Malaysian Cabinet formed but legitimacy crisis continues

May 15, 2013

Malaysian Cabinet formed but legitimacy crisis continues

By Anil Netto

PENANG – Large crowds have turned out in protests in major cities on peninsular Malaysia in response to a general election marred by allegations of irregularities and vote-buying. As the protests spread across the country, the Opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat’s challenge has the potential to destabilize Prime Minister Najib Razak’s new government.

Despite winning less than half of the national vote, BN now controls 10 out of 13 federal states due to its careful carving of constituencies.

In the central state of Selangor, some 100,000 thronged a stadium in the first major protest three days after the May 5 polls. Thousands more attended a simultaneous protest at the Rusila Mosque in Terengganu on the peninsula’s east coast. These were followed by another large turnout of close to 100,000 at another stadium, in the northern state of Penang, on May 11.

On Sunday night, some 30,000 crammed into the streets of Ipoh, the capital of the state of Perak, for yet another rally. More rallies are expected this week, including in Johor Bahru in the south and Kuantan on the east coast of the peninsula. Smaller groups of Malaysians have congregated in cities abroad, including in Melbourne, Taiwan, and Singapore.

At all the rallies participants have dressed in black to symbolize a democracy “blackout”. The de facto Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leader Anwar Ibrahim and other coalition politicians have made several rousing speeches decrying fraud and irregularities at the polls. They have also made their case with international audiences, including in interviews with big global broadcasters.

In a campaign that highlighted rampant corruption and cronyism in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, the PR won almost 51% of the popular vote at the polls. But with constituencies gerrymandered to favor less-populated rural areas traditionally held by BN, PR won only 40% of parliament’s 222 seats. (BN captured 133 parliamentary seats to the PR’s 89.)

PR retained the state governments of Penang and Selangor, both developed states that it has governed since 2008, and the rural east coast state of Kelantan and lost narrowly in the northern state of Kedah.

Despite winning less than half of the national vote, BN now controls 10 out of 13 federal states due to its careful carving of constituencies. In Perak state, which PR captured in 2008 only to lose power after a few of its elected representatives defected, the BN won only 43% of the popular vote but still captured the state assembly, winning 31 state seats to the PR’s 28.

Subramaniam Pillay, a steering committee member of the civil society Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH), notes that the last time constituencies were redrawn was in 2003, and that only a simple majority in parliament and the state assemblies is required to redraw electoral boundaries – though a two thirds majority is required to increase the number of seats.

PR’s three component parties are expected to challenge the results in some 30 parliamentary constituencies where the BN won with small majorities. They have 21 days from the date the results are officially gazetted later this month to submit court petitions.

They could also file more general suits relating to vote-buying and constitutional issues related to the conduct of a caretaker government. Bersih, which has staged massive street rallies in the past against BN’s perceived manipulation of the electoral system in its favor, has said it would set up a “People Tribunal” to investigate the allegations of fraud and irregularities.

Najib, for his part, claimed a “Chinese tsunami” (a reference to the ethnic Chinese who represent 25% of the population) voted down BN candidates in many urban areas. Utusan Malaysia, owned by Najib’s United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party, took the cue with a headline splashed on its front and back pages asking “What more do the Chinese want?”.

BN’s insistence on viewing the country’s fast-changing political landscape through a race-tinted lens is consistent with its old style of politics, which is theoretically based on power-sharing among race-based political parties in BN but in reality is dominated by the ethnic Malay-led UMNO.

The contrast with the PR’s self-proclaimed “new politics” could not be more pronounced. Multi-ethnic demonstrators have said they represent a “Malaysian tsunami” that wants good governance, clean and fair elections and an end to corruption, and an end to the BN’s practice of exploiting ethnic divisions.

“Some commentators here have missed the whole point: we are not saying the opposition will take over the government or whether the elections results can be verified and fraud detected,” said Jeremiah Liang, who left a comment on a blog. “No. The real change is that the people of Malaysia, from all races and mostly urban, starting with Selangor and then to other states, are saying to the incumbent government: You have lost the people’s mandate to lead and to govern.”

The Police have responded by threatening to investigate 28 speakers at recent rallies for sedition, an offense, punishable by imprisonment, that the BN has long used to stifle criticism of its rule. The organizers of the various rallies will also be investigated for allegedly violating the Peaceful Assembly Act, which requires they give 10 days notice to the police before staging rallies. Should the government make mass arrests, the situation could tilt towards instability, some analysts believe.

To what extent election fraud, including allegations of voting buying in the crucial North Borneo states of Sabah and Sarawak, can be proven with sufficient evidence to overturn the results remains questionable. PR parties will face significant constraints to scrutiny in interior and difficult-to-access rural areas long controlled by BN politicians.

However, in one significant expose, the social reform group Aliran found people lining up for payments ranging from 150-200 ringgit (US$50-67) over the weekend in a few nondescript locations based on vouchers received before polling day. Some of those lining up for payments but who didn’t receive cash were told they would only receive payment if the BN candidate in their area won.

Others says the real source of fraud lies in the integrity of the electoral rolls. The BN’s granting of identity cards or citizenship documents to migrants in Sabah that allow them to vote had been the subject of a royal commission of inquiry but was postponed ahead of the election.

The Election Commission, meanwhile, has received flak for using indelible ink that disappears with mild scrubbing. With 260,000 military and police personnel eligible for early voting five days before official polling, the issue has raised concerns that BN-loyal security officials may have voted more than once.

The PR’s focus on electoral irregularities and gerrymandering may mask somewhat the coalition’s failure to deliver its clean governance message in grass roots rural areas. Many of the rural voters receive their news from television, radio and newspapers tightly controlled by the BN-led federal government, while few have access to more independent Internet-based news.

If PR did get its message across, it may not have resonated with rural voters as it did with urban ones. For instance, its pledges to reduce highway tolls, provide free higher education and usher in good governance lacked popular resonance in remote areas of Sabah and Sarawak where direct BN populist hand-outs maintained voter loyalty.

Among rural voters and some urban voters there were no doubt concerns that they would lose out if the BN’s affirmative action policies were replaced by the PR’s promise of more meritocracy in the distribution of state funds. While PR had indicated it would adopt a more needs-based – rather than race-based – approach, old insecurities remain.

Other weaknesses in the PR campaign included disputes over seat allocations among component parties that led to several multi-cornered contests that split votes in pro-PR areas. The late selection of PR candidates also gave them little time to familiarize themselves with the area and electorate in Malaysia’s short campaign period.

Despite these weaknesses, Anwar has announced plans to hold more rallies. While it still seems unlikely these will morph any time soon into a larger Arab Spring-like movement that overturns the result, the rallies and the allegations add to the pressure on Najib, who is clearly struggling to come to terms with the erosion of BN popular support.

Anil Netto is a Penang-based writer.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/SEA-01-150513.html

Malaysian Buddhist Organisations: Vote Wisely and Make the Difference

April 28, 2013

http://www.malaysiakini.com (04-25-13)

The coming 13th general election will be a critical one deciding the fate of the people and this nation. Malaysia’s Buddhist organisations, in the spirit of upholding Buddha Sakyamuni’s compassion and wisdom, call on all Malaysian Buddhists as well as the political parties participating in this election to:

(1) Step forward and fulfill one’s duty as a citizen; to vote in earnest and with responsibility to elect a government that will bring advancement, harmony and equity in serving the people of different races and faiths.

(2) Follow Malaysia’s founding spirit which emphasise on unity and the mutual prosperity of all ethnic groups. Whichever political party that comes into power, the ruling government must assure that the resources are equally distributed and that racial, religious and educational issues shall not be manipulated by political parties as tools to polarise the people.

(3) Encourage religion which has the effect of purifying the society and our hearts. We seek the ruling government to protect the constitutional rights of freedom of religious beliefs, put to a stop the marginalisation of non-Islamic religious education and accord fair treatment to religious development.

(4) Ensure Malaysia shall maintain its status as a secular country, pursues a policy of separation of religion and state. The ruling government must also ensure that the Federal Court is the highest source of adjudication in all matters.

(5) Ensure that the political parties must be genuine in curbing the malpractices within current electoral system, including money politics, vulgarism and abusive language should not be engaged during campaigns.

Politics is everybody’s business as political parties and politicians’ words and deeds affect the social life of the people. Let’s elect an ideal government.

6) Urge the political parties and people throughout the country during the election period to be more action oriented in the decision-making with compassion to curb violence and more wisdom to reduce ignorance.

Vote wisely as their decisions will make a difference. Let’s all be united together to build a better tomorrow. May our nation be blessed with prosperity, happiness and peace.

From:

1) members of Malaysian Buddhist Consultative Council:-

Young Buddhist Association of Malaysia,
Buddhist Missionary Society Malaysia,
Sasana Abhiwurdhi Wardhana Society
Persatuan Penganut Agama Buddha Fo Guang Malaysia
Vajrayana Buddhist Council Malaysia

2) Fo Guang Shan, Malaysia

3) Theravada Buddhist Council of Malaysia

GE13: Political Religion in Malaysian Politics

April 10, 2013

by Farish A. Noor
@http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

It is significant that in this coming general election in Malaysia, many demands are being made in the name of religion and religious identity.

A host of demands are coming from almost every ethnic and religious constituency — demands ranging from the implementation of Islamic law to the protection of churches and temples in the country.

It was in the 1970s that political Islam became a visible marker in the form and content of Malaysian politics, and there is little reason to believe that this is going to change any time soon. What is relatively new, however, is the role played by political religion in general in Malaysian politics, as demonstrated by the rise of Hindu and Christian political movements.

Between 2004 and 2008, Malaysia witnessed, for the first time, the rise of politicised Hindusim in the form of the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) movement. Its appeal was specifically to the Hindus of the country rather than to Malaysians of Indian or South Asian origin. Then, in the general election of 2008, it was evident that some Christian leaders were also involved in mobilising their fellow Christians, and that trend seems to have continued and even sharpened today.

These developments indicate that Muslims are not the only ones who are now politically active in Malaysia, but other religious communities too. There is every reason to believe that religion in general, and Islam in particular, will be a key variable that impacts the voting process.

Discussion about political Islam’s role in Malaysian politics cannot be confined to the Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) alone, for it is clear that in PAS’s contestation against UMNO, both parties will be turning to Islam as a source of politically and ideologically loaded symbols and ideas. Looking at current developments in Malaysia, it is obvious that many of the issues that divide — but which may also unite — PAS and UMNO happen to be Islamic ones.

Witness, for instance, the difficulties faced by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition when dealing with the thorny issue of Islamic law and whether the word “Allah” could be used by non-Muslim Bumiputera Malaysians in their Bahasa Indonesia bibles.

PAS’s unease with the stance taken by its coalition partners — the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) — stems from a deeper theological question of whether the concept of a singular, monotheistic God found in Islam is similar to that of other confessional communities.

Though the pragmatists of PAS may wish the debate to be closed so that the party can focus on the coming elections, the theologians of PAS maintain that this is an issue that cannot be resolved simply through pragmatic political alliances.

It is for these reasons that the Malaysian public sphere has been dominated by debates of a religious character: From calls on Muslims not to celebrate Valentine’s Day, to demands that Christians be allowed to use the word “Allah”, Malaysia’s complex electorate seems to be guided by theological, as well as ideological, concerns.

The Founding Father and Imam of Islam Hadhari

As voters head to the polls in a few weeks’ time, religion and religious loyalties may well be the deciding factor for which parties and leaders they vote for. The recent statement by PAS leader Hadi Awang — that the party may leave the opposition coalition if its involvement in Pakatan does not serve the needs and interests of Islam and the Malays — shows that multiple loyalties are at work in PAS’s calculations.

PAS may wish to remain in the opposition coalition if that guarantees its path to power, but it will not countenance being part of a government where Islamist needs and aspirations are sidelined. If this happens, it could well choose to join forces with UMNO instead.

On the other side of the religious divide, the country’s Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and other faith communities are also more politicised today, and are likely to take into account their religious identities and loyalties at the voting booth too. This could be the case with the Christian Bumiputeras of East Malaysia, for instance, who insist on their constitutional status as Bumiputeras but who also zealously defend their Christian identity.

All of this means that Malaysian society is even more complex than ever before, with horizontal and vertical cleavages of ethnicity, language, culture and religion dividing them. To win power in Malaysia, all political parties need to cultivate a bridge-building capacity to narrow these divisions, but not at the expense of losing their religious identities.

Religion, in short, has now become a permanent variable in Malaysian politics that is not about to be transcended any time soon. ― Today

*Dr. Farish A. Noor is Associate Professor with the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

BN Ministers have no Common Sense, so let’s boot them out for good!

