Thanks, Zainah Anwar, for Your 2017 Toast to living honestly


December 5, 2017

Thanks, Zainah Anwar, for Your  2017 Toast to living honestly

by Zainah Anwar@www.thestar.com.my

Image result for Zainah Anwar

So to all those reading this column, do not allow regrets to paralyse your life. There is still time to make the choices you need to make to live the life you want, and not what others expect of you. So, here’s to a new year of living honestly.–Zainah Anwar

AS 2017 comes to a close and we head into yet another new year, I want to share this discussion I heard on radio on the subject of regret. It was based on a book by an Australian palliative care nurse, Bronnie Ware, on The Top Five Regrets of the Dying.

The pain of those regrets were so huge that she said she knew she did not want to end up like that. It made so much sense and I thought what a good way to start the new year with a new resolve to live life with courage and to make conscious choices to make it worth living.

According to Ware, the most common regret of the dying is their lack of courage to live a life true to themselves, not the life others expected of them.

Image result for On Wisdom from Socrates

This was the most painful regret because as they looked back, they realised that their lives were shaped and defined by others, and their dreams were unfulfilled because of the choices they had made, or not made. And the older you are, the more your regrets centre on the choices not made.

You regret because this was something that was within your control, but you made those choices to make others happy, instead of you happy.

Some years ago, I heard a radio interview with a gay rights activist who was pressured for years by his father to give up being gay (as if that was a choice) and to get married and have children.

One day, in yet another fight with his father, he said: “How many people must be unhappy in order for you to be happy?”

I thought that was a profound statement. Indeed, it was that statement that finally made his father see the light and accepted his son’s sexual identity. I admired him for his courage and honesty to be persistent and frank with his father and to make that difficult decision to be true to himself.

The second most common regret is, “I wish I hadn’t worked so hard”. I guess few people die wishing they had worked harder.

It seems this regret afflicted mostly men who missed out on their children’s youth and the companionship of their wives. They regretted that they had not honoured other aspects of their lives, like care giving and being there for their loved ones.

It’s good to know that many younger men these days make the time to care for their children and actually find joy in that.

Some friends even have regular “date nights” with their husbands, making sure that just the two of them go out for dinner to talk – to catch up with each other’s thoughts and feelings and ideas and plans.

The third most common regret is one that I thought only afflicted emotionally repressed Asians. But it seems everyone wishes they had the courage to voice their feelings. I bet many more women expressed this regret than men as women often suppress their feelings in order to keep peace with others.

These regrets are mostly over relationships. They regret for not speaking up in their own defence and not treating themselves with the kindness they deserve. They regret for not telling their children, partners, friends how much they loved them. They regret staying in, or leaving, or not pursuing relationships.

Such regrets can do damage to body and mind. At best, you feel like punching yourself for not having the courage to speak out against a hurt, an injustice; at worst people develop illnesses and suffer chronic stress because of bitterness and resentment bottled up for months, years or lifetimes.

Whenever I am angry or upset, I will always ask myself if this person or this incident is worth my time and my emotion getting livid over

Most of the time they are not; and if they are, I will set a time limit to my negative feelings. Usually not more than three days. Then life must go on. Either get the feeling out of your system, or get that toxic person out of your life. Although, I must admit that for those with spouses, this is easier said than done.

An activist friend who works with single mothers said she regretted crying for three years over the breakdown of her marriage. In hindsight, the man was worth just three days of tears. And she should have gotten on with her new life much earlier.

The fourth most common regret is, “I wish I had stayed in touch with my friends.” Families naturally go into grief in the presence of loved ones dying. But Ware said that person actually wants to live as fully as they can. They want joy brought to the bed, they want to hear laughter, and birds singing.

They want to know what’s going on outside. They don’t want to stop living until the body stops breathing. Old friends tell stories of a past their adult children are not a part of and this brings joy to the dying.

But there are friends who don’t know what to say to a dying person, except look on with grief that the person’s life is coming to an end.

Image result for socrates on death

I remember my father who passed away two months short of his 100th birthday expressing indignation when his surau friends came to visit and sat there in silence and sorrow.

When they left, he turned to me and said, “Do they think I am dying?” He still wanted to live and to know what’s going on in the outside world.

The fifth regret, says Ware, is a surprising one: “I wish that I had let myself be happier.” Many did not realise until the end that happiness is a choice, that life is a choice; and they did not exercise the choices they could have made.

Fear of change had them pretending to others, and to themselves, that they were content, that things were all right, when deep within, they longed to laugh heartily and loudly and feel a lightness of being.

We feel the biggest regrets over things that are within our control. That is why it is such a negative emotion.

So to all those reading this column, do not allow regrets to paralyse your life. There is still time to make the choices you need to make to live the life you want, and not what others expect of you. So, here’s to a new year of living honestly.

Malaysian train on wrong track, says tycoon Kuok in memoir


November 27, 2017

Malaysian train on wrong track, says tycoon Kuok in his memoir

https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/24454/

Image result for Tunku  and Tan Siew Sin

TYCOON Robert Kuok has released his autobiography in Hong Kong and Singapore today, detailing his thoughts on Malaysia and his relationship with its Prime Ministers.

The South China Morning Post (SCMP), which Kuok once owned, released excerpts of his memoir today.

IN the 376-page “Robert Kuok, A Memoir”, the 54th richest man in the world, according to Bloomberg, said he had known all of Malaysia’s six Prime Ministers and shared how he saw Malaysia’s trajectory as far back as 1969.

Tunku – chief trustee of a nation

Kuok, who is also ranked Malaysia’s richest man, said first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman was a well-educated law graduate with “tremendous rhythm”.

Image result for Tunku  and Tan Siew SinTunku was brilliant, and very shrewd. And he had that touch of Thai shrewdness, an ability to smell and spot whether a man was to be trusted or not. –Robert Kuok

 

“If you talk of brains, Tunku was brilliant, and very shrewd. His mother was Thai, and he had that touch of Thai shrewdness, an ability to smell and spot whether a man was to be trusted or not.

“Tunku was less mindful about administrative affairs. But he had a good number two in Tun (Abdul) Razak (Hussein), who was extremely industrious, and Tunku left most of the paperwork to Razak.”

The 94-year-old said Tunku had many friends but he would not adopt cronies.

“His friends sometimes helped him, or they sent him a case of champagne or slabs of specially imported steak. He loved to grill steaks on his lawn and open champagne, wine or spirits. Tunku would also do favours for his friends, but he never adopted cronies.

“When Tan Siew Sin was Finance Minister, Tunku sent him a letter about a Penang businessman who was one of Tunku’s poker-playing buddies. It seems the man had run into tax trouble and was being investigated by the tax department, and he had turned to Tunku for help.

Image result for Tunku  and Tan Siew Sin

 

“In his letter, Tunku wrote, ‘You know so-and-so is my friend. I am not asking any favours of you, Siew Sin, but I am sure you can see your way to forgiving him,’ or something to that effect.”

But Kuok said Siew Sin was upset and marched into Dr. Ismail (Abdul Rahman)’s office to complain.

Image result for Tun Dr. Ismail

“Ismail took the letter, crumpled it into a ball and threw it into the waste-paper basket. He then said, ‘Siew Sin, Tunku has done his duty by his friend. Now, by ignoring Tunku, you will continue to do your duty properly’,” Kuok said.

“That was as far as Tunku would go to help a friend. Cronyism is different. Cronies are lapdogs who polish a leader’s ego. In return, the leader hands out national favours to them.

“A nation’s assets, projects and businesses should never be for anyone to hand out, neither for a king nor a prime minister. A true leader is the chief trustee of a nation. If there is a lack of an established system to guide him, his fiduciary sense should set him on the proper course.”

Kuok said a leader who practised cronyism justified his actions by doing everything necessary to achieve his ends.

A different man after 1969

Kuok said Tunku was a different man after the May 13 race riots. Tunku felt he had helped the country gain independence and had ruled as wisely as he could, yet, the Malays turned on him for purportedly selling out to the Chinese, said Kuok.

“In fairness to Tunku, he had done nothing of the sort. He was a very fair man who loved the nation and its people. But he knew that, if you favour one group, you only spoil them. When the British ruled Malaya, they extended certain advantages to the Malays.

“When the Malays took power following independence on August 31, 1957, more incentives were given to them. But there was certainly no showering of favours.”

Kuok said everything changed after 1969 due to extremist Malays attributing their poverty to plundering Chinese and Indians.

“The more thoughtful leaders were shunted aside and the extremists hijacked power. They chanted the same slogans as the hotheads – the Malays are underprivileged; the Malays are bullied – while themselves seeking to become super-rich.

“When these Malays became rich, not many of them did anything for the poor Malays; the Chinese and Indians who became rich created jobs, many of them filled by Malays.”

Pro-Malay Malaysia

Kuok said prior to 1969 the government would open tenders and if a company worked hard, it would succeed “eight or nine times out of 10”.

“But things were changing, veering more and more towards cronyism and favouritism.”

Kuok said Malay leaders were quite reasonable in running the country and gave Malays an advantage at times.

“Then, when they see that they have overdone it, they try to redress the problem. Their hearts are in the right place, but they just cannot see their way out of their problems. Since May 13, 1969, the Malay leadership has had one simple philosophy: the Malays need handicapping. Now, what amount of handicapping?”

