Total Recall - "Trojans" Revisited ....

"Who are the oppressors but the Nobility and Gentry; and who are oppressed, if not the Yeoman, the Farmer, the Tradesman and the Labourer?
... your slavery is their liberty, your poverty is their prosperity; yea, in brief, your honouring of them, dishonoureth the commonality... Unlord those that are lorded by you."
- Ranter Laurence Clarkson, 1647 (p. 81), The Many-Headed Hydra

*****************************************

Lately, as I was going thru the web for some reading material, I found this image of the three legged stool at a DIY blog - and guess what I thought of as I read the author's comment (below)?
It was none other than BN and its "NEP/social contract/Ketuanan Melayu" rhetoric!
"I like the design, but crutches are pretty expensive, so unless you have access to broken ones, it’s a bit prohibitive."

***************************************************

I also stumbled upon reviews of this book which I wish to get soon:

The Many-Headed Hydra is a book which explains how the ruling elites used legitimizing myths based upon metaphors of societal "terror" to manipulate cultural understandings in order to justify repressive violence against culturally defined "punishable categories of people".......

Be that as it may be, what actually plagues the nation now isn't just BN, but also the lack of conscience among politicians - more so, among those who trumpet "religious dogma" and not "values", so as to exploit the masses.

The recent removal of YB Khalid Samad as the PAS Dty. Commisioner from the Selangor line-up spoke volumes about the sincerity of the high profile BN-moles within the PAS hierarchy.
Therefore, calling these currently defensive guys in the leadership, "Trojans", as I did in a post here (it was mainly an interesting discussion on MT - Trojan Horses in the opposition ranks - early this year), wouldn't be too far from the truth.

With the PKR AGM currently afoot, it would be wise for the leadership to bear in mind - that anything which compromises the principles of the desired end result, is morally unsound. The electorate to bear in mind the Achille's Heel of the Pakatan Rakyat coalition, which threatens to derail the process of reform that has begun with 308. Hence, it is imperative that PKR and DAP strengthen their bonds and alliance, and consolidate their position - while not neglecting other partners.
So long as "these elements" do not apologize for the threats that they pose, but remain within the fold, instability and the possibility of derailment cannot be ruled out. These are elements who feel sidelined and apparently do not have not achieved "stature" in national politics befitting their "image", despite their popularity among their faithful. They definitely feel that "smaller" politicians have stolen the limelight which they seek for themselves..... hence the refusal to "play second fiddle" to PKR, but the willingness to be the "expensive crutch" (as in the pic) to Umno's "DIY stool", so as to "hide the shame".

BN/Umno, being masters at what they do, definitely wouldn't mind paying a kings ransom to ascertain their grip on real power, while dishing out peanuts for their "allies". With the might of the instruments of state on its side, let us not be so naive as to believe that Umno doesn't have moles within PAS - they have much more than we may realize, and DSAI knows that quite well.

While I value the electoral partnership that PAS has provided, never for a minute have I been convinced of their sincerity or their intellectual prowess (referring to these "certain individuals").
Although they never expected the electoral "windfall", they did it grudgingly - simply out of their hunger for power - and now their thirst don't seem to be unquenchable! Call me "politically naive" if you like - but I still maintain, that the least trustworthy in a roomfull of politicians, are those who have the need to hide behind the cloak of religion (at least, physically).

Here we have some politicians in "religious" garbs, clamouring for posts and making a pretense of their intellectual credentials, which only impresses the politically illiterate of the nation. They never hesitate to lie to the masses to hide the greed, envy and deceit that they harbour in their hearts.
These are the people who trumpet the virtues of a "theocracy", while they espouse the politics of sectarianism and subjugation.

They are just political wannabes and Umno "drop-outs", who just like their counterparts in Umno/BN, use the platform of democracy, to garner absolute power (but under the cover of religion). They do not care about the economy, democracy, justice or nationhood - they only care for power. These "godmen" would agree to any deal, as long as it can assure them access to power and control. They wouldn't mind being just one of the expensive crutches that would hold up a thoroughly corrupt regime, despite all their religious convictions and psycho-babble.
Their tool is ignorance (of course, once again under cover of religion) among the cloistered and isolated "unreasoning faithful".
Until and unless these guys have had their fill of "power" within the coalition, the danger of BN/Umno rearing it's one of its ugly heads from within would remain.
Just like the mythical Hydra, you can chop it off - but another would grow in its place.

This doesn't mean that PAS as a whole cannot work with their allies, as there is still a significant voice of "reason" within it's fold, which is unfortunately suppressed due to the lack of progressive politics, democracy and open debate (despite all the show we see). They are however, merely "tolerated" rather than accepted in the hierarchy. When push comes to shove, I seriously doubt that people like Khalid Samad and Husam Musa can withstand the onslought of the "godmen", who hold the minds of the unthinking faithful in a vice grip. It would be best for them to align themselves with PKR, and fight for their values from there.

Considering the frail & aging Nik Aziz, and the culture of "idol-worship" that's prevalent, the salvation of PAS's politics hinges on their "Erdogan-ization" - intellectuals and pragmatic in their fold. The so called "Erdogan Faction" within PAS should be embraced for their pragmatism and intellectual clout, while the heroes of "Amanat Hadi" should be zippered. In the event that the current PAS leadership resorts to Mahathirism (or Khomeini-ism) to suppress them, they would only fade once again into the political oblivion of radicalism, even if they were to ally themselves with Umno.
Considering the circumstances, the scepticism which DAP might harbour with regard to the sincerity of these "trojans" is, I'm certain, shared by PKR and Anwar.

But let's not write them off as yet - there's still hope that PAS will embrace positive values advocated by the intellectuals. There is hope yet, that they would be willing to open the minds of their followers to change, instead of recoiling into "Amanat Hadi"s of the future.
Let's see how they evolve, and what the future holds for them in Pakatan Rakyat ..... or maybe even in Umno!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Related:
Fearing the 'Trojans' of 916?
The PAS factor - A Viable Alternative?
The PAS "Cooperation" and Vote.
Class Politics - the Other Option?