April 5, 2013

On March 22, Borders Bookstore won its judicial review against three recalcitrant government defendants namely JAWI, the Minister of Home Affairs and the Minister in the PM’s Department for Religious Affairs in the controversial case involving the book “Allah Liberty & Love” by Canadian writer Irshad Manji.

Nik Raina and her lawyer, En. Rosli Dahlan

I even hailed the Tudung Judge Dato’ Zaleha Yusof for her moral courage in making a bold judgment that I thought had restored some sense and sensibility into our government’s administration. See this link to my previous article: HERE

Malaysians were relieved that a senseless case had ended. That was what we all thought. But apparently not!

It now appears that JAWI, the Home Affairs and Religious Ministers and the Attorney-General do not have any common sense nor any sensibility. I am told that despite receiving a polite letter from the Malaysian premier legal firm of Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill for the case to be withdrawn, JAWI has not done so.  See the letter below:

And the most scandalous thing is that A-G Gani Patail is instigating JAWI not to respect Judge Zaleha’s decision. The Syariah criminal charge against Nik Raina is still not withdrawn. Contrary to what we think, Nik Raina is still an accused person in the Syariah case. She is still the enemy of Islam. That is how vindictive JAWI, the BN Minister for Home Security and BN Minister for Religious Affairs and A-G Gani Patail have become towards Nik Raina. They want to drag her life into hell through eternity. That is why A-G Gani Patail filed an application to stay the Order given by Judge Zaleha. See below the application filed by AG Gani Patail:

What is most laughable in that application is to see JAWI saying- “Kami akan mengalam¡ múdarat yang serius dan seterusnya mengalami ketidak-upayaan untuk menempatkan semula kepada kedudukan yang asal” which means JAWI, the Home Minister and the Religious Ministers are saying that they will suffer if they cannot be allowed to prosecute Nik Raina, the poor victimised Malay manager.

JAWI akan mengalami múdarat yang serius dan seterusnya  ketidak-upayaan untuk menempatkan semula kepada kedudukan yang asal jika gagal melakukan sesuatu terhadap kes Nik Rania.

Hello! What is wrong with you people? Are you suffering from brain damage to say that in a formal court application? Obviously, A-G Gani Patail is taking the court process as a joke to be saying that. They should all be punished for contempt of court!

To make it worse, that was not how A-G Gani Patail behaved when Razak Baginda was acquitted for the murder of the Mongolian beauty Altantuya Sharibbu. In that sense, Nik Raina is treated worse than a murder accuse. So the saying that everyone is equal before the law is not true. In the Malaysian criminal justice system, you are treated according to who you are. So, if you Razak Baginda who is a close confidante of the Prime Minister, you will get preferential treatment.

Razak who hired the UTK Police sharpshooters to blow up Altantuya was freed while the UTK personnel were convicted. A-G Gani Patail did not appeal against Razak Baginda and Razak is now living in absolute luxury in London from the billions of ringgit commissions that he made from the Scorpene submarines sold to the Royal Malaysian Navy.

We have always suspected that the Scorpene submarines cannot dive, remain submerged nor defend our coastal line. And now all our suspicions are proven true. How do we know that? Well, in the invasion of Lahad Datu by the Filipino terrorists, we have seen that these terrorists can enter and leave our territories and waters at will. They can enter undetected and leave despite a sea blockade. And throughout the whole battle episodes, we have not once seen the Scorpene in action.

That is how the BN Defence Ministers have fleeced the public coffers in the name of buying sophisticated weaponry to protect the country. When the time comes to defend the country, it is the “tulang empat kerat” of our brave soldiers that are defending the motherland and not the sophisticated weaponry bought to line the pockets of these politicians!

The same goes for our internal or homeland security. The inept Home Minister said that these terrorists were harmless and toothless sarong clad old men. Believing that what the Home Affairs Minister said was true, our Policemen put their guard down and treated these foreign terrorists more kindly than they treated the BERSIH 3.0 rally goers. And in the end, it cost horrifying deaths to our Policemen who were brutally killed and mutilated by these harmless toothless old men.

So I say – let us honor our fallen heroes. Let us honor our fallen soldiers and policemen. But Never shall we honor or give credit to the BN politicians and Ministers who have caused these unnecessary deaths. We weep for the families of these fallen heroes, their wives and children. But we must also hold those who caused these wanton deaths accountable. We must!

Now that Parliament has been dissolved on April 3, these politicians will have to go back to the ballot box to seek the people’s mandate. It is time that we tell them who is master. It is time that we shape the fate of this country for the next 4 years. It is time that we, the People of Malaysia tell these inept leaders that they are no longer wanted.

It will be the job of the political parties to tear each other to pieces during their political rallies. But we too can play a role. It is time that we hold all these politicians and the Ministers to be answerable for the deaths of Teoh Beng Hock, Kugan, Ahmad Sarbaini and many others. The persecutions of Anwar Ibrahim, Rosli Dahlan, Datuk Ramli Yusuff and many other innocent Malaysians can happen to anybody when you have morally depraved politicians in power and an A-G beholden to them.

Whatever your status in the country, whatever your race, whatever your religion, your enemy is the one who is turning your country into a disaster zone and the sooner you vote those crooks out of power the sooner you can save your nation and get something better.

We can influence the political parties to offer to the people not only winnable candidates but also candidates whom have seen in the public domain to display impeccable strength of character and moral uprightness.

Gen (Rtd) Md Hashim Hussein is currently is the PKR’s candidate for Johor Baharu parliamentary seat.

The outcome of Lahad Datu could have been different if former CCID Chief Dato’ Ramli Yusuff gets elected into parliament and becomes Home Minister and former army chief Gen (Rtd) Md Hashim Hussein becomes Defence Minister. These are the people that we should get PAS, PKR and DAP to put into Parliament and boot out the BN Ministers who have no common sense to run the country !

Datuk Ramli  was charged by Musa Hassan for using the Police Cessna while he was conducting the aerial survey and boarder patrol to prevent Filipino infiltration which could have avoided the Lahad Datu incident !

A House is not a Home

March 29, 2013

by Elza Irdalynna

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

By the time this article comes out, a close friend of mine will be getting ready to leave the country. Newlywed and pregnant, she will be joined by her entire family to migrate to Australia after obtaining their permanent resident status they applied for nearly a decade ago.

She isn’t the first of my friends to start their lives anew in another country, and she won’t be the last. And while they will be terribly missed, can we really blame them for choosing to leave?

Statistics keep showing an increase of Malaysians migrating with each passing year. The brain drain is a true problem in this country, as more and more of our creative and intellectual minds leave, never to return.Many factors come into play, but at the core of it all, they leave because this land has ceased to become their sanctuary.

In secondary school I wrote a play called “Anak Ikan Lemas di Laut” (Small Fry Drowning at Sea), about a girl struggling to understand and fit in the racial definition bestowed upon her.

This play was written as a direct response to another play I wrote, which did not win at the state level competition for drama as it was “not Malay enough”. Note that this was an English drama competition.

The champion was a play on Hang Tuah. Needless to say, the play mentioned above that questions culture and tradition and its irrelevance to the person she chooses to be, was deemed too controversial to be staged.

However, that feeling of being alien in your own home plagued me since I was a little girl, and it still does till this day. I’m sure many Malaysians experience this same crisis.

Being fluent in English is jeered upon. Forsaking archaic traditions and beliefs is considered immoral. Freedom of expression is either restricted or misunderstood.

Of course, no country is perfect. No government is without flaws and corruption. Yet why do so many choose to go over to the so-called greener patch of grass?

Perhaps it’s largely due to the people who run this country. The societal parents – and how detached we’ve grown from each other. A ruling party more interested in rebranding its name and increasing its number of voters, with no intention of fulfilling its promises as its slogan suggests.

Election is a game

Unlike the set dates for elections in many countries such as the United States, even Indonesia, Malaysia treats its elections like a game – up to the whims and fanies of the ruling government.

Like parents so caught up in chasing wealth, our rulers have abandoned us, and left little reason for true patriotism. The people who leave aren’t traitors to their nation. Instead, they are the ones who have been betrayed. Our rights are stripped, and any attempt at true justice is easily thwarted by new laws that clearly violate the constitution.

If anyone dares to question or challenge these biased laws, they would be threatened with imprisonment for “sedition”. The government doesn’t want  people who can think and stand up for what is right. It wants zombies. Throughout our lives, we are forced to fit ourselves in its definition of what our identities should be.

Racial, economic, religious and educational gaps are enforced instead of bridged. Individualism is suppressed. Youths of today are told to be grateful and not question the authority.

They forget: it is the people who gave them that power. Instead of telling the people to serve the country, might I suggest the government start serving the people?

Most of all, this country lacks hope. No amount of 1Malaysia songs it repeats on the radio, or recitals of the Rukun Negara in school could instil faith in the country, when its blatant abuse of power is on display for all to see.

We are no longer blind. We are better informed and we are aware of the mainstream media being used as the government’s tools of propaganda.

Alternative and social media has exposed its trickery, and the people won’t stand for it any longer.That is why many leave. They’ve grown weary of the lies and deceit. They yearn for their rights to be protected, and their voices heard.

Perhaps the country they move to will not be far different from this. But treachery isn’t something they aren’t used to, and maybe it’s better to be betrayed by others, instead of your own countrymen.

Elza Irdalynna writes about art, love, and other things she pretends to understand. She is also an FMT columnist.

THE BORDERS/IRSHAD MANJI BOOK CASE: SENSE AND SENSIBILITY PREVAILED!

March 22,2013

by Din Merican

I have become friends with Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz, the poor Malay Borders Bookstore

manager who, on  May 30, 2012, was charged with much fanfare in the Syariah Court for purportedly distributing anti-Islam books. The book in question was by a Canadian writer Irshad Manji titled “Allah Liberty and Love”.

That immediately made Nik Raina an enemy of Islam. In Malaysia, nobody wants to be an enemy of Islam. It did not matter that Nik had not read the book nor understood what it is about. It did not matter that she was a mere employee and had no control over the books sold in the Borders Bookstore. It did not matter that nobody knew that the book was against Islam. It did not matter that nobody knew about any ban on the book, because it was not banned at that time.

Once the Jabatan Agama, in this case Jabatan Agama Wilayah Persekutuan (JAWI), charged her in the Syariah Court, she became Islam’s No.1 Enemy. That was what happened to Nik Raina since May 2012 until this morning when I received the good news that Borders Bookstore, Stephen Fung and Nik Raina have been vindicated by High Court Judge Dato’ Zaleha Yusuf. News spread very fast that Judge Zaleha had chastised JAWI for displaying religious madness in their action against Borders, Stephen and Nik Raina.

Nik Raina and her lawyer, En. Rosli Dahlan

Immediately I was impressed because I have seen this judge. Dato’ Zaleha wears the tudung. This must be one brave Malay lady tudung Judge to vindicate the enemies of Islam in her court of law.

More than that, she dared to chastise JAWI and two Ministers namely the Home Minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, and the Agama Minister, Jamil Khir Baharom for not correcting JAWI. But why was this judge so brave to vindicate people branded by JAWI as the enemies of Islam? And why vindicate? For what? What wrong have they done? So, let’s understand the facts a bit.

Apparently, some time before the incident, JAWI and Islamic scholars from JAKIM had reviewed the Irshad Manji book and prepared a thick report counting out 1001 reasons why Irshad Manji is an enemy of Islam and thus all her writings are blasphemous. If JAWI had their way they would burn Irshad Manji on the stake and make her books a bonfire.

Anyway, JAWI then approached the Minister of Home Affairs to ban the book because under the Printing and Presses Act, only the Home Minister can ban books. For some reason, the Home Minister slept on it like how he slept on the job when more than 100 Filipino terrorists took over Lahad Datu.

In Lahad Datu, the Home Minister justified the continued presence of these terrorists on Malaysian soil by saying that they are harmless toothless sarong clad old men, that is, until our security forces men were brutally killed and mutilated. In the end, we had to call on jet fighters and the army to bomb the three villages to get rid of these harmless toothless old men.

The inaction of Home minister Hishamuddin Hussein in this case is almost similar to his late action  to table a white paper on the Lahad Datu episode. It should have been done during the early stage of intrusion. The matter has prolonged long enough and many security personnel had lost their lives. The people had also waited too long for answers, but in the end they were disappointed as none had been forthcoming.

