Dear Malaysian "Fighter for Justice",
Woke up this morning feeling real good - thank you.
The morning call for prayers don't disturb my sleep anymore, even if they had three melodic voices (they could've been echoes, though) to announce it. I've learnt to sleep through it, just as many of the "faithful" that I had known in the past, during my hostel days - in fact I learnt it from them ....
However, as I go through the www for news (I've stopped subscribing to newspapers long ago - I only buy if I'm bored on weekends, or if there's something I seek. Who needs crap everyday anyways) a cloud seems to descend - I'm reminded of events that reflect a mood of religious persecution.
As much as one may try to say to oneself that Malaysia is a beautiful country that practices a just rule of law, the events happening of late screams at you, otherwise.
Thanks to the empowerment of the Religious Bodies that have offended the sentiments of those belonging to Non-Muslim faiths and some Muslims (to a lesser extent).
(Thank You too, Dr. Mahathir - for the "excellent statecraft", for the all supreme Syaria Courts, the impotent Civil Courts and Election Commission, the less than democratic UMNO Baru, Vision 2020,and Negotiated Tenders and what not).
Dr. Mahathir obviously missed out in his "visions" on the future of the seeds that he planted - he didn't see that he created monsters that have today risen to prominence.
He can now comfortably comment on the current predicament while being a comfy, corporate, "Roti-Bhai" in his sunset years, pretending to be very intellectual and forgetful at the same time.
The images of Lina Joy, Moorthy, Revathy, Subashini, Hindraf, Banning of Bibles, raids at restaurants, Ma Tzu, Temples, The Herald, request to remove Crosses, request for baca Doa in muslim minority schools, ridiculous dress codes, thought police, moral police, arrest of Muslims at entertainment outlets, raids on foreign couples, Seizure of religious books, arrest of minority "deviant sects", Mr. Gan ...... and now, the Rukumony insurance case - they keep coming back to mind, every time I try to tell myself that Malaysia is in good hands.
Is there a subtle agenda to persecute the Non-Muslims or Muslims perceived as "deviant"?
Or is it an agenda to create unrest by alienating the rakyat from each other?
Or is it a campaign to pacify one group or other, by looking for scapegoats?
Despite all the rhetoric from some truly "righteous" Muslims, there appears to be a queer silence on matters such as these in general.
I wouldn't be so bold and unrealistic as to say that they don't attempt to speak out at all - but they are few and their voices are definitely muted in comparison, to that of the advocates of "strict enforcement of religious laws".
The strange part about it all is, they are supposedly the "silent majority"!
Yeah, right - and I'm Abraham Lincoln .....
It was sad to read that from what Malaysia was before the time of TDM, it is now perceived as a "Taliban-Lite" regime in other nations of the world.
One can see how many a Muslim reacts to criticism - they tend to perceive the criticism of the injustices meted out as criticism of Islam. They tend to get all defensive and abusive at times, as a way to intimidate their "perceived opponents". It doesn't matter to them if Islam doesn't tell you to be abusive - to them, the appearance of defending Islam, overrides everything else.
At times, they tend to project themselves as "liberals" or "open-minded" and even write long articles/ comments on blogs so as to give a "friendly" image - however, when push comes to shove, they tend to give a muted response or remain silent altogether. Sometimes they do come out with "arguments" with a big "BUT" that plays both sides.
It is somehow mind-boggling as to how "these guys" appear to advocate Hypocrisy, in the face of justice.
They would never go so far as to admit that they are plain chicken-shit to stand up for JUSTICE, in the face of the "Talibans-Lites" who have overrun the nation.
Believe you, me - these guys would be the first to shout out loud about corruption this and corruption that, judiciary this and judiciary that, Linggam this and Linggam that, Mahathir this and Mahathir that, Scandal this and Scandal that!
Go ahead and BLOG all you want - deride them for all the lies apparently dished out in the press.
Go ahead - Boycott the Newspapers all you want.
Go ahead - march with a million people all you want.
I say - it's all HOGWASH.
Why do I say that?
Because YOU YOURSELF LIE, brother.
Because the "silent majority" LIE.
You lie that you want TRUTH.
You lie that you want TRUST.
You lie that you want JUSTICE.
You LIE that you want ACCOUNTABILITY.
You lie that you want a RIGHTEOUSNESS in Government.
You LIE, my friend.
You LIE to yourself.
You LIE to your Brother.
You LIE when you are tested.
You LIE when the nation is ripped-off in the name of RACISM and APARTHEID.
You LIE when you scream out against Zionism.
You LIE when you remain silent in the face of injustice.
You LIE, when you don't stand up for your Non-Muslim brothers/ sisters.
You LIE when you forget that the true measure of a just society, is how it cares for its minority.
Justice has to come all round - you cannot choose when you want to have and choose when you can do away with it based on out-dated laws.
You cannot have two parallel courts of law!
Two courts are, one two many!
You just cannot have it both ways!
What goes around, comes around.
You made your CHOICE, brother.
You made your choice to be a HYPOCRITE -
and the politicians know it, when they see you FAIL the TEST.
You made your choice to doom the nation.
YOU ASKED FOR THE "LINGGAMS"!
Wednesday, 30 January 2008
Tuesday, 29 January 2008
Boycott the Newspapers Campaign.
Image from The People's Parliament
The following from Screenshots:
Ho Kay Tat out of free (-of-charge) paper;
The Star to buy into theSun?
Ho Kay Tat is now half a Group Editor-in-Chief and half a managing director for what he used to be, and the free(-of-charge) paper appears not free from editorial control.
According to The NST, the newspaper theSun displaced as the country's No. 2 largest circulation English daily, Berjaya Corporation Bhd executive director Chan Kien Sin has been appointed the managing director of theSun, while Editor Chong Cheng Hai was made acting editor-in-chief, taking over from Ho who held both posts previously.
Ho, however, remains the managing director and editor-in-chief of The Edge, at least for now.
Meanwhile, political editor Zainon Ahmad was appointed as the paper's consultant editor.
The announcements were made to theSun's senior executives and staff at two separate meetings yesterday by Ho, who also introduced Chan to the personnel.
Nexnews, which publishes the Edge and theSun, was made a subsidiary of Berjaya Corp following a takeover by tycoon Vincent Tan last Friday.
Tan's partner in Nexnews, Tong Kooi Ong, has called it quits after he sold all his shares for RM139.2 million, making Nexnews a 54.59% subsidiary of Berjaya.
Media circle said the staff at theSun were taken by surprise of the development.
According to The NST, quoting sources, said Ho had tried explaining to the worried staff why the paper had to be separated. However, a reporter at theSun was quoted as saying that there was no opportunity for staff to ask questions during the meetings as they were chasing deadlines.
The staff said: "Morale is still low, so what's the point of asking anyway? We will just wait and see."
Ho was quoted as having assured the staff that the separation had nothing to do with theSun's editorial content but it's about... ahmmm... "economic expediency on Tong's part".
The Star to buy into theSun. By the way, today has been declared the 'Buy No Newspapers, Buy No Lies" Tuesday by People's Parliament and the supporting community.
At the press conference yesterday, lawyer Haris Ibrahim spoke about how Vincent Tan's purchase of the Nexnews group confirms the politics-media nexus responsible for the suppression of press freedom in Malaysia.
Today, Rocky's Bru exposed that The Star is expected to announce soon the purchase of 30% of Nexnews, for between RM1.80 and RM2 per share. The plan is to place theSun under the control of the Star.
The Star's editorial bosses have been briefed, Rocky said..
Are we moving down Jalan Singapura where the Englisgh press is duopoly-ed by two cartels?
"Valid" Legal "Conversion" Documents - Bolehland Style
So sad that this is what "Religion" has taught some people.
And I'm ashamed that this happened in Seremban of all places.
Why doesn't The Ruler come into the picture?
Friday, 25 January 2008
The Overbearing R&R Factor.
- It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem.
(Do not misconstrue what I speak of - Religiosity is not Religion, and neither is it Spirituality)
Until and unless many Malaysians from all walks of life can look in the mirror and admit the fact that they have these two evils deep in their hearts, the nation cannot snap out of the slumber and decadence that it is in.
"CORRECT" - We all know who the architects of these two evils are, and we also know who made it worse by subverting the constitution and undermining the judiciary - but that's a different story.
What I wish to speak about is, the people.
Do they even realize that this has become a problem, that is shredding the very fabric of the nation - slowly but surely?
Evidently not. They are blinded by the ego-boosting rhetoric of their respective spin-doctors and clerics who masquerade as political leaders and Judges. They want to believe it. In fact they almost beg for it, so as to hide their weaknesses and insecurities. So convinced are the people by these lies, that honest men shudder at the prospect of speaking of the truth about this Evil. Such is the grip of lies on the people's minds, that not just ordinary people shy away from truth, but even the Judiciary prefer to appear impotent, rather than mete out justice without fear or favour.
The not-so-honest politicians on the other side of the fence too, refuse to confront these issues head-on, lest they be stuck with a badge & labeled as being a traitor to their race/ religion or (if you're on the other side), an enemy of state and the people and so on and so forth.
We can vote the opposition to power and then vote UMNO back to power if we don't like - but the fact remains that neither promises to bridge the gulf that divides and fractures the nation.
Would there be a difference? I seriously doubt it - this is simply becos Race & Religion are almost as good (if not better) than hard currency in Malaysian politics.
This is simply becos the people simply are not ready to build a nation based on dynamic and progressive ideas/ ideologies of nationhood - they still prefer to indulge themselves to petty kampung, feudal politics of sectarianism. Whatever the issue that crops up, the decision ultimately depends on either race or religion.
As it is, we "proudly" carry our MyKad that states our Race and Religion. It isn't enough that we are all human and Malaysian - we silently accept being branded like cows. (At least cows make some noise).
Fill up any official document - at least one or both will be included in your bio.
This is something I find absolutely disgusting and demeaning.
We don't need to be "profiled" like criminals.
We don't need to be stereotyped.
We don't need to be differentiated based on Race or Religion when filling up a form for a business or job or whatever.
My name, NRIC number, address, profession and a few other relevant factors is all they need - nothing more.
Why the profiling?
With this in place, what do we make of all the propaganda on "Unity" that is drummed into us by our politicians and clerics? Oh yeah - we have some politicians who'd say that it is bad, but shy away from condemning it wholeheartedly. He'd always find a "but" to insert into his argument in support of racism, by hook or crook!
It is all nothing but hypocritical HOGWASH.
Take a good look at our political parties - they all shamelessly flaunt their sectarian agendas. One for religion. Another for race. Even if they have a multi-racial facade, there are politicians "entrusted" to welfare of certain ethnic groups. It seems to be beyond the scope of our politicians take us for our similarities - they prefer to take us for our differences! Not just that, they choose to highlight these differences.
They just cannot see us all as human beings and Malaysians first, simply becos they cannot understand the very diversity that enriches the nation.
It is not to say that we cannot have lobby groups to address relevant issues - it is just that the primitive premise that "R&R are the cornerstone of the political structure of the nation", is fundamentally flawed, and it invites disaster in the long run - and we would end up a failed state.
The people, being so gullible to the propaganda machinery and leaders who seek to exploit our differences are to blame for this.
