immigrants and other foreigners are doing in Sabah. It's counter-productive, being politically suicidal, for any Government to create jobs for foreigners when the local people are in dire need and there's widespread poverty. It appears that bringing in foreign workers is a more lucrative business for the parties concerned than hiring local workers. I rather touch on the subject of the Orang Asal in Sabah and half-Natives since it involves the matter of Native Customary Rights (NCR) and non-Natives who are citizens. The Indo Natives, for example, have to choose whether they want to be Indians or Natives. Only those who choose to be Natives can be Natives. (The Orang Asal are the first people to settle down in a geographically defined area and usually cannot point to remnants of their population elsewhere outside this defined area.) No one can be both Indian and Native in Sabah at the same time. It's a principle in law not to open the floodgates. We need to draw the line somewhere. Ethnic Indians are not Native even in India despite 8,000 years of history. Only the tribals in India are Native. (Ethnic Indians who set up the Kadaram Civilisation in Kedah are also not Native in Peninsular Malaysia because they came after the Orang Asli. The Malay-speaking communities -- Bugis, Javanese, Minang, Acehnese, Indian Muslims etc -- in Peninsular Malaysia who came after the ethnic Indians of Kadaram are not Native either.) However, anyone can go to India and become Indian if qualified under the Constitution just as anyone can come to Malaysia and become Malaysian if qualified. Therefore, how can an Indian in Sabah, for example, be Native? It's an insult to the Orang Asal and besides there are no safeguards against abuses taking place. The same problem with Sinos in Sabah who insist on Native status but want to remain Sino at the same time. If they want to remain Sino, they have no business claiming to be Native. This is an insult to the Orang Asal. Many Sinos in Sabah don't have even a drop of Native blood. But that's a different story. I am speaking from personal experience. The Native Court does not enter the picture in Sabah. The National Registration Department decides. Immigration decides with or without the NRD. The Chief Secretary's circular in Nov 2010 on half "Bumiputera" refers. (No Orang Asal went to Court for a Judicial Review to challenge this circular. This is because our Orang Asal politicians who are sleeping as usual are no politicians, but only after projects via corrupt practices. It's probably too late now for JR because there's generally a 45-day time bar on any challenge to administrative laws.) Sarawak Immigration follows the Chief Secretary's said circular. Sarawak NRD however, in "defiance" of the Chief Secretary, does not comply with the said circular and refers matters on Native status to the Native Court. Here, half-Natives won't be declared Native because the law does not provide for it. That means no Native birth certificate. Ironically, the children of Native fathers and non-Native mothers, are by "practice" considered Natives. This sexist and blatant discrimination should be challenged by those with locus standi. So, Sarawakians born in Sarawak are in a dilemma. There's a need for the Chief Secretary to rein in the Sarawak NRD since its violation of the said circular is causing untold hardship to half-Natives in Sarawak. There are no problems for Sarawakians born in Malaysia outside Sarawak. On NCR, we often forget that three terms apply in decided cases: maxims, principles and floodgates. The law of course has to be in line with the Constitution. The Constitution is made up of Constitutional documents and both must be read together. Don't blame our Courts and Judges. Blame the parties in a conflict. Any Tom, Dick and Harry, as the practice in Malaysia shows, can be a Judge -- actually a Referee -- under our adversarial system of justice. Most of our Judges are making strange decisions at times because the quality of most of our lawyers in private practice and prosecution leaves a lot to be desired. Don't consider this as contempt of the Judiciary or looking down on lawyers. It's the truth. In short, a Judge can only avoid making a strange decision if both the prosecution and the defence or the lawyers for the Plaintiff and Defence are nothing short of being brilliant. Logically, the most brilliant people in law should be in private practice as consultants, followed by legal advisors, solicitors and finally practising lawyers. It's better if they lecture as well. The rest don't really matter and this goes as well for those who pretend to be great lawyers -- while they fleece and scam/con Clients left, right and centre -- but read their last law book while still in university. There's a case for the people, especially NCR claimants, to get back the Courts from the Judges and lawyers and the Land Office from the bureaucrats and politicians. The Sarawak Government routinely ignores Court decisions in NCR cases which go against it.
|
| Posted: 04 Feb 2013 12:26 PM PST
No prime minister in Malaysia's history has ever tried to correct his image at the expense of his party or his coalition partners. Selvaraja Somiah, FMT When a prime minister shows he is helpless, is he not letting down the rakyat? The fact is no prime minister in Malaysia's history has ever expressed helplessness in facing challenges that have come up during his tenure. No prime minister has ever sought refuge in compulsions in dealing with crucial national matters. No prime minister has admitted to the failings of his Cabinet colleagues while trying to absolve himself. No prime minister has ever tried to correct his image at the expense of his party or his coalition partners. As such, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak must realise that he is occupying a seat that was once occupied by a great visionary and statesman – his father, Tun Abdul Razak. Razak faced many challenges in his life. But he never said he was helpless. The same office was held by humble but strong-willed Hussein Onn, acclaimed for his discipline and against all corruption. He, too, was never helpless. Neither was Tunku Abdul Rahman, a leader whose mass base was astounding and who came to power after getting independence. Najib not 'chosen one' Tunku was faced with confrontation with Sukarno's Indonesia. He was faced with political crisis with Lee Kuan Yew and even within Umno he had to face people like Dr Mahathir Mohamad who was undermining him from inside. He had to face racial riots and the separation of Singapore but he did not yield to the pressure of the syndicate. He dug his heels and abolished privy purses. He was never helpless, even when he fought the Singapore leaders with all chips down. Even Abdullah Ahmad Badawi never displayed helplessness. When his time was up, he just went but did not blame political situations, colleagues and circumstances. Perhaps all these leaders were from the political class now gone missing. Perhaps, too, they were made of sterner stuff. But they all realised and respected the fact that prime ministers can never show helplessness. What is Najib's helplessness all about? Simple: He didn't earn his stripes. He did not get the "all-important" mandate to lead. He just "took over" the Umno presidency from Abdullah. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/02/05/has-najib-let-rakyat-down/ |
| Meet Abdul Rahman Kasim, the man behind the Muslim-Christian ‘cake’ diplomacy Posted: 04 Feb 2013 12:23 PM PST
Why should the likes of Ibrahim Ali, Hasan Ali and Harussani Zakaria hog the headlines? If you are tired of reading about their preposterous statements, meet bridge-builder Abdul Rahman Kasim, who has been working hard to improve ties between Muslims and Christians in the country. Anil Netto You may have read about Tok Guru Nik Aziz handing over a cake to Bishop Sebastian Francis during their recent Penang meeting, which was held at 6.30pm. Nik Aziz was only told by his aides at 4.00pm that day that the meeting had been confirmed. So where did they find a mouth-watering cake at such short notice with words inscribed at such short notice. Enter Abdul Rahman Kasim, the Mr Fix-it with a booming voice and an equally hearty laugh, who has been instrumental in setting up appointments for talks and dialogues between Pas and churches in the northern region. After all, what do you give a Bishop as a momento during such a meeting to help sweeten ties? It was Abdul Rahman who had ordered the cakes even before the meeting – and an earlier one for a previous meeting between Mujahid Yusof Rawa with the bishop – well before the meetings at taken place. Indeed, it was Abdul Rahman who sent out the initial feelers to set up the meeting between Tok Guru and Bishop Sebastian.  Tok Guru presents Bishop Sebastian with a mouth-watering cake: Where did the cake come from? The Langkawi-born Rahman is the Tasik Gelugor Pas information chief and the point-man in sending out feelers to Catholic churches in the northern region. He is a familiar face whenever the Pas head of inter-religious dialogue, Mujahid Yusof Rawa or Dzulkefly Ahmad, conducts these dialogue sessions with parishioners of churches. Rahman, 56, worked for a decade at the Royal Malaysian Air Force base in Butterworth before turning to business as a chicken seller in a local market – an honest living if there was one – for the past two decades. Today, he is trying to sell the idea of Muslims and Christians talking to one another. "I feel compelled to do so, because during my parents' generation we had much better ties. I am experienced that growing up. But today, we are more polarised and I am doing my part to promote closer ties among people of different faiths."  Abdul Rahman (far left) at the recent Tok Guru-Bishop Sebastian meeting But why is he focusing on the churches? Abdul Rahman is clear about the reason: "We have so much in common especially a shared Abrahamic tradition; so it is a good place to start." |
| Posted: 04 Feb 2013 03:06 AM PST A disgustingly sick news that came my facebook way ... a psycho-Islamic preacher sanctioned by a semmingly deranged state and a strange interpretation of the Shariah? READ: http://rt.com/news/saudi-preacher-fine-rape-333/ ----------------------------------------------------------------- EXCERPT:
|
| Will Pakatan tighten its grip on Penang? Posted: 04 Feb 2013 02:59 AM PST
The Pakatan-led government may have managed to keep Penangites happy over the past five years, and the state may be considered a "sure win", but there have been several issues that have sparked heated debates and may reduce their majority in the state. Kristina Mariswamy, fz.com AS FAR as the consensus goes, Pakatan Rakyat is likely to retain power in Penang in the impending general election, riding on its dramatic sweep to victory in the 2008 polls. In 2008, Pakatan won 29 of the 40 state seats mainly on the wave of Chinese votes cast by an electorate that was resentful of what they said was weak Barisan Nasional (BN) leadership in the state. Despite the fact that the BN may be fighting a losing battle, its Penang chief, Teng Chang Yeow, insists that the coalition has no plans of giving the state up without a fight. It's all about strategy While Teng admits that the BN may not win the state back this round, he is confident that they have a fighting chance to regain some territory. "We could garner 15% to 20% of the lost ground," he tells fz.com in a recent interview. While he agrees that it was a conservative number, the Gerakan secretary-general maintains that when he was appointed the state BN chief by the prime minister barely a year ago, he was not given a set date to win back the state. He was given a task, which Teng describes as rejuvenation. "My task is to build up the morale and the team to face the general election. There is no specific date set for me, but there is a specific task given to me," he says. According to political analyst Khoo Kay Peng, BN's chances of winning back a few seats all depends on their strategy. "They will have to come up with a smart strategy in trying to take away some seats, work their way to convince some middle ground voters and swing voters to support their candidate," says Khoo. He points out nevertheless, that it will be no easy feat, as even some of the seats the BN currently holds may be difficult for the coalition to retain. "If you were to trace back to the 2008 election, Umno may have won 11 of the state seats, but they won 6 of the seats with very, very slim majorities, including a majority of below 800 votes. These seats are Sungai Dua, Seberang Jaya, Sungai Acheh, Bayan Lepas, Pulau Betong and Telok Bahang. Civil society and swing voters can make or break parties But there are factors that both coalitions could use to garner more votes, Khoo opines. They include civil society and swing voters. "There are a few tricks in Penang that political parties may want to recognise. One, of course, is the very active civil society movement; there have always been activists in Penang. "They provide a counter-balance to the (political) power. So these coalitions need to find out what issues these activists are concerned about," he says. As for swing voters, Khoo says that compared with most states, their proportion in Penang is substantial, coming close to 40%. "If you are able to put forth an argument that could bring back the swing voters, that could help you gain some seats," he says. 'Pendulum-like' Penang voters While many believe that Penangites never fail to "surprise" when it comes to elections, according to Khoo there is a voting trend in the northern state. "Somehow, sentiment and perception change very quickly for voters in the state. People actually do vote according to such trends," he says, pointing out the surprise turns in 1995 and 2008. In the 1990 general election, DAP won 14 seats in the state legislative assembly, but they were almost wiped out in the next election in 1995, barely winning one seat, Batu Lanchang, with a 100-odd vote majority. Subsequent general elections saw the DAP maintaining only that seat while PAS joined DAP on the opposition bench with one seat in 1999 and 2004. The Pakatan-led government may have managed to keep Penangites happy over the past five years, and the state may be considered a "sure win", but there have been several issues that have sparked heated debates and may reduce their majority in the state. These include housing problems, traffic problems as well as Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng's leadership style. Since taking over, the state government has been accused time and time again by the opposition of not heeding the needs of the poor in the state. DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who leads the Pakatan coalition in the state, has also been accused numerous times of being "arrogant" and "cocky". Something both the opposition and analysts feel could work against the party. "They look at the current leadership and people find that the current one, as described by the current deputy chief minister, is cocky, arrogant and has a 'tokong-like leadership' style (behaves like a deity). That is not going down well with a lot of people. "People want to see a strong but humble leader. They do not want to see a cocky kind. Especially Penangites, they are very particular about this," added Teng. While Khoo agrees that leadership style is very pertinent to Penangnites, he points out that at the end of the day, the question still is, how effective one is as a leader. State make-up and the odds While the state is made up of the island and part of the mainland under one ruling state government, there are clear differences between the two. Out of the 40 seats in the state, 23 are Chinese-majority constituencies, 14 of which are located on the island. Another 15 have a majority of Malay voters, with 11 of these seats being on the mainland. In 2008, PR won 29 out of the 40 state seats (21 on the mainland, 19 on the island) leaving the BN with only 11 seats, a stark difference compared with 2004 when BN held 38 seats. Of the 21 seats on the mainland, BN won eight while Pakatan won 13, mostly through DAP. As for the island, Pakatan won 16 of the 19 seats. On the Parliamentary level, BN only managed to win two out of the 13 seats in the state in 2008, compared with the eight they held in 2004. Both the seats won were contested by big names in the party, including former prime minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for the Kepala Batas constituency. Chinese voters may form a large part of the electorate, hence the bigger battle for the state will be in the Malay-majority areas on the mainland. While winning all the Chinese majority seats may keep the DAP-led state government in power, political observers think that winning the Malay seats is also an important factor for Pakatan in this election as it will give them legitimacy in the state in view of the fact that the party has always been branded by its critics as a Chinese-based party. Leadership style, swing votes and several other factors may come into play as Penangites decide the fate of both coalitions in the upcoming election. It is almost certain that Penang will remain in Pakatan's hands, but will the hold be as strong? That question can only be answered when the last ballot is counted. AS FAR as the consensus goes, Pakatan Rakyat is likely to retain power in Penang in the impending general election, riding on its dramatic sweep to victory in the 2008 polls. In 2008, Pakatan won 29 of the 40 state seats mainly on the wave of Chinese votes cast by an electorate that was resentful of what they said was weak Barisan Nasional (BN) leadership in the state. Despite the fact that the BN may be fighting a losing battle, its Penang chief, Teng Chang Yeow, insists that the coalition has no plans of giving the state up without a fight. It's all about strategy While Teng admits that the BN may not win the state back this round, he is confident that they have a fighting chance to regain some territory. "We could garner 15% to 20% of the lost ground," he tells fz.com in a recent interview. While he agrees that it was a conservative number, the Gerakan secretary-general maintains that when he was appointed the state BN chief by the prime minister barely a year ago, he was not given a set date to win back the state. He was given a task, which Teng describes as rejuvenation. "My task is to build up the morale and the team to face the general election. There is no specific date set for me, but there is a specific task given to me," he says. According to political analyst Khoo Kay Peng, BN's chances of winning back a few seats all depends on their strategy. "They will have to come up with a smart strategy in trying to take away some seats, work their way to convince some middle ground voters and swing voters to support their candidate," says Khoo. He points out nevertheless, that it will be no easy feat, as even some of the seats the BN currently holds may be difficult for the coalition to retain. "If you were to trace back to the 2008 election, Umno may have won 11 of the state seats, but they won 6 of the seats with very, very slim majorities, including a majority of below 800 votes. These seats are Sungai Dua, Seberang Jaya, Sungai Acheh, Bayan Lepas, Pulau Betong and Telok Bahang. Civil society and swing voters can make or break parties But there are factors that both coalitions could use to garner more votes, Khoo opines. They include civil society and swing voters. "There are a few tricks in Penang that political parties may want to recognise. One, of course, is the very active civil society movement; there have always been activists in Penang. "They provide a counter-balance to the (political) power. So these coalitions need to find out what issues these activists are concerned about," he says. As for swing voters, Khoo says that compared with most states, their proportion in Penang is substantial, coming close to 40%. "If you are able to put forth an argument that could bring back the swing voters, that could help you gain some seats," he says. 'Pendulum-like' Penang voters While many believe that Penangites never fail to "surprise" when it comes to elections, according to Khoo there is a voting trend in the northern state. "Somehow, sentiment and perception change very quickly for voters in the state. People actually do vote according to such trends," he says, pointing out the surprise turns in 1995 and 2008. In the 1990 general election, DAP won 14 seats in the state legislative assembly, but they were almost wiped out in the next election in 1995, barely winning one seat, Batu Lanchang, with a 100-odd vote majority. Subsequent general elections saw the DAP maintaining only that seat while PAS joined DAP on the opposition bench with one seat in 1999 and 2004. The Pakatan-led government may have managed to keep Penangites happy over the past five years, and the state may be considered a "sure win", but there have been several issues that have sparked heated debates and may reduce their majority in the state. These include housing problems, traffic problems as well as Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng's leadership style. Since taking over, the state government has been accused time and time again by the opposition of not heeding the needs of the poor in the state. DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who leads the Pakatan coalition in the state, has also been accused numerous times of being "arrogant" and "cocky". Something both the opposition and analysts feel could work against the party. "They look at the current leadership and people find that the current one, as described by the current deputy chief minister, is cocky, arrogant and has a 'tokong-like leadership' style (behaves like a deity). That is not going down well with a lot of people. "People want to see a strong but humble leader. They do not want to see a cocky kind. Especially Penangites, they are very particular about this," added Teng. While Khoo agrees that leadership style is very pertinent to Penangnites, he points out that at the end of the day, the question still is, how effective one is as a leader. State make-up and the odds While the state is made up of the island and part of the mainland under one ruling state government, there are clear differences between the two. Out of the 40 seats in the state, 23 are Chinese-majority constituencies, 14 of which are located on the island. Another 15 have a majority of Malay voters, with 11 of these seats being on the mainland. In 2008, PR won 29 out of the 40 state seats (21 on the mainland, 19 on the island) leaving the BN with only 11 seats, a stark difference compared with 2004 when BN held 38 seats. Of the 21 seats on the mainland, BN won eight while Pakatan won 13, mostly through DAP. As for the island, Pakatan won 16 of the 19 seats. On the Parliamentary level, BN only managed to win two out of the 13 seats in the state in 2008, compared with the eight they held in 2004. Both the seats won were contested by big names in the party, including former prime minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for the Kepala Batas constituency. Chinese voters may form a large part of the electorate, hence the bigger battle for the state will be in the Malay-majority areas on the mainland. While winning all the Chinese majority seats may keep the DAP-led state government in power, political observers think that winning the Malay seats is also an important factor for Pakatan in this election as it will give them legitimacy in the state in view of the fact that the party has always been branded by its critics as a Chinese-based party. Leadership style, swing votes and several other factors may come into play as Penangites decide the fate of both coalitions in the upcoming election. It is almost certain that Penang will remain in Pakatan's hands, but will the hold be as strong? That question can only be answered when the last ballot is counted.  The polls result breakdown from the 2008 General Election. |
| Malaysia secretly deported six Chinese Muslims to face uncertain fate under Beijing Posted: 03 Feb 2013 05:52 PM PST
Chinese riot police control a crowd of Uighur protesters in Xinjiang [File] (Harakah) - Malaysia secretly deported six Uighur Muslim refugees to China in what critics have slammed as a grave violation of international law. Human Rights Watch claimed the forced return was done on December 31, 2012.