So, JAWI being irritated with the inaction by the Home Minister decided to take things into their own hands and orchestrated a dramatic raid on Borders Bookstore at the Gardens Mid Valley Mall. Just like the siege of Bahgdad when the Mongolian horde stormed a Muslim city, the JAWI commandos stormed Borders Bookstore with a horde of photographers and reporters as if it was a fortress of anti-Islam books. Like in a Jihad (Holy War), JAWI needed to capture some POWs (Prisoners of War), otherwise it would not be a successful war campaign.

But JAWI had a problem because Borders is owned by a company, Berjaya, and they dare not arrest the owners of Borders because that would be Tan Sri Vincent Tan. So they went after the General Manager who is Stephen Fung. Again, that was a problem because Stephen is a Christian and JAWI has no powers over non-Muslims. So, JAWI went down the chain of command and to their delight found that the store manager is a Muslim. So that’s how Nik Raina got embroiled.

But that was not the end of JAWI’s problem. After interviewing Nik Raina, JAWI discovered that Nik Raina had neither power over nor knowledge about the book. You see, at that time JAWI had not announced to the public of the findings of their thick report that the book is anti-Islam because that report was official secret meant only for the eyes of the Home Minister. And the Home Minister had forgotten to gazette a ban on the book as anti-Islam. So, on the day of the raid and Nik Raina’s arrest, nobody knew that the book was banned. But JAWI didn’t care. JAWI was in a rush to announce the success of their raid, so they needed to charge someone, anyone. JAWI refused to listen to reason and even refused legal representation to Nik Raina. So that’s why Nik Raina was charged, because it was convenient to do so.

But JAWI underestimated that Berjaya is now under a new leadership, Dato Robin Tan. Robin Tan may be Vincent Tan’s son, but he is a man of the brave new world and could not stand to see his company and his employees being bullied and kicked around. Also, Borders’ COO is a feisty Australian trained lawyer, Yau Su Peng. So, between them, they decided to look around for a lawyer who is qualified to appear in the Syariah Courts and the Civil Courts; who will not be cowed to appear against the bullying and intimidating tactics of the Ketua Pendakwa Syarie; a lawyer who is not afraid of the establishment. Enter my young friend, Lawyer Rosli Dahlan!

No one can be perfectly free till all are free; no one can be perfectly moral till all are moral; no one can be perfectly happy till all are happy.

To give support to Nik Raina, my wife and I have attended the court sessions in the Syariah Courts and the Civil Courts. I have seen how committed and passionate Rosli is in defending Nik Raina. I have heard him articulating why JAWI’s action was misguided and the madness of JAWI and the Ketua Pendakwa Syarie in pursuing the matter. I have heard him imploring the Civil Courts not to be intimidated by the Syariah authorities and persuading them not to abdicate their constitutional duty.

Thus, I was most happy today that Judge Dato Zaleha was moved by Rosli’s closing Submissions that JAWI’s actions set a dangerous precedent that any state religious body can simply deem a publication to be contrary to hukum syarak without the public being aware of it. And that was what that had stirred controversy, created a conflict of laws situation and gave Malaysia unnecessary international acclaim for illogical religious enforcement action.

From my sources in Borders, I have obtained a copy of Rosli’s Submission in which he implored the Judge “to reinstate reason into this already tumultuous situation so that some sense and sensibility can prevail to calm our multi-racial and multi-religious Malaysian society which has been disturbed by an unwarranted fear stirred by JAWI and the lack of moral courage and political will by the Minister of KDN and Minister Agama to correct the obvious wrongs committed by JAWI.”

I salute Tudung Judge Dato’ Zaleha for her moral courage in making this bold Judgment. More than that, Malaysians now can have more confidence in the new Judiciary where Judges are not afraid to restore sense and sensibility which is much needed in our government’s administration!

_____________

DECISION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION: KUALA LUMPUR HIGH COURT CIVIL NO. R2-25-137-06/2012

Brief Grounds by Yang Arif Dato’ Zaleha Binti Yusof on 22.02.2013, 9:37 a.m.:

“This is going to be the gist of my decision.

This case involves the review of the Respondents’ action in raiding and searching the premises of the 1st Applicant and seizing publication therein and examining the Applicants and subsequently arresting and prosecuting the 3rd Applicant.

The Respondents here are public authorities and the Applicants are aggrieved and have been already affected by the Respondents’ action. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that this Court has a supervisory jurisdiction over the decision and acts of these bodies. This application also involves the interpretation of law that relates to fundamental liberties thus it is clear to me that the Applicants are entitled to file this application under Order 53 of the Rules of Court and this Court has jurisdiction to hear it. To me the question of this Court encroaching into the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court does not arise as it is the Civil Court that has jurisdiction to review.

Well the actions of the Respondents affect the Applicants who are a company, a non-Muslim and a Muslim respectively. Section 1 subsection (2) of Syariah Offences Act clearly provides that the Act shall apply to persons professing the religion of Islam and corporation is not included in the definition of Muslim under the Syariah Administration Act.

As submitted by the learned counsel for the Applicants, the High Court in Potensi Bernas Sdn Bhd v. Datuk Badaruddin Datuk Mustapha had decided that Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over a non-muslim and that a company being a creature of the statute does not profess any religion. Similary in Latifah Mat Zin v. Rosmawati Sharibun & Anor, the Federal Court had held that an application to the Syariah Court can only be made if both parties are Muslim. Since the Syariah law is only applicable to Muslim therefore the actions taken by the 1st Respondent against the 1st and 2nd Applicants in my opinion were clearly illegal.

On action against the 3rd Applicant, no doubt she is a Muslim, however does that alone justify the 1st Respondent’s action against her? She is a merely a Store Manager and the person who is responsible for the collection of titles and range of stock of books and publications displayed and sold in the 1st Applicant’s Bookstore is the 2nd Applicant and not her, and this has not been disputed.

 Matters pertaining to publication, printing and printing presses fall within item 21, List I of the Ninth Schedule read together with Article 74 of the Federal Constitution. If we look at item 1 of List II of the Ninth Schedule, the State is given power to create and punish offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of Islam except in regards to matters included in the Federal List. No doubt the creation of punishment of offences against the precepts of Islam can be enacted by the State Legislature. However clear reading of Item 1 of List II of the Ninth Schedule as I mentioned just now shows that the State cannot enact laws in regards to matters included in the Federal List. Since matters pertaining to publication, printing and printing presses fall within List I ie. The Federal List, the validity of section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act is questionable as it is ultra vires the Printing Act and the Federal Constitution. Even if it is a valid law what amounts to contrary to Islamic Law is also questionable as it is too wide. Members of the public must be made known what publication is contrary to Islamic Law or precepts of Islam. Otherwise as the Learned Counsel for the Applicants have submitted, a Muslim employee who works in a bookstore that also sells Christianity Bible, books on Buddhism or Hinduism or any other religion besides other books which as we know now they are many such bookstore would be committing an offence. Hence there need to be notification by the Respondents as to what books and publication are contrary to Islamic Law.

It must be noted that at the material time the publications or books in question was not subject to any Prohibition Order by KDN. The Prosecution Order was only issued 3 weeks after the raid. Bear in mind the provision of Article 7 of Federal Constitution which provides that no person shall be punishable for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made.

Section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act must be in conformity with the Federal Constitution especially the said Article 7. The Court of Appeal in Multi-Purpose Holdings Berhad v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri the Parliament does not intend its act to violate the Constitution. Hence, a statute must be read harmoniously with the Constitution to avoid any conflict between them which will result in the statute becoming void. Adopting that approach, the Act must, in my judgment be read prospectively to prevent the appellant in that case and those similarly circumstanced from becoming retrospectively criminally liable. Applying that principle I am of the opinion that the criminal charge against the 3rd Applicant in the Syariah High Court is an infringement of Article 7. Further there is nothing in the Syariah Offences Act which provide for any State Religious Body to prohibit any publication. It only creates an offence to publication. As submitted both by the Respondents and Applicants, whenever there is a conflict between a law enacted by the Parliament and a law enacted by the State Legislature, the Court has to follow and adopt a harmonious interpretation of the law. The only logical approach is for Section 7 of the Printing Act to support Section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act ie. notification to the public first, then only the enforcement action.

We live in multi-religious and multi-racial society, such approach would be harmonious and avoid any tension, controversy and conflict into the society and law.

To conclude, I agree with the submission of the Applicants and therefore allow this Application in Prayer (a) to (i) of Enclosure 6.”

“No order as to costs.”

Habemus Papam for Roman Catholics

March 14, 2013

by Reuters

Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Argentina was yesterday elected in a surprise choice to be the new leader of the troubled Roman Catholic Church, taking the name Francis I and becoming the first non-European pontiff in nearly 1,300 years.

Pope Francis (above), 76, appeared on the central balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica just over an hour after white smoke poured from a chimney on the roof of the Sistine Chapel to signal 115 cardinal electors had chosen him to lead the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. “Pray for me,” the new pontiff, dressed in the white robes of a pope for the first time, urged the crowd, smiling warmly.

The choice of Bergoglio, who is the first Latin American and first Jesuit Pope, was announced by French Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran with the Latin words “Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum. Habemus Papam” (“I announce to you a great joy. We have a Pope.”)

Francis has become the 266th pontiff in the Church’s 2,000-year history at a time of great crisis, with the church under fire over a child sex abuse scandal and torn by infighting in the Vatican bureaucracy.

Jubilant Argentines poured into churches, some crying and praying, after the announcement at the Vatican. “This is a blessing for Argentina,” one woman shouted on a Buenos Aires street. “I hope he changes all the luxury that exists in the Vatican, that he steers the church in a more humble direction, something closer to the gospel,” said Jorge Andres Lobato, a 73-year-old retired state prosecutor.

Jesuit order

Although a conservative, Francis is seen as a reformer and was not among the small group of frontrunners identified before the election. The Jesuit order to which he belongs was founded in the 16th century to serve the Pope. It is best known for its work in education and the intellectual prowess of its members.

White smoke from the chimney on the Sistine Chapel (above) heralds the new Pope.  Bergoglio is known as a humble man who leads an austere and sober life without ostentation, travelling by public transport and living in a small apartment outside Buenos Aires.

He is a moderate who is willing to challenge powerful interests and is deeply concerned about the social inequalities in Argentina and elsewhere in Latin America. He has had a sometimes difficult relationship with President Cristina Fernandez and her late husband and predecessor Nestor Kirchner.

Francis has spoken out strongly against gay marriage, denouncing it in 2010 as “an attempt to destroy God’s plan”. He was born into a middle-class family of seven, his father an Italian immigrant railway worker and his mother a housewife.

Replacing Pope Benedict, who resigned last month, he overturned one of the main assumptions before the election, that the new pope would be relatively young.

Bergoglio is the oldest of most of the possible candidates and was barely mentioned in feverish speculation about the top contenders before the conclave. He is the first non-European pope since Syrian-born Gregory III in the eighth century, and the third successive non-Italian pontiff.

The Vatican said his inaugural mass would be held on March 19. US President Barack Obama said the election of Francis “speaks to the strength and vitality of a region that is increasingly shaping our world”.

‘Pray for Benedict’

In brief remarks from the balcony of St. Peter’s, Francis called on the faithful to pray for Benedict and said the Church was setting off on a “journey of fraternity, of love, of trust”.

It seemed the cardinal electors “went to the end of the world” to find him, he said. The Vatican said Francis would visit Benedict soon at his temporary home in the summer papal residence outside Rome.

Thousands of people sheltering from heavy rain under a sea of umbrellas had occupied the square all day to await the decision and the crowd swelled as soon as the white smoke emerged. They cheered wildly and raced towards the basilica as the smoke billowed from a narrow makeshift chimney and St. Peter’s bells rang.

The tens of thousands in the Square cheered even more loudly when Francis appeared, the first pontiff to take that name. “Viva il Papa (pope),” they chanted.

The election was enthusiastically welcomed in Latin America. “I am happy because another European pope would be like eating the same bread every day,” said Mexico City cab driver Martin Rodriguez.

“We’re happy because we have a new pope and because the choice of a Latin American shows that the Church is opening, is now focused on the entire Church. It’s not just a church only focused on Europe,” said Leonardo Steiner, general secretary of the national conference of Brazilian bishops.

Frontrunners at the conclave had included Brazilian Odilo Scherer, and Italy’s Angelo Scola, who would have returned the papacy to traditional Italian hands after 35 years of the German Benedict XVI and Polish John Paul II.

The decision by cardinal electors sequestered in a secret conclave in the Sistine Chapel came sooner than many experts expected because there were several frontrunners before the vote to replace Pope Benedict.

The cardinals faced a thorny task in finding a leader capable of overcoming crises caused by priestly child abuse and a leak of secret papal documents that uncovered corruption and rivalry inside the Church government or Curia.