Closing the gap but opening new wounds

Kuok said Malaysia’s zeal to narrow the wealth gap between the races caused even more racism.

“As a Chinese who was born and grew up in Malaysia, and went to school with the Malays, I was saddened to see the Malays being misled in this way. I felt that, in their haste to bridge the economic gap between the Chinese and the Malays, harmful shortcuts were being taken. One of the side effects of their zeal to bridge the economic gap was that racism became increasingly ugly.

“I saw very clearly that the path being pursued by the new leaders after 1969 was dangerous. But hardly anyone was willing to listen to me.”

Hussein Onn and the three sons

Image result for Tun Hussein Onn

 

Kuok said his father and Hussein Onn’s father, Onn Jaafar had known each other since the 1930s. Kuok and Hussein were even classmates at one time.

And he told the third Prime Minister to use the best Malaysians for the job regardless of race, colour and creed before he took over.

“You’re going to be the leader of a nation, and you have three sons, Hussein. The firstborn is Malay, the second-born is Chinese, the third-born is Indian. What we have been witnessing is that the firstborn is more favoured than the second or third. Hussein, if you do that in a family, your eldest son will grow up very spoiled.

“As soon as he attains manhood, he will be in the nightclubs every night. The second and third sons, feeling the discrimination, will grow up hard as nails.

“Please, Hussein, use the best brains, the people with their hearts in the right place, Malaysians of total integrity and strong ability, hard-working and persevering people. Use them regardless of race, colour or creed.

“The other way, Hussein, the way your people are going – excessive handicapping of Bumiputeras, showering love on your first son – your firstborn is going to grow up with an attitude of entitlement.”

Kuok said Hussein was quiet for a while and after that he said: “No, Robert. I cannot do it. The Malays are now in a state of mind such that they will not accept it.”

He clearly spelt out to me that, it was going to be Malay rule, said Kuok.

“I felt disappointed, but there was nothing more that I could do. Hussein was an honest man of very high integrity. Before going to see him, I had weighed his strength of character, his shrewdness and skill. We had been in the same class, sharing the same teachers.

“I knew Hussein was going to be the Malaysian Prime Minister whom I was closest to in my lifetime. I think Hussein understood my message, but he knew that the process had gone too far.

“I had seen a picture developing all along of a train moving in the wrong direction. During Hussein’s administration, he was only partially successful in stemming the tide. The train of the nation had been put on the wrong track. Hussein wasn’t strong enough to lift up the train and set it down on the right track.” – November 25, 2017.

‘Robert Kuok, A Memoir’ will be available in Hong Kong exclusively at Bookazine and in Singapore at all major bookshops from November 25. It will be released in Malaysia on December 1 and in Indonesia on January 1.

https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/24454/



Ops Lalang: Dr. Mahathir’s Legacy, lest We Malaysians Forget


October 28, 2017

Ops Lalang: Dr. Mahathir’s Legacy, lest We Malaysians Forget

COMMENT | I remember vividly the day when Dr Mahathir Mohamad, then Prime Minister cum home minister, revoked the publication licenses of two dailies, The Star and Sin Chew Jit Poh, and weekly newspaper Watan on October 27, 1987.

Just earlier on that day, opposition leaders Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang, as well as Chinese educationist Lim Fong Seng and Kua Kia Soong had been arrested under the notorious Internal Security Act (ISA).

Image result for Ops Lalang

At 18, I was old enough to appreciate Mahathir’s autocratic act.

Shell-shocked and in disbelief, I reached for the phone and called Sin Chew‘s head office in Petaling Jaya. The guy answering my call couldn’t tell me what was really going on other than that there would not be any Sin Chew newspapers in circulation the following day and suggested that I wait for further developments.

Image result for mahathir and anwar

Anwar and Mahathir’s Requiem for Malaysia– a little too late. But an apology is required from Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

It was a sleepless night for me. Never a fan of Mahathir and growing angrier at the hawkish rhetoric of Anwar Ibrahim, then Education Minister who was widely seen as equally responsible for the crackdown, I had vowed never to support Umno/BN for the rest of my life.

Things became worse the next day as the Mahathir regime spread its dragnet far and wide. Soon, I learned that another well respected Chinese educationist, Sim Mok Yu, was also detained. In total, 106 Malaysians of different ethnic backgrounds became the immediate victims of what came to be infamously known as Operasi Lalang.

Sim was already 74 years old at the time; which politician would subject an increasingly frail septuagenarian to arbitrary detention and constant fear, except for one who was heartless and power-hungry?

It was no doubt the nadir of Malaysian politics since May 13, 1969.