|
| RPK: Get Mahathir, Anwar to testify Posted: 03 Feb 2013 05:04 PM PST The two should be subpoenaed by the Sabah RCI as they know more than what they're telling us, says Malaysia Today editor Leven Woon, FMT Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Anwar Ibrahim, his deputy in the 1990s, should be made to testify in the Sabah's Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI), Prominent blogger and Malaysia Today editor, Raja Petra Kamarudin, said it would help in the RCI's probe into Sabah immigrants and the Project IC as they were the decision-makers then. "I feel that both Mahathir and Anwar must be called to testify in the RCI, as should all those others in power since the 1970s until today," said Raja Petra, popularly referred to as RPK. "They know more than what they are telling us. There is more than meets the eye here and finger- pointing is not the right way to go," he said in a blog posting today. Mahathir and Anwar accused each other of being complicit in the citizenship-for-votes scam in the 1990s which saw about 200,000 Sabah immigrants obtaining Malaysian citizenship. Mahathir claimed that Anwar had acted without his orders, while Anwar said the task force to grant citizenship to Sabah immigrants was managed by Mahathir. RPK believed that Project IC was "a series of episodes" which happened at different times due to different reasons. Separate the wheat from the chaff He said despite the typical stereotyping of Sabah immigrants, there were genuine refugees who escaped from Mindanao, Philippines, when war erupted in the region in 1970s.
|
| Posted: 03 Feb 2013 04:20 PM PST
The story of these Vietnamese boat people is a sorry tale indeed that must shame many governments. If these boat people did not die at sea, they were attacked by the Thai pirates. If they survived the pirates and death at sea, they were robbed when they reached Malaysia. And after all that, they faced the risk of being pushed back to sea where they would certainly die in that wide, open, and killer South China Sea. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin "138 rescued from 'Malaysia-bound' boat," said the Asia News Network today. The news report went on to say: "The Sri Lankan Navy rescued 138 Bangladeshi and Myanmar nationals on Saturday from a sinking vessel 50 miles off the island's eastern coast. Of them, 127 are Bangladeshis and the rest are Myanmar nationals, according to a press release of the Sri Lankan Navy. However, in a statement late last night, Bangladesh High Commission in Colombo said most of the survivors are Myanmar nationals." "The boat was heading to Malaysia. It ran out of fuel on the way and drifted to Sri Lankan waters. According to a Sri Lankan newspaper, citizens of the country pay as much as $3,000 to travel across the sea." (Read more here). The news report above reminds me of my early days in Terengganu. I lived there for 20 years from 1974 to 1994. This was soon after the fall of Saigon in 1975 when we woke up one morning and found a boat beached along Batu Burok in Kuala Terengganu. It was a boatload of Vietnamese. THE FALL OF SAIGON: 1975 From that day on the boats kept coming, sometimes more than one a day. And they came mostly during the year-end monsoon when most boats that size would stay in port due to the strong winds and treacherous seas. But they chose this particular time so that the wind could blow their boats to Terengganu. This ensured that they reached Terengganu, and in a faster time as well, plus they could avoid drifting into the Gulf of Thailand where they would be prey to the Thai pirates (who were fishermen and Thai navy/marines moonlighting as pirates). The story of these Vietnamese boat people is a sorry tale indeed that must shame many governments. If these boat people did not die at sea, they were attacked by the Thai pirates. If they survived the pirates and death at sea, they were robbed when they reached Malaysia. And after all that, they faced the risk of being pushed back to sea where they would certainly die in that wide, open, and killer South China Sea. THE MISERY OF THE VIETNAMESE BOAT PEOPLE They soon learned to puncture their boats just before they touched land and then swim the rest of the way so that they cannot be pushed back to sea. But the undercurrents of the South China Sea along Terengganu were treacherous, especially during the monsoon period. You would get swept out to sea and drown unless you were a strong swimmer. And most of the boat people were very weak and near collapse. Hence many drowned. Even one Olympic swimmer medallist who was snorkelling in Terengganu drowned once. And he was an Olympic medallist, mind you. Elizabeth Becker, who wrote 'When the War Was Over, 1986', cites the UN High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) statistics as 250,000 boat people died at sea while 929,600 reached asylum. Rummel, however, says that 500,000 Vietnamese boat people died. It is estimated that for every two who reached dry land one died trying. Trying to reach land was one issue. It is after they reached land was when the real nightmare started, as if the journey itself was not a nightmare enough. Then we realise how cruel humans can be to fellow humans. SWIM OR DIE The early group that came in the mid- to late-1970s were mainly Vietnamese who had worked for the South Vietnamese government (some of them in the secret police and hit squads -- even one colonel in the army who had murdered many VCs). In fact, one boat was a boatload of soldiers in uniform armed with M16s and rocket launchers. This early group could be considered as political refugees, those who would be punished and/or killed if they remained in Vietnam. The later group were mainly economic refugees. These were people who had money and just wanted to leave and migrate to the west for a better future. They only wanted to go to a 'white' country. They refused to stay in Thailand or Malaysia. This second group had money. And they paid an expensive bribe to be allowed to leave Vietnam -- just like what the Jews had to do to leave Nazi controlled Europe during the Second World War. And many in this second group were Chinese. They had stacks of US Dollars, gold and diamonds on them. Hence everyone wanted to rob them -- the Thais, the Malaysians, the army, the navy, the fishermen, the pirates, the civilians, the shopkeepers who sold them bread and Maggi Mee at 10 or 20 times the normal price, and the middlemen who helped exchange their US Dollars, gold and diamonds for Malaysian Ringgit. I remember Chinese traders coming to see me to offer US Dollars at a discount. The local banks would not accept them because of the serial numbers. It seems these notes were 'special' and were printed in Vietnam by the Americans to finance the war. So the banks would not touch them. Hence they had to sell them privately. And that was why we were approached. I did not touch the US Dollars though. But I did buy some of the diamonds after they had been verified as real diamonds and not fakes. I am still in possession of some of them until today, those I bought 35 years or so ago back in the 1970s/1980s. Looking back now, these Vietnamese boat people were given a raw deal. The early batch of Vietnamese boat people was not so badly treated. They were real refugees and mostly poor. It is the later batch of rich Chinese who brought in loads of cash, gold and diamonds that suffered. In the beginning, the west was quite happy to take these refugees. Later, because these refugees were not considered real refugees but economic refugees, the west was not so quick to absorb them. So they were left to the mercy of the vultures that stripped them clean. Anyway, this article has nothing to do with the RCI hearing going on in Sabah. It is just that talk of refugees brought back memories of Terengganu of the 1970s and 1980s when we would wake up every morning and find boats with Vietnamese who had arrived in the middle of the night waiting to be screwed -- both literally and figure of speech. The Malays have a saying for this: sudah jatuh ditimpa tangga. This means after you fall down the ladder falls on you -- what the English would say: being kicked in the teeth after you are down. **************************************** Vietnamese Boat People The 'Boat People of Vietnam' seemed to encapsulate all the suffering Vietnam had suffered from 1965 to 1975. Despite the end of the Vietnam War, tragedy for the people of Vietnam continued into 1978-79. The term 'Boat People' not only applies to the refugees who fled Vietnam but also to the people of Cambodia and Laos who did the same but tend to come under the same umbrella term. The term 'Vietnamese Boat People' tends to be associated with only those in the former South who fled the new Communist government. However, people in what was North Vietnam who had an ethnic Chinese background fled to Hong Kong at the same time fearing some form of retribution from the government in Hanoi. In late 1978, Indo-China degenerated into wholesale confrontation and war between Vietnam and Kampuchea (Cambodia) and China. In December 1978, Vietnam attacked Kampuchea while in February 1979, Vietnam attacked Chinese forces in the north. These two conflicts produced a huge number of refugees. Many in what was South Vietnam feared the rule of their communist masters from what had been North Vietnam. Despite the creation of a united Republic of Vietnam in 1975, many in the South feared retribution once it was found out that they had fought against the North during the actual war. The rule exerted in Ho Chi Minh City (formally Saigon) was repressive as this was seen as a bastion of 'Americanisation'. Traditional freedoms were few. It has been estimated that 65,000 Vietnamese were executed after the end of the war with 1 million being sent to prison/re-education camps where an estimated 165,000 died. Many took the drastic decision to leave the country – an illegal act under the communis government. As an air flight out of Vietnam was out of the question, many took to makeshift boats in an effort to flee to start a new life elsewhere. Alternately, fishing boats were utilised. While perfectly safe for near-shore fishing, they were not built for the open waters. This was coupled with the fact that they were usually chronically overcrowded, thus making any journey into the open seas potentially highly dangerous. No one can be sure how many people took the decision to flee, nor are there any definitive casualty figures. However, the number who attempted to flee has been put as high as 1.5 million. Estimates for deaths vary from 50,000 to 200,000 (Australian Immigration Ministry). The primary cause of death was drowning though many refugees were attacked by pirates and murdered or sold into slavery and prostitution. Some countries in the region, such as Malaya, turned the boat people away even if they did manage to land. Boats carrying the refugees were deliberately sunk offshore by those in them to stop the authorities towing them back out to sea. Many of these refugees ended up settling in the United States and Europe. The United States accepted 823,000 refugees; Britain accepted 19,000; France accepted 96,000; Australia and Canada accepted 137,000 each. History Learning Site: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/vietnam_boat_people.htm **************************************** The boat people of Pulau Bidong (Sin Chew, 6 Oct 2012) - The federal government decided in 1978 to borrow Pulau Bidong from the Terengganu state government to temporarily house the increasing number of boat people arriving in the country. From that year on, Pulau Bidong was isolated from the rest of Peninsular Malaysia and outsiders were barred from visiting the island. Similarly, these boat people were also prohibited from leaving the island while waiting for a third country to pick them up. During its peak Pulau Bidong accommodated as many as 250,000 boat people, who were gradually sent to third countries in batches. At the same time, the Malaysian government was also under mounting pressure from the fishermen in Terengganu. For many fishermen, Pulau Bidong has indeed been a safe haven for generations. Even with the massive storms in South China Sea, this tiny island remains the fishermen's safest refuge. However, the island became out of bound to the fishermen ever since the government started housing boat people there for over a decade. The irate fishermen rose up in protest. After the Terengganu state government assured the fishermen, the federal government finally announced on March 14, 1989 a