Francis will head a Church also shaken by rivalry from other churches, the advance of secularism, especially in its European heartland, and allegations of scandal at the Vatican bank. The series of crises is thought to have contributed to Benedict’s decision to become the first pontiff in 600 years to abdicate.

Rival to Ratzinger in 2005

Bergoglio was a moderate rival candidate at the 2005 conclave to the conservative Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who went on to become Benedict. Italian media say he impressed cardinals in pre-conclave meetings where they discussed the Church’s problems.

Pope Francis appears on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica to deliver his first blessing to the multitudes in St Peter’s Square. Reserved and humble, Francis does not fit the profile of an active preacher that many cardinals had previously said they were seeking. He studied chemistry before joining the priesthood nearly a decade after losing a lung to respiratory illness.

“He’s very humble, I heard that in Buenos Aires he used to take public transport, have an apartment and cook for himself. The fact that he chose the name Francis means a lot. It means we will have a humble, simple pope close to the poor people. But it was a big surprise,” said Jules Charette, 54, a Canadian lawyer in St. Peter’s Square.

Bands from the Italian armed forces and the Vatican’s own Swiss guard army paraded in front of the Basilica before the new pope appeared.

The secret conclave began on Tuesday night with a first ballot and four ballots were held yesterday. Francis obtained the required two-thirds majority in the fifth ballot.

Following a split ballot when they were first shut away amid the chapel’s Renaissance splendour on Tuesday evening, the cardinal electors held a first full day of deliberations yesterday. Black smoke rose after the morning session to signal no decision.

The previous four popes were all elected within two or three days. Seven ballots have been required on average over the past nine conclaves. Benedict was clear frontrunner in 2005 and elected after only four ballots.

In preparatory meetings before the conclave, the cardinals seemed divided between those who believe the new pontiff must be a strong manager to get the dysfunctional bureaucracy under control and others who are looking more for a proven pastoral figure to revitalise their faith across the globe.

Apart from Brazil’s Scherer and Italy’s Scola, a host of other candidates from numerous nations had also been mentioned as potential popes. They included US cardinals Timothy Dolan and Sean O’Malley, Canada’s Marc Ouellet and Argentina’s Leonardo Sandri. But the frontrunners list never mentioned Bergoglio. — Reuters

Wawancara dengan Dr. Bakri Musa (No.6)

March 3, 2013

Posted on February 20, 2013 by SUARIS

DI DALAM demokrasi, kuasa terakhir terletak kepada rakyat (atau ahli dengan parti). Fikirkan jika PAS memerintah, kepada (pihak) mana menteri PAS menunggu arahan, Parlimen atau Majlis Syura? Badan mana yang lebih tinggi taraf dan daulatnya? Mengikut perlembagaan, rakyat melalui Parlimen; mengikut PAS, Majlis Syura dan ahli ulama…

Suaris:  Sehubungan itu, apa pandangan Dr terhadap parti PAS dan pemimpin-pemimpin mereka? Apakah dasar-dasar parti dan perjuangan PAS boleh dianggap pendorong atau penghalang kepada kemajuan umat Melayu/Islam di negara kita?

Dr Bakri Musa:  Pemimpin serta dasar dan perjuangan PAS tidak mengagumkan saya. Sebaliknya PAS akan mengakibatkan kemunduran bangsa Melayu. Sama ada Melayu senang masuk syurga akibat PAS, Tuhan saja yang tahu.

PAS ada dua masalah asas. Pertama, ia keliru sama ada PAS parti itu adalah badan politik, bermakna ingin satu hari menerajui kuasa dan memerintah negara, atau gerakan dakwah. Kedua- dua tujuan itu tidak bertentangan tetapi PAS mesti memilih yang mana patut diutamakan dan didahului. Keliruan ini menyebabkan PAS tidak cekap di dalam kedua-dua aliran.

Yang kedua, PAS tidak berlandaskan demokrasi. Kuasa terbesar dan terakhir dalam parti terletak bukan kepada ahli seperti yang sepatutnya tetapi ke Majlis Syura Ulama, satu badan yang tidak dipilih oleh ahli-ahli. Lebih memburukkan, majlis itu terhad kepada ulama sahaja. Di (dalam) kitab mana tertulis yang hanya kaum ulama sahaja yang mempunyai kebolehan, kebijakan dan keistimewaan untuk memimpin?

Di dalam demokrasi, kuasa terakhir terletak kepada rakyat (atau ahli dengan parti). Fikirkan jika PAS memerintah, kepada (pihak) mana menteri PAS menunggu arahan, Parlimen atau Majlis Syura? Badan mana yang lebih tinggi taraf dan daulatnya? Mengikut perlembagaan, rakyat melalui Parlimen; mengikut PAS, Majlis Syura dan ahli ulama.

Ini bukan perkara kecil. Lihat sekarang pertelingkahan di Iran antara pemimpin negeri yang dipilih oleh rakyat ditentang oleh Majlis Syura yang tidak dipilih oleh rakyat. Saya tidak ambil kisah jika badan (majlis) syura hanya sebagai penasihat. Tetapi kuasa terakhir mestilah di (tangan) rakyat melalui Parlimen. Begitu juga dalam parti, Majlis Syura mestilah tunduk kepada pemimpin yang dipilih oleh ahli. Kuasa menenggek tidak ada tempatnya dalam demokrasi; semua kuasa mesti berasal daripada ahli atau rakyat. Mereka yang berdaulat.

Lebih mengecewakan ialah PAS memberatkan label daripada isi. Pemimpin mereka heboh dengan hudud dan Negara Islam tetapi tidak menerangkan apakah yang dimaksudkan dengan kedua-dua istilah itu. Negara Islam mana yang mereka anggap patut dicontohi? Iran dan Saudi Arabia?

Begitu juga dengan hudud. Kalau orang bukan Islam tidak dikenakan hudud, ini bermakna hukuman seseorang melakukan jenayah tergantung bukan atas perbuatannya tetapi atas agamanya. Orang Islam berzina dihukum bunuh tetapi orang bukan Islam hanya mendapat kemarahan suami atau isteri mereka! Begitu juga jika ditangkap mencuri. Orang Islam dipotong tangan; bangsa lain kena denda sahaja atau masuk penjara. Adakah itu adil? Kalau tidak adil, tidak mungkin Islam.

Kelemahan lebih terang ialah pemimpin PAS tidak ada kebolehan untuk mentadbir negara. Bakat dan kemahiran untuk menjadi seorang pentadbir berlainan daripada seorang bakal ulama. Latihan dan latar belakang ilmiah ulama amat sempit. Mereka tidak pernah mengambil kursus dalam bidang ekonomi, sosiologi atau psikologi. Taraf kefahaman saintifik dan teknologi mereka tidak ada langsung. Oleh demikian, fikiran mereka ikut bersama sempit.

Dari segi politik pula, pemimpin PAS tidak bijak untuk berkongsi dan berkerjasama dengan parti- parti lain supaya dapat menuju ke arah yang sama dipersetujui. Lihat tingkah laku pemimpin mereka dalam Pakatan Rakyat. Perangai mereka macam budak kecil; kalau hendak main bola dengan mereka yang lain mesti ikut cara mereka sahaja, tidak mahu atau pandai bertolak ansur. Itu bukan gaya politik. Politik, mengikut pemimpin German termashur Bismarck, ialah seni memungkinkan (art of the possible).

Contoh kecekapan pentadbiran PAS ialah Kelantan. Apa borkat pimpinan PAS selepas lebih dua dekad? Penyakit taun yang sudah tersingkir di negeri lain masih berada di sana, mencerminkan kerendahan kesihatan masyarakat, dan itu sebaliknya akibat kelalaian pemerintah. Penduduk Kelantan, maknanya orang Melayu, terus hingga sekarang satu kumpulan yang paling bangsat.

Saya hormati Tok (Guru Nik) Aziz sebagai seorang ulama. Tetapi dia mesti ingat rakyat memilih dia untuk menjadi menteri besar bukan imam besar. Beliau patut sedar yang dia tidak ada langsung pengetahuan atau kemahiran mentadbir negara. Itu satu kelemahan bukan kesalahan. Yang salah ialah ia tidak sedar dan berendah hati dengan kelemahan beliau. Kalau dia sedar tentu dia ambil penolong dan penasihat yang mahir dan berkebolehan.

Cuba lihat Presiden Reagan, seorang pemimpin yang dianggap paling hebat. Dia seorang yang kurang cerdik atau (kurang) mempunyai kebolehan mentadbir. Dia sendiri sedar dengan kelemahannya. Tetapi dia yakin arahan yang dia dan pimipinannya ingin tujui. Oleh sebab dia sedar kelemahan dirinya, dia ambil sebagai bakal menterinya orang yang berkebolehan dan berpengalaman, serta bersetuju dengan falsafah dia. Akibatnya pemerintahannya cemerlang dan Amerika maju di bawah pentadbirannya.

Ramai anak Kelantan dan orang Malaysia yang berkebolehan. Apa sebab Tok (Guru Nik) Aziz tidak menggunakan bakat dan kebolehan mereka? Mungkin mereka tidak hafiz Quran dan enggan pakai jubah dan serban besar, tetapi kalau mereka boleh mentadbir dan jujur serta cekap, cukup lah. Maknanya, jika mereka boleh memastikan supaya pasar bersih dan sampah dipungut, besarlah kebajikannya kepada rakyat dan negeri.

PAS heboh dengan negara Islam. Ramai yang tak setuju dengan itu, dan mereka tidak terhad kepada kaum bukan Islam sahaja. Kalau begitu apa sebab PAS membuat degil? Lebih baik kalau pemimpin PAS cuba memahami mengapa mereka tidak setuju dan menentang. Sebab yang pertama ialah mereka takut Malaysia akan jadi Iran atau Saudi Arabia. Isteri Tok (Guru Nik) Aziz pun tak setuju kita menjadi Saudi. Maklumlah perempuan tidak boleh bawa kereta!

Bagaimana hendak melegakan prasangka mereka dan memikat mereka yang tidak setuju dengan negara Islam? Yang tentu ialah jika kita labelkan semuanya sebagai murtad atau kafir, itu akan hanya menjauhkan mereka.

Cuba jangan hebohkan label, sebaliknya tegaskan isi. Berpakat dengan Keadilan dan DAP untuk menghapuskan rasuah, salah guna kuasa, dan akta-akta yang menghina kemanusiaan kita. Itu semuanya salah dari segi Islam. Hapuskan semua dan negeri kita akan lebih dekat lagi ke tujuan negara yang bercorak Islam. Kalau negara adil, aman, makmur dan tiada rasuah, itulah satu negara yang benar-benar Islam. Jangan gilakan label.

Sememangnya UMNO sekarang sudah jauh daripada unsur-unsur Islam. Rasuah, makan suap, salah guna kuasa, itu semuanya bertentangan dengan Islam dan tidak boleh ditebuskan dengan membina masjid yang indah dan mengadakan perarakan Maulid yang mewah.

Pilihan raya yang akan datang ialah pilihan antara satu pihak yang mungkin ada sikit kebolehan dan pengalaman mentadbir tetapi korup dan tamak, UMNO, dan pihak satu lagi, PAS, yang kurang cekap mentadbir tetapi jujur dan tidak gilakan kebendaan. Yang mana patut kita pilih?

Betul, yang endahnya jika kita dapat memilih parti yang cekap memerintah dan pemimpinnya jujur dan beramanah. Tetapi Tuhan tidak memberi kita pilihan itu.

Bagi saya, antara UMNO dan PAS, saya tidak teragak-agak lagi memilih PAS. Sebabnya ialah kita lebih senang lagi melatih pemimpin PAS dan memberi mereka pertolongan supaya mereka lebih cekap lagi memerintah. Amat susah untuk menukar atau melatih peribadi dan tabiat seorang yang korup, tamak dan tidak beramanah. Mereka akan berterusan seumpama itu selagi rakyat memberi mereka kuasa dan peluang.

Former ISA Detainee admits to processing I/Cs for Illegals In Sabah

February 28, 2013

by Zulaikha Zulkifli @http://www.malaysiakini.com

A former ISA detainee has claimed she and her group had helped process “thousands of identity cards” for Sabah illegal immigrants in the early 1990s to help topple the PBS state government.

Sixty-three-year-old Siti Aminah Mahmud (right) was detained under ISA in 1995 for two years for her alleged involvement in the IC project.

Speaking at a press conference in Petaling Jaya today, she described how she had been tasked with collecting information for the illegal immigrants’ IC application and handing the issued ICs to village chiefs throughout Sabah, to be issued to foreigners who were mostly Indonesians and Filipinos.