R&R, being an effective tool to garner support, by using "fear tactics" of trouble, "they" seek to stoke the fire of insecurity within each community. "They" fear that with unity among the people, they would be rendered vulnerable to the dictates of the masses.
Trust, understanding and unity appear to be the enemy that they seek to destroy in all of us.
Moving on to the other R, it is beyond me to understand the desire of clerics who seek political power - don't they see that politics can corrupt their theology.
But I suppose most of them study religion - not theology.
(There is a subtle but significant difference here - Theology starts with God; Religion starts with Man - go figure, guys .....)
Power is the ultimate goal of all these politicians masquerading as clerics. Religious laws are nothing but instruments of control that the sheep would fear to question lest they invite "divine retribution" in the hands of their human masters. The objective of all religious laws appear to be that of intellectual emasculation of the man on the street. The relentless "war" on secularism, and the "evils" of it are drummed into the blinded "faithful" in their quest for power. The message of secularism is craftily hidden by these God-men from their followers. They wouldn't want the "faithful" to know that, "Secularism is a device that seeks to protect religion from the corruption of politics and politics from becoming usurped by religion", to quote Muqtader Khan (refer : The Myth of Secularism : Religion and politics are mutually Constitutive).
Sadly, the masses, the "silent majority", is cowered by the vociferous but intellectually impotent religious zealots. The politicians on the other hand, keep them "breeding" so as to intimidate the "opposition", and thus facilitating the execution of their agenda of greed and rape of the economy. After all, to these religious zealots who'd rather live in misery in return for the rewards of afterlife, the economy is the last thing on their mind.
To the political opportunists who also jump the bandwagon of religiosity, the appearance of success (with all the physical trappings of "modernity") is definitely more important than real success.
The question of nationhood, modern political sciences, sustainable development, progress, globalisation and wealth management don't figure in their equation.
It is imperative, that the people willingly surrender their rights to men who can apparently understand the mind of their Almighty (that has been reduced to a few books written by man).
The absurdity of puny minds restricted to religiosity, being able to comprehend the impossible, and that people willingly surrender their right to such as these, is in itself, incomprehensible.
All that matters appears to be the subjugation and control that the political/clerical elite can exert upon the unthinking masses, thus enslaving them.
And the wonder of it all is - these "slaves" are pretty much happy about being relieved of their intellectual burdens!
They are happy to be told what to do and what to think, by their political masters who appear to be god-like in their eyes - and when things go horribly wrong, it would be perfectly logical for them to persecute the scapegoats for their "evil practices" (which has rained the wrath of god on everybody else) .... like that would turn to showers of blessings from the Almighty, overnight!
These R&R factors have been and will be the overriding factors in determining the direction that the nation takes in the next few years.
These next few years (probably 10-15 yrs) will determine what the future holds for all Malaysians.
As things are, the politicians, clerics and the people appear to lack the courage to face the truth and abandon the old feudal, racist and religiosity that is today being used to subvert the nation.
The future does not look too appealing, any which way we look at it.
The day when all else is lost, let us pray that there will still be hope.
Monday, 21 January 2008
The Myth of Secularism
The Myth of Secularism:
Religion and Politics are Mutually Constitutive
M. A. Muqtedar Khan
Had Allah willed He could have made you all one community? But He made you as you are (diverse) as a test. So vie one with another in good works. Unto Allah you will all return, and He will then inform you of the meaning of differences within you.
[Quran 5:48].
Identity and Politics are Inseparable
As a Muslim intellectual living in the West, researching and teaching political theory and political philosophy, I have always marveled at the durability of the idea of secularism. For a civilization that boasts considerable sophistication in most areas, to assume that politics and religion constitute two separate realms or that the two can be separated is uncharacteristically naïve. This belief, not in separation of church and state, but in the separability of church and State, in my opinion is one of the enduring myths of modernity. This myth rests on the false assumptions of pure politics and pure religion. Secularism is a device that seeks to protect religion from the corruption of politics and politics from becoming usurped by religion.
All core issues are not only normative in nature but also impinge on individual and collective identities. Neither the conception of the individual self nor the construction of the collective self is free from political or religious considerations. Even in societies that were anti-religious such as the former Soviet Union and present day China, or more secular than the US, such as France and Turkey, religion remained an important political issue and politics shaped the way religion was practiced. Christianity played a significant role in the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and Islamists found a way to come to power in secular fundamentalist Turkey. The place of religious symbols in public sphere, whether it is Hijaab (Muslim headscarf) in French public schools or the Ten Commandments in American courts, remains contested primarily because there is no consensus on the exclusion of religion from public sphere anywhere.
Not only does religion play a role in politics, but politicization of religion is also a common occurrence. Notice how some Republicans are relishing the idea of taking Howard Dean to cleaners, if he were to become the democratic nominee in the coming Presidential elections, by painting him as an advocate of gay marriages. This would be a clear case of exploiting religious sentiments (that marriage is a divine institution) for political gains. I have noticed that often, American politicians try to couch their religious motivations in secular terms while advocating specific policies. A very good example is the unyielding support for Israel and Israel’s occupation of West Bank and Gaza among certain Republican politicians with evangelical connections. While they support it for Biblical reasons they justify it by arguing that Israel is the “only democracy in the Middle East.” I often wonder if their support for Israel will stop if Israel became less democratic, or it can be shown that some people within its borders do not enjoy basic democratic rights?
In the Muslim world on the contrary, legitimacy comes from Islam and therefore many politicians justify material motivations using Islamic cover. While religious politicians in the West often use secular discourse for legitimacy, Muslim politicians deliberately Islamize mundane issues for the same reason. Notice the Islamization of Saddam Hussein’s rhetoric in the first Gulf War. Religion in the West lacks legitimacy in the public sphere and must therefore be concealed, in the Muslim World all legitimacy derives from Islam hence Islam is used as a justification for politics.
There are two reasons why religion and politics are intertwined. The first is the increasing use of complex discourses for the purpose of legitimization. Today all politicians seem to follow the Machiavellian dictum – it is not important to be just, it is important to be seen to be just – and therefore politicians and political parties and regimes produce discourses to legitimize their goals and strategies. It is in the production of these discourses that religion either underpins political logic are camouflages politic motivations, depending upon the cultural context.
The second reason and perhaps the most important reason why religion will always play a role in crucial issues is the important role that religion plays in identity formation. All political issues that are important eventually affect individual and collective identity and in the process trigger religious sentiments. As long as religion plays a role in the identities of people, it will play a role in politics.
Both Governor Mario Cuomo and Congressman Mark Souder link religion with private and public morality. They both agree that it is difficult for a believer to divest herself of her religious values while also serving in a public capacity. However, it is interesting to see how each of them uses separate mechanisms to limit the impact of religion in public policy. Governor Cuomo argues that politicians must exercise self-restraint and only allow those religious values that are universal in nature to influence their politics and abstain from allowing particularist values to shape their agenda. Congressman Souder rejects the notion of a natural God and common religious values by suggesting that the uncommon is more important than common ground between religions. This is an interesting contrast between identity and difference. Cuomo seeks to overcomes differences by seeking the identity of all faiths while Souder celebrates difference in search of identity.
What if they do agree upon some basic issues, what if the Christian Coalition does manage to construct a broad coalition to deprive Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism the same legal protections as Christianity (for example in England blasphemy laws protect Jesus but not Muhammad)? When Muslims repeatedly requested President Bush to condemn anti-Islam (Islamophoebia)[i] bigotry from prominent Christian figures such as Rev. Pat Robertson, Rev. Franklin Graham, and Rev. Jerry Falwell, the President hedged for weeks, because these individuals have a large following that translates directly into political power at the ballot and in campaign fund raising.
In an era when religious minorities in America are becoming extremely nervous about the relations between Christian Right and the Republican establishment which controls both the White House and the Congress, a plain, unequivocal statement -- “we will not impose Christian beliefs on non-Christians,” – would have gone a long way. Congressman Souder makes the point that as a Christian politician he is conscientious enough to fulfill his constitutional obligations. He will abide by the constitution since he has sworn to protect and abide by it. After listening to Governor Cuomo’s eloquent argument for self-restrain, I wish someone had asked Congressman Souder would he self-consciously abstain from advocating the amendment of the constitution to make his religious beliefs the law of the land. In a democracy what stands between minority rights and majority domination are constitutional guarantees, which are themselves at the mercy of good intentions of the majority.
The Muslim World today is experiencing deeply divisive and traumatic religious resurgence. This is not a venue to discuss them, but I think it is important to draw an interesting parallel that is prompted by Congressman Souder’s claim that his faith is a worldview. The Islamists too make this claim. They argue that Islam is not a religion, it is a worldview and they even compared it to other ideologies and worldviews such as capitalism and communism. Islamists’ have penned tons of books comparing Islam with communism, socialism, capitalism, liberalism and democracy to prove that Islam not only has something to say about every aspect of life, but also whatever it may have to say on any subject is necessarily superior to what other ideologies have to say on the same subject. This for them is an article of faith. Claims about religious creeds as an all-encompassing worldview have the potential to blossom into totalitarian ideologies.
The two politicians demonstrate contrasting models. Governor Cuomo is a model of statesmanship as he chooses wisdom over parochialism and seeks to exercise self-restraint on personal beliefs in search of common public values. In doing so he chose to become a generic religious politician and not just a Catholic politician. Congressman Souder on the other hand is a model of citizenship where his commitment to the US constitution proscribes the role of his religion in politics. But his view that his faith is a worldview and a true worldview, including those elements that question the authenticity of other faiths, places the constitution in jeopardy. I fear that his citizenship will prompt him to uphold the constitution, but his Christianity will compel him to change the constitution whenever possible to accommodate his beliefs. The statesman will always be the ally of religious minorities in pluralist democracies, but the Christian citizen is an imminent threat to constitutional guarantees of freedom from religions.
O humanity! We have indeed created you from one man and one woman, and have made you into various nations and tribes so that you may know one another
[Quran 49:13].
And let there be amongst you a group of people who invite to goodness, encouraging that which is right and forbidding that which is wrong; it is they who are the successful
[Quran 3:104].
The two verses from the Quran cited above and the one with which I began this chapter make two important points: 1). Diversity is a consequence of divine designs and 2). Muslims have an ethical role to play in the public sphere. The verses 3:104 in the opinion of some Muslims scholars is a Quranic call for political parties to emerge and play a normative role in the public sphere. I have argued that the mission of Islam/Muslims in the West can be to become the moral conscience of free societies. The objective of Muslim participation in Western, particularly American politics should be to encourage what is right and forbid what is wrong rather than seeking to advance the geopolitical agendas of the Muslim World.[ii]
| Islamic sources recognize racial and ethnic and even religious differences and advocate a culture of inclusion and equality. However, there are also sources that lend themselves to exclusivist politics. Consider the following verses: |
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and do good deeds, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve (Quran 2:62 and 5:69).
And if one seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted from him; and he is among the losers in the Hereafter (Quran 3:85).
Today liberal and radical Muslims are divided over which of the above two verses should determine Muslim relations with other faith communities. The first verse is inclusive and clearly indicates that those who are good people have nothing to worry. And if one treats the word “and” as separating sets of people, Muslims and Christians… and those who do good deeds, one could even argue that atheists who do good deeds, such as stand up for justice, help the poor etc, may have nothing to fear. This status of fundamental moral equality of all people can become the basis for political equality in a multicultural, multi-religious society.
But radical Muslims who believe that only Islam has the Truth and only good Muslims are good people, rely on 3:85 exclusively arguing that it is not only the ultimate source for defining Muslim-non-Muslim relations but also abrogates both 2:62 and 5:69. Some Muslim leaders in Dallas, Texas now object to my speaking there because I once rejected this idea of abrogation of Quranic sources that radicals do not like by arguing that, the only reason why God repeated 2:62 in 5:69 was to ensure that bigots did not use 3:85 to annul 2:62. How can one verse abrogate two verses from the same sources was my point. Muslims must realize that not only does Islam influence politics, but politics too shapes what Islam is.
Today Islam has once again become the ethical language of the Muslim World. Islam will not only guide Muslim public discourse but also Muslim conception of what is ethical politics. The Iraqis today have managed to make President Bush an advocate of Islamic democracy. European Muslims are making sure that Europe’s foreign policy balances US’ pro-Israeli stance in the Middle East. As Muslims become a political force in America, they will most certainly seek to redefine the role of religion in American politics. I only hope that an inclusivist rather than an exclusivist understanding of Islam shapes American Muslim politics. I hope 2:62 prevails over 3:85 and that Muslims seek to emulate Governor Cuomo and not Congressman Souder.
The reason why the myth of secularism is so precious to modernity is not its potential to separate religion and politics but its potential to advance a framework for dealing with religious diversity under conditions of unequal power. In perfectly homogenous societies, it does not matter if the state is influenced by religion or not. It is only when there are other faith communities, or other interpretations of the same faith that the state can become an instrument of religious oppression in the hands of the majority. But religion disguised as national interest or secular reason can play havoc with minority rights.
As religion becomes more assertive, and religious zealots become more adept at “playing the system” then constitutional guarantees become meaningless if even the constitution of the Supreme Court can be rigged. In the modern West, the best examples of freedom and protection of religious minorities has come under the reign of secular democracies, in the Muslim experience the same has happened under the reign of Islam. Today as all religions experience revivals we must find a ways to guarantee religious freedom without proscribing the scope of religion. Ultimately the plight of the minorities is at the mercy of those who are enlightened among the majority and are willing to break ranks with their kind to stand up for equality and justice for all. Systems are safe only as long as we strive everyday to keep them safe.
M. A. Muqtedar Khan is a Visiting Fellow at Brookings Institution and Director of International Studies at Adrian College. He is also a fellow at the Institute of Social Policy and Understanding. He is the author of American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom (2002) and Jihad for Jerusalem: Identity and Strategy in International Politics (2004). He writes and maintains www.ijtihad.org.
Posted January 01, 2004
END NOTES
[i] Muslims hope that one day this word will become as powerful as the term anti-Semitism in calling attention to prejudice.
[ii] See M. A. Muqtedar Khan, American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom (Beltsville, MD: Amana Publications, 2002).
Friday, 18 January 2008
Trojan Horses - Unpublished Reply to Comment on MT
There is a very interesting discussion that is going on on Malaysia Today on the topic of Trojan Horses in the opposition ranks
The following were my comments in the discussion column, in response to RPKs comments. For "perspective", I've also included parts of the article and the relevant comments. The last comment was however censored, and I really don't know if I mentioned anything "offensive" - pls enlighten me if you could .... so here goes excerpts from RPK's article .....
"We were blessed with good news last week when it was announced that the opposition had already come to an agreement on the seat allocations for Penang Island. We were told that PAS, DAP and PKR had agreed on how to carve up the state. And in the event that the opposition does win enough seats in Penang to form a state government, then DAP would be given the post of Chief Minister."
"Has an agreement been reached for these states as well?"
"Before this question could be answered, DAP surfaced to officially declare that the party does not have any electoral pact with PAS. Why the need to deny that an agreement has been reached for Penang? Okay, maybe Gerakan had 'revealed' that a secret pact between PAS and DAP exists. But the voters were elated. They were happy that an electoral pact, secret or otherwise, had been made. The voters expressed no problems with the announcement that DAP has 'gone to bed' with PAS. But DAP appears to see this as a problem and has publicly denied it."
"So what is DAP's game plan? Is DAP committed to the opposition cause or is it but a mere Trojan Horse? It boggles the mind that we, those who are not in the front-line of politics, can see the need for racial unity while the DAP leaders have this impression that all it needs is Chinese support and the Malays can go to hell."
Let's go the the comments ....
written by Raja Petra, January 17, 2008 | 17:42:57
written by Raja Petra, January 17, 2008 | 17:48:04
Dear Jefus, the 'horse trading' should be about NO THREE-CORNER FIGHTS. And this must be agreed BEFORE the election and not after. If the opposition can win in spite of three- or four-corner fights, then why the need to horse trade later? We agree to be able to win. If we can win without agreeing then no need to agree.
............
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 19:40:53
We love DAP in spite of its opposition to the Islamic State and Malay rights and special privileges. Why can't DAP love us in return with no conditions attached.
=====================
Pete,
You are being a tad unfair here aren't you?
Let's just say I had an "opponent". He promotes me when it suits him, but has made a public declaration that he wishes to kill me, although I haven't done the same.
I'd love my opponent too, if he could put me in power ..... forget the placards and balloons - I'd even publicly carry him!!
But would I want to declare my "love" in public, if he's promised publicly, to kill my constitutional way of life, just to "kill" a common "enemy" who does recognize my lifestyle?
What credibility would I have, should I do it?
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 19:47:05
BTW, I think DAP needs to wean themselves off the anti-NEP rhetoric, and come up with an alternative affirmative economic plan that is acceptable to all.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 20:48:20
teo siew chin wrote:
>Wouldn't the ones in the opposition who strongly object to PAS be suspected to be the Trojan Arses?]]
You said it, Teo. As I said before, first party to say bad things about their fellow opposition gets the brickbat. No exceptions here.
LChuah
===================
Chuah - I'm disappointed with your comment!
It isn't about "talking bad things" - it is about using the system to subvert our secular constitution!!
Would you wanna publicly declare your love for somebody who promises to subvert what you stand for, and praises you for "opportunity" and convenience?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:07:45
DonplayGod writes:
"Those are not the main worries, man. The main worries are: the womenfold have to cover up from head to toe(in this hot weather?), women are not allowed to go out alone, unless escorted by some relative, and if PAS practises Taliban Islam, women are not allowed to go to school or even go to work, non-Islamic religions are banned, as in Taliban Afghanistan, and even in Saudi Arabia etc. etc. etc."
People like DontplayGod are gullible to western propaganda.
In the first place, what people hear abt the Taleban is nothing more than propaganda spread by western media in order to justify the inhuman bombing of innocent Afghan and to allow Dick Chenney's oil pipeline project crossing Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The currrent Hamid Karzai is a US puppet and used to serve under Dick Chenney as an employee.
Taleban is viewed as anti women largely due to their verbal confrontation they once had with Feminists activists in New York. In the forum the feminist leaders were embarrassed and thus launched a massive lie campaign against the Taleban.
In short, many Malaysian were duped into rejecting the Taleban when what the Taleban had done in Afghanistan not only helped the people of Afghan but also the entire world.
Example? They managed to reduce world's supply of heroin by 95% during their reign.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 21:16:15
Taleban is viewed as anti women largely due to their verbal confrontation they once had with Feminists activists in New York. In the forum the feminist leaders were embarrassed and thus launched a massive lie campaign against the Taleban.
==============
RC,
Could you pls enlighten us as to how Taliban managed to embarrass the feminists?
BTW - you don't intend to promote Talibanisation of Malaysia, do you?
You don't propose hudud,
and an Islamic State governed by the syaria,
abolishing our secular constitution,
and emasculation of the women's rights movements,
do you?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:22:41
cruzeiro writes:
"
RC,
Could you pls enlighten us as to how Taliban managed to embarrass the feminists?
BTW - you don't intend to promote Talibanisation of Malaysia, do you?
You don't propose hudud,
and an Islamic State governed by the syaria,
abolishing our secular constitution,
and emasculation of the women's rights movements,
do you?"
Dear Cruzeiro,
Have u actually met any Taleban to confirm your "Talebanization" theory?
What is Talebanization? Can u define it properly?
Also, i thought Syariah is part of Islam. If anyone rejects Syariah, he or she is rejecting ISlam?
Are u anti Islam too?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:25:39
dontplaygod writes:
"Hey dude, don't be too fast to reply, before you understand fully what I have written. I said, when the Muslim Malay populaltion is more than 80%(85%?....), don't you think then that PAS, and even UMNO can contest on their own without bothering about the other races? Your dream Islamic state can then be a reality!! Get it. And what is there to stop PAS and UMNO Muslim Malays from uniting for a common cause, i.e. to turn Malaysia into a full-fledged Islamic state?"
What's wrong with u Dontplaygod?
If the 80-85% wishes to have Islamic law in this land, will you deny their democratic rights to have one?
What you're saying it's OK to practice democracy as long as it adheres to secular principles. In other words, Muslims must adotp secularism while abandoning their faith and beliefs?
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:09:50
Dear RC,
I'm against anything that intends to subvert the secular constitution by abusing the very spirit that it stands for - I call those who intend to do that Cheats and liars.
If Islam as you define it falls under that category, you are free to draw your conclusion about my stand.
Now, you don't propose and Islamic state, do you?
Please answer questions, instead of dishing out questions, RC.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:17:30
BTW, by "talibanisation", I meant the idea that women are denied equal rights and education, beheadings or firing squads for "perceived adultery", tribal laws, rape victims being persecuted, chopping of limbs and what not - mind you - these things, most if not all are quite true about the Taliban rule.
I however, do not propose that these actions are all condoned by Islam unconditionally.
(On democracy - remember that it may be the rule of the majority, but it's true test is in it's protection of minority rights)
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:20:13
Let us go back to the days of Tunku - tolerant, respectful and understanding. The concept of one's race being more superior is already gone. We are all Malaysians esp those born after 31 Aug 1957.
============
Yes - Tunku and also Hussein Onn were against the concept of an Islamic State!!
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:34:53
cruzeiro says:
"Dear RC,
I'm against anything that intends to subvert the secular constitution by abusing the very spirit that it stands for - I call those who intend to do that Cheats and liars. If Islam as you define it falls under that category, you are free to draw your conclusion about my stand.
Now, you don't propose and Islamic state, do you?
Please answer questions, instead of dishing out questions, RC."
So to you, secularism is higher then democracy? Plus, no where in the MAlaysian constitution that states clearly of the secularist nature of our Constitution.
Not a single unequivocal provision anywhere in the Constitution.
Furthermore, it's like i asked, if 80-85% of the people of this country wishes to replace the estadblish an Islamic state, will u deny their democratic rights?
Again, i'm beggining to see your double standard. You don't stand for democracy, yous tand for secularism and u want secularism to be shove down every single Muslim's throat if u have your way.
Plus, Islam has existed in multi culture and religous soceity for a long time. Islam pioneered such concept long before secularism.
Why rely on secularism so much, Cruzeiro?