You can’t say that!

by James Chin,
TheMalaysianInsider

In the bad old days when I conducted seminars, I used this opening line: “Don’t believe what you read about Malaysia. There is complete freedom of speech in Malaysia. There is only no freedom after the speech.” I’d get a few laughs here and there.

I know, I know, this line has been overused by Kit in the august House. After what happened to some bloggers (you know, being sued all) and RPK sent to UK (Universiti Kamunting) you really have to wonder what it is you can and cannot say.

My professional 2 sen is that you can say what you want but be ready to be sued, or be given a full scholarship to UK. (This scholarship covers all costs including tuition, full board, transport allowance from anywhere in Malaysia to Ulu Kamunting and back.)

You see, the problem is Malaysians cannot really talk to each other. Everything that is non-sensitive to one community is ACTUALLY very sensitive to another. There is no common area for any real discussions on religion or politics or even mundane issues such as the price of cars, scrap metal business, etc.

When you complain about the price of cars in this country, some people are unhappy because you are deemed to be unpatriotic for not supporting the national car project.

After all, in the name of patriotism, who does not want to pay TWICE the world price for a product that is “Kampung First Class” – you know, cheap plastics, funny noises after 10,000km, constant problems with the auto-gearbox, etc. (For more information, please check with the mechanics looking after the exco cars in Selangor, Perak and Terengganu.)

On the scrap metal business, no logical or rational discussions please! You are raising a “sensitive” issue since the scrap metal issue is really an ethnic issue given that one race dominates the trade (Did I just say something sensitive?) With a smart lawyer, you can probably use the Sedition Act on this one.

In other words, you name it, it is bound to be sensitive. You really have to wonder how people handle stress here since opening your mouth may lead to all sorts of trouble!

Is this the reason why obesity is fast becoming a problem here? Since you cannot talk, might as well eat.

Truth be told, Malaysians have not learnt the simple lesson in life: you can agree to disagree. Malaysians want to “win” the argument – any argument. Since a “win” means someone has to “lose” the best solution is to fly the “sensitive” issue flag.

If you think you cannot win the argument, just shout “you cannot say that – its sensitive!”

The obsession with “sensitive issues” has led to some funny results. Mainstream newspapers are now losing their readership because they don’t cover the real news – the real news is too sensitive to be printed. So you increase the entertainment news and the classifieds.

Local–made movies and teledramas are pathetic because their storylines cannot deal with any sensitive issues. You cannot be creative because everything around you is sensitive.

So what do you do? Most people bare their souls by writing anonymous postings on the internet. There are thousands of anonymous Malaysian blogs that complain about everything around them.

Yet the writers refused to identify themselves. You can’t blame them, though. After all, from kindergarten onwards, every time they open their mouths, their teacher would say, “You can’t say that! It’s a sensitive issue!”

P.S. I have to take back everything I said because I have been told it’s too sensitive to discuss UK, national cars, scrap metal business, obesity, etc. PLEASE IGNORE WHAT YOU HAVE READ. I TAKE BACK EVERYTHING!

============================

Cruz says ....
You never heard of something called the "BN/Umno Social Contract", meh???
BTW, you forgot the mantra in Malaysian politics - "Don't Question ...."

Constitutional (Amendment) Bill 1983, revisited

88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

“Immunity is quite essential. Take the situation where we have a hung Parliament, the Ruler comes in to decide on a Prime Minister from one side of a political party and imagine if the other side of the political party opposes it and takes the Ruler to court”
- Tunku Naquiyuddin

88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

Well, well, well - first it was TM Pahang who said this.
Now we have Tg. Naquiyuddin asking for "immunity". Is it simply because of this immunity that the Rulers aren't able to "perform their duties" in defending the Federal Constitution?
It escapes me, if the Rulers can be charged in court for carrying out their duties as per the Constitution. Here I was thinking that they are not immune from the law, only in their conduct in their personal capacity. Shouldn't it be a source of pride that the Royalties in their personal capacity, are bound by the laws of Humanity? I cannot say if just possibly, maybe - Tg Naquiyuddin feels otherwise.

It is sad that some people are quick to request that they are given "powers to defend the constitution", when they have hardly raised a whimper when the people's rights have been subverted repeatedly all these years (even in the immunity years).

While I may not exactly be a fan of Mahathir, this was probably one of the best things he's done - impressing upon all that none is above the law. However, that he erred in that he took that privilege for the executive is regrettable. It shouldn't have been to the extent that after 30 days, the King's assent was insignificant to the passing of Laws. There should have been some middle way, where neither the King nor the Executive held absolute power.

It's strange that the most outspoken, publicly respected and erudite of the Royals - HRH Raja Nazrin - who has been at the forefront of this struggle for socio-political reform, isn't too concerned about "power" or "immunity from the law".
I wonder why anyone would want absolute "immunity" from the Law - what have they got to fear? Maybe we should ask Bruce Willis, StanChart or maybe we should ask all those who have been in the limelight for "various reasons" .... that should answer many questions, I suppose.

Anyways, I did some checking up on the matter of the Ammendments ....

"The immunity of the Malay Rulers and the royalty in the performance of their official/state duties has never been taken away. They continue to enjoy that immunity.
.......Although their private immunity was taken away, they continue to enjoy the privileges of being tried by special courts.
So, in my humble view, the question of restoring royal immunity does not arise because they have never lost that protection."
- Kadir Jasin, Royal Immunity is Never Withdrawn

888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

"But R.S. Milne and Diane K. Mauzy, in Malaysian Politics Under Mahathir, citing interviews with Umno ministers, suggest that what became known as the 1983 constitutional crisis “was precipitated by reports, received by Mahathir, that the Sultan of Johor stated at a gathering that when he was elected Agong he would unilaterally declare a state of emergency, and with the aid of the army, throw out all the politicians.

“Compounding this were stories that the Sultan was close to certain key military men, and that the army chief, General Tan Sri Mohd Zain Hashim, had criticised Mahathir’s approach and had questioned where the army’s loyalty rested.”

Whatever the case may be, on Aug 1, the Government brought the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 1983 before both houses of Parliament, and it was quickly passed.

The bill put forward 22 amendments to the Federal Constitution, including three very significant changes to the position of the Malay Rulers.