Outraged and feeling helpless, few classmates and I paid a visit to the staff at Sin Chew Jit Poh’s office in Jalan Maju Jaya, Johor Bahru and offered our moral support.

One Mr Foo received us and kindly advised us to focus on our studies and leave politics to others.

“The time will come for you to shoulder your responsibility as citizens of Malaysia.” Mr Foo said gently.

The rest is history.

Operasi Lalang indeed marked my political awakening. If more than 100 ordinary citizens who had done nothing more than exercise their civil rights could be detained without trial, what guarantee would there be for me to live in this country with dignity and pride?

Later on, I read from books and articles how the Operasi Lalang detainees and their family members suffered mentally and emotionally – parents, siblings, spouses, children all living in profound fear with no certainty over the future. What a heavy price to pay to speak up for injustices, I thought to myself.

After 30 years, Mahathir finally admitted that Operasi Lalang was meant to win elections, but at whose expense?

Image result for kua kia soong detained under ISA in 1987

When the remnants of Pakatan Rakyat decided to form an alliance with Mahathir more than a year ago, many saw it as a historic opportunity to defeat Umno in the next election, but I was among the very few who actually thought they were going to be beset with a host of challenges and internal feuds.

The reason is simple – Mahathir has too many skeletons in his closet and Harapan leaders just cannot attack Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak without some of the issues rebounding at them.

For instance, one risks being reminded of the lop-sided deals on Mahathir’s watch when one chastises Najib for toll hikes on highways.

And how can Harapan accuse the judges of being beholden to Najib yet expect the public to not remember how Mahathir sacked six supreme court judges in one go and subjected the judiciary to parliamentary rule?

Which is perhaps why Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong, once critical of Mahathir’s obsession with our national car project, now chooses not so subtly to overlook Mahathir’s role in making Malaysia a car-dependent society with haphazard public transportation systems nationwide.

Lim Kit Siang used to call for Mahathir to own up to Operasi Lalang, and vociferously so, but has since fallen silent. Does he think Malaysians are malleable and stupid to not see it as being opportunistic?

How ironic, that an Operasi Lalang victim like Kua Kia Soong is derided as being ‘naïve’, ‘vengeful’ and ‘makan dedak whenever he writes of the need for Mahathir to face up to his political sins.

Don’t the detractors know Kua is also the one who untiringly pursued Najib for an answer for the dodgy Scorpene-class submarine deals and the tragic death of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu?

What is wrong if a former ISA detainee seeks justice from the perpetrator?

Harapan would say the timing is not right because we must all unite and work towards getting rid of Najib.

So when would be the right time for an apology from Mahathir over Operasi Lalang?

Truth be told, every Malaysian has the constitutional right to demand an apology from Mahathir, and when and how this should be done should not be dictated by any partisan considerations. Malaysia does not belong to any political party but to the people.

If a so-called government-in-waiting can procrastinate on the restoration of justice on dubious grounds, how can I not be concerned that there would be myriad of excuses to delay institutional reform upon regime change?

It is truly pathetic that many civil society leaders, mindful of the ‘big picture to save the country’, are now hesitant to endorse the statement that calls for Mahathir’s apology. If we only speak up when it is our material interests that are at stake, how different are we from the powers-that-be?

Perhaps this is why many maintained their elegant silence when Mahathir was clamping down on dissent in a merciless manner. After all, the economy was ‘booming’ and radical Islam had yet to rear its ugly head.

It does not mean that I hate Mahathir. Far from it.I merely hold Mahathir responsible for the moral decadence so prevalent in our country today – the haste to get rich and economic growth trumping human rights, to name but two.

Mahathir must, therefore, first repent before we can move on as a nation, following which we would need a real transformation of the country in which we no longer value material achievements more than human rights, for the two are not mutually exclusive to one another as either Mahathir or Najib would have us believe.

True reform cannot come about without the dark legacy of Mahathir being addressed, and a sincere and collective acknowledgement of the injustice of Operasi Lalang is the first step towards national reconciliation and restoration.

Didn’t we often cite the famous quote that “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”?

Let’s not prove Mahathir right when he said Melayu, or Malaysians, mudah lupa.


JOSH HONG studied politics at London Metropolitan University and the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. A keen watcher of domestic and international politics, he longs for a day when Malaysians will learn and master the art of self-mockery, and enjoy life to the full in spite of politicians.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

 

Malaysia’s Najib Razak fans the flames of Religious Intolerance


October 20, 2017

Malaysia’s Najib Razak fans the flames of Religious Intolerance

by Mariam Mokhtar.

http://www.sentinel.com

Image result for Chicken Najib Razak

Chicken Najib Razak fans the flames of religious intolerance

Malaysia has been thrown into a royal shambles by a growing rivalry between the country’s nine religiously moderate sultans and its conservative mullahs, considered by many to be “nouveaux royals” vying for the attention of ethnic Malay Muslims.