Siti Aminah said she had been instructed to facilitate the issuance of ICs for the foreigners as part of a plan to help UMNO take over Sabah.“It was in the early 1990s, I was told to help UMNO to contest in Sabah and defeat PBS by conducting Project IC in Sabah.

“There were five tasks for me – helping to campaign, increasing Malay voters, locating villagers in rural areas especially those who have no IC at the border of Sabah-Indonesia, and ensuring the victory of UMNO in toppling PBS,” she said at the press conference, where PKR Wanita Chief Zuraida Kamaruddin was also present.

Originally from Sabah and residing in Skudai, Johor, Siti Aminah was a member of Johor Baru UMNO then and was asked by her cousin, who was also an UMNO member, to help the party in Sabah.

She was continuously involved in the covert operation from 1990 to 1994, before she was detained under the ISA in 1995 over the operation.

Siti Aminah claimed the instruction was from the late Sabah UMNO chief Datu Mustapha Datu Harun, who allegedly told her that the project was led by the then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and executed by the Deputy Home Minister Megai Junid Megat Ayub and Mahathir’s Political Secretary Aziz Shamsuddin.

“I knew about it because Datu Mustapha told us not to be afraid about getting arrested. He said this is Mahathir’s and Megat Junid’s project, and he said if he helps UMNO to win, he would be appointed as state governor. He said so during a mass briefing at the UMNO office in Sembulan, Kota Kinabalu in the early 1990s,” she claimed.

‘Documents prepared within a month’

Elaborating on the operation, Siti Aminah said the related documents were prepared within a month after the forms were processed.

“We gave out the forms and later handed them over over to the National Registration Department (NRD) and the UMNO office in Sembulan. After that, we just distributed the completed ICs to Village chiefs.I don’t know (the village chiefs). We went in a group of five. One recorded (the details), one collected fingerprints, and I sometimes arranged forms. I went to Sabah twice a week.We found a village, we gathered several people without ICs. The motive was indeed (to give them ICs),” she explained.

Among others, the IC were given to a group of Indonesians in a Felda area in Sandakan, she claimed.

“After collecting the forms, we handed them over to the NRD and the UMNO office. Not some but in bags. The process to get ICs would be completed in a month or slightly more than that.After we submitted the forms, the process took a month and the ICs will be completed and distributed back to the villages.”

Siti Aminah claimed that those ICs can be identified by the special code printed on the back of the ICs.

“The project IC code is 04 and 05. It is on the back of the ICs. Only NRD people can identify them.”

From 1990 to early 1995, when Mahathir was Prime Minister, the average number of ICs given to Filipinos and Indonesians was nothing less than half a million, according to her estimation.

“The areas with the highest numbers were Tawau, Sandakan, Lahad Datu and Kota Kinabalu, as well as areas at the Tawau-Indonesia border. Another area was Semporna. Many were given there because many Filipinos were there.”

Some 100 persons in her team were individuals who were not working with NRD. They also told the Village chiefs who collected the ICs from them to help inform those IC holders to vote for UMNO.

She did not know whether the Village chiefs had received any money, but she and her team received no pay except a transport allowance.

“I volunteered myself and I went there to fight for UMNO because I was an UMNO member in Johor then. Hence, I was called to campaign in Sabah.”

Although not summoned to testify in the ongoing public hearing of the royal commission of inquiry on the Sabah immigrants issue, Siti Aminah hoped she will be given the opportunity to tell her story to the Royal Commission.

Warancara dengan Dr Bakri Musa (Bahagian 5)

February 25, 2013

Warancara dengan Dr Bakri Musa (Bahagian 5):Islam cara Ismaili atau Talibanlisme

“BANDINGKAN mereka dengan Taliban di Afghanistan. Taliban maknanya pelajar tetapi mereka sibuk membakar sekolah dan melempar asid ke muka anak dara yang ingin belajar. Pemuda Taliban sibuk belajar mengunakan letupan C4 dan senapang AK 47, pelajar Ismaili tekun menyelesaikan masalah sains dan ilmu hisab…”

Suaris:  Dr dilihat amat sinikal terhadap perkara yang dibalut dengan nama Islam. Ramai yang faham bahawa Dr kurang berminat dengan Islam konservatif sepertimana amalan kebanyakan penduduk Islam hari ini, bukannya

Dr Bakri  Saya dilahirkan dan mengamali Islam. Saya percaya kepada Tuhan dan Muhammad (SAW) Rasul terkemudiannya. Selanjutnya saya percaya atas kelima-lima landasan agama kita. Itu memanglah disetujui oleh semua umat Islam.

Apakah intisari ajaran agama kita mengikut kitab suci dan Nabi Muhammad SAW? Amalkan yang baik, jauhi yang jahat. Ayat itu disebut beberapa kali dalam al-Quran dan hadis. Itu juga tidak jadi soalan antara umat Islam, semua setuju.

Itulah yang saya utamakan dan sifatkan Islam, atau dalam kata lain, ajaran emas atau “golden rule” agama kita. Saya kurang berminat dengan label; itu senang saja dicetak. Isi atau kandungan hal lain. Maknanya, kalau pemerintah atau negeri tidak mengamalkan kebaikan dan menjauhi kejahatan, saya tidak anggap pemerintahan atau negeri itu Islam tidak kira apa labelnya. Mengukir “Allah” dan “Muhammad” di pintu gerbang dan bangunan besar senang saja, begitu juga bagi pemimpin memakai serban dan jubah menjela-jela.

Soalannya, adakah rasuah, makan suap dan menyalahgunakan kuasa amalan menjauhi kejahatan? Begitu juga jika pemimpin tidak membela dan membaiki penderitaan dan kemiskinan rakyat, adakah itu amalan yang baik? Bila saya menimbang keislaman pemimpin atau negara, itulah landasan yang saya kira, bukan berapa kali pemimpinnya ke Mekah atau berapa indah tajwidnya membaca al-Quran.

Seorang rakyat Singapura pernah menganggap negaranya lebih Islam daripada Indonesia. Di Singapura tidak ada rasuah dan penyelewengan kuasa di antara pemimpin. Rakyat pun tidak mengganggur atau bangsat. Kemiskinan mendekati kekufuran, dan kekufuran nanti mendekati kekafiran. Pergilah ke Riau dan kebijakan perpatah itu ternyata. Kita tidak boleh salahkan orang Indonesia. Orang China semasa dulu pun macam itu juga akibat kebangsatan hidup mereka.

Mengikuti asas Islam – amalkan yang baik, jauhkan yang jahat – susah hendak mempertikaikan pandangan orang Singapura itu.

Saya kurang faham dengan erti “konservatif” dan “liberal.” Saya faham maknanya dalam bahasa asal (Inggeris), tetapi bila digunakan dalam bahasa kita, perkataan itu bertukar 180 darjah! Itu sebabnya saya enggan mengunakan kedua-dua label itu.

Lebih bermakna jika diberi contoh umat dan pemimpin Islam yang saya sanjung tinggi dan patut kita contohi, dan bandingkan dengan satu masyarakat dan pemimpin Islam yang enggan saya mencontohi. Bukan tempatnya untuk saya mengatakan yang mana lebih Islam atau puak mana yang akan masuk syurga. Itu Tuhan saja yang tahu, dan Dia tidak memberi tahu saya atau makhlukNya yang lain.

Kaum Islam Ismaili tidak melebehi 15 juta, lebih kurang sama dengan orang Melayu di Malaysia. Mereka tidak ada negeri sendiri pun, tetapi kuasa, sumbangan dan pengaruh mereka serta kebajikan mereka kepada dunia amnya dan masyarakat Islam khasnya beberapa kali ganda melebihi bilangan mereka.

Kaum Ismaili memberatkan zakat, dan duit itu mereka laburkan dalam syarikat membuat ubat dan membina sekolah, universiti dan hospital. The Aga Khan University Hospital di Pakistan hanya dibina pada tahun 1985, tetapi sekarang ia satu pusat terkenal. Kaum Ismaili tidak mengutamakan sama ada perempuan mereka berhijab; mereka pesat dilatih menjadi doktor, jururawat, cikgu dan engineer supaya boleh menjadi makhluk soleh, maknanya, membuat baik untuk masyarakat.

Bandingkan mereka dengan Taliban di Afghanistan. Taliban maknanya pelajar tetapi mereka sibuk membakar sekolah dan melempar asid ke muka anak dara yang ingin belajar. Pemuda Taliban sibuk belajar mengunakan letupan C4 dan senapang AK 47, pelajar Ismaili tekun menyelesaikan masalah sains dan ilmu hisab.

Masyarakat mencerminkan pemimpin. Pemimpin Ismaili ialah Aga Khan. Betul, dia mewah, membela kuda lumba, dan bapanya pernah berkahwin dengan Rita Hayward, pelakon Amerika tercantik. Tetapi dia berkelulusan Harvard dan mengunakan kaitannya dengan cerdik pandai Amerika untuk memikat mereka mengajar di universiti-universiti yang ditubuhkannya di Asia.

Pemimpin disanjung tinggi oleh Taliban ialah Osama. Dia pun mewah, berkelulusan kejuruteraan dari universiti Saudi. Tetapi ia menggunakan kekayaan dan kepandaian dia untuk menjahanamkan bangunan dan membunuh orang.

Siapa yang lebih mengamali baik dan menjauhi buruk, Aga Khan atau Osama? Terpulanglah kepada pembaca untuk memutuskan sama ada kaum Melayu lebih dekat dengan Ismaili atau Taliban. Bersama itu, terpulanglah kepada pembaca sama ada masyarakat Ismaili atau Taliban yang patut kita contohi.

Kita heboh dengan hudud dan hijab sementara masalah dadah dan membuang bayi tidak terhad lagi. Apa sebab beratkan hudud tetapi tidak menghukumkan semua termasuk sultan membayar zakat? Zakat satu daripada lima landasan Islam, hudud tidak.

Kalau semua (kecuali si miskin) membayar zakat mal (2.5 peratus nilai harta) dan kita ambil pakar ekonomi untuk mentadbirkan modal itu, tak terhingga akibat baik yang tercapai. Itu yang diberatkan oleh kaum Ismaili dan membolehkan mereka membina sekolah dan rumah sakit. Apa berkat zakat kaum Taliban? Kalau kita beratkan hudud, banyak yang tidak bertangan. Siapa nak menyuap mereka makan dan bagaimana mereka hendak mencari nafkah untuk keluarga?

Kita lebih membentengkan keislaman kita dengan mengutuk dan tidak bertolak ansur dengan pemimpin yang menipu, tidak adil, pecahkan amanah, dan terang-terangan melakukan rasuah. Itu disyaratkan oleh kitab kita.

Betul, kita mesti ambil Islam dengan sepenuhnya tanpa memilih mana yang kita suka sahaja. Soalannya ialah apa sebab kita beratkan hijab dan memotong tangan tetapi mengabaikan tekun belajar dan menentang rasuah?

Ambil (contoh) tekun belajar. Hamka pernah berkata Tuhan memberi kita dua Quran. Quran pertama kita sedia maklum. Quran kedua ialah alam indah di sekitar dan di dalam kita. Tuhan memberi Nabi Muhammad SAW untuk memimpin kita belajar Quran pertama. Untuk Quran kedua, Dia merestukan umatNya dengan akal supaya kita boleh memilih antara yang benar dan palsu, yang baik dari yang busuk. Kita diwajibkan belajar kedua-dua Quran.

Ahli sains menyelidik virus polio boleh disifatkan mengkaji Quran kedua ini. Akibatnya ialah suntikan yang membasmikan penyakit yang dulu melumpuhkan ribuan kanak kanak. Itu perbuatan baik. Tetapi kaum Taliban menyifatkan suntikan polio sebagai racun rekaan si kafir! Akibatnya, polio masih lagi merajalela di Pakistan! Sekali lagi, berlandaskan ajaran emas agama kita, adakah itu perbuatan baik?

Di permulaan agama kita, ulama tidak membezakan antara apa yang disifatkan sebagai ilmu ain dan ilmu kafiyah. Ilmu itu ilmu, dan berasal dari Tuhan. Ulama dulu juga pakar sains, perubatan, dan ilmu hisab. Mereka tekun belajar Quran kedua itu seperti Quran pertama. Tetapi ulama sekarang tidak memberatkan bahkan mencaci mengaji Quran kedua ini, kononnya itu perusahaan untuk dunia bukan akhirat. Akibatnya kita tidak boleh memberi sumbangan yang sepatutnya untuk membuat kebaikan di dunia.