First, it removed the need for the Agong to give his Royal Assent to a piece of legislation before it could be gazetted as law. Instead, it stipulated that if the Agong did not give his Assent within 15 days, he was deemed to have done so, and the law could come into effect.

Second, it introduced parallel provisions removing the need for a Sultan to give his Assent to State laws.

Third, it transferred the power to declare an Emergency from the Agong (who was, in any case, supposed to act on the advice of Cabinet in this regard) directly to the Prime Minister, who was not obliged to act on anyone’s advice.

The Prime Minister’s Department had ordered a press blackout on the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 1983 and, so, while the fact of the bill’s passing was mentioned, its significance was downplayed, and the debate – including an impassioned speech in opposition to it by DAP’s Lim Kit Siang – did not appear in local media.

For the following two months, nothing appeared. But a right royal storm was brewing.

Immediately, the liberal intelligentsia opposed the provision that allowed the Prime Minister to unilaterally declare an Emergency.

On Aug 2, 1983, Aliran issued a statement condemning the Bill, claiming the proposed amendment “opens the way to political abuse. For the Prime Minister is, in the ultimate analysis, a political personality very much involved in the conflicts and compromises of party politics. There is no constitutional mechanism for ensuring that he will not use his emergency powers against his political foes from any quarter.

“It is simply not possible to prevent an ambitious Prime Minister in the future from emerging as a ‘supremo’ after the proclamation of an emergency.”

But, under the strict press blackout, it was not reported.

Meanwhile, unbeknownst to the public, the Agong, under pressure from his fellow Rulers, refused to give his Assent to the Bill.

The Rulers maintained that the Bill contravened Article 38(4) of the Constitution, which stated that “No law directly affecting the privileges, position, honours or dignities of the Rulers shall be passed without the consent of the Conference of Rulers.”

The Rulers had also come to understand the full legal implications of removing the need for Royal Assent to legislation. It meant that if Parliament voted to abolish the monarchy, the Rulers would be powerless to stop them.

Tensions continued to build behind the scenes. It was only in October, when Senu Abdul Rahman circulated a letter condemning the amendments, followed by Tunku Abdul Rahman defying the gag order by writing about them in the pages of this newspaper, that Malaysians woke up to the crisis.

There were also disagreements within Umno; as Gordon P. Means notes in Malaysian Politics: the Second Generation, “? many in the ruling coalition were distressed by the contents of the amendments and the confrontational style of Dr Mahathir towards the Malay Rulers.”

Some establishment figures believed the Prime Minister had far-reaching aims. In a 1988 interview transcribed in K. Das & The Tunku Tapes, Tunku Abdul Rahman and the veteran journalist discuss the constitutional crisis.

If one can look past the bitchy, surat layang (poison pen letter) tone of their stories about Dr Mahathir’s children, one can get a snapshot of the groundswell of suspicion.

Tunku: “You see, the Malays have a cause for adat, resam and so on ? tradition. I have a respect for it but he has none. He dislikes it. You see, his whole aim is to upset the constitution and turn this country into a republic. His son was in London talking quite openly amongst the students that his father is going to be the first President of Malaya.”

Das: “I heard his daughter was also talking about it here. Apparently she was caught talking about it at a party not knowing that behind her was one of the Tengkus from Negri Sembilan who overheard it. She said that as soon as the constitution amendment is signed, it is finished, we can become a republic.”

Against this background of suspicion, the 1983 constitutional crisis "
-Huzir Sulaiman, The Mahathir years, StarOnline

888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

A major constitutional crisis broke out in 1983 when the Mahathir government sought to amend the constitution to clip the assumed power of the King (Yang di-Pertuan Agung) to confer royal assent to parliamentary bills before they became laws. When the Conference of Rulers objected to the government's bill of 1983 which required compulsory granting of royal assent by a period of 15 days, the Prime Minister went on a country-wide campaign to drum up support for the government's position.

Thus, four years later when the Judiciary came under siege, the Prime Minister had a very compliant set of rulers on his side. This set of events led to the removal of the Lord President, the highest ranking official of the judicial branch, the suspension of five Supreme Court judges and the eventual sacking of two of them. The events that brought this about were a complex intertwining of politics and litigation, which led to the accusation that the judges, including the Lord President had become embroiled in politics (See box).

In truth it was the chagrin and hubris of a Prime Minister who was unable to accept legal decisions working against his party's political and economic interests that led to the bizarre developments. Various interpretations of these events have been written but the main outcome, all will agree, has been the further strengthening of the hand of the executive vis-à-vis the Judiciary to the extent that judicial independence has become a chimera in the Mahathir period (Lee, 1995, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, 1990). This together with the emasculation of the role of the traditional Rulers has made executive dominance in government a stable and underlying feature of the state.

-Executive Dominance, http://www.aliran.com/oldsite/hr/js2.html

"Bubble of Hope & Faith" Blues .....

88888888888888888888888888888
"He never chooses an opinion; he just wears whatever happens to be in style."

-Leo Tolstoy

888888888888888888888888888888888

Do not let this Hope & Faith that the people have in democracy through the ballot-box, be just another bubble that needs to burst!
It would be wise for our leaders to start heeding the voice of the people - real soon!! Or else, they risk being the laughing stock of their opponents, and being branded as traitors to the rakyat.
If Faith and Hope in our secular Federal Constitution & Democracy is lost, we are headed down the drain. This reminder would especially significant to the two parties that cater to the "Malay Heartlanders" - not that PKR is absolved of this crime of indifference, anyway.

Issues that have been "staple diet" among the politicians on both sides of the fence lately, has got me wondering if I've just been feeding the "Bubble of Hope".
Our politicians are coming dangerously close to bursting this "bubble", if they do not take the people seriously.
Same goes for the actions of our Men-in-Blue too - the blatant lies that are dished out in the media by some quarters pretty high in the chain of command doesn't do much to enhance their image nor the confidence in the rule of law.

Here we have a State that's politically lost - playing up non-issues like the DAP, Pas in booze sale row, Pak Lah says yoga is ok for Muslims, "Allah", 'Nod not needed for fatwa'.
Umno knows that Yoga won't fill bellies - nor will a ban on candlelight vigils or the pro-ISA demos. They are just concerned with preserving the status quo of absolute executive power and their grubby hands in the cookie jar, thanks to Mahathir. Umno is obsessed with their "transition" and "money politics"/corruption, 'malay rights"/pseudo-NEP, sabotaging "opposition states" and their show of power against peacful and unarmed citizens.

Meanwhile, PAS trying to "exert its influence" in the PR electoral pact. Then we have PAS/ PKR trying to "play it smart" where the anti-ISA vigil issue is concerned - just how many PAS/ PKR MPs have come out in support of civil society movements' against the ISA?
Do they need accolades and glory in order to make themselves felt?
Or is it because, we cannot roll out the red-carpet for them?
Maybe it is because they fear being hauled up by the "men-in-blue" for attending an assembly deemed "illegal" by an unconstitutional law?

At one time, it was PKR that I had this "Hope" in - it is now slowly dissipating.
They seem more obsessed with posturing, and making a pretense of the real issues that plague the nation. I did not see any PAS or PKR politicians taking up issues seriously with the BN/Speaker in the Dewan. Nor have I seen any of them (or their thousands of ardent followers) making their presence felt at any of the Anti ISA vigils.
Then we have our Selangor MB speaking of 15 minute vigils indoors
(I can almost hear echoes of - OMG, WTF!!)!!!!

If he's so concerned about "playing by the rules", what the hell is he doing in the opposition bench? Doesn't he realize that it is these very unconstitutional laws/rules he wishes to subscribe to, that subjugates the people & keeps his opponents in power?
Maybe he just wishes to be what G.B. Shaw would call, "A man of great common sense and good taste - meaning thereby, a man without originality or moral courage".

Of course they are always there to pass comments and press statements for political mileage, though .....
Don't they see that they are being manipulated by their political adversaries, and they are swallowing the bait - hook, line & sinker!!!

And what's with PAS and their issues with alcoholic beverages? Why do they play the Umno-esque "siege-politics"? Aren't there any other issues that they have to fight for? Should corruption and the economy be their priority? Don't they understand that they need to address the "bread & butter" issues?
Don't they know that they have to learn to work with their partners and the electorate, who have given them greater voice?
Is this the "Thanks" we get from a party that's obsessed with "morality"?
Don't they know that too much of a good thing, loses its virtues?
Don't they know that "It's the Economy, Stupid"?

As much as I have had misgivings about DAP and its "confrontational" style of politics in the past, it appears to me now that they seem to be only ones who are actually sincere about fighting for the rights of the people! Probably it doesn't fantasize about being the "dominant" party in a ruling coalition - which is why they do take risks to express themselves in dissent (which incidently, is the true mark of a patriot).
If only DAP could somehow transform itself into a truly multi-racial party by attracting more "people from the heartlands" by speaking their language, and acknowledging that there has to be a more significant presence of Malays in their midst.
Now - is that a "bubble of Hope", or what .....

Decisions & Destiny

Bawak Bertenang - Where are the PDRM guys????

God-Talk, Fatwas & Inquisition Theology

UPDATE:- *
Irene Fernandez acquitted
S Pathmawathy | Nov 24, 08 12:12pm
* BREAKING NEWS The Kuala Lumpur High Court today acquitted migrant workers' activist Irene Fernandez, bringing an end to a 13-year court battle.
===========================================

Luther himself was convinced that the separation of the teachings from the customs of the papal Church-to which separation he felt obligated-struck at the very foundation of the
act of faith.
The act of faith as described by Catholic tradition appeared to Luther as centered and encapsulated in the Law while it should have been an expression of the acceptance of the
Gospel. In Luther's opinion, the act of faith was turned into the very opposite of what it was; for faith, to Luther, is tantamount to liberation from the Law, but its Catholic version appeared to him as a subjugation under the Law.

-Luther and the unity ofthe churches...... Cardinal Ratzinger

==================================

Of late, there's been plenty of talk about the recent Fatwas released by the religious authorities, prompting many other sectors of society being horrified at the apparent "mindlessness" of it all.
This phenomenon of "religious edicts" being passed by "Godmen" isn't as isolated as it may seem. This has been the rule, rather than the exception in the Abrahamic faiths/sects for ages. More so, when the political establishment is intellectually and ideologically bankrupt, as it was during the time when the "Holy Roman Emperors" were attempting to perpetuate their rule through ignorance. They used religion to reinforce the perception that they were indispensible, in that they were the temporal guardians of "souls" in the hereafter.
After all why wouldn't a "right-thinking" public accept them as rulers on earth, when they care for the people's souls, right??!!
It gives them reason to "soldier on" in "defense" of whatever they seem worthy, so as to divert anger & attention from the corrupt & inefficient politicians, to the taxpayers themselves.
Today, these things would (if ever), rarely happen in a civilised nation.
Thanks to the Mahathirist antidote to earlier PAS-inspired "revivalism"/extremism through "Amanat Hadi" - In Malaysia however, they are enforced through using instruments of state, at the taxpayers' expense - just as in the Papal politics or "Islamist Republics/Monarchies".
Who knows - Maybe one day, we will have Rela-like uniformed Mat Skodeng "SWAT teams" ....

Anyway, I found some interesting things on the web with regard to this "Inquisition Theology", which speaks of orthodox "Catholicism", but quite comparable to the thinking of the Godmen we have in town.
Here's something from a forum on TheologyOnline:

Well, let's define what an Inquisition is: It is the execution of convincted heretics. What is a heretic? A heretic is a baptised person who denies or obstinately doubts some part of the data of divine revelation. A heresy is a belief which runs contrary to some part of the data of divine revelation.

For this reason, is it proper to call Hindus in India heretics? No. Is it proper to call Hinduism a heresy? Absolutely.

So, is killing those who are guilty of heresy acceptable? This is easy to answer. It is absolutely acceptable, and perhaps even mandated.

Here, we should differentiate between two sorts of crimes. There is the sort of crime which affects noone, and the sort which affects others. I think it is clear that, generally speaking, law is not the sort of thing to regulate crimes which affect only the criminal. For there to be a law, generally speaking, there must be a victim.