Your double standard is as clear as Angelina Jolie's pimple
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:38:03
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:17:30
BTW, by "talibanisation", I meant the idea that women are denied equal rights and education, beheadings or firing squads for "perceived adultery", tribal laws, rape victims being persecuted, chopping of limbs and what not - mind you - these things, most if not all are quite true about the Taliban rule. "
Cruzeiro,
You're as confused as Richard Nixon's US Medical reform program.
You don't even know the difference between Islam, Taliban, tribal courts and rules and not to mention lies and untruth promoted by western medias against the Taliban.
You need to go back and reexamine the facts before coming out with crappy statements like the above.
In short, you don't even know:
a. What Talibanization means?
b. Have they really existed before or not?
TQ
ps Islamic syariah is not only practiced in Afghanistan. It's also practiced in Saudi, Sudan, Pakistan, IRan, Acheh and many more places in the world not touched by Taleban.
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:42:25
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:20:13
Let us go back to the days of Tunku - tolerant, respectful and understanding. The concept of one's race being more superior is already gone. We are all Malaysians esp those born after 31 Aug 1957.
============
Yes - Tunku and also Hussein Onn were against the concept of an Islamic State!!
Yes, let's go back to the Tunuku and TUn Hussein Onn and support their "Ketuanan Melayu" concept which was started by Tunku and continued by TUn Hussein.
I read a Tunku's interview 2 years before he died, in which he declared his utmost support for Islamic State.
...
written by renoir, January 18, 2008 | 00:14:28
cruzeiro wrote:
>Chuah - I'm disappointed with your comment!
It isn't about "talking bad things" - it is about using the system to subvert our secular constitution!! Would you wanna publicly declare your love for somebody who promises to subvert what you stand for, and praises you for "opportunity" and convenience?]]
Cruz, my fellow Christian: Churchill once said that when you're young and not a liberal, you've no heart. But when you're old and not a conservative, you've no brain. What he meant was that, ultimately, we gotta do what's possible, not fantasize what's impossible. Reality says that the Opposition will not win the next GE. They'd be very lucky to even deny BN a two-thirds majority. Thus the possibility of PAS establishing an Islamic State is as likely as DAP setting up a democratic socialist state - somewere between zero and subzero. So why make a fuss about the kind of government the other might establish when neither has the ability? Isn't that nothing more than grandstanding, not to say a form of currying favor with BN?
I'm not asking anyone to publicly declare his love for anyone else - unless the object is Keira Knightley - rather, what I'm suggesting is that no opposition party should publicly attack a fellow opposition party , even by inference, as there's much more to criticize the government that has brought our country to such a sorry mess. Just point out, should anyone suggest that DAP is having a pact with PAS, that the accuser must insane to suggest that such a charge could hide 50 years of misrule. PAS should answer in somewhat the same manner, should the establishment attack it for having a pact with the secular DAP - just mention that a just, non-Islamic party is much more favored in the eyes of the Prophet than a party that makes a mockery of Islam.
LChuah
...
written by cabearth, January 18, 2008 | 01:36:09
The way i see it heres the thing
a. First, everyone is afraid of the so-call PAS'es "islamic state". Yet no one knows exactly how the Islamic state looks like.
b. Or PAS actually intends to implement the Islamic state immediately after they get into power
c. and PAS did say that islamic state will not be IMPOSED and only can be implemented with the consent of the people
d. The way i see it, PAS will subject the decision for Islamic State to a referendum in which a 75% approval rating will be required
e. And, what abt the fact that Malaysia is already an Islamic state announced by BN? How come the Chinese and Indian still votes for BN in large numbers despite Malaysia already taken the Islamic state identity?
f. As for Syariah laws as promoted by PAS, i fail to see why non muslims are concerned about it because non muslims is not subjected to the law altogether. Remember the Quran says "No Compulsion in religion".
g. As for issues related to religous identity of a deceased non-muslim but claimed to be a muslim by religous authority, i propose the setting up of a special tribunal consisting of members from Mahkamah Syariah and those of the civil court to determine the status of Islam of the deceased. That way both side can settle the issue equivocaly.
...
written by teo siew chin, January 18, 2008 | 09:06:16
hahahahahaha Renoir, u r funny man! "...not fantasize what's impossible..." - totally agree with you on that. I'd say you guys should reserve your fantasies for say...Keira Knightley - that bag of bones? nah, bad taste! go for more meat!!
Cruzeiro need to log on to more porn-sites (RPK can help with that?
) just so to work out that angst hehehehe.
=====================
(The following got "censored" automatically for some reason - maybe too long a reply)
LChuah,
I'm not asking anyone to publicly declare his love for anyone else - unless the object is Keira Knightley
=========
First and foremost, let me apologize for my ignorance - I'll google Keira Knightly after this (TSC - she's a pornstar, huh?)
In my statement earlier, the reason I mentioned it was becos RPK asked "why don't they love us" (with reference to the public denial by DAP) without really dissecting the issue.
But I do get your point. Yours too TSC!
Now RC,
Pls find it in your heart to forgive me, my ignorance about "taliban's true progressive nature" - I wasn't talking about them per se. I was referring to the popular idea/concept about the Taliban/ Saudi (Wahabbi/ Salafi) "brand" of Islam, reinforced with the declarations.
I'm well aware about the fact that "Islamic syariah is not only practiced in Afghanistan. It's also practiced in Saudi, Sudan, Pakistan, IRan, Acheh and many more places" - thank you. I'm impressed with the number of progressive syaria ruled states that you mentioned, and I wouldn't go further on that matter.
"So to you, secularism is higher then democracy? Plus, no where in the MAlaysian constitution that states clearly of the secularist nature of our Constitution. ....
Why rely on secularism so much, Cruzeiro?
Your double standard is as clear as Angelina Jolie's pimple"
Ha ha - you do have a sense of humor!
No lah - I'm not for secularism over democracy. You've misunderstood me. I do recognize the virtues of "Secularism". However, without being rooted in theologically based morality, it is bound to get corrupted - man will be lost Morally.
On the other hand I also recognize the evils that a theocracy can bring about.
While secularism can has the freedom to be "flexible" thus enabling pluralism, a theocracy doesn't - be it Islamic, Hindu or Christian. This is where secularism has an edge over theology, where statecraft is concerned.
To say that I prefer secularism over democracy, in a sense, I confess that you would be correct under certain circumstances - democracy is only a formula by which the people may rule, but it doesn't guarantee justice (just as any other system). A Theocracy on the other other hand, sooner or later, is definite to lead to repression of "infidel" communities.
You wrote, "Yet no one knows exactly how the Islamic state looks like."
Precisely - shouldn't they be articulating their ideas better, considering the fears of other communities? It isn't really sufficient that they say it for mass appeal (of Muslims) and be clueless about it, right?
For further info on my opinions on this matter, you may read what I wrote with regard to the "PAS Dilemma", [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/12/thots-on-pas-cooperation-and-vote.html[/url] , [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/11/pas-factor-viable-alternative.html[/url], and [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/11/class-politics-other-option.html[/url]
Please be sure that these aren't hard and fast opinions - they are debatable.
Thanks.
==============================
For those who may wonder as to who RC is, it is just referring to cabearth.
Anyway, RC (nor RPK) never gave me a straight answer to any of my questions, about the dilemma that PAS has created for DAP, to appease the Muslims.
What I question here is,
"Who now is the 'Trojan Horse' that RPK wishes to highlight?
Who is being divisive by not articulating a concept that they hope to sell to the voters?"
Is it DAP who makes a constitutional stand against the NEP without articulating the alternative?
Or is it PAS who declared the desire to create an Islamic state, (which could possibly mean the rewriting of the Constitution) using the "secular spirit" and processes enshrined in the Constitution- the ideas which also haven't quite been articulated to reassure the non Muslims?
I leave it to the reader to decide, and possibly "reassure/ enlighten" me with regard to the matter at hand.
The following were my comments in the discussion column, in response to RPKs comments. For "perspective", I've also included parts of the article and the relevant comments. The last comment was however censored, and I really don't know if I mentioned anything "offensive" - pls enlighten me if you could .... so here goes excerpts from RPK's article .....
"We were blessed with good news last week when it was announced that the opposition had already come to an agreement on the seat allocations for Penang Island. We were told that PAS, DAP and PKR had agreed on how to carve up the state. And in the event that the opposition does win enough seats in Penang to form a state government, then DAP would be given the post of Chief Minister."
"Has an agreement been reached for these states as well?"
"Before this question could be answered, DAP surfaced to officially declare that the party does not have any electoral pact with PAS. Why the need to deny that an agreement has been reached for Penang? Okay, maybe Gerakan had 'revealed' that a secret pact between PAS and DAP exists. But the voters were elated. They were happy that an electoral pact, secret or otherwise, had been made. The voters expressed no problems with the announcement that DAP has 'gone to bed' with PAS. But DAP appears to see this as a problem and has publicly denied it."
"So what is DAP's game plan? Is DAP committed to the opposition cause or is it but a mere Trojan Horse? It boggles the mind that we, those who are not in the front-line of politics, can see the need for racial unity while the DAP leaders have this impression that all it needs is Chinese support and the Malays can go to hell."
Let's go the the comments ....
written by Raja Petra, January 17, 2008 | 17:42:57
Dear hiro, Malays, including PAS members/leaders, are prepared to work with DAP in spite of DAP's 'NO TO 929' campaign. This is the anti-Islamic State campaign (929 means September 29, the date Mahathir announced that Malaysia is already an Islamic State). The Malay voters do not boycott PAS and PAS does not demand that DAP first of all drop the 'NO TO 929' campaign before it will cooperate with DAP. Heck, the PAS-PKR Malays even carry the yellow balloons with 'NO TO 929' written all over it (see the photos in the freeanwar.com website). DAP, however, said it will not even sit at the same table with PAS unless PAS first of all drops the Islamic State issue. PAS has never raised the Islamic State issue in more than 4 years but that is still not good enough for DAP. And DAP has always upheld the 'Malaysian Malaysia' slogan and calls for an end to Malay rights and special privileges and the PAS-PKR Malays still wear DAP T-shirts and help carry DAP flags and yellow balloons. We love DAP in spite of its opposition to the Islamic State and Malay rights and special privileges. Why can't DAP love us in return with no conditions attached.
...written by Raja Petra, January 17, 2008 | 17:48:04
Dear Jefus, the 'horse trading' should be about NO THREE-CORNER FIGHTS. And this must be agreed BEFORE the election and not after. If the opposition can win in spite of three- or four-corner fights, then why the need to horse trade later? We agree to be able to win. If we can win without agreeing then no need to agree.
............
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 19:40:53
We love DAP in spite of its opposition to the Islamic State and Malay rights and special privileges. Why can't DAP love us in return with no conditions attached.
=====================
Pete,
You are being a tad unfair here aren't you?
Let's just say I had an "opponent". He promotes me when it suits him, but has made a public declaration that he wishes to kill me, although I haven't done the same.
I'd love my opponent too, if he could put me in power ..... forget the placards and balloons - I'd even publicly carry him!!
But would I want to declare my "love" in public, if he's promised publicly, to kill my constitutional way of life, just to "kill" a common "enemy" who does recognize my lifestyle?