Itu yang patut kita bincang, bagaimana mendidik anak-anak kita supaya mereka boleh membuat baik di dunia ini. Kalau kita membuat baik di dunia ini mungkin Tuhan tidak akan lupakan kita di kemudian hari.

Fikirkan hadis mengatakan seorang pelacur masuk syurga sebab dia memberi air kepada anjing yang nak mati dahaga. Perempuan seumpama itu pakai hijab ke? Satu lagi hadis mengatakan seorang itu masuk syurga sebab ia membuang duri dari tengah jalan. Kalau membuang duri dari jalan satu perbuatan yang baik, berapa baiknya jika seseorang itu membina jalan?

Kita boleh lebih menunjukkan keislaman kita dengan membina jalan yang tidak bahaya atau jambatan yang tidak senang runtuh. Tidak ada gunanya mengukir ayat-ayat Quran di bumbung kalau jurutera kita lalai atau tidak mahir dan bumbung mereka bina runtuh dalam ribut mencederakan kanak- kanak sekolah.

Beberapa tahun lalu ada perbahasan antara Datuk Asri Zainal Abidin (Dr. Maza) dengan Astora Jabat berkenaan tajdid. Mereka berdua adalah antara pemikir Melayu yang amat saya hormati. Tetapi dalam tiga jam perbahasan itu, mereka bertengkar sama ada rambut perempuan disifatkan aurat dan patut ditutup! Hanya di penghujung ada seorang menyoal apa sebab kita beratkan pasal hijab sementara di negara kita rasuah sudah tidak terbendung lagi.

Soalan asas itu tidak sempat dijawab! Kita mesti buat tajdid Islam supaya kita boleh mengatasi perkara ini serta lain-lain masalah sosial yang pesat dalam masyarakat kita. Jangan heboh pasal hijab.

Bila kita dengar perbincangan agama di radio, masjid atau universiti, haluannya sehala sahaja, dari ulama ke pendengar. Kebanyakan masa ditelan dengan menyebut ayat-ayat Quran dan hadis. Bila sebut saja hadis atau ayat Quran, habislah perbicangan. Sepatutnya ayat-ayat Quran dan hadis semestinya memulakan dan bukan penghabis perbincangan!

Fikirkan hadis yang mengatakan kaum Islam akan berpecah ke 73 puak tetapi hanya satu sahaja yang tulen. Yang 72 lain itu masuk neraka! Tiap-tiap ulama dan orang Islam sangkakan puak mereka sahaja yang tulen. Apa akibatnya dengan sikap itu? Kita terdesak “membaiki” orang Islam lain dengan alasan untuk menolong mereka ke syurga! Itu sebabnya Taliban membakar sekolah dan menyembur asid ke muka perempuan!

Mengikut statistik, kemungkinan kita betul hanya satu daripada 73. Can (peluang) tak sampai 1.5 peratus pun! Kita patut berasa insaf dan rendah hati serta ingin belajar dan faham fikiran, fikih, dan puak Islam yang lain. Mungkin satu di antara mereka yang betul dan tulen!

Saya bermastautin di Amerika. Melalui kebebasan di sini saya boleh baca kitab Shiah atau Ahmaddiyyah dan tidak bimbang diganggu oleh wakil jabatan Islam. Di Malaysia kita sudah diberitahu terus terang oleh ulama kita bahawa ajaran Shiah itu sesat. Baca kitab mereka dan kita akan dipenjarakan tanpa bicara, seumpama seorang komunis! Soalan yang penting, adakah prasangka demikian membawa kedamaian dan keamanan atau pertengkaran dan permusuhan antara umat Islam?

Seperti Astora Jabat, saya tanpa bermazhab. Saya masih belum tahu lagi yang mana di antara 73 puak itu yang tulen. Apa yang saya tahu ialah kealiman, kearifan, dan kebijakan tidak terhad kepada sesuatu bangsa, kaum atau mahzab. Dalam perkataan lain, saya masih lagi boleh belajar dari kaum Shia, Ismaili, Salafi, dan Wahabi, antara lain tentang kebenaran dan kemuliaan agama suci kita.

Di Hari Kemudian kita akan disoal tentang perbuatan kita di dunia. Kita tidak boleh memberi alasan bahawa perbuatan kita ialah akibat mengikut ajaran ulama itu atau mahzab ini. Agama kita teristimewa sebab tidak mempunyai kelas paderi tertentu. Kita mesti fikir sendiri. Patutkah kita ikut ajaran ulama yang menyuruh kita membencikan orang bukan Islam atau menyifatkan orang Islam yang politiknya kita tidak setujui sebagai kafir?

Balik ke pangkal, fahaman Islam saya ringkas sahaja: amali yang baik, jauhi yang jahat. Yang lain hanya contoh dan hiasan.

http://suaris.wordpress.com/2013/02/13/islam-cara-ismaili-atau-taliban-dr-bakri-musa/

Build Bridges, not burn them

February 22, 2013

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/617105

by R. Nadeswaran

EXTREMISM in any form – religious, political, cultural or even literary – has its pitfalls. The one-upmanship, the brinkmanship and the rhetoric that come with it are most of the time viewed as comic relief by right-thinking people.

But when religious zealots and political bigots join the fray provoking ordinary folk into supporting their narrow and obtrusive ideology and thoughts, the majority has to stand up and unequivocally make their position known.

Religiously-inspired actors (including politicians) add oil to the fire. Religion is intricately tied up with questions of identity and value systems. In instances where religious identities are threatened or where conflict parties adhere to different value systems, it will be harder to resolve than simple interest-based conflicts.

However, when such threats are merely perceived and are creations of one’s imagination, society has a role and must make a concerted effort to dismiss such notions even if they have to incur the wrath of the minority.

As much as right-thinking Malaysians stepped up and condemned the call to burn Bibles, a similar stand must be taken against religious bigots who launched a boycott of halal-slaughtered meat and demanded that shops clear their stocks of halal food by April.

Fortunately, no one in their right frame of mind would think the latter happened in our blessed country, but in Sri Lanka, thousands of people led by hundreds of monks of the Bodu Bala Sena, or Buddhist Force, staged a rally on Sunday demanding the government order Islamic authorities to stop issuing halal certification.

What is the justification for such a call? If madness and insanity are not the factors, then it could be psychosis or lunacy which led Buddhist monk Kirama Wimala Jothi to say: “More than 90% of the population is Buddhists, Hindus and Christian and therefore there is no justification to force them to eat halal products.” Utter bunkum!

The fact that values form the basis of every religion and that some of these values have evolved into law can and will never be challenged. Religious leaders are supposed to inculcate these values and spread the message to their flock.

Religious leaders, past and present have been in the forefront of solving conflicts instead of promoting them. In South Africa, Archbishop Desmond Tutu (pic with Nelson Mandela)played a prominent role as chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. According to Owen Frazer, of the Center for Security Studies in Zurich, the commission was inspired by Christian notions of forgiveness and reconciliation and the approach gained widespread acceptance because of the prevalence of Christian beliefs across the whole of South African society.

The roles of other religious leaders are well documented in international journals. Kenyan peace activist Dekha Ibrahim Abdi, tragically killed in a car accident two years ago, was a well-known and successful mediator and conflict resolution expert. She explicitly acknowledged the role of her Muslim faith as a motivator of her efforts and in her work she consciously combined Islamic values and approaches to conflict resolution with traditional and other approaches.

In Cambodia, the Buddhist Monk Maha Ghosananda (left), famous for his annual peace marches was a key figure in the post-communist era who helped to revive Cambodian Buddhism (which the Khmer Rouge had done their best to eradicate) and rebuild the nation state.

Why then have the leaders suddenly seen as abdicating their roles and fanning the fire? Are they doing it for materialistic gain or for political expediency? Are they saying it from their hearts or for five minutes of fame?

In every part of the world, we have seen their roles in a different light. From banning girls from going to school in Pakistan to compelling women to adorn the burkha in France, we have heard of them all.

Religious leaders are supposed to be building bridges – not burning them. Therefore, as those who have been brought up on the value-system, we have the right and must stand up to extremism of any form, failing which; we will be subjected to accepting fanatical, obsessive and fixated views. Accepted values will disintegrate and society will be subjected to mob-rule.

R. Nadeswaran continues to believe that all countries should embrace the call by the Dalai Lama for a global ethical code which would be beneficial to everyone, including people who don’t follow any particular religion. Comments: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com

‘Allah’, a non-issue really

February 16, 2013

by Bishop Paul Tan

For centuries, Christians in Islamic countries, especially in the Middle Eastern countries where Islam was born, have been using the word Allah without stirring up any storm in the tea cup.

COMMENT

The reason why I write this short article is to dispel all doubts about facts, truths and rationality in the use of the word Allah, a non-issue really. It becomes an issue when it is being politicised which is the case in Malaysia. This article is not intended to be polemical.

First, allow me to make a few introductory remarks.

(1) I do not pretend to speak for every Christian, less still for everyone. I speak for many people who do not profess the Islamic faith in Malaysia and perhaps for a number of Muslims in and out of Malaysia.

(2) I do not claim that Christians must use the word Allah. It is up to everyone in accordance to his or her conviction.

(3) I only claim for every human being the right and freedom to use any word found in any language. Upholding this principle, I personally claim that I have the right to use the word Allah.

In this present Malaysian context, it must be said explicitly: it is not that Christians want to use the word to confuse Muslims; rather, it is taking a stand that no one has the power to take away the God-given right to a human person the freedom to use whatever word he or she wants to use provided the rights of others are not being violated.

If certain Muslims in Malaysia feel that their rights are being violated, they have only to look at history to know that for centuries, Christians in Islamic countries, especially in the Middle Eastern countries where Islam was born, have been using the word Allah without stirring up any storm in the tea cup.

To say that using the word Allah may confuse the Muslims in Malaysia is tantamount to casting aspersion on them because it is accusing them of having a faith so weak that, unlike their Muslim brothers and sisters in other countries, they are easily shaken because people of other faiths use the word Allah for God. Sikhs, Bahai’s, Maltese, Mizrahi Jews, etc., use Allah. More of this later.

In the same setting, I would like to emphasise that Malaysia is a constitutional or parliamentary democracy and not a theocratic state, in concrete, an Islamic state; say what you want, the fact remains that at the inception of the Federal Constitution, our founding fathers did not want Malaysia to be an Islamic state.

Our founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman’s statement on the matter is the best testimony.

The Sultan of Selangor and the Sultan of Pahang have banned non-Muslims from using the term Allah. Our Federal Constitution does not give any sultan the power to dictate to people of other faiths what religious rules that they must follow.

People of faiths other than those of Islam have their own religious heads who govern and tell them what is right or wrong in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Facts and reasoning

My claim of human right for everyone on the use of any word from any language, in this case the word Allah, is based on the following facts and reasoning.

Allah is a pre-Islamic word used by Arabs, e.g., the Arabs in Mecca, before Prophet Muhammad was born. For these Arabs, the word, Allah, means “creator deity”. It is therefore not an Islamic creation and Muslims have no exclusive claim to it although they may and have injected into it specific nuances.

If the Holy Prophet Muhammad wanted Muslims to use a specific word with special connotations that others did not have, he would have created a new word and not use a word already used by the Arabs and Arab-Christians before his time.

Besides, Christians, Mizrahi Jews, Bahai’s, Maltese, Sikhs, and others use the same word. The Skhs have publicly proclaimed that their Holy Scriptures have used the word Allah 37 times. The Sikhs ask the rhetorical question: Are they also forbidden to read and pray their Scriptures?

This word Allah and its cognates are found in many languages. Just to give a few examples:

in Urdu/Persian/Dari/Uyshur, it is the same word, Allah; in Bengali, and in Bosnian languages, it is also Allah; in Czech and Slovak languages, it is Allach, etc.,

In the Holy Quran, it is written clearly that Jews, Christians, Sabeans worship Allah. Allow me to quote only one surah – surah 2:62: “Those who believe in the Quran and those who follow the Jewish Scriptures and the Christians and the Sabeans… who so believe in God (Allah) and the last day…

In our own country, in Sabah and Sarawak, our Bumiputera, e.g., Kadazans, Ibans, Bidahyus, Melanaus, etc., have been using the word Allah in their languages for umpteen years.

No country in the world, including the Arab countries in the Middle East and, closer to Malaysia, Indonesia, forbids non-Muslims from using the word Allah. Christians in these countries have been using it for centuries. At present, there are about 10 to 12 million Arab Christians using the word Allah for God.

If some Malaysian Muslims claim that non-Muslims cannot use the word because the Malaysian Muslims’ understanding of Allah is unique to them, then logically they are saying that the Arab Muslims also have a different understanding of Allah from their understanding because the Arab Muslims use the word Allah for God and allow Christians to use the same word.

Consequently, we would be a laughing stock of enlightened people in the world if we were to continue to make criminals of people of faiths other than those of Islam because they use the word Allah.

I have in my possession a Dutch Gospel according to St Matthew or in Malay Language, Injil Matius, in the book “Nuevve Testament.” It was translated into the Malay language in 1629. In it, the word for God is translated as Allah. There are other Christian literatures translated into the Malay language after 1629 using Allah for God.

There is only one God

Permit me to quote wholesale Malaysiakini on what lawyer Annou Xavier said:

“The May 4, 2009 order by the court, according to Annou, stated the applicant (Jilil Ireland Lawrence Bill, a Melanau Christian) be given a declaration that it is within her legitimate expectation to use the word Allah and have ownership, to obtain, use and import such materials including printing items with the word for her own practice.”

He further brought MAIS’s attention to a circular, dated April 11, 2011 and endorsed by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak himself, which stated that the government has agreed that non-Muslims may import, buy, print, distribute, read and use the bible in any language, including Bahasa Malaysia.

Further to this, although the issue is still pending on the appeal to the court of appeal, KL High Court has ruled on Dec 31 2009 that the ban on the use of the word “Allah” by people of faiths other than those of Islam is illegal.

There is only one God, call Him/Her/It whatever you want, Brahman, God, Almighty, Absolute, Allah, Shang Ti or Tian or Tian Zhu. The One Creator does not change just because we humans change the word or the meaning of the word. He is the One Creator of all creatures.

Hence, to forbid people who profess faiths other than those who profess Islam is to say that Allah is not the creator of non-Muslims.

This would indeed be a blasphemy to Allah. A greater insult would be to confine Allah to Muslims and consequently logically to admit that there are other gods, true or false, besides Him/Her/It. This would be against the very tenet of Islam that there in only one God.

God does not speak in human words. Words are created by the human mind that wants to convey to others that which he or she sees, hears, smells, touches and tastes.

From what comes through these senses, the human person extrapolates with his/her intelligence all the common features of similar things and comes up with a symbolic word, e.g., that is a “tree”.

God is spirit. The Absolute has no human body through which It comes to know. The Almighty does not speak in any human language. He/She/It is beyond and above all limited human language.

Why must one pray in a particular language, be it in Latin or in Arabic or in Pali, etc.,? This human rule seems to say that God or Allah can only understand that one language. This is tantamount to limiting the power of God to being able to understand only one language.

It is also equivalent to saying that there are other gods who can understand other languages. It defeats the basic belief of the monotheist religions that believe that there is only one god, one god, creator of all things.

Hence, to limit that absolute being to any human word would be equivalent to making Him/Her/It a human being. This is what we humans say: “to anthropomorphise” the Absolute Almighty. It would be an insult to make Him/Her/It less than what IS.

From the above, it is clear that to forbid anyone from using any word for that Absolute Almighty is to fall into irrationality and absurdity. It is against all reasoning, all facts and truths.

Bishop Paul Tan is the immediate past president of the Catholics Bishops’ Conference of Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei

Note: if you have the time and patience please read this: http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2272&catid=78

Malaysia has a Cat among Pigeons not a Nelson Mandela

January 13, 2013

by The Ice Cream Seller @http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

In the last few weeks, I have been prodded enough to awaken my few and far between bouts of commenting on issues here. The bile and venom that spews out of one man is enough to awaken a grizzly bear from hibernation.

As I thought about it, I also thought of Nelson Mandela (left) (can someone please tell Ibrahim Ali that he is not a footballer playing in the African Nations Cup?). How blessed South Africa is to have such a statesman and what did we do to have a cat among the pigeons?

Then I thought back to the days towards  the end of Apartheid when I first set foot on the African continent and what it was like then and now. At that time, Mandela was the rage.

Also at the time, our then Prime Minister was also riding high, but somehow, it always seemed that hands down, Mandela was it. The man. The hero. Now both are past leaders. One is revered in retirement and the other, working feverishly as a “dalang”.

Let’s examine some aspects of each based on their actions, qualities and achievements, and from there, a reader ought to distinguish the one with the broad shoulders and the one with a chip on his shoulder.

Jail

One spent a considerable time in jail in Robben Island. The other sent a considerable number to jail all over the country.

Revenge and Separation

After Apartheid (can someone please tell Ibrahim Ali that it is not the name of some kuih?), Mandela worked tirelessly for reconciliation. A truth and reconciliation commission was set up.

At the televised proceedings, white Police personnel and Army officers broke down and wept when confessing their misdeeds. Likewise the black community, whether they were from the ANC or not. They sought forgiveness and forgiveness was largely given. The price of the terrible acts they committed was the weight of their conscience.

Here, we can’t even allow Chin Peng to return home. Unlike the Malaysian Bali bombers, Chin Peng (right) fought for independence though his ideology was different in terms of what we felt should be, post Merdeka.

On the contrary, our exported terrorists have their bodies brought home in RMAF aircraft and we are so humane as to fly their relatives or spouses to accompany the bodies home.

Whilst Apartheid was dismantled, our NEPartheid grew and flourishes till today ― separate schools, separate examinations, university placements, civil service intakes, promotions in the various government agencies and bodies, separate mutual funds, separate plates, separate cups, scholarships, housing discounts, loan schemes, set apart cities (Putrajaya, Shah Alam, Bangi), etc.

Forgiveness vs Revenge

Mandela was able to forgive those who put him in jail ― even the wardens became his friends. He earned their respect and made them see the error of their ways and value system.

He could sit and talk with FW de Klerk (the then leader) and de Klerk ― though a political opponent ― could see the larger picture through humane eyes that Apartheid was wrong. He could also see the measure of the man in Mandela. A white Afrikaneer (please tell Ibrahim Ali that it is not a type of cheese) that I knew told me that he was so proud of what he referred to as “my president”. To come from someone of the opposite divide and to say so with such pride was something to hear and behold

Here we are being taught and brainwashed against the perils of imaginary enemies. And our enemies are everywhere ― Jews, Christians, pendatangs, gays, lesbians, Singapore, Valentine’s Day, Bibles, etc, etc.

Odium and disdain

One is a revered statesman and hugely popular, even amongst past political opponents. The other (right) is looked upon in utter contempt and disdain bar the life members of the racist NGO, PERKASA, where he is the patron.

Rugby World Cup

Years back, South Africa hosted the Rugby World Cup. At that time, it was almost entirely played by the whites and the challenge was to get the best team to play for the new Rainbow nation.

Mandela realised that this was something that would help cement the nation’s peoples. He called for the captain ― a white ― and had tea with him in the Presidential Palace. It didn’t matter to the President that he was white and that nearly all the team would be white.

The equivalent of PERKASA was screaming that the black players should be the majority. Mandela reasoned that they should not take away what was so important to them (the white population ) ― Rugby ― and his view prevailed.  Bottom line: They won the World Cup with nearly all their players white and sweating blood and guts to bring glory to their country and the event was a great advertisement for their country.

Here, what were multiracial teams for football, hockey, rugby that represented the nation are reduced to mono-ethnic camps. Almost every sports association has been politicised and consequently, the spirit of the nation has been crushed under the tidal wave of NEPartheid.

Our best years in football had the likes of Chin Aun (left), Mokhtar Dahari, Choon Wah,  Santokh Singh, M. Chandran, James Wong, Spiderman Arumugam, Chow Chee Keong, etc. The hockey team that came in 4th at the 1975 World Cup was only unusual in that every race was present except a Punjabi!! Where have all the so-called “pendatangs” gone in team sports?

Diversity

South Africa is made up of many indigenous peoples. Add to that the migrant Asians, white settlers and other neighbouring African states. Today, they celebrate their diversity and are called the Rainbow Nation.

Here, we threaten pendatangs with revocation of citizenship. Even the word pendatang, which I never really heard in my school days in the 70s, has gained considerable currency so much so I am quite nonchalant to define myself as a pendatang even though I am “Genpentiga (Generasi Pendatang Tiga)”.

Pribumi, Bumiputera (all imported words from India by the way) are singled out at the expense of people of migrant descent. Unfortunately, the singular defining factor of separation in our land has been for sometime now along the lines of religion ― diversity can be accepted provided religion is the same.

Genuine warmth

When Madiba ( as Mandela is affectionately known), the smile radiates warmth. There is no venom in his smile. When Madiba laughs, it is a hearty laugh. Madiba does not snigger.

Confidence vs Insecurity

When Mandela speaks or walks, there is an air of authority, presence and confidence. Despite all the years spent in jail, he never thought of payback time by clinging on the reins of power. Equally, he was able to entrust his political foes with the reins of power. On one occasion, he appointed a political opponent, a tribal chief ― Mangosuthu Butolezi ― as the President whilst he was away from office. Mangosuthu Butolezi was a Zulu chief.

Can we envisage a situation where a Karpal Singh or a Lim Kit Siang is given the reins even for a few hours?

Chiefs of national institutions

During Mandela’s tenure (though not necessarily during its entirety), he showed he could govern with a robust Opposition, a Judiciary and Police force headed by whites. Compare that to the situation here ― where they were either sacked or retired off. Magnanimity, grace, compassion and exemplary leadership compared to deceit, lust, jealousy, greed and insecurity all rolled into one.

Post retirement

Madiba does a lot for charity and in his early years of retirement, was a sought after peace maker throughout the African continent. He lives is a relatively modest residence and does not involve himself in the pits and gutters of politics.

He does not promote his children to higher office ― certainly not at the expense of and detriment to others. More than anything, he is a powerful symbol of unity despite there being no such thing as “1 South Africa”.

Noble Peace Prize

South Africa can stand proud and tall as a nation that two of its leaders ― from opposite sides of the political divide ― were recognised for their efforts in forging peace and dismantling Apartheid by the award of the Noble Peace Prize. Unfortunately, here, opponents are ostracised and those who are not get awards from PERKASA

To the younger readers you will note that in many parts above, I only allude to Mandela. To elucidate on our equivalent situation will only add to your despair and grief. So I will spare you that.

* Ice Cream Seller reads The Malaysian Insider

Jocelyn On the Significance of Nik Aziz’s Visit to Karpal Singh

January 30, 2013

by Jocelyn Tan @http://www.thestar.com.my

Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat made a significant visit to Karpal Singh’s house on Thaipusam day but behind the big smiles and the birthday cake for the PAS leader is the message that PAS is not quitting the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.

KARPAL Singh was still taking his bath when Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat and his entourage arrived at his house in Penang’s Western Road. It was the first time that the PAS leader was calling on the DAP leader, and everyone in the house was quite thrilled.

“My wife was banging on the bathroom door telling me to hurry up, that he is already here, he is inside the house. I think Nik Aziz must have heard it as well,” said the DAP chairman.

Nik Aziz, accompanied by Penang PAS commissioner Datuk Salleh Man, was about 15 minutes early although Karpal’s house lies smack along the kavadi route of the Thaipusam festivities.

The meeting of these two long-time adversaries is still the talk of their party supporters today. Some loved it that the two men looked so cosy and congenial in the company of each other. Although both men had exchanged sharp words in the past, they greeted one another with megawatt smiles and held on to each others’ hands.

To Karpal, Nik Aziz is “the old man” (said fondly); after all, Karpal is only 72 to Nik Aziz’s 82 years. But others, especially some in PAS, were unsure what to make of it because Karpal has been a leading critic of PAS’ Islamic policies. This is the very same man who had declared “over my dead body” to PAS’ goal of setting up an Islamic state in Malaysia.

In fact, many in PAS think that Karpal ranks up there with MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek when it comes to criticising the theocratic policies of PAS. Let’s just say the two men are not the best loved figures among PAS members.

Harakahdaily played up the event, splashing photographs of Nik Aziz cutting a birthday cake surrounded by Karpal’s family and several other Pakatan Rakyat MPs and state assemblymen.

Utusan Malaysia also gave it the front-page treatment in its Monday edition, with the heading: “Hari jadi Nik Aziz di raikan dirumah Karpal Singh” (Nik Aziz’s birthday celebrated in Karpal Singh’s house). In fact, PAS dominated Utusan Malaysia’s front page that day because the lead story was “Nasharudin dipecat” — it was a report on PAS sacking its former deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa from its Syura Council.

Nik Aziz had turned 82 on January 10. His birthday cake was custom-made — it had the emblems of the three Pakatan parties and the words “Selamat Hari Jadi Tok Guru”.