Some say that heresy affects only the criminal. Yet, this is not true. Heresy tends to spread, and heresy breeds heresy. You don't believe me? Just think about the Protestant Deformation. Heresy spreads heresy, and leads to worse and worse heresy. First, there was Luther. And then Communism. And then Anabaptism. And then the rejection of the mass and the Eucharist. Etc.

In heresy, there is a victim: Those who might be tempted to convert to that heresy.
Furthermore, there ought to be a distinction in the sort of thing lost in a crime: There is the sort of crime which threatens physical sorts of integrity and privacy, like theft, murder, rape, and the like.
Then, there is the sort of crime which threatens the soul. Our Lord says that this is the worse crime. "Fear not those who kill the body, but the soul (Paraphrase of Matthew 10:28)."

And indeed, heresy brings the death of the soul. Outside of the Church, there is no salvation (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus). To intentionally believe heresy is to excommunicate oneself from the Church. Therefore, to intentionally believe heresy is to close to yourself the gates of Heaven, and open wide for yourself the Jaws of Hell.
We say that murder ought to be met with execution. It is much more fitting, then, that heresy be met with execution, if the heretic is unrepentent.
So, in answer to the first part...is it right that heretics be executed? Not only is it right, but it is demanded by Divine Justice.
However, what about the Inquisition now?
Well, we can't say "It was right then, but not now." Justice is justice...end of story.
The problem lies in this, though: The vast majority of those who believe heresy are only formally heretics. Which is to say, that they believe that which is contrary to the Church, but do so out of ignorance of the truth. Therefore, they are formally heretics, but not subjectively.
==============================================


In comments from the letter that appeared on Sunday in Corriere della Sera, Italy’s leading daily, the pope said the book “explained with great clarity” that “an inter-religious dialogue in the strict sense of the word is not possible.”
In theological terms, he added, “a true dialogue is not possible without putting one’s faith in parentheses.”
-Pope questions interfaith dialogue ============================================

I answer that, With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death.

On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death. For Jerome commenting on Galatians 5:9, "A little leaven," says: "Cut off the decayed flesh, expel the mangy sheep from the fold, lest the whole house, the whole paste, the whole body, the whole flock, burn, perish, rot, die. Arius was but one spark in Alexandria, but as that spark was not at once put out, the whole earth was laid waste by its flame."

Reply to Objection 1. This very modesty demands that the heretic should be admonished a first and second time: and if he be unwilling to retract, he must be reckoned as already "subverted," as we may gather from the words of the Apostle quoted above.

Reply to Objection 2. The profit that ensues from heresy is beside the intention of heretics, for it consists in the constancy of the faithful being put to the test, and "makes us shake off our sluggishness, and search the Scriptures more carefully," as Augustine states (De Gen. cont. Manich. i, 1). What they really intend is the corruption of the faith, which is to inflict very great harm indeed. Consequently we should consider what they directly intend, and expel them, rather than what is beside their intention, and so, tolerate them.

Reply to Objection 3. According to Decret. (xxiv, qu. iii, can. Notandum), "to be excommunicated is not to be uprooted." A man is excommunicated, as the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 5:5) that his "spirit may be saved in the day of Our Lord." Yet if heretics be altogether uprooted by death, this is not contrary to Our Lord's command, which is to be understood as referring to the case when the cockle cannot be plucked up without plucking up the wheat, as we explained above (10, 8, ad 1), when treating of unbelievers in general.

Chew on this, Mei Fun!!!

The following in Uncle Lim's response to a query from a loser, an ex-MP from MCA:-

I will employ Chew Mei Fun at a salary befitting her real qualifications – send me her cv

MCA Wanita chief and Pempena Executive Chairman, Datuk Paduka Chew Mei Fun publicly asked me on Thursday whether I will employ and “feed” her if she resigns from Pempena. (Sin Chew Daily, Guang Ming Daily)

My response – Chew should send me her job application with her cv and I will employ her at a salary befitting her real qualifications.

However, Malaysians are amazed at her crass audacity – which is typical of many MCA leaders – that Malaysians owe her a living, and the government must give her a job and “feed” her just because she lost to Tony Pua in the March general election in the Petaling Jaya Utara parliamentary constituency!

If this is the case, then Chew should have been truthful in the March general election campaign and should have owned up publicly that she would be “fed” by the Barisan Nasional government even if she loses in the parliamentary contest against Pua – that she was in an envious “cannot lose” situation, whatever the outcome of the election!

Be that as it may, Chew may be out of her job as Pempena Executive Chairman faster than she think, especially if the Star report “Pempena probe has Azalina fuming” (20.11.98) is to be believed, that the Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman is mulling over whether to shut down the subsidiary of the Tourism Ministry!

The report said Azalina was “irked” by the “nonchalant attitude” of those being questioned over the RM50 million Pempena Group of Companies scandals.

She said:

“I have been told the immediate standard response we have been getting is that it is the Government’s money and ‘why should we care’ statements as if it is the Govern¬ment’s obligation to invest with them.

“It is so disgusting when nobody cares. How can you not care when it comes to the people’s money?”

Lashing out at the poor Pempena investments, Azalina said:

“Pempena should close down if it cannot invest properly. If it fails, it fails. Then we pick up the pieces and carry on.”

What is most shocking is that such outrageous “nonchalant attitude” is fully inherited by the current Pempena executive chairman as illustrated by Chew’s utter contempt for accountability, transparency and good governance when she:

" Umno Revivalism - Reinforcing the "Seige Mentality"... contd

***********************************

الله محبة فمن أقام في المحبة أقام في الله وأقام الله فيه

("God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him")

1 John 4:16

*********************************************

With reference to "Umno Revivalism - Reinforcing the "Seige Mentality"..."

Allah may be disappointed that I'm no fan of the name or word. I'm not much for this idea of the use of Allah in translated Christian Scripture either.
From what I know, the word is just a word for "god", as in "theos".

Apparently, Allah originates from pagan gods of of the preIslamic era, back to the days of Hammurabi. Before Islam, in Arabia, Pagans believed that "Allah" had three daughters. They worshiped them among the other 360 gods and goddesses. The infamous Satanic Verses were that "al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat were called “the daughters of Allah”" - and we all know what happened to Salman Rushdie ....