Political and social observers believe that if the controversy is left unchecked, it could undermine the position of the corruption-scarred Prime Minister, Najib Abdul Razak.

Image result for Tough Sultan of Johor

 

Johor people are proud of Major General Sir Sultan Ibrahim Ibni Sultan Abu Bakar, who ruled Johor for 64 years from 1895 to 1959 and his successors. Born on September 17th 1873, he ascended the throne on June 4th 1895 following the death of his father Sultan Abu Bakar. He was proclaimed on September 7th 1895 and was crowned on November 2nd of the same year. He celebrated his diamond jubilee of his accession on his 82nd birthday, a world record at that time. Sultan Sir Ibrahim also declined to become the first Yang Di-Pertuan Agong of Malaysia in 1957 and so did the subsequent Sultan of Johor, Sultan Sir Ismail.Johor Mesti Sentiasa Jadi Johor

Image result for Tough Sultan of Johor

HRH Sultan Ibrahim Ismail Ibni Baginda Al Mutawakkil Alallah Sultan Iskandar Al-Haj, born on 22 November 1958 during the reign of his great grandfather Sultan Ibrahim, is widely admired and respected by all Malaysians

On October. 10, the Royals, who serve as the hereditary titular heads of nine of Malaysia’s 13 states and who even today have a deep reserve of loyalty from feudal rural Malays, called for unity and religious harmony after what they described as “excessive actions” in the name of Islam, a rare intervention into the public arena.

“It is feared that the excessive actions of certain individuals of late can undermine the harmonious relations among the people of various races and religions,” said the statement, signed by the Keeper of the Rulers’ Seal, Syed Danial Syed Ahmad, according to a report in the state-run news agency Bernama.  “The Rulers feel that the issue of harmony has deep implications if any action is associated with and undertaken in the name of Islam.”

Najib is normally swift to act against members of the Malaysian public who condemn the royal households, the Islamic institutions, or his administration. But last week, after the Malay rulers issued the royal rebuke, Najib was silent.

Leaders of the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), the country’s biggest ethic political party, understand the potency of conservative Islam to manipulate ethnic Malays, who make up about 60 percent of the population. The other 40 percent are comprised of Chinese, Hindus, East Malaysian ethnic Bumiputeras, and others.

The nine royal households, who by tradition and the Constitution are the guardians of Islam in their respective states, are believed to oppose the implementation of hudud, or harsh Islamic law, and a bill before the parliament to enlarge the power of the Syariah Courts. They are also said to be alarmed about recent events like the banning of certain books and the arrest and deportation of authors and speakers including the Turkish academic, Mustafa Akyol.

Image result for mustafa akyol

 

A series of religious-related incidents has pitted the mullahs and the government against the royal households. Last month, the Kuala Lumpur City Council cancelled the annual Oktoberfest event, a Germany-inspired celebration of the passing of the seasons and of beer-drinking, and told the organizers that the event was a sensitive issue. They did not say who considered it sensitive or how it would affect Muslim sensitivities.

Days later, a launderette in Johor issued a statement saying that its services were only for Muslim patrons. The owner deemed that items belonging to non-Muslims would “contaminate” items of clothing worn by Muslims and invalidate their prayer.

The public were outraged by this act and HRH Sultan of Johor Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar waded in, warning the owner that the business would face closure by him if it did not stop operating as if it was in the Taliban portion of Afghanistan. After the dressing-down, the launderette owner apologized for his action and offered his services to people of different faiths.

The Royals have thrown the ball into Najib’s court, but he has refused to play. His relationship with the Sultans is increasingly tenuous, but his reticence to make a stand is regarded as weakening his own position.

The nature of the Sultans’ intervention is regarded as an indication that the royals are fed up and irritated as in fact are many of the country’s urban Malays by the erosion of community integration, as are many professionals among the Malay population, who say they are at the end of their tether with Najib and fundamentalist Islam. At a recent wedding, some even said they wouldn’t mind if a Chinese were to become prime minister, an astonishing heresy in the country. Many said they are openly encouraging their children to migrate. Nonetheless, the opposition as a political force remains splintered and a long shot against Najib and UMNO in an expected general election which must be called before the middle of 2018.

“The royals, too, feel their position is threatened. They may be Malay and act as the guardians of Islam, but many, when away from prying eyes, lead a very western lifestyle,” a political analyst told Asia Sentinel. “Some royals spend an appreciable amount of time in the west and enjoy a lifestyle that many of their Malay subjects can only envy. With rising Islamic conservatism, the ordinary Malays cannot emulate this western lifestyle in Malaysia.”