Karpal on his part looked thrilled to bits. The fiery politician has seen it all but this was something else. He recognised the significance of this influential leader coming to his house as Hindus passed by outside, shouting “Vel! Vel!” in praise of the deity.

“It was nice of him to come. We have our differences but we get along. My feelings even before this have been quite warm. He is one of those people whom you cannot hate, he exudes friendliness,” said Karpal.

“We went into Parliament together in 1978, you know. I remember he sat beside me.”

No one in PAS can quite recall the Mursyidul Am ever celebrating his birthday, let alone cut a birthday cake. Apparently, the more conservative segment of PAS thinks that celebrating birthdays is a western practice that they would rather not emulate.

But Nik Aziz is the ultimate consummate politician. The fact that he agreed to go to Karpal’s home on no less than on Thaipusam day says a lot about the man. It was a risky political move and only someone of his extended years and stature could dare do it.

But it was less of a birthday celebration than about sending out signals to those watching. Nik Aziz was basically telling his audience that although PAS and DAP differed regarding the thorny kalimah Allah issue, he was not above calling on its top leader.

Later in the afternoon, he met with the new Catholic Church head for the Penang diocese, Bishop Sebastian Francis (left). The meeting was just as cordial and Nik Aziz even presented the Bishop with a cake ringed with cherries.

This time, his message was that although PAS is against the use of the term Allah in Christian Bibles, PAS leaders could still sit down and talk with Christian leaders.

Politically speaking, Nik Aziz is trying to portray a moderate image for PAS and to reach out to the middle ground, especially among the Chinese community. Hence, his visit to the house of a DAP leader.

The kalimah Allah has damaged Pakatan, particularly given that it has placed PAS on one side and DAP and PKR on the other. They are the proverbial “strange bedfellows” still living in the same house but in different bedrooms and they want to persuade voters that they are still together despite differences on this fundamental matter.

But Nik Aziz is probably aware that people inside and outside his party are bound to see all this as yet another instance of PAS dancing to DAP’s tune. But PAS needs DAP’s help to hold on to its seats in the west coast.

Critics in PAS said all these gestures benefit DAP more than their own party. They think that reaching out to Karpal is a waste of time because it is not going to change him and they are probably right.

Karpal is still enjoying the warm buzz from the visit but he said: “My stand on hudud law and the Islamic state remains the same, visit or no visit. What needs to be heard, has to be said.”

Bridge builders stand down Book Burners

January 29, 2013

by Terence Netto (01-28-13) @http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT It was a weekend fraught with anxiety over what some pyromaniacs had threatened to do. In the event, it turned out to be an occasion when meaningful symbolism triumphed as incendiary intent fizzled out – and the rest of the country breathed a little easier.

The children of light had triumphed over the children of darkness – that was the essential story of the weekend just past. Whom and what did it take for this to happen?

It took imagination by some leaders and constructive thinking by ordinary people for the triumph – albeit, temporary – of the nobler impulses over the baser instincts of man.

Rarely have such disparate symbolic gestures, like the birthday celebration of a durable leader, and the quiet reading and contemplation of scriptural texts by a host of ordinary people, combined to provide an appraising public with the liberating possibilities that a creative imagination affords.

Perkasa firebrand Ibrahim Ali (left) had set the stage for dire possibility two weeks ago with his call to Malays to burn Malay-language bibles that used the term ‘Allah’ for God.

That incendiary call prompted a welter of reaction but none was publicly forthcoming from leaders rhetorically invested in the paths of moderation.

Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum. Predictably, Ibrahim’s call, seemingly safe from interdiction by the powers-that-be, drew an anonymous respondent to post an invitation to the public to witness a burning of bibles on January 27 at a public venue on mainland Penang.Fortunately, not everyone took the threat in supine fashion.

Nik Aziz meets Karpal

The ecumenical Mujahid Yusof Rawa, the PAS MP for Parit Buntar and his party’s pointman for their outreach programme to non-Muslims, had been working for a long time to counter just the kind of fear mongering at which Ibrahim Ali is a dab hand.

Mujahid, in cahoots with comrades in PKR and DAP in Penang, contrived to have PAS spiritual leader Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat meet up with DAP chairperson Karpal Singh at the latter’s home, which is located in the thick of the Thaipusam festivity yesterday along Waterfall Road in Penang.

Sunday, Jan 27, happened to be the Kelantan Menteri Besar’s 82nd birthday.  Karpal, who has recently been the target of criticism by some ulama in PAS over the former’s appeal to them to reconsider their stance on the ‘Allah’ issue, was pleasantly surprised by the visit to his house by Nik Aziz, the birthday man himself.

They reminisced on a past when they first became colleagues in 1978 on the Opposition benches in Parliament, Karpal representing Jelutong in Penang, and Nik Aziz turning out for Pengkalan Chepa in Kelantan.

“His presence sends a strong message that our unity is as strong as ever, despite all that happened,” chimed a happy Karpal.

A cake for the prelate

After that visit to Karpal, Nik Aziz met up with the Catholic bishop of Penang, Sebastian Francis, at a hotel where he presented a cake to the prelate.

The meeting was not originally on Nik Aziz’s schedule but was arranged spontaneously, as a counterpoint no doubt, to the threatened bible-burning event that did not take place.

Bishop Francis told a frail-looking Nik Aziz that the country’s needs his spiritual example, a sentiment that Ibrahim Ali would likely disagree.

Elsewhere in the country, at a park within the vicinity of the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, a small crowd of people, who could not have known about the ecumenical goings-on between DAP and PAS in the north and between Islamic and Christian leaders, flopped down on the grass to read spiritual books they have brought along to the collective read-in.

One of them, a Muslim named Masjaliza Hamzah (right), brought a Bible and read from it. She said, “Other people may be worried for me, but I am not worried about my own faith.”

The thought here echoes with some resonant lines from the poet William Blake: “In every cry of man/In every infant’s cry of fear/In every voice, in every ban/The mind-forged manacles I hear.”

Yesterday, spiritual and lay leaders in Penang and in Kuala Lumpur, acted out gestures whose striking panache helped breach the ‘mind-forged manacles’ that the book-burning crowd want people to be shackled with.

Pakatan holds fast on ‘Allah’ Issue

January 28, 2013

by Terence Netto (01-27-13) @www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT Amid the cacophony that followed hard upon PERKASA chief Ibrahim Ali’s call to Muslims to burn Bibles that use the ‘Allah’ term for God, one was hard put to find a reaction and a reminder more bracing than what emerged from the Penang state minister for religion.

(Dato’) Abdul Malik Abul Kassim, the PKR state assemblyperson who has been holding the sensitive religious portfolio in the DAP-led Pakatan Rakyat state government since 2008, was quoted earlier this week as saying:

“We are told not to kick, throw or burn any holy book. Those who want to do these acts are discrediting Islam in the eyes of the world.”

Nothing very profound about this reminder by a politician of quietly effective and often under appreciated capability, but still, putting it alongside the screeching of other respondents to the controversy, Malik’s counsel is one of irenic content and bracing effect.

It puts you in mind of some lines from ‘If’, Rudyard Kipling’s famous poem: “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs …” Introspection is not exactly a strong suit of believers, which makes Malik Kassim’s impulse to look within his religion before declaiming on what would be appropriate or unbecoming conduct commendable indeed.

To be sure, Malik’s was not uncommon or exceptional deportment on the controversial topic of the use of ‘Allah’ in Malay-language bibles. Generally, the PKR national leadership cohort have held to the middle octaves in the cacophony that arose after Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng in his Christmas Day message called on the federal government to allow the use of the term ‘Allah’ in Malay-language bibles in Malaysian Borneo.

They pushed for a revisit of the Pakatan consensus on the issue, enunciated in January 2010, which resolved that the term was not exclusive to Muslims.

This was a courageous position to take in the teeth of arson attacks on churches and incidents of desecration of mosques that occurred in the month of January in 2010, following a High Court decision that allowed the Catholic Church’s weekly publication, Herald, to use the term in its Bahasa Malaysia edition.

PKR adviser and Pakatan supremo Anwar Ibrahim hosted a series of learned discussions on the issue before steering the opposition coalition to a consensus on the issue. This decision dovetailed nicely with the reigning consensus in Arab and other Muslim-majority countries where the term is not regarded as exclusive to the Islamic religion.

Consensus breaks down

However, this consensus broke down last month in the wake of Lim’s call for ‘Allah’ to be allowed in Malay-language bibles that Christians use as their scriptural texts in Sabah and Sarawak.

Pakatan component, PAS, publicly demurred with Lim and this led to a fraying of the consensus before an uneasy armistice prevailed which saw PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang declaring, in an agreement worked out under Pakatan’s auspices that, to wit, the term was not exclusive to Muslims but that non-Muslims must be careful not to abuse its usage.

The theologians in his party, however, disagreed: the PAS syura council, the highest policy-making body in the party, deemed the term permissible for use by non-Muslims only when employed in reference to a ‘Supreme Being’. Subtle nuances tend to be squashed in the heat of partisan volleys. And when the philistines wade in, as Ibrahim Ali of Malay right-wing group PERKAS did, the tensions were inevitably heightened.

But through it all, there was no wavering on the part of corporate Pakatan. The coalition reiterated the consensus they reached three years ago while taking note of the seeming dissent voiced by PAS’ theologians.

Agreeing to disagree without schismatic tendencies has become an accepted rule of engagement within the coalition. It would have helped if Anwar had come out a little sooner with his condemnation of Ibrahim’s bible-burning threat.

However, his reiteration of an assurance he gave three years ago when the ‘Allah’ issue first flared in the national arena, was noteworthy: he said Pakatan would protect the sanctity of all religions in this country.

That reiteration (Anwar’s)  and Malik Kassim’s emphasis on what he said was requisite behaviour of Muslims towards the sacred books of other believers are reflections of a way of looking at the diversity of religious beliefs that conduces to peaceful resolution of conflict rather than its heightening.

The Chief Constable and his warnings

January 27, 2013

by SakmongkolAK47 @http://sakmongkol.blogspot.com/

Politicians and civil servants are saying a lot about religion nowadays. The Malaysian IGP or equivalent to UK’s Chief Constable has come out warning those who make fun of religion and racial issues.

He says doing that can create hostilities and disunite the country. We agree with him fully. He should use whatever powers he has to haul these people in without fear or favour.

So why are the Police slow in taking up action against Ibrahim Ali? This fellow has made seditious calls for Malaysian Muslims to seize and burn bibles. He should have been called the instance he uttered those words. Are we waiting for some bonfires somewhere before action is taken?

Then, representatives from the NGO which Ibrahim heads deny any knowledge of a planned bible burning event in Penang. Having thrown the stones, you hide your inciminating hands.Why has Penang been singled out? Penang which is headed by a non-Muslim, allocates more than RM60 million a year for Muslim affairs. It has increased allowance for mosque and surau officials. Gave money to Quran reciters. And so on and so forth.

PERKASA as the self-appointed guardian of all things Malay, Islam and the King should congratulate Penang rather than turning Penang into a Bible burning venue. If PERKASA wants to burn Bibles, it should choose Seremban. The Chief Minister there, a Malay and a Muslim, can only manage to give RM10 million allocation. The same amount he asked one money changer to send over to UK.

But back to the IGP. Having declared it, he must translate his talk into action. Please arrest Chua Soi Lek for making fun and mocking Islam at his MCA General Assembly late last year. The whole of Muslim Malaysia heard what he said. Soi Lek has made so many disparaging remarks about Islam.

PERKASA was silent on the things Soi Lek said about Islam and in fact condoned and agreed to what Soi Lek said. Maybe Ibrahim Ali needs to be arrested too because he has said that one of the reasons why Malays and Muslims lagged behind in business is because Islam is inhibitive.

Please also arrest Najib Tun Razak for being physically present in the event where Soi Lek uttered those words. Later Najib also endorsed what Soi Lek said. Please arrest Mahathir for saying that if Allah has not chosen Muhammad to be the Messenger of Islam, He would have chosen someone else. That’s blasphemous.

Otherwise the public will interpret that Ismail Omar’s statements were only directed to those opposed to UMNO’s interpretation of Islam. To Muslims please read Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:57 (f0r clear image of this verse please one image below).

” O you who have believed, take not those who have taken your religion in ridicule and amusement among the one who were given the Scripture before you nor the disbelievers as allies. And fear Allah, if you should [truly] be believers.”

After reading that, will they still want to support Najib? – as long as I am PM, we will not implement Islamic laws. Will they continue to believe what Mahathir says?