What credibility would I have, should I do it?
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 19:47:05
BTW, I think DAP needs to wean themselves off the anti-NEP rhetoric, and come up with an alternative affirmative economic plan that is acceptable to all.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 20:48:20
teo siew chin wrote:
>Wouldn't the ones in the opposition who strongly object to PAS be suspected to be the Trojan Arses?]]
You said it, Teo. As I said before, first party to say bad things about their fellow opposition gets the brickbat. No exceptions here.
LChuah
===================
Chuah - I'm disappointed with your comment!
It isn't about "talking bad things" - it is about using the system to subvert our secular constitution!!
Would you wanna publicly declare your love for somebody who promises to subvert what you stand for, and praises you for "opportunity" and convenience?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:07:45
DonplayGod writes:
"Those are not the main worries, man. The main worries are: the womenfold have to cover up from head to toe(in this hot weather?), women are not allowed to go out alone, unless escorted by some relative, and if PAS practises Taliban Islam, women are not allowed to go to school or even go to work, non-Islamic religions are banned, as in Taliban Afghanistan, and even in Saudi Arabia etc. etc. etc."
People like DontplayGod are gullible to western propaganda.
In the first place, what people hear abt the Taleban is nothing more than propaganda spread by western media in order to justify the inhuman bombing of innocent Afghan and to allow Dick Chenney's oil pipeline project crossing Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The currrent Hamid Karzai is a US puppet and used to serve under Dick Chenney as an employee.
Taleban is viewed as anti women largely due to their verbal confrontation they once had with Feminists activists in New York. In the forum the feminist leaders were embarrassed and thus launched a massive lie campaign against the Taleban.
In short, many Malaysian were duped into rejecting the Taleban when what the Taleban had done in Afghanistan not only helped the people of Afghan but also the entire world.
Example? They managed to reduce world's supply of heroin by 95% during their reign.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 21:16:15
Taleban is viewed as anti women largely due to their verbal confrontation they once had with Feminists activists in New York. In the forum the feminist leaders were embarrassed and thus launched a massive lie campaign against the Taleban.
==============
RC,
Could you pls enlighten us as to how Taliban managed to embarrass the feminists?
BTW - you don't intend to promote Talibanisation of Malaysia, do you?
You don't propose hudud,
and an Islamic State governed by the syaria,
abolishing our secular constitution,
and emasculation of the women's rights movements,
do you?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:22:41
cruzeiro writes:
"
RC,
Could you pls enlighten us as to how Taliban managed to embarrass the feminists?
BTW - you don't intend to promote Talibanisation of Malaysia, do you?
You don't propose hudud,
and an Islamic State governed by the syaria,
abolishing our secular constitution,
and emasculation of the women's rights movements,
do you?"
Dear Cruzeiro,
Have u actually met any Taleban to confirm your "Talebanization" theory?
What is Talebanization? Can u define it properly?
Also, i thought Syariah is part of Islam. If anyone rejects Syariah, he or she is rejecting ISlam?
Are u anti Islam too?
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 21:25:39
dontplaygod writes:
"Hey dude, don't be too fast to reply, before you understand fully what I have written. I said, when the Muslim Malay populaltion is more than 80%(85%?....), don't you think then that PAS, and even UMNO can contest on their own without bothering about the other races? Your dream Islamic state can then be a reality!! Get it. And what is there to stop PAS and UMNO Muslim Malays from uniting for a common cause, i.e. to turn Malaysia into a full-fledged Islamic state?"
What's wrong with u Dontplaygod?
If the 80-85% wishes to have Islamic law in this land, will you deny their democratic rights to have one?
What you're saying it's OK to practice democracy as long as it adheres to secular principles. In other words, Muslims must adotp secularism while abandoning their faith and beliefs?
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:09:50
Dear RC,
I'm against anything that intends to subvert the secular constitution by abusing the very spirit that it stands for - I call those who intend to do that Cheats and liars.
If Islam as you define it falls under that category, you are free to draw your conclusion about my stand.
Now, you don't propose and Islamic state, do you?
Please answer questions, instead of dishing out questions, RC.
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:17:30
BTW, by "talibanisation", I meant the idea that women are denied equal rights and education, beheadings or firing squads for "perceived adultery", tribal laws, rape victims being persecuted, chopping of limbs and what not - mind you - these things, most if not all are quite true about the Taliban rule.
I however, do not propose that these actions are all condoned by Islam unconditionally.
(On democracy - remember that it may be the rule of the majority, but it's true test is in it's protection of minority rights)
...
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:20:13
Let us go back to the days of Tunku - tolerant, respectful and understanding. The concept of one's race being more superior is already gone. We are all Malaysians esp those born after 31 Aug 1957.
============
Yes - Tunku and also Hussein Onn were against the concept of an Islamic State!!
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:34:53
cruzeiro says:
"Dear RC,
I'm against anything that intends to subvert the secular constitution by abusing the very spirit that it stands for - I call those who intend to do that Cheats and liars. If Islam as you define it falls under that category, you are free to draw your conclusion about my stand.
Now, you don't propose and Islamic state, do you?
Please answer questions, instead of dishing out questions, RC."
So to you, secularism is higher then democracy? Plus, no where in the MAlaysian constitution that states clearly of the secularist nature of our Constitution.
Not a single unequivocal provision anywhere in the Constitution.
Furthermore, it's like i asked, if 80-85% of the people of this country wishes to replace the estadblish an Islamic state, will u deny their democratic rights?
Again, i'm beggining to see your double standard. You don't stand for democracy, yous tand for secularism and u want secularism to be shove down every single Muslim's throat if u have your way.
Plus, Islam has existed in multi culture and religous soceity for a long time. Islam pioneered such concept long before secularism.
Why rely on secularism so much, Cruzeiro?
Your double standard is as clear as Angelina Jolie's pimple
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:38:03
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:17:30
BTW, by "talibanisation", I meant the idea that women are denied equal rights and education, beheadings or firing squads for "perceived adultery", tribal laws, rape victims being persecuted, chopping of limbs and what not - mind you - these things, most if not all are quite true about the Taliban rule. "
Cruzeiro,
You're as confused as Richard Nixon's US Medical reform program.
You don't even know the difference between Islam, Taliban, tribal courts and rules and not to mention lies and untruth promoted by western medias against the Taliban.
You need to go back and reexamine the facts before coming out with crappy statements like the above.
In short, you don't even know:
a. What Talibanization means?
b. Have they really existed before or not?
TQ
ps Islamic syariah is not only practiced in Afghanistan. It's also practiced in Saudi, Sudan, Pakistan, IRan, Acheh and many more places in the world not touched by Taleban.
...
written by cabearth, January 17, 2008 | 22:42:25
written by cruzeiro, January 17, 2008 | 22:20:13
Let us go back to the days of Tunku - tolerant, respectful and understanding. The concept of one's race being more superior is already gone. We are all Malaysians esp those born after 31 Aug 1957.
============
Yes - Tunku and also Hussein Onn were against the concept of an Islamic State!!
Yes, let's go back to the Tunuku and TUn Hussein Onn and support their "Ketuanan Melayu" concept which was started by Tunku and continued by TUn Hussein.
I read a Tunku's interview 2 years before he died, in which he declared his utmost support for Islamic State.
...
written by renoir, January 18, 2008 | 00:14:28
cruzeiro wrote:
>Chuah - I'm disappointed with your comment!
It isn't about "talking bad things" - it is about using the system to subvert our secular constitution!! Would you wanna publicly declare your love for somebody who promises to subvert what you stand for, and praises you for "opportunity" and convenience?]]
Cruz, my fellow Christian: Churchill once said that when you're young and not a liberal, you've no heart. But when you're old and not a conservative, you've no brain. What he meant was that, ultimately, we gotta do what's possible, not fantasize what's impossible. Reality says that the Opposition will not win the next GE. They'd be very lucky to even deny BN a two-thirds majority. Thus the possibility of PAS establishing an Islamic State is as likely as DAP setting up a democratic socialist state - somewere between zero and subzero. So why make a fuss about the kind of government the other might establish when neither has the ability? Isn't that nothing more than grandstanding, not to say a form of currying favor with BN?
I'm not asking anyone to publicly declare his love for anyone else - unless the object is Keira Knightley - rather, what I'm suggesting is that no opposition party should publicly attack a fellow opposition party , even by inference, as there's much more to criticize the government that has brought our country to such a sorry mess. Just point out, should anyone suggest that DAP is having a pact with PAS, that the accuser must insane to suggest that such a charge could hide 50 years of misrule. PAS should answer in somewhat the same manner, should the establishment attack it for having a pact with the secular DAP - just mention that a just, non-Islamic party is much more favored in the eyes of the Prophet than a party that makes a mockery of Islam.
LChuah
...
written by cabearth, January 18, 2008 | 01:36:09
The way i see it heres the thing
a. First, everyone is afraid of the so-call PAS'es "islamic state". Yet no one knows exactly how the Islamic state looks like.
b. Or PAS actually intends to implement the Islamic state immediately after they get into power
c. and PAS did say that islamic state will not be IMPOSED and only can be implemented with the consent of the people
d. The way i see it, PAS will subject the decision for Islamic State to a referendum in which a 75% approval rating will be required
e. And, what abt the fact that Malaysia is already an Islamic state announced by BN? How come the Chinese and Indian still votes for BN in large numbers despite Malaysia already taken the Islamic state identity?
f. As for Syariah laws as promoted by PAS, i fail to see why non muslims are concerned about it because non muslims is not subjected to the law altogether. Remember the Quran says "No Compulsion in religion".
g. As for issues related to religous identity of a deceased non-muslim but claimed to be a muslim by religous authority, i propose the setting up of a special tribunal consisting of members from Mahkamah Syariah and those of the civil court to determine the status of Islam of the deceased. That way both side can settle the issue equivocaly.
...
written by teo siew chin, January 18, 2008 | 09:06:16
hahahahahaha Renoir, u r funny man! "...not fantasize what's impossible..." - totally agree with you on that. I'd say you guys should reserve your fantasies for say...Keira Knightley - that bag of bones? nah, bad taste! go for more meat!!
Cruzeiro need to log on to more porn-sites (RPK can help with that?
) just so to work out that angst hehehehe.=====================
(The following got "censored" automatically for some reason - maybe too long a reply)
LChuah,
I'm not asking anyone to publicly declare his love for anyone else - unless the object is Keira Knightley
=========
First and foremost, let me apologize for my ignorance - I'll google Keira Knightly after this (TSC - she's a pornstar, huh?)
In my statement earlier, the reason I mentioned it was becos RPK asked "why don't they love us" (with reference to the public denial by DAP) without really dissecting the issue.
But I do get your point. Yours too TSC!
Now RC,
Pls find it in your heart to forgive me, my ignorance about "taliban's true progressive nature" - I wasn't talking about them per se. I was referring to the popular idea/concept about the Taliban/ Saudi (Wahabbi/ Salafi) "brand" of Islam, reinforced with the declarations.
I'm well aware about the fact that "Islamic syariah is not only practiced in Afghanistan. It's also practiced in Saudi, Sudan, Pakistan, IRan, Acheh and many more places" - thank you. I'm impressed with the number of progressive syaria ruled states that you mentioned, and I wouldn't go further on that matter.
"So to you, secularism is higher then democracy? Plus, no where in the MAlaysian constitution that states clearly of the secularist nature of our Constitution. ....
Why rely on secularism so much, Cruzeiro?
Your double standard is as clear as Angelina Jolie's pimple"
Ha ha - you do have a sense of humor!
No lah - I'm not for secularism over democracy. You've misunderstood me. I do recognize the virtues of "Secularism". However, without being rooted in theologically based morality, it is bound to get corrupted - man will be lost Morally.
On the other hand I also recognize the evils that a theocracy can bring about.
While secularism can has the freedom to be "flexible" thus enabling pluralism, a theocracy doesn't - be it Islamic, Hindu or Christian. This is where secularism has an edge over theology, where statecraft is concerned.
To say that I prefer secularism over democracy, in a sense, I confess that you would be correct under certain circumstances - democracy is only a formula by which the people may rule, but it doesn't guarantee justice (just as any other system). A Theocracy on the other other hand, sooner or later, is definite to lead to repression of "infidel" communities.
You wrote, "Yet no one knows exactly how the Islamic state looks like."
Precisely - shouldn't they be articulating their ideas better, considering the fears of other communities? It isn't really sufficient that they say it for mass appeal (of Muslims) and be clueless about it, right?
For further info on my opinions on this matter, you may read what I wrote with regard to the "PAS Dilemma", [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/12/thots-on-pas-cooperation-and-vote.html[/url] , [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/11/pas-factor-viable-alternative.html[/url], and [url]http://cruzinthots.blogspot.com/2007/11/class-politics-other-option.html[/url]
Please be sure that these aren't hard and fast opinions - they are debatable.
Thanks.
==============================
For those who may wonder as to who RC is, it is just referring to cabearth.
Anyway, RC (nor RPK) never gave me a straight answer to any of my questions, about the dilemma that PAS has created for DAP, to appease the Muslims.
What I question here is,
"Who now is the 'Trojan Horse' that RPK wishes to highlight?
Who is being divisive by not articulating a concept that they hope to sell to the voters?"
Is it DAP who makes a constitutional stand against the NEP without articulating the alternative?
Or is it PAS who declared the desire to create an Islamic state, (which could possibly mean the rewriting of the Constitution) using the "secular spirit" and processes enshrined in the Constitution- the ideas which also haven't quite been articulated to reassure the non Muslims?
I leave it to the reader to decide, and possibly "reassure/ enlighten" me with regard to the matter at hand.
Tuesday, 15 January 2008
But It Isn't Our Culture ...... or is it?
People do not believe lies because they have to, but because they want to. - Malcolm Muggeridge
The following are words from the article "Another Merdeka? - Return of the repressed" by M. Nadarajah in MalaysiaKini :-
“If Ketuanan Melayu is about being aggressive, then it involves breaking us into groups and applying the principle of exclusion…and pulling out the keris to threaten or frighten others. If Ketuanan Melayu is about peace, then it must be based on the principle of inclusion. Ketuanan Melayu must be protective not aggressive, must be nurturing not destructive, particularly when the others…(many born here)… have come here to help build this country…That is the real Malay Culture.”
There seems to be many perceptions and opinions with regard to what actually IS "our culture". In the first place, is there any real "culture" left, that is worth acknowledging?
Just as the cliche "The Root Cause of ..." was popular in the days of TDM, these days, the catch phrase seems to be "This isn't our Culture!"
Anything and everything that doesn't work in favor of the "political elite" is deemed to be a "foreign culture" and undesirable.
Since when were these wise guys "cultural" experts on determining what was, is, should or shouldn't be our culture? Half of them, can't even articulate their thoughts
well enough for a decent debate! Some of them embarrass the nation by stuttering incoherently on Al-Jazeera, or reduce Muslims to a tribe on BBC!
Let me try to imagine what our politicos say is, and isn't our culture .....
It is apparently our culture to avoid questioning authority and demanding accountability - or else, you're an undesirable element. It is apparently very much in our interest to be submissive and subservient to authorities, no matter what the cost.
Freedom of expression through the available media, is a big No - or else, your licence may be suspended. Blogging about "interesting" socio-political issues may get your cheap PC taken for "investigation" for months on end, even if you're just trying to be constructive in your free time. (There goes your hobby, and online trading/ banking facility ....) You're now made to feel like a "potential threat" to society, even if you're a patriotic citizen - that's our culture!
Public protest isn't our culture even if the people want it. Political assassinations isn't our culture, even if it happens. Nor are pedophilia, corruption, nepotism, cronyism or
C4 bombing of pretty girls.
Accountability towards financial/legal impropriety or sexual indiscretions isn't quite our culture as well! (Mr. CSL, What you know- You've let "us" down with your confession and resignation!)
It is not in our culture to have an independent Judiciary, EC, Media, and whatever else - we are simply too stupid to know anything, and as such, we need to have "leaders" to tell us what to think!
These leaders now promote a culture that approves of calling the dissatisfied tax-paying rakyat, who pay for their fancy suits and cars, "beruk", "monyet", "goblok", "wayar putus" and what not.
Of course, we cannot forget the bravado and calls for duels with the fairer sex (or otherwise) in parliament, even if violence "isn't in our culture".
We have "leaders" who prefer to look at hemlines of stewardesses with an eye elsewhere (which they don't have to, lest they get an infarct), terowongs (in their heads, probably, which voters
don't see), and vulgar bocor statements in parliament, while ignoring factors leading to the lack of FDI in comparison to neighbouring nations.
We have a culture of being deaf and blind to the realities of globalisation, in the face of the much lauded "social contract".
We have a culture that highlights the differences between ethnic communities, rather than similarities - and it is okay to look for petty issues that divide the people further, like politicising Arabic word Allah.
It is also okay to promote prejudice against the beliefs and practices deemed alien from the Islamic perspective, while the "Non" elite politicians kowtow as always.
Matters like these have to gain maximum exposure to promote a sense of "non-belonging" among the Nons.
Meanwhile we are told that we should talk behind closed doors to sort out "our problems" - in other words, we have to make a "contract" (social or private) and come out smiling for the public to see. Whatever the "negotiated deal" was, it has to be under the jurisdiction of the OSA.
Matters that promote pride and prejudice among the people in the nation is always played up so as to promote the feeling of "insecurity".
It is always "acceptable" within our culture to have inflammatory statements screaming for blood of their fellow citizens, simply becos they were born "infidels" of "Non-Bumi" stock. That was acceptable, as the "leaders" were playing to the gallery, and becos the Kris was actually meant to "protect" them, apparently! No apology is due from one who is the "Tuan" - that's our Culture.
All these events that have brought about lots of ill-feeling and restlessness among Malaysians, brings to mind what Malcolm Muggeridge said of mankind in general:-
It is difficult to resist the conclusion, that 20th century man has decided to abolish himself ...... Tired of his struggle to be himself, He has created boredom out of his own affluence, Impotence out of his own erotomania, Vulnerability out of his own strength. He himself blows the trumpet that brings the walls of his cities crashing down, until at last, Having educated himself into imbecility, Having drugged and polluted himself into stupefaction, He keels over, a weary, battered old brontosaurus, and becomes extinct.
It wouldn't be too difficult to imagine the above statement in the Malaysian context, considering the events that have transpired over the last 25 yrs.
The sad part is, a vast majority of Malaysians are too oblivious to their surroundings, being all too busy in the hustle and bustle of urban life, trying to make a living to cope with their aspirations of a "better" lifestyle - albeit a costlier one, physically, emotionally and financially. Anything that comes in the way of these "aspirations" is perceived as a nuisance.
They have been conditioned to believe that it isn't their duty to improve the system, but only to work and compete within it. Malaysians are convinced that political struggles are best left to the elite/ the Malays/ Bumiputras, lest they lose their "bread and butter" as a result of persecution- as a result of asserting their rights.
Malaysians have been made to believe that Freedom, Human Rights, Dignity and Accountability isn't worth the price that they might have to pay in this country, for their future generations. This is more evident among the "Nons" - many of who, have dreams of migrating to other lands of opportunity, where their contributions would be appreciated. Meanwhile, many Nons have been made to believe that it is their duty to work their asses off and pay through their nose while they have to, before they can "jump ship".
Many Malays in the heartlands and in the middle/ lower socio-economic strata, on the other hand, have swallowed the propaganda of the mainstream media, that boosts their ego and religious fervor.
They would fight tooth and nail to uphold the racist and divisive agendas (of some selfish leaders, as per the social contract) that they are convinced, to be truly beneficial to their interests. Having been convinced of this myth, many have willingly surrendered their rights to their "leaders", who have been entrusted to speak for them.
They are only too happy to see that people whom they perceive to be of their "stock", being able to call the shots, even if they can only crow about it, while being enslaved and dependent on "economical favoritism".
This, I'm certain, is what our "leaders" really appreciate as "our culture"
- this is, "Truly Malaysia".
"Many of our perceptions are distorted by our prejudices, particularly if we perceive those prejudices to be convictions". - Ravi Zacharias
The following are words from the article "Another Merdeka? - Return of the repressed" by M. Nadarajah in MalaysiaKini :-
“If Ketuanan Melayu is about being aggressive, then it involves breaking us into groups and applying the principle of exclusion…and pulling out the keris to threaten or frighten others. If Ketuanan Melayu is about peace, then it must be based on the principle of inclusion. Ketuanan Melayu must be protective not aggressive, must be nurturing not destructive, particularly when the others…(many born here)… have come here to help build this country…That is the real Malay Culture.”
There seems to be many perceptions and opinions with regard to what actually IS "our culture". In the first place, is there any real "culture" left, that is worth acknowledging?
Just as the cliche "The Root Cause of ..." was popular in the days of TDM, these days, the catch phrase seems to be "This isn't our Culture!"
Anything and everything that doesn't work in favor of the "political elite" is deemed to be a "foreign culture" and undesirable.Since when were these wise guys "cultural" experts on determining what was, is, should or shouldn't be our culture? Half of them, can't even articulate their thoughts
well enough for a decent debate! Some of them embarrass the nation by stuttering incoherently on Al-Jazeera, or reduce Muslims to a tribe on BBC!Let me try to imagine what our politicos say is, and isn't our culture .....
It is apparently our culture to avoid questioning authority and demanding accountability - or else, you're an undesirable element. It is apparently very much in our interest to be submissive and subservient to authorities, no matter what the cost.
Freedom of expression through the available media, is a big No - or else, your licence may be suspended. Blogging about "interesting" socio-political issues may get your cheap PC taken for "investigation" for months on end, even if you're just trying to be constructive in your free time. (There goes your hobby, and online trading/ banking facility ....) You're now made to feel like a "potential threat" to society, even if you're a patriotic citizen - that's our culture!
Public protest isn't our culture even if the people want it. Political assassinations isn't our culture, even if it happens. Nor are pedophilia, corruption, nepotism, cronyism or
C4 bombing of pretty girls.Accountability towards financial/legal impropriety or sexual indiscretions isn't quite our culture as well! (Mr. CSL, What you know- You've let "us" down with your confession and resignation!)