The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god.In Old Testament times, Nabonidus (555-539 BC), the last king of Babylon, built Tayma, Arabia as a center of Moon-god worship. Segall stated, "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations." Many scholars have also noticed that the Moon-god's name "Sin" is a part of such Arabic words as "Sinai," the "wilderness of Sin," etc. When the popularity of the Moon-god waned elsewhere, the Arabs remained true to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god.

This is what made it the most sacred site of Arabian paganism. In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.
The evidence reveals that the temple of the Moon-god was active even in the Christian era.

However, I don't care if people want to call their God "Jack" - for God doesn't depend on our language. If that's how the translation has been over the years, so be it.
For the faithful, it is within their right to do so.
Same goes here.

It is sad that people wish to fight over these petty things in these days ....

According to http://www.worldscriptures.org/,

Malay is spoken by more than 17,600,000 people:
10,000,000 in Indonesia,
7,181,000 in Malaysia,
390,000 in Singapore,
21,000 in Myanmar,
more than 20,000 elsewhere.

It gives the Malay Bible Publishing History as Follows:-
Part of the Bible was published for the first time in 1629.
The New Testament was first published in 1668.
The complete Bible was first published in 1733.

Forget about DBP, Ketuanan Melayu or the arrival of the ancestors of Hamid Albar, Mahathir, Abdullah Badawi or Khir Toyo
- that's long before many from Nusantara were even literate - in Malay or Arabic!!

(From L to R : Bibles in Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, Turkish, Kurdish, Dari)

Anyways, as far as I know, no holy book states that the word Allah is exclusively "Islamic". In fact it was also the name of one of the pagan Arab Gods - the Moon God!
As such, I'd say that common sense & basic decency dictates that Sikhs and Christians can use it, within the context of their worship.

This has been going on for ages - probably more than 200 yrs (without the help of DBP, thank you), with no problems whatsoever.

Malay Muslims cannot be so weak in their faith after fifty years of NEP-education, that a common word/name can cause confusion ....
Just how many conversions to Sikhism or Christianity can be attributed to this word "Allah"!
None!!
So why infringe on their right to practice their religion as they deem fit?

The argument that there are "other words for God in Malay" does not hold in this case - DBP isn't the guardian of all versions of Malay. Should the publishers not subscribe to DBP, it's the choice of their faithful if they want to accept it.
DBP definitely doesn't have rights to the use of Punjabi anyways ....

There are "agent provocatuers" at work to propagate the "siege mindset" that's required to create conflict among peaceful citizens.
They want a confrontation in which they hope to triumph so that they can thump their chest in pride. They want to impress upon Muslims and Malays that they are "under attack", and as such need to "rise to the occasion".
Who are these "defenders of God" to dictate that someone cannot use a word in accepted in their vocabulary?
It's just that certain quarters want to split hairs to claim something for themselves, when even Arabs have no problems with the word being used by other religions.
Next they will attempt to prevent all non-Muslim religious literature publication and worship in Malay.
I found a blog Comparative Religion Studies by effry saiful of Al Azhar Uni, which had some discussion on this.

The Following is John 3:16 in various languages
(for more, go to everytongue.com)

English (New Living Translation of the Bible)

"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son,
so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life."

Arabic

Bahasa Melayu

Allah sangat mengasihi orang di dunia ini sehingga Dia memberikan Anak-Nya yang tunggal, supaya setiap orang yang percaya kepada Anak itu tidak binasa tetapi beroleh hidup sejati dan kekal. Allah mengutus Anak-Nya ke dunia ini bukan untuk menghakimi dunia, tetapi untuk menyelamatkannya.

Here's a comment from MT:-
written by gorshan, November 21, 2008 18:41:33
The word Allah is written in the Sikh Holy Scripture The Granth Sahib and in the Shabad kirtan
"Awal Allah Noor Upaya, Kudrat kae sab bandey ek noor tae sabh jag upjaya, kaun bhaley kaun mandey?"

First, Allah created the Light; then, by His Creative Power, He made all mortal beings.
From the One Light, the entire universe welled up. So who is good, and who is bad?

The Fatwa Council should first take the Sikh scriptures into consideration before coming out with any fatwa banning the use of the term 'Allah' by non-muslim.
============================================

Just for Kicks, Take A Look at My Nose - I'm Mikaeel!!

(from MalaysianInsider)

MJ converts to Islam, says British tabloid

LONDON, Nov 21 — Michael Jackson has become a Muslim — and changed his name to Mikaeel. The skint superstar, 50, donned Islamic garb to pledge allegiance to the Quran in a ceremony at a pal’s mansion in Los Angeles.

Jacko sat on the floor wearing a tiny hat after an imam was summoned to officiate — days before the singer is due to appear at London’s High Court where he is being sued by an Arab sheikh.

A source told last night how Jacko, brought up as a Jehovah’s Witness, decided to convert as he used a studio at the home of his chum to record a new album.

The star — whose hits include “The Way You Make Me Feel” — was spotted looking “a bit down” by a producer and a songwriter who had both embraced Islam.

The source said: “They began talking to him about their beliefs, and how they thought they had become better people after they converted. Michael soon began warming to the idea.

“An imam was summoned from the mosque and Michael went through the shahada, which is the Muslim declaration of belief.”

Mikaeel is the name of one of Allah’s angels.

“Jacko rejected an alternative name, Mustafa — meaning ‘the chosen one’”.

British singer Yousef Islam, 60 — who was called Cat Stevens until he famously converted — turned up to help Jacko celebrate.

It was his pals David Wharnsby — a Canadian songwriter — and producer Phillip Bubal who counselled Jacko.

The pair’s new names are Dawud Wharnsby Ali and Idris Phillips.

Jacko now prays to Mecca after the ceremony at the Hollywood Hills home of Toto keyboard player Steve Porcaro, 51, who composed music on the singer’s Thriller album.

Jacko, who rarely ventures out without a mask, is due to give evidence on Monday in a £4.7million (RM25 million) lawsuit brought by Prince Abdulla Al-Khalif of Bahrain.

The sheikh claims he bankrolled the singer’s lavish lifestyle in exchange for an exclusive recording contract. The billionaire sent songs for him to record but claims he was blanked.