deadline for the boat people to leave, and return the island to Terengganu. Nevertheless, the number of boat people flooding into the east coast of Malaysia continued to rise, averaging 65 people a day and forcing the government to defer closing the refugee camp. On November 30, 1991, Pulau Bidong was finally closed down by the federal government, with then Deputy Prime Minister Tun Ghafar Baba returning the island to the Terengganu state government on behalf of the federal government. Prior to the closure of the Pulau Bidong refugee camp in 1991, the remaining 12,000 boat people on the island were transferred to the refugee camp outside KL awaiting repatriation to Vietnam. The training centre and other facilities constructed at a cost of RM170 million with UNHCR funds were all handed over to Terengganu. While they were here, the boat people called the island the "Island of Sorrows," as though they wanted to leave all their grievances behind on this island. As the Vietnamese government celebrated the 30th anniversary of Liberation, 142 former boat people from around the world returned to Pulau Bidong to pay respect to their late relatives and compatriots. These Vietnamese, now living in third countries, were youngsters in their twenties when they left their homeland in search of freedom and better life. They now returned to the island as middle-aged people in their fifties and sixties. This transitional "home" of theirs has changed completely and many of the buildings on the island have gone into disrepair following years of abandonment and neglect, as the graves of their bereaved relatives and friends are now run over by overgrowth. During the visit of these former boat people, they erected a concrete monument with the following inscriptions: Front: "In remembrance of millions of Vietnamese boat people who sacrificed their lives in search of freedom (1975-1996). Eternal peace be with those suffering from starvation, thirst, violence, physical exhaustion and all causes of death. Their sacrifices will be remembered forever -- Overseas Vietnamese boat people community, erected 2005." Rear: "Our heartfelt thanks to the UNHCR, the Red Cross Society, the Malaysian Red Crescent Society and other relief organisations from around the world, the Malaysian government and all Malaysians who offered us their most valued assistance. We also wish to thank thousands of volunteers who once helped the boat people -- Overseas Vietnamese boat people community, erected 2005." |
| Posted: 03 Feb 2013 02:46 PM PST
Cultural performances during the Chinese New Years should not be erotic shows exposing breasts and hips and pornography is never a Chinese culture. Once again, the rights of women has been played with, culture has been trampled and issues have been exploited by politicians. By Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily An erotic dance in conjunction with the Chinese New Year had recently been staged in Kulim, Kedah. Sexy showgirls indistinctly exposed their breasts and hips while drastically shaking to the music at a corner of the street. Some of the crowd were shocked to see an uncle wearing a political party shirt actually became so high and stepped forward to approach the girls, and shook his 50-inch hips with them. The showgirls went further to drag a few little boys and girls to join them shaking their hips after a burst of clamour. It reminded me of the novel Big Breasts and Wide Hips written by Chinese novelist Mo Yan. If the Nobel Prize for Literature winner were there, he might be able to write another award-winning novel after watching the obscene scene. The scene did not only reflect the human nature of erotic desire, but as well show the absurd political show of Malaysia. The performance was initiated by a Kedah PKR Chinese state executive councilor. He invited showgirls for the erotic dance to prove that the PAS state government respected Chinese culture and did not forbid performances by female performers. Some people might think that, as a Chinese and a man, we should be proud of the move of upholding the "Chinese culture", while our heart beating fast for the dance. However, I did not know why, my heart sank without even a trace of excitement. Instead, I felt the surge of lingering sorrow. The ignorance of politicians and the absurdity of political shows have actually come to this point. Months ago, the Chinese community expressed their collective dissatisfaction over the Chinese New Year celebration guidelines of the PAS state government. The people opposed to the restrictions of the guidelines, including banning adult female performers and live bands while limiting only to religious and specific songs. The guidelines were said to have discriminated against women and people were worried that it was part of the state government's move of Islamisation, which was applied also to non-Muslims. However, no one said that Chinese New Year celebrations should have sexy performers and erotic performances and no one takes pornography and obscenity as Chinese culture. It is strange that when the state government announced the guidelines, the Chinese exco did not say a word. After being chased after by reporters for a few days and was finally contacted, he claimed that he knew nothing about it. We actually do not understand what is he doing as an exco. After the state government revoked the guidelines out of pressure, the exco suddenly became so brave and took the initiative to organise a show to prove that the state government is very open-minded and respects Chinese culture. To show his justness, leaders of confronting parties were invited to attend the show. In fact, he should invite Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak and Datuk Hamdan Mohd Khalid, the state executive councillor in charge of culture and arts, to appreciate the so-called "Chinese cultural show". If Azizan and Hamdan were there, from the view of being responsible, they should be remorseful for revoking the guidelines. Cultural performances during the Chinese New Years should not be erotic shows exposing breasts and hips and pornography is never a Chinese culture. Once again, the rights of women has been played with, culture has been trampled and issues have been exploited by politicians. Honestly, as a Chinese, I feel humiliated.
|
| Dompok scares Christians with hudud Posted: 03 Feb 2013 02:19 PM PST Support for Barisan Nasional is plunging and religion seems to be the only weapon left to fight the war against Pakatan Rakyat in Sabah and Sarawak. Queville To, FMT Embattled Upko chief, Bernard Dompok, has raised the "Islamic state" bogeyman to scare Christians in Sabah and Sarawak into voting for the ruling Barisan Nasional in the coming general election. Worried that support for Upko (United Pasokmomogun Kadazandusun Murut Organisation) and the ruling coalition is plunging, Dompok warned the Christian community in both states that voting in BN would prevent the shift towards a more Islamised country as desired by opposition PAS, a partner in the Pakatan Rakyat pact. The Plantation Industries and Commodities Minister stressed that there is no reason for Christians to believe that BN will go the same route as PAS in changing the religious makeup of the country. "But I think the Christian community also recognises that the present government is always trying its best to see that the interests of everybody are looked after… [because] if you look at the alternative, what is there?" he said during the Penampang-level BN annual Chinese New Year walkabouts in Lido, here, over the weekend. Dompok was commenting on a news report that quoted a local university researcher as saying that Sabah and Sarawak are no longer fixed deposits for BN because the Christian community in the two states have risen against the coalition. He said the "Allah" issue raised by DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng was "actually a non-issue." "The government has solved the issue by allowing the importation and reprinting of the Bibles into Sabah. "So if you are allowed to import then certainly you are allowed to use it. So it is already a non-issue," said Dompok who is Penampang MP. He also took a swipe at Pakatan for its stand on the "Allah" issue. "All the Pakatan partners got together and said it is okay [for non-Muslims] to use the word 'Allah', but three days later PAS changed its mind. "And there was a time a DAP leader [reportedly] said [impose] the hudud over his dead body. But PAS does not want to respect his body because the next day it said it wants to implement it because it has already implemented it in Kelantan." "And this is the thing that PAS wants because religion is part of its constitution," said Dompok. Christians furious Dompok said once PAS comes to power it is certain it will move to set up an Islamic state. "And I think all of us will not want that…because Malaysia was formed on secularism and not as an Islamic state," he said. He reiterated that the Christian community must support the current government because it does not want an Islamic state.
|
| On Gangnam Style, Malaysia's Gangsta Politics, and the Glory of Neo-Romantic Asian Vulgarism ... Posted: 03 Feb 2013 02:04 PM PST We are in Malaysia -- where everything, including degenerating culture, can be imported lock, stock, and barrel to the tune of few million US dollars here and there for quick fifteen-minute vulgar shot A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE Dr Azly Rahman Welcome to hypermodern Malaysia, in which entertainment, hedonism, and political ethics are all enmeshed -- the body, mind and soul become a location of Asian capitalist exploitation and the reason for new age political campaigning as well, for a party in need of vulgar votes. ********************************** OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS:
AND - VOTE WISELY! https://www.facebook.com/#!/azly.rahman http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/
|
| Posted: 03 Feb 2013 02:03 PM PST The former DAP man speaks about upholding the rule of law, fighting corruption and his infamous stand on Bersih 3.0. Lisa J. Ariffin, FMT Tunku Abdul Aziz, 78, is not your average politician. For starters, the former Transparency International vice-chairman has spent most of his life battling corruption and promoting good governance in Asia. He was special adviser to Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Anan, from February 2006 to January 2007, during which he set up the UN Ethics Office. Despite numerous invites from Umno to be a member, Tunku Aziz had over the years declined its offer, holding on to his belief in multiracialism and inclusiveness. "That is why I joined DAP in August 2008, because I believe in multiracialism and they aspired to be just that," he said. "I joined because they offered me a platform to continue my work, to fight corruption and provide integrity in both the government and corporate sectors," he added. "But within two months, I realised I had got myself in the wrong box," said Tunku Aziz. He explained that the party had not provided him an avenue to fight corruption and believed DAP was not as multiracial as he thought it to be. Tunku Aziz said he wanted to resign from the DAP immediately, but was persuaded to stay on by party leaders. "I stayed because of my respect for (DAP parliamentary leader Lim) Kit Siang. There is something about honouring a friendship," he said. "But my break came when Bersih 3.0 wanted a street demo. I have seen what happens during these events. It always starts peacefully, but ends in the spilling of blood," he added. 'Pakatan MPs lawbreakers' Tunku Aziz said he has always supported Bersih as an electoral watchdog group, but his support was conditional and he strongly believed the organisation had to act within the law. "When they broke they law by attempting to occupy Dataran Merdeka, even though it was prohibited, I drew the line," he said.
|
To protect baby girls from being sexually exploited, the Saudi cleric, Sheikh Abdullah Daoud, has called parents to make their female children wear the Islamic headscarf.
| 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 | |