It is not in our culture to have an independent Judiciary, EC, Media, and whatever else - we are simply too stupid to know anything, and as such, we need to have "leaders" to tell us what to think!
These leaders now promote a culture that approves of calling the dissatisfied tax-paying rakyat, who pay for their fancy suits and cars, "beruk", "monyet", "goblok", "wayar putus" and what not.Of course, we cannot forget the bravado and calls for duels with the fairer sex (or otherwise) in parliament, even if violence "isn't in our culture".
We have "leaders" who prefer to look at hemlines of stewardesses with an eye elsewhere (which they don't have to, lest they get an infarct), terowongs (in their heads, probably, which voters
don't see), and vulgar bocor statements in parliament, while ignoring factors leading to the lack of FDI in comparison to neighbouring nations.We have a culture of being deaf and blind to the realities of globalisation, in the face of the much lauded "social contract".
We have a culture that highlights the differences between ethnic communities, rather than similarities - and it is okay to look for petty issues that divide the people further, like politicising Arabic word Allah.It is also okay to promote prejudice against the beliefs and practices deemed alien from the Islamic perspective, while the "Non" elite politicians kowtow as always.
Matters like these have to gain maximum exposure to promote a sense of "non-belonging" among the Nons.
Meanwhile we are told that we should talk behind closed doors to sort out "our problems" - in other words, we have to make a "contract" (social or private) and come out smiling for the public to see. Whatever the "negotiated deal" was, it has to be under the jurisdiction of the OSA.
Matters that promote pride and prejudice among the people in the nation is always played up so as to promote the feeling of "insecurity".
It is always "acceptable" within our culture to have inflammatory statements screaming for blood of their fellow citizens, simply becos they were born "infidels" of "Non-Bumi" stock. That was acceptable, as the "leaders" were playing to the gallery, and becos the Kris was actually meant to "protect" them, apparently! No apology is due from one who is the "Tuan" - that's our Culture.All these events that have brought about lots of ill-feeling and restlessness among Malaysians, brings to mind what Malcolm Muggeridge said of mankind in general:-
It is difficult to resist the conclusion, that 20th century man has decided to abolish himself ...... Tired of his struggle to be himself, He has created boredom out of his own affluence, Impotence out of his own erotomania, Vulnerability out of his own strength. He himself blows the trumpet that brings the walls of his cities crashing down, until at last, Having educated himself into imbecility, Having drugged and polluted himself into stupefaction, He keels over, a weary, battered old brontosaurus, and becomes extinct.
It wouldn't be too difficult to imagine the above statement in the Malaysian context, considering the events that have transpired over the last 25 yrs.
The sad part is, a vast majority of Malaysians are too oblivious to their surroundings, being all too busy in the hustle and bustle of urban life, trying to make a living to cope with their aspirations of a "better" lifestyle - albeit a costlier one, physically, emotionally and financially. Anything that comes in the way of these "aspirations" is perceived as a nuisance.
They have been conditioned to believe that it isn't their duty to improve the system, but only to work and compete within it. Malaysians are convinced that political struggles are best left to the elite/ the Malays/ Bumiputras, lest they lose their "bread and butter" as a result of persecution- as a result of asserting their rights.
Malaysians have been made to believe that Freedom, Human Rights, Dignity and Accountability isn't worth the price that they might have to pay in this country, for their future generations. This is more evident among the "Nons" - many of who, have dreams of migrating to other lands of opportunity, where their contributions would be appreciated. Meanwhile, many Nons have been made to believe that it is their duty to work their asses off and pay through their nose while they have to, before they can "jump ship".Many Malays in the heartlands and in the middle/ lower socio-economic strata, on the other hand, have swallowed the propaganda of the mainstream media, that boosts their ego and religious fervor.
They would fight tooth and nail to uphold the racist and divisive agendas (of some selfish leaders, as per the social contract) that they are convinced, to be truly beneficial to their interests. Having been convinced of this myth, many have willingly surrendered their rights to their "leaders", who have been entrusted to speak for them.
They are only too happy to see that people whom they perceive to be of their "stock", being able to call the shots, even if they can only crow about it, while being enslaved and dependent on "economical favoritism".
This, I'm certain, is what our "leaders" really appreciate as "our culture"
- this is, "Truly Malaysia".
"Many of our perceptions are distorted by our prejudices, particularly if we perceive those prejudices to be convictions". - Ravi Zacharias
Tuesday, 8 January 2008
The Pirate and "Social Contractor".
Tsze-Kung asked, saying, 'Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life?"
The Master said, "Is not Reciprocity such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others."
-Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
Bodohland is the land of contractors, for the contractors, by the contractors.
Mind you, just like all humans, they are all very social animals.
With great pride, we give you The Social Contractor - who "abides" by the "social contract" laid down by himself, even if the goalposts keep shifting on the "level playing field".
For a start, do the "Social Contractor" in Bodohland understand what this word "Reciprocity" means at all?
Maybe they do - and their definition would most probably go like this :-
1. I'm the boss aka "Tuan" - and I decide on everything, I'm always the best and always "Korrect".
2. We have a contract and I get all contracts - for all time. Do not question it. Especially that of Petronaz.
3. This is my land, and - even if I sold it to you when it was worthless.
4. Be thankful for that - and as a reward for my acceptance of your money, you have to serve me.
5. I reserve the right to abrogate all earlier contracts and rights that might have been favourable to you, even if it doesn't favour me in the long run.
6. However, should 'my people' object or my pockets run dry, you should be willing to pay me damages - happily.
7. Once you've built something of value, I may exercise my right to acquire it at par value.
8. If I run out of cash, You have to buy it out at 10 times the market value to make me happy- lest I unleash Mr. Chris and Mr. ISA, whom I nurture to "protect" you.
9. In return, I shall give ("sub") you more contracts that are in my name, for which you shall pay me royalties.
10. If you have a problem, refer to articles 1, 2 and 3, or you "boleh keluar/ balik negeri".
(Please refer to your local contractor for further details/ the fine print)
This is very fair contract, from the perspective of the contractor - doesn't matter which color or creed or party he belongs to. For further reading, please go to "Warlords and heavyweights: two peas in a pod"
In short, whatever the contract may say, (just as in the democratic elections of Bolehland), the unwritten mantra, "the Pirate's" greatest commandment is - "I win". All other things have to work around this one infallible Law, or else the contract would be in jeopardy.
All you Bodohlander dissenters, will be given some peanuts to munch on (much like monkeys), should you agree to dance to this music. The social contractor would be eternally grateful to you for playing the game and letting them win on their own terms. The Lead Monkeys will be given a real fat peanut contract. The commoners (non-contractors) will be given their chance to gloat about the peanuts.
One thing is for sure - The Social Contractor (according to some people) wouldn't accept anything other than the above, just as they wouldn't accept "Allah" as the Arabic word for God.
In fact Arabic which has now been hijacked (and pirated), comes under the jurisdiction of the ministry of internal security (I think) - acquired under the spirit of "the contract" (refer item no.7, above).
No amount of debate and logic can change their silly mind on this matter - Allah is only meant for Malay speaking Muslims in this land of Social Contractors.
[On behalf of all thinking people, my humble apologies to all Arab linguists for the piracy. If you have questions, please refer to items 1,2, and 3 in the contract].
The beauty about the Social Contractor is - he/ she has innate ability to deny him/herself and the followers, the truth about anything and everything.
The social contractor of today however isn't the same as those of yesteryears.These days, they come in all colors, shapes, sizes and mental capacity.
The most popular among them have fetishes for the long metallic objects, "beruks", "terowongs" that are "bocor", tolls, Corridors, C4 explosives, "wayar putus", fights with the fairer sex (in and out of parliament or hotel rooms), nasi kandar, PKFZs, OPVs, Petronaz ..... and the list goes on.
The "chosen ones" have always got to be made to feel like bosses, despite being willing slaves, and being fed peanuts by the contractors. This has to be done by depriving their nemesis - the commoner "non-chosen ones" - of equal opportunities or rewards for their efforts in nation building.
These "nons" (as opposed to the "Social contractor Nons") need to be deprived of opportunities so as to make them more resilient during economic hardship, so as to be able to feed the contractors.
If things were to go wrong, social contractor has to be absolved of all sins. Contractors must always have a spin to dump the blame on somebody else, preferably those "Nons" of Chinese, Indian or Hebrew descent. To make things easy, the contractor just has to lump them all together and refer to the "little red dot" down south. The free pirate's media has to be just that - but only as the mouthpiece of the contractor, to get the above mentioned message to the "ignorant Nons".
Of course when all fails and people object, they always have the options of either gagging the "Nons", spraying chemicals and gassing the dissenters, or putting the fear of god in them through this guy called ISA.
ISA has been quite efficient since the days of the white man, when he thought us "Asian Values" of submission, in the face of daylight robbery.
ISA has been the cornerstone of the "volatile stability", provided to all of us by the Social Contractor. He was instrumental in neutralizing and demonizing all "undesirable elements" who might've posed a threat to the Contractor's grip on Contracts (aka Power).
Whatever said and done, the Social Contractor/ Pirate par excellence in the last 50 yrs, is none other than the cross-causeway/border chameleon, Mr. Mahatheeran himself.
He single handedly (with the help of some low-profile philanthropist tycoon sponsors, of course) brought us out of the dark recesses of the third-world, into the showcases of the despotic third-world, all via "negotiated contracts".
He gave new meaning to the word "Contract" and "Correct".
He gave new meaning to the words "Justice", "Law", "Order", "Freedom", "Merit" and "Boleh" (not to mention, "BODOH").
To justify his greatness, he put a sleepy fall guy in his place, to take all the "punches" coming from his downliners and "Nons" while they party- and I'm pretty sure that was part of the Contract.
Hey, who's complaining - I wouldn't mind taking a few "punches" (not the kind that would give me "black eye") myself, if I could sleep peacefully in the corridors, make my bucks and live a jet-set (or "yacht-set", as the case may be) life!
Hell man - I know of people who'd kill for such a negotiated contract!
[Mona Affendy did it for sure ....... and I still wonder if she actually did get away with it, is alive and kicking, like some of her clients - although some kicked the bucket].
All the Contractor needs these days to escape the scrutiny of Bodohlanders and be regarded as a hero, is a piece of tin badge, a piece of paper with a signature and be called a Tune, Granpa (or something like that).
And guess what - the simpletons of Bodohland would drool and go ga-ga over him, in this third-world feudal backwater.
In fact, the people would even bend over (backwards and/or forwards) to pleasure him and his band of contractors!
Such is the state of this beautiful land of Pirates from time immemorial.
Praise the Lord. Hallelujah!
(which means "ALLAHU", according to Deedat, the famous showman/ Godman).
The Master said, "Is not Reciprocity such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others."
-Confucius (551 BC - 479 BC)
Bodohland is the land of contractors, for the contractors, by the contractors.
Mind you, just like all humans, they are all very social animals.
With great pride, we give you The Social Contractor - who "abides" by the "social contract" laid down by himself, even if the goalposts keep shifting on the "level playing field".
For a start, do the "Social Contractor" in Bodohland understand what this word "Reciprocity" means at all?