He told the court yesterday: “Many times he confirmed to me he would pay me back.” — The Sun

Umno Revivalism - Reinforcing the "Seige Mentality".

Islamic councils say courts have no right to decide on ‘Allah’
By Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 21 — The ongoing lawsuit filed by the Catholic Church in Malaysia seeking a judicial review of the government decision to ban it from using the word “Allah” is not a matter that can be decided by the courts, says lawyer Mubashir Mansor.

“We are making an application under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act for the High Court to stay the effect of the proceedings in order to state a case to be determined by the Federal Court on the effect of relevant provisions of the Federal Constitution,” he said.

“The effect is whether or not the present issue is justiciable, something that should be decided by a court of law.

“We are saying that this issue is not,” he added.

Mubashir is acting on behalf of three state Islamic councils, namely Malacca, Penang and Terengganu, which are seeking to intervene in the case.

He told reporters at the High Court here that he would be filing his application to the Federal Court in Putrajaya in the next two weeks.

A total of eight Muslim organisations today joined the Home Minister and the federal government as respondents in the suit filed by the church on the right to use the word in its publication and practices.

The other five are the Federal Territory Religious Council, Selangor Religious Council, Kedah Religious Council, Johor Religious Council and the Malaysian Chinese-Muslim Association.

The Malaysian Gurdwaras Association, representing the Sikh community, had also sought to be included in the court case for the right to use "Allah" in their religious practices.

Justice Lau Bee Lan, of the KL High Court of Appellate and Special Powers Division, fixed Feb 27 for mention to enable the various Muslim organisations time to file their affidavits.

The Catholic Church's official publication, The Herald, had in May this year won the right to challenge the Home Minister's decision to ban it from using the word "Allah" as a synonym for God in its Malay-language section.

The counsel for the church, Porres Royan, said that the church had previously objected to the inclusion of these parties seeking to intervene in their case, but had changed its mind.

Asked to comment on Mubashir's claims, Porres replied that he did not understand what they wanted.

He affirmed that the church merely wanted the Home Minister's decision overturned.

"The Home Minister decided that we cannot use the word 'Allah'," he said.

"We are saying that decision is wrong," he concluded.

Roping in the "Pribumi" for Legitimacy?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Another Brick in The Wall had this post on Perkasa's declaration at a forum which was strangely called "Hak-Hak Pribumi dalam Perlembagaan"- which I saw as an attempt at upping the ante on the seige mentality of a racist ruling elite.

This time though, they have roped in the "Pribumi" of Sabah and Sarawak (they forgot about the West Malaysian Pribumis, apparently), to justify their claims of an "attack" on their well being.
As such they have conveniently declared themselves as "Pribumi" on their Logo.
Their concerns were purely ethnocentric, although they did insert some decent suggestions for good measure. Upon reading the declaration, one could be forgiven if he thought that we were in the midst of a real war, should the reader not be aware of the intentions of certain sectors.

They have managed to insert a few decent suggestions on the supremacy of the Federal Constitution (probably as 'flavouring'), while highlighting their fear of an apparent psychological war that apparently intends to deprive them of their rights!! They have this perception that they are under attack, and thing will fall apart without the racism, the NEP crutches and the corruption that have kept them afloat, while depriving citizens of their rights.

The Ketuanan Melayu is apparently misunderstood - and they now, (just like every other defensive spin-doctoring Umno apologist who attempts to redifine, rearticulate and re-present such a "noble idea") have the real meaning of it at last. It is supposedly something that's "melalui ketuanan berhemah"- somewhat like "through compassionate supremacy" .....

Yesss - At last, all Malaysians can be proud of this oxymoronic fascist concept!!!
They probably also believe that the repeated calls to "bathe the kris in chinese blood" by some Umno head honchos, was misundertood too.
While stressing on these apparent fears, they surprisingly haven't mentioned anything about "Ketuanan Pribumi" - but strangely, mentioned the need for "Negara Bangsa Malaysia".

With all the lawyers in their midst, never once have they spoken of the need for freedom, democracy, the doctrine of separation of powers or equal rights. Never have they requested that evil laws that rob the people of their rights be repealed or reviewed. Never have they demanded that sunset clauses be inserted to emergency laws. Nothing of the sort.

But of course they need to address everything from the perspective one who desires a people divided and classified by race.They only stress on race.
That's all that they seem to care about.

While they go on harping on racism and their "Pribumi-ness", little do they realize that a vast majority the Pribumi of Sabah/ Sarawak (at least the ones online and the ones I have spoken to) wouldn't want to have anything to do with these guys who have raped and plundered their lands, while stripping them of their rights (maybe Project M will ring a bell ...).
Anyway, I find it strange that these Pribumis of Sabah/ Sarawak - a great many of them non-Muslims - would want to work with the Muslim Lawyers Association to defend their rights!

****************

**A message for Perkasa before the declaration below -

Below is the declaration of Perkasa taken from Another Brick in the Wall
(minor typo editing & bold italics, mine)
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

BISMILLAHIR-RAHMANIR-RAHIM

1) MENGINSAFI BAHAWA kelangsungan dan kejayaan Persekutuan Malaysia akan sentiasa bergantung kepada kejayaan sebenar usaha-usaha pengisian Kedaulatan Melayu dan Pribumi dalam proses kenegaraan dan amalan masyarakat Malaysia;

2) MENYEDARI BAHAWA sebarang usaha untuk menafikan kedudukan, kuasa, wibawa, kepentingan dan peranan Kedaulatan Melayu dan Pribumi dalam proses kenegaraan dan amalan masyarakat Malaysia akan menghasilkan ketidaktentuan kepimpinan negara dan amalan politik yang tidak terarah dan lemah;

3) MENYEDARI BAHAWA ancaman-ancaman terhadap kelangsungan dan kejayaan Persekutuan Malaysia yang berteraskan kepada Kedaulatan Melayu dan Pribumi, telah dan sedang berlaku dengan hebat, tersusun dan menyeluruh, yang menuntut perjuangan dan tindakan-tindakan penentangan dari bangsa Melayu dan pribumi, serta masyarakat terbanyak;

4) MENGETAHUI BAHAWA kaum bukan Melayu di Malaysia memiliki jaminan hak dan kepentingan sah pada tahap paling tinggi di bawah perlindungan Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong;

MAKA dengan berpandu kepada fakta-fakta yang benar, bukti-bukti sejarah dan bukti-bukti terkini dan hujah-hujah yang sah, KAMI Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (PERKASA) dengan kerjasama Persatuan Peguam-Peguam Muslim Malaysia yang bersidang pada hari ini, 16 November 2008 bersamaan 18 Dzulkaedah 1429H, dalam wacana Hak-Hak Pribumi dalam Perlembagaan di Auditorium Memorial Tun Hussein Onn, Kuala Lumpur, dengan tegas dan lantang menyatakan bahawa :

SATU - MENGGESA pihak kerajaan (persekutuan dan negeri ) agar sentiasa mendapatkan restu dan perkenan DYMM Raja-Raja Melayu bagi apa jua tindakan pentadbiran yang menyentuh atau berkaitan dengan hak dan kedudukan istimewa orang-orang Melayu dan Pribumi di Sabah dan Sarawak serta kepentingan sah kaum-kaum lain;

KEDUA - MENGGESA semua pihak supaya menghormati semangat perlembagaan yang mendasari dan menjadi paksi kepada kedudukan Bahasa melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan serta tidak melakukan sesuatu tindakan yang secara langsung atau tidak langsung menjejas dan menggugat kedudukan bahasa Melayu sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan. Di atas semangat yang sama, kami menuntut dilaksanakan penggunaan sepenuhnya Bahasa Melayu dalam urusan perundangan dan kehakiman negara;

KETIGA - MENGINGATKAN bahawa peruntukkan asas perlembagaan adalah suatu piagam yang tidak boleh sama sekali di ubah, dipinda, dibuang, dimansuh atau dicabar secara sewenang-wenangnya. Ini kerana peruntukkan-peruntukkan asas tersebut bukan sekadar suatu dokumen undang-undang, tetapi ia mencatatkan dan melambangkan semangat permuafakatan dan kerjasama pelbagai pihak dan kepentingan;

KEEMPAT - MENCADANGKAN agar kedudukan tanah rezab Melayu dan regimen askar Melayu dimasukkan di bawah perlindungan Raja-Raja Melayu melalui pindaan kepada perkara 159 Fasal (5) dan perkara 10 fasal (4). Ini berdasarkan hakikat bahawa perlembagaan adalah suatu piagam yang di dalamnya terjamin maktub struktur asas Negara bangsa Malaysia ;

KELIMA - PERCAYA bahawa fahaman ketuanan Melayu sering disalah tafsir sedangkan ianya adalah satu hakikat sejarah bahawa orang Melayu dan pribumi lainnya adalah tuan rumah asal negara ini. Pembuktian mengenai faham ketuanan ini secara langsung telah dilambangkan melalui institusi Raja-Raja Melayu melalui ketuanan berhemah seperti yang terjamin maktub di dalam perlembagaan persekutuan. Justeru, itulah seluruh peruntukkan dalam perlembagaan Raja Melayu dan pribumi tidak boleh dipertikaikan;

KEENAM - MENGUSULKAN agar beberapa peruntukkan khas perlu diadakan dan dilindungi di bawah perlembagaan bagi memelihara dan memajukan kedudukan dan kepentingan golongan yang daif dan miskin secara saksama tanpa mengira bangsa, keturunan dan agama;

KETUJUH - MENGGESA agar semua rakyat, terutamanya generasi muda serta pemimpin semua peringkat, wajib memahami isi kandungan serta peranan perlembagaan dalam menjamin ketenteraman dan keharmonian Malaysia sebagai sebuah Negara bangsa. Untuk itu kerajaan pusat dan negeri harus mewajibkan kefahaman ini kepada kumpulan sasar melalui sistem pendidikan atau kursus-kursus khas seperti pusat latihan khidmat Negara ;

KELAPAN - MENGGESA agar semua parti politik dan badan-badan bukan kerajaan agar mengakui dan menerima peruntukkan-peruntukkan yang berkaitan hak-hak keistimewaan kaum melayu dan bumiputra serta kepentingan-kepentingan sah kaum lain serta tidak mengeksploitasi peruntukan di atas bagi maksud-maksud sempit sehingga menggugat keharmonian dan kestabilan Negara bangsa.

Menginsafi dan menyedari bahawa perjuangan mempertahankan yang hak dan benar dan memperkasakan Kedaulatan Melayu dan Pribumi memerlukan beberapa tindakan segera, maka KAMI mengesyorkan :

(i) Supaya dirangka dan dilaksanakan satu program raksasa memberi pendidikan dan memasyarakatkan, berdasarkan kumpulan sasaran yang ditetapkan akan kedudukan, kuasa, wibawa, kepentingan dan peranan Kedaulatan melayu dan pribumi dalam proses kenegaraan dan amalan masyarakat Malaysia, di mana Institusi Raja-Raja Melayu mohon Menjungjung Kasih akan berperanan sebagai Penaung dan Penasihat;

(ii) Supaya diambil tindakan menyusun kurikulum program pemasyarakatan ini secara lengkap dan kaedah penyampaiannya ditentukan supaya berkesan ditahap di mana kumpulan sasaran berupaya menjiwainya;

(iii) Supaya disusun strategi yang menyeluruh dan bertindak secara bijaksana dan berkesan bagi mengalahkan peperangan psikologi dan saraf, usaha-usaha halus dan terang-terangan penghakisan dan pengkhianatan terhadap asas-asas, struktur-struktur dan kekuatan Kedaulatan Melayu;

(iv) Menggesa pihak yang bertanggungjawab agar merangka pelan-pelan dan jangkamasa tindakan serta pengukuran kejayaan terhadap usaha-usaha memperkasakan hak-hak istimewa bangsa Melayu dan pribumi serta mendapatkan pandangan dan maklum balas dari Duli-Duli Yang Maha MUlia Raja-Raja Melayu selaku Penaung dan Penasihat, dan melaksanakan semua pelan-pelan tindakan ini sehingga berjaya.

KUALA LUMPUR
16 November 2008/ 18 Dzulkaedah 1429H

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$