The Royals are compelled to speak out before extremism takes root and undermines their royal status, another social critic said. “In Islam everyone is considered equal, and only in Saudi Arabia are kings above the law. The Malaysian royals are taking the initiative and acting before their own existence is questioned by the extremists.”

As an example, he said, in April 2016, the Sultan of Terengganu, Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin stripped the state’s chief minister Ahmad Razif of all state-awarded titles because Razif had presented a controversial Indian zealot, Zakir Naik, with three islands.

Najib is not known for issuing retractions, denials or affirmations, as he has normally depended on a coterie of loyal supporters, most of whom belong to his inner circle, to lash out on his behalf.

However, the Royal dressing down has thrown Putrajaya, the seat of government, into disarray and political observers wonder if Najib will order an immediate shakeup of the Department for the Development of Islam in Malaysia, known by its Malay-language initials JAKIM.

Image result for harussani zakaria

It takes a Siti Kassim to put Perak’s Chief Mullah Harussani Zakaria in his proper place

Several other religious experts including two influential muftis, Asri Zainul Abidin of Perlis and Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri of the Federal Territory also admonished the launderette owner in Muar and another “Muslim-only” launderette operating in Perlis.

The Royals are compelled to speak out before extremism takes root and undermines their royal status, another social critic said. “In Islam everyone is considered equal, and only in Saudi Arabia are kings above the law. The Malaysian royals are taking the initiative and acting before their own existence is questioned by the extremists.”

As an example, he said, in April 2016, the Sultan of Terengganu, Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin stripped the state’s chief minister Ahmad Razif of all state-awarded titles because Razif had presented a controversial Indian zealot, Zakir Naik, with three islands.

Najib is not known for issuing retractions, denials or affirmations, as he has normally depended on a coterie of loyal supporters, most of whom belong to his inner circle, to lash out on his behalf.

However, the royal dressing down has thrown Putrajaya, the seat of government, into disarray and political observers wonder if Najib will order an immediate shakeup of the Department for the Development of Islam in Malaysia, known by its Malay-language initials JAKIM.

Several other religious experts including two influential muftis, Asri Zainul Abidin of Perlis and Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri of the Federal Territory also admonished the launderette owner in Muar and another “Muslim-only” launderette operating in Perlis.

In an unprecedented move, however, an Islamic preacher, Zamihan Mat Zain, fired back at the Johore Sultan and the Perlis and FT muftis for their stance, claiming that Muslims were only trying to lead good lives.

In a YouTube video, Zamihan termed Malaysia an “Islamic state” and said that being clean was Islamic. He was shocked, he said, that the small issue of the Muslim-only laundrette had been blown out of proportion, and become a worldwide sensation.

At a graduation ceremony at the Tun Hussein Onn University, the Johor Sultan called Zamihan “an empty tin with no brains,” adding that he was “very arrogant,” “haughty” and someone who believed he was the only one who had the right to scorn people of other races.

The Sultan of Johor’s criticism was swiftly followed by a similarly worded statement from the Perlis Crown Prince, Tuanku Syed Faizuddin Putra Jamalullail. The other Sultans delivered the October 10 Royal rebuke, saying Malaysians should focus on tolerance, moderation, and inclusivity for life in a diverse, multicultural Malaysia.

The statement, signed by the keeper of the ruler’s seal, Syed Danial Syed Ahmad, said, “The rulers are of the opinion that the damaging implications of such actions are more severe, when they are erroneously associated with, or committed in the name of Islam.”

In a further development, the royal rebuke has finally forced Jamil Khir Baharom, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (PMD), who also heads JAKIM, into the open. JAKIM is under the control of the Prime Minister’s department, with an annual budget of RM1 billion (US$236.7 million). Calls for the accounts to be audited and made transparent have been ignored.

Jamil was silent when the issue of safety, teaching quality and the mushrooming of illegal tahfiz, or religious schools cropped up, but Zamihan, who took potshots at the Sultan, has forced Jamil to seek an audience with the Johor Sultan, who in turn ordered the state religious authority, JAIJ, to sever ties with JAKIM.

Zamihan initially denied he was attached to JAKIM, but it was revealed that he is an “Islamic affairs officer” who has been seconded to the Home Ministry’s publications and Koranic text control division. His videos and talks are often inflammatory. It is also alleged that preachers are paid about RM20,000 per month.

Anyone who thinks that this battle royal is just another religious incident that will soon blow over is wrong. Najib knows that clipping the religious preachers’ wings would seriously erode his powerbase, but he is caught in a dilemma of his own making. Rural, feudal Malays are making it crucial that Najib’s political future be determined by his ability to conciliate the royal households and the demands of the power-hungry, conservative Islamic clerics whom he has fostered. Najib has unleashed a hydra which he may be unable to control.

Mariam Mokhtar is a liberal political commentator in Malaysia

 

The Theocratic Threat to our Constitution and Democracy


October 20, 2017

The Theocratic Threat to our Constitution and Democracy

By Mohamed Tawfik Tun Dr Ismail

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

Image result for Tawfik Tun Dr. Ismail

The danger in Jakim preacher Zamihan’s video is not just the inflammatory racial slurs on the non-Muslims, specifically non-Malay non-Muslims, but the dare he threw to the Constitutional Monarchs and the elected Government of the day to make him a Martyr for the Islamo-Fascist agenda.

This agenda, from his own mouth and as a Jakim officer, is to replace the monarchical system with a theocracy when he dismissed and belittled the Sultan of Johore’s decree on the Muar laundrette.

It was reinforced a few days later when the Deputy Minister in charge of Jakim publicly declared it was Barisan Nasional’s goal to create an Islamic State in Malaysia, ignoring the Constitution as well as ignoring what many in East Malaysia believe to be the secular foundation upon which Malaysia was formed. He erroneously declared it was Umno’s agenda for the last 60 years, ignoring the secularism of Umno’s leaders till Umno’s demise in 1988.

The means of implementing this has been to test the limits of the relationship between the monarchs and the government. Something as innocuous as renaming the main roads after the sultans was not to flatter them, but to do it as a fait accompli without their consent.

Image result for Kassim Ahmad

If the Government could get away with this the next step is to erode their powers over religion. If the Rulers resist, then a Zamizam type assault would come into play to test the waters. There is no need here to rehash the Kassim Ahmad episode where jurisdiction is ignored and harassment becomes the means of punishment.

No need to repeat Jawi’s heartless response when after Kassim’s demise, Jawi declared it had no further interest in the case, as though Kassim’s death was the end they sought. What more the vigilantism practiced by catching sons for khalwat with their mothers, or married couples caught for legitimately being together?

The above actions not only alarm ordinary citizens but also undermines the institution of Rulers, for is it not in their name that such actions are taken? In fact is it the case of the tail wagging the dog when Zamizan is summoned by his superiors to explain himself, as though Jakim has no control over it’s officers?

Image result for mustafa akyol

Is it also the same in the Mustafa Aykol case where the officers act of their own accord in the mistaken belief they are “protecting the image of Islam” when the end result to the world at large is to demean and diminish the beauty of Islam, and belittle the warmth and hospitality that Malays are known for?

Image result for Council of Rulers Malaysia

The Malaysian King and HRH Sultan of Johor

I suggest that the Conference of Rulers among themselves appoint a Privy Council to advise them on Constitutional issues and reassert their powers over religion to thwart any attempt by stealth by the Islamo-Fascist to impose a theocracy. It is time for the sultans to assert their authority over religion as His Majesty the Sultan of Johore has done.

The Cabinet, Members of Parliament and the Civil Service have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, and those who openly defy the constitution like Zamizan should be punished not just for sedition, but also for treason against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the people of Malaysia.

Tawfik Ismail is an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.

 

 

The Demise of A Secular State


October 16, 2017

The Demise of  A Secular State

by S. Thayaparan

http://www.malaysiakini.com

“What the State can usefully do is to make itself a central depository, and active circulator and diffuser, of the experience resulting from many trials. Its business is to enable each experimentalist to benefit by the experiments of others, instead of tolerating no experiments but its own.”
John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty”

Malaysiakini columnist P Gunasegeram ends his latest piece, ‘I am a pendatang and proud of it,” with the appropriate “And know that I am here to stay whether you bloody like it or not because this country is mine too!” which is exactly how most non-Malay/ non-Muslims feel whenever they read about the use of the weaponised Islam in this country.

All you have to do is read the comments on social media when Johor’s HRH Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar stands up for what is right and decent when it comes to countering the agendas of Islamists in this country, who would use religion as a demarcation line to understand the frustrations non-Malays have with a system that on the one hand, finds utilitarian value in non-Malay contribution to this country, and on the other, is disgusted by their very existence as Malaysians with hopes and agendas of their own. These agendas are not necessarily different from each other but are anathema to the agendas of these state-sponsored Islamists.

Image result for hrh sultan of johor

Johor’s HRH Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar stands up for what is right and decent when it comes to countering the agendas of Islamists in this country. The Malaysian Opposition led by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and his sidekick DAP’s Lim Kit Siang is deaf and dumb on this issue.
 

People often miss the larger narrative when it is easier to digest sound bites. When a religious school burns down, this should have been an opportunity for a national discussion on why these religious schools exists in the first place, what values they are promoting, how safe are they and the corrupt practices that goes in the creation and maintenance of these schools. Instead, nobody was really interested in this, but carried on putting all their eggs in the 1MDB basket.

The Muslims-only launderette issue becomes about how:

1)HRH The Sultan of Johor was the line in the sand when it comes to this type of religious mischief because politicians offered only mild condemnation which sounded more like bemusement, and

2) the relevance of an institution like Jakim (Islamic Development Department) to state religious bodies is questioned by the moves of the Johor Sultan, who, by cutting off contact between the federal religious authorities and his state’s religious department, is making it clear that – for the time being at least – he does not want religious extremism from the federal level contaminating Islamic moderation at the state level.

Where is our glorious opposition in all of this? As I said before – “If you are waffling on your commitment to a secular state, then you have to make your case for an Islamic state and this is where the trouble begins and ends. If oppositional Muslim political operatives and their allies would just stop using religion as the basis of critique and concentrate on furthering the agenda of the secular state, oppositional Muslim MPs would not have to worry about attempting to ‘out-Islam’ their rivals because this would not be the grounds on which they battle for votes.”

Image result for Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki

Prime Minister Ayahtollah Najib Razak, Malaysia Al-Islam

Image result for abdul hadi awang

Ayahtollah Abdul Hadi Awang–Deputy Prime Minister, Malaysia al-Islam

Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki  reminds us that BN – not Umno but BN – is committed to make Malaysia an Islamic state and of course, we will not hear anything from the MCA and MIC about this glorious agenda. Neither will we hear anything from our doughty opposition, because they have convinced themselves that they need to be “Islamic” to win the votes of the majority of the Malay community to replace the current Umno poohbah who is apparently the enemy of the state.

Which brings up the uncomfortable question of what kind of state? The enemy of an Islamic state or a secular state?

Forsaking the Constitution

Communications and Multimedia Minister Salleh Said Keruak blathers on about how we should embrace new politics – whatever that means – and not abandon the Constitution, but the reality is that by chipping away at the Constitution which is what Umno is doing in its attempt to create an “Islamic” state, it is just further evidence that the Constitution is not worth the paper it is printed on.

Meanwhile, the opposition is doing nothing about this. Nobody in the opposition has ever made statements that reaffirm the primacy of the Constitution or the opposition’s agenda of ending the Islamisation process. We do not even know if this is one of the reforms that would “save Malaysia” that the opposition intends to carry out.

 

Remember, “this meme that by benching UMNO, we as Malaysians, whatever our religion or credo, would be safe from the machinations of Islamic extremists, is irrational considering that we neither have a committed secular opposition nor Muslim politicians who openly commit to secular agendas. As long as this remains the default setting of Malaysian politics, there will never be a period where secularism is safe from encroaching Islamic extremism.”

I mean really, this whole idea of making Malaysia an “Islamic” state is really about making Malaysia more like Saudi Arabia. And you know what the Johor sultan thinks about that, right? Here is a reminder – “If there are some of you who wish to be an Arab and practise Arab culture, and do not wish to follow our Malay customs and traditions, that is up to you. I also welcome you to live in Saudi Arabia.”

But what I really want to know is, what does the opposition think of that? Does the opposition think that Malay culture should emulate Arab culture and if so, does the opposition advocate that Malays who don’t want to follow “Malay” customs and traditions are welcome to live in Saudi Arabia?

Depending on your point of view, the balkanisation of Malaysia is something that is a very real possibility because of this agenda of turning Malaysia into an “Islamic” state. This is not something that any rational person would want and I am including the Malays in this equation, because if they really wanted to live in an Islamic paradise, they would have voted for PAS a long time ago.

https://akrockefeller.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/TangkapNajib.jpg

Young Malaysians on a Mission: #TangkapNajib

Writing for Malaysiakini has presented me with opportunity to talk to young people from all over Malaysia. This is purely anecdotal, but what young people tell me is that they are disgusted by politics in this country. They voted for change and even on a state level, this has not happened. Most, if not all, of them say that if UMNO stops “playing” with race and religion they will vote BN because they know all over the world politicians are corrupt.

A common complaint or some variation of the same, is that Pakatan Harapan is not doing anything to stop Malaysia for becoming an Islamic state. Most young people who choose to leave do not leave because of corruption, but because of race and religion.

Image result for mahathir and lim kit siang

Pakatan Harapan is not doing anything to stop Malaysia for becoming an Islamic state.

I am beginning to realise that the idea of voting for the opposition to create a two-party system and the almost zealous advocacy (mine?) of such, is an idea of diminishing returns.