Maybe they do - and their definition would most probably go like this :-
1. I'm the boss aka "Tuan" - and I decide on everything, I'm always the best and always "Korrect".
2. We have a contract and I get all contracts - for all time. Do not question it. Especially that of Petronaz.
3. This is my land, and - even if I sold it to you when it was worthless.
4. Be thankful for that - and as a reward for my acceptance of your money, you have to serve me.
5. I reserve the right to abrogate all earlier contracts and rights that might have been favourable to you, even if it doesn't favour me in the long run.
6. However, should 'my people' object or my pockets run dry, you should be willing to pay me damages - happily.
7. Once you've built something of value, I may exercise my right to acquire it at par value.
8. If I run out of cash, You have to buy it out at 10 times the market value to make me happy- lest I unleash Mr. Chris and Mr. ISA, whom I nurture to "protect" you.
9. In return, I shall give ("sub") you more contracts that are in my name, for which you shall pay me royalties.
10. If you have a problem, refer to articles 1, 2 and 3, or you "boleh keluar/ balik negeri".
(Please refer to your local contractor for further details/ the fine print)
This is very fair contract, from the perspective of the contractor - doesn't matter which color or creed or party he belongs to. For further reading, please go to "Warlords and heavyweights: two peas in a pod"
In short, whatever the contract may say, (just as in the democratic elections of Bolehland), the unwritten mantra, "the Pirate's" greatest commandment is - "I win". All other things have to work around this one infallible Law, or else the contract would be in jeopardy.
All you Bodohlander dissenters, will be given some peanuts to munch on (much like monkeys), should you agree to dance to this music. The social contractor would be eternally grateful to you for playing the game and letting them win on their own terms. The Lead Monkeys will be given a real fat peanut contract. The commoners (non-contractors) will be given their chance to gloat about the peanuts.
One thing is for sure - The Social Contractor (according to some people) wouldn't accept anything other than the above, just as they wouldn't accept "Allah" as the Arabic word for God.
In fact Arabic which has now been hijacked (and pirated), comes under the jurisdiction of the ministry of internal security (I think) - acquired under the spirit of "the contract" (refer item no.7, above).
No amount of debate and logic can change their silly mind on this matter - Allah is only meant for Malay speaking Muslims in this land of Social Contractors.
[On behalf of all thinking people, my humble apologies to all Arab linguists for the piracy. If you have questions, please refer to items 1,2, and 3 in the contract].
The beauty about the Social Contractor is - he/ she has innate ability to deny him/herself and the followers, the truth about anything and everything.
The social contractor of today however isn't the same as those of yesteryears.These days, they come in all colors, shapes, sizes and mental capacity.
The most popular among them have fetishes for the long metallic objects, "beruks", "terowongs" that are "bocor", tolls, Corridors, C4 explosives, "wayar putus", fights with the fairer sex (in and out of parliament or hotel rooms), nasi kandar, PKFZs, OPVs, Petronaz ..... and the list goes on.
The "chosen ones" have always got to be made to feel like bosses, despite being willing slaves, and being fed peanuts by the contractors. This has to be done by depriving their nemesis - the commoner "non-chosen ones" - of equal opportunities or rewards for their efforts in nation building.
These "nons" (as opposed to the "Social contractor Nons") need to be deprived of opportunities so as to make them more resilient during economic hardship, so as to be able to feed the contractors.
If things were to go wrong, social contractor has to be absolved of all sins. Contractors must always have a spin to dump the blame on somebody else, preferably those "Nons" of Chinese, Indian or Hebrew descent. To make things easy, the contractor just has to lump them all together and refer to the "little red dot" down south. The free pirate's media has to be just that - but only as the mouthpiece of the contractor, to get the above mentioned message to the "ignorant Nons".
Of course when all fails and people object, they always have the options of either gagging the "Nons", spraying chemicals and gassing the dissenters, or putting the fear of god in them through this guy called ISA.
ISA has been quite efficient since the days of the white man, when he thought us "Asian Values" of submission, in the face of daylight robbery.
ISA has been the cornerstone of the "volatile stability", provided to all of us by the Social Contractor. He was instrumental in neutralizing and demonizing all "undesirable elements" who might've posed a threat to the Contractor's grip on Contracts (aka Power).
Whatever said and done, the Social Contractor/ Pirate par excellence in the last 50 yrs, is none other than the cross-causeway/border chameleon, Mr. Mahatheeran himself.
He single handedly (with the help of some low-profile philanthropist tycoon sponsors, of course) brought us out of the dark recesses of the third-world, into the showcases of the despotic third-world, all via "negotiated contracts".
He gave new meaning to the word "Contract" and "Correct".
He gave new meaning to the words "Justice", "Law", "Order", "Freedom", "Merit" and "Boleh" (not to mention, "BODOH").
To justify his greatness, he put a sleepy fall guy in his place, to take all the "punches" coming from his downliners and "Nons" while they party- and I'm pretty sure that was part of the Contract.
Hey, who's complaining - I wouldn't mind taking a few "punches" (not the kind that would give me "black eye") myself, if I could sleep peacefully in the corridors, make my bucks and live a jet-set (or "yacht-set", as the case may be) life!
Hell man - I know of people who'd kill for such a negotiated contract!
[Mona Affendy did it for sure ....... and I still wonder if she actually did get away with it, is alive and kicking, like some of her clients - although some kicked the bucket].
All the Contractor needs these days to escape the scrutiny of Bodohlanders and be regarded as a hero, is a piece of tin badge, a piece of paper with a signature and be called a Tune, Granpa (or something like that).
And guess what - the simpletons of Bodohland would drool and go ga-ga over him, in this third-world feudal backwater.
In fact, the people would even bend over (backwards and/or forwards) to pleasure him and his band of contractors!
Such is the state of this beautiful land of Pirates from time immemorial.
Praise the Lord. Hallelujah!
(which means "ALLAHU", according to Deedat, the famous showman/ Godman).
Sunday, 6 January 2008
Friday, 4 January 2008
Open letter to God (Malaysian Edition)
- It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them.
Dear God,
Firstly, I'd like to wish you a very good day or whatever you call it in heaven.
Please take note that this letter is being written while I'm having my regular medical-dose of the "stengah" (I recommend Chivas or Tiger beer), to assist in the process of "meditation". Might've recommended Mary Jane, had I been in Jamaica or Holland - places I hope to meet you some day.
Allow me to humbly apologize for my homo sapien ignorance - I really don't know which religion you belong to, unlike the "wise guys" to have regular communications (via teleconference facilities) with you and other friends, at their closed (possibly hotel) door private meetings, with or without any fancy outfits.
I'd also like to apologize for the fact that being a Malaysian "Kufr", I'm not permitted to call you "ALLAH". This is due to the fact that, due to the prevalent sentiment (aka "UMNO Baru culture") it is a word that has been reserved for Muslims (I really don't know if it is meant only for the "mukmeen", or also for the "munafeeq" as well), where Malaysia is concerned.
The weird part of it all, is the fact that Lina Joy and Azhar Mansor (and numerous others in secret) can legally do so, at their whim and fancy - simply because they were born into a certain "tribe"(as the Honourable Foreign Minister would put it on BBC). I object to such double standards. On second thoughts, their only other option is to be given an early appointment to meet you (by your defenders) to sort out the problem ....
Anyway I've got no problems with that - but I suppose my "brothers and sisters" in Sabah and Sarawak do. I also pity the confusion among non-Muslims from the Arab states who would visit Malaysia- they could possibly be arrested for not knowing that your name changes when they cross into Malaysian borders.
To prevent your flock from being arrested, I shall suggest to those in the travel/ tourism industry to print in bold, on all tickets to Malaysia the required information.
I shall also advise the honorable Minister of Tranport to instruct all entry points/ flights/ ports to make the neccessary announcements to all who are Alien to "Malaysian culture/ mental health". A memo with regard to this matter shall be sent via a (govt approved) courier ASAP, i.e. through the next "UMNO Baru" member who kicks the bucket.
Who said you were Almighty .... now the Malaysian Govt (aka UMNO Baru, I think) is giving you a run for the money .... sorry - for your omnipotence, I guess.
Speaking of mental health - how come our former Minister of Health is accusing all and sundry for plotting his downfall, and doesn't seem to blame you for the "blessings" that you endowed him with?
How could he, (being a doctor on top of that) have expected the people accept his apology, to tolerate sexual promiscuity/ philandering, and allow him to remain in a coveted post? Had he lost all sense of shame and decency, or did you forget to insert the software into the "hardware"? Has he (and many others in the Malaysian Corridors of Power) forgotten that they should have exemplary behaviour, and be seen to be incorruptible?
LKY down south would've used the expression "whiter than white", to describe the character required of a leader - obviously, you inserted a different software for Singaporeans, eh?
On the other hand, it could've been your nemesis, who corrupted the Malaysians' software, after they joined the "band of tuans, taikos and thalaivars" in politics after kicking Singapore out ..... that sounds more like it.
Getting back to CSL, with all the cribbing, I'm certain that he didn't resign voluntarily - so much for the God-fearing "honorable actions" of humility and accountability. He must have somehow been faced with the possibility of losing the "blessings" and "heirlooms" - I seriously doubt that it was you who threatened him. He obviously feared for his "jewels", more than you, if that were the case!!!
As far as your abode on earth is concerned, kindly be aware that Hindraf, is on the warpath to defend your rights, even if they are illegal shrines. Anyway they are also very keen on avoiding confrontation with those responsible for these actions, and have skillfully dodged them, by begging the Brits while screaming their guts out locally. Rest assured Dear God, that the "Minister of Hindu affairs" will be making his offerings and penance to you, even as Hindraf offers prayers for his soul. Please God, do not make a mockery of hairstyles, if and when you grant him reincarnation as a wild boar or dog.
By the way, why is it that many bodies (and now, children too) in Malaysia these days, tend to get snatched away by those who are permitted to call you Allah? First, it was Moorthy, then that lady who got sent for rehab, then Subashini. The latest seems to be that of a "one day old" lady in HUKM. (I have a strange feeling that some money matters are involved here).
Anyway - How could you grant the luxuries and opulence of heaven, to one who denied you all her life, gorged herself with the lovely, non-kosher taste of alcohol and pork but for only a day?? The calibration of your Dacing must be so totally screwed-up, like the NEP's "level playing field"!
I don't get it!
That simply isn't fair - I thought that you were fair and compassionate ...... it's like saying that your whole life is worthless, until the very last moment!
No wonder the adulterers, pedophiles, rapist, "sodomists", robbers, the Mona affendys and C4 culprits are unrepentant - did you give them some inside information or what?
Based on this logic, CSL might just become "whiter than white". If he just decides to convert - jumping from one "ministry" to another, each time his zipper fails and is "caught on tape", until the final moment when he chooses "the one true religion". But of course the family could lose the corpse and inheritance lah (depending on which is the last). The same goes for "Angeline Yam aka A. Yam" too!
Lastly, let me stress that I truly appreciate the divine wisdom of your "Malaysian emissaries", in making this "prohibition-of-your-hallowed-name-for-Kufrs" statement after the Visit Malaysia Year is over - now everyone can fly over, and nobody needs to visit Malaysia.
Okay lah God, I think I'll call it a day for now - nice talking to you. Hope to do this again soon.
Cheers.
Your faithful "Kufr",
Cruzeiro.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)