RPK Speaks His Mind - The Altantuya SD

......................................................

...................................................................

Bagan Pinang : Take off your race-tinted glasses

by Vijay Kumar Murugavell

I write this in response to Subramaniam Bharathy's article entitled What Position Should the Indian Voters of Bagan Pinang Take?
published on Malaysia Today linking makkal.org link here http://www.makkal.org/content/what-position-should-indian-voters-bagan-pinang-take

There is an idiom called "seeing through rose tinted glasses" which means seeing things as more positive than they really are,
this is not good as the beholder is totally detached from reality. On the other hand seeing through "race tinted glasses" is also dangerous
as it tends to afflict one with racial myopia or looking at every issue from a racial viewpoint.

The pitfalls of race based politicking :
I am not saying that racial discrimination does not exist, I mean to say no such thing but playing up race based sentiments will only
invite others to take up a counter challenge and guess what ? The race based party with the biggest numbers usually wins, in Malaysia
that biggest race based party is UMNO who while imploring subservient component party's to toe the line controls the BN ruling coalition.
They use convoluted or non-existent logic to please a certain segment who are defensive that their political dominance is threatened.
The soup was left in the laundry bag and it is beginning to stink.many of the maladies the writer speaks of stems from BN getting
re-lected continuously for the last half a century, sending a message that their policies are acceptable.

The majority of the Malaysian Indian community gave their vote to BN since independence until March 08,2008 when they joined
a broad based revolt that denied the BN its cherished two-thirds majority in parliament.
This was a joint effort by Malaysians of all creeds, so for some segments of Hindraf to say that Hindraf played a key role is akin to
a cocky rooster crowing at dawn then claiming that its crowing caused the sun to rise.
As to his statement "PKR, DAP, MIC, UMNO, just want our votes – that’s all", wake up and smell the coffee -ALL political party's without exception strive
to increase their membership and obtain votes, show me one that does not, Even NGO's like Hindraf strive to increase their numbers
that is part of the democratic process - get with the program.
Some Hindraf members were posturing that they may vote for BN next elections and other pronouncements that infer that they will decide who rules Penang State government after turning a controversial land issue in Kg Buah Pala into a racial one.Racist posturing only invites others to take up a similar stance.

Penang with a population of 1.3million is made up of roughly 60% Chinese, 30% Malay and 10% Indians, lets not also forget its 80% urbanized.
How would Hindraf feel if 800,000 Penang Chinese who are fed up retaliate by saying :
"To hell with you WE will decide who rules Penang with or without your vote"
Even the mighty UMNO cannot rule in Penang without Gerakan's help.
Posture when you are in the position of strength, negotiate when you are not.
Roosevelt said " carry a big stick and talk softly NOT "carry a small twig and shout loudly"


Kampung Buah Pala, Hindraf and LGE :
I will not go into a ten page explanation regarding Kampung Buah Pala except to say that it is irrefutable that the previous BN
government alienated the land for a miserable sum without consulting the residents.
Lim Guan Eng (LGE) may be many things but to call him a liar or evil is pushing the buck a bit too far, in the worst case he was probably
not well informed or inexperienced in running a state in some aspects.As to the assertations of LGE sending "Indian mandores" is a cheap shot, he sent two of his Deputy Chief Ministers to meet the villagers one of whom happened to be Prof Ramasamy.At the height of Hindraf protests did for PM Pak Lah send his Deputy Prime Minister to meet Hindraf on the streets ? No, instead they were met with water cannons.

I was am truly disappointed with Hindraf's stunt of threatening to burn LGE's effigy, a memorandum of protest would have sufficed, LGE would have gladly accepted the memorandum and explained his side of the story.
Hindraf aimed its vitriol at LGE from the beginning, had they joined LGE in the beginning to pressure the previous state government to account for their
actions and failing that compensation for the settlers the outcome may have been very different.

Hindraf advisor K Maran said Hindraf campaigned against Barisan Nasional because the Indian community wanted a better caring government to help them.
However, he slammed the DAP government for purportedly not showing any difference from the previous one.

Malaysian's mudah lupa (forget easily) including Hindraf. let me take you down memory lane.

Please view this video :Guan Eng: Indians Rich? Please prove it (Dec 13th 2007) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLt3QARQ1HA
barely a month after the Hindraf Nov 25th rally, LGE stood up for you guys.
LGE is now the villain ? How about the still unresolved Kugan case ? Dare Hindraf burn effigies of the IGP and Health DG ?

Pakatan Manifesto vs Hindraf 18 point Manifesto :
Lets get something very clear, the Pakatan Manifesto is meant as a framework if Pakatan takes over the Federal Government not at state level,
Pakatan Manifesto promises to take care of all Malaysians based on NEED not BREED.
It does not promise special quota's for Malaysian Indians or any other ethnicity.
If we look at a cross section of Malaysians below the poverty line, the Malays are likely to make up the largest portion in absolute numbers
followed by Indians in numbers disproportionate to their total population, then smaller numbers of Chinese and others in respect to their total population.
All should be given help regardless of their ethnicity, if the Malays and Indians make up most of this number so be it.

Lets look at the 18 point manifesto the writer is talking about http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24064/84/
Excepts from Hindraf 18 point manifesto

Quote 1
End Racism, end Islamic extremism and end Malay privileges on the 50th year golden jubilee mega Independence celebrations of Malaysia on 31st August 2007.
Quote 2
20% of the Government top most level postings (Secretaries Generals), Middle level Management (Directors) and management level (Managers) postings, and the same for the Private Sectors, and positions of District Officers; Foreign and Diplomatic Service positions, civil service positions are reserved for Indians for the next 15 years.
Quote 3
A minimum of 20 Opposition members of Parliament are elected exclusively by the Indian Community

Do you see a contradiction between 1 juxtaposed against 2 & 3 ? You cannot fight racism on a raced based platform, whether you do it offensively of defensively
When I first saw the 18 point manifesto I saw many points of contention within the manifesto interspersed between universal values,
above is just an example, I picked many such contentious elements in the manifesto.
Do you also see how this cannot fit in with the Pakatan manifesto ? I will just politely say that the 18 point manifesto proposed by Hindraf is "surreal".
In my humble opinion Hindraf should do some soul searching and revise its manifesto to stick to propositions that are unique to the Indian community
and not foray into areas of universal governance.Goal setting whether for individuals or organizations should incorporate the following elements: -
It must be realistic, achievable and have a time limit upon which it must be reviewed to remain current.

Pakatan State Government inefficiencies and the mainstream media :
With the exception of Kelantan all other Pakatan State governments are new, who while trying to run their states face relentless sabotage
from the Federal Government in terms of funding and various other aspects.many have taken bold initiatives in transparency unheard of previously.
There were cases where the state government was blamed for issues under the ambit of the federal government simply because the complainant/s
were ignorant on jurisdictions.
Sometimes the temple demolitions that some made a brouhaha in the mainstream media turned out to be relocations that the state governments
already discussed with the respective temple committee's and obtained their blessings, but the mainstream media (MSM) being aligned to BN gleefully
ran provocative articles playing up ethnic sentiments and consequently when the truth was exposed they did not bother publishing an apology
or retraction, the MSM just stopped informing on the follow up action being taken and looked for the next controversy to drum up.
Does this mean I am saying that PR state governments are faultless and perfect ? No way, they make mistakes just like you and me.
In cases where the PR State government did not perform their duty it would be useful to send a memorandum to your elected representative.
If he/she fails to take action ask for explanations , if the answers are not satisfactory send a copy to the Menteri Besar, if you have exhausted
all avenues and still have grievances then no one will blame you for going to the press.
You must however have specific grievances,not vague ones like the writer quoted ie "lying DAP Chief Minister " ,"string of broken promises ",In PKR we have a bunch of wimps for MPs and Aduns"so on and so forth, it just sounds like typical sensationalist headlines published by garbage pile tabloids.

If grievances are consistently not addressed satisfactorily, then go ahead and exercise your democratic right at the ballot box, just as you
do not like governments only paying attention to you during election time, it is also incumbent upon citizens to give feedback to governments
on a regular basis so they have an opportunity to correct themselves not join the bandwagon and scream together with the chorus when elections are near, about issues you have not bothered to understand.You must educate yourself on the issues and repercussions of policies before you cast your ballot, not base you decision on emotion, rhetoric and hearsay.THIS IS YOUR DUTY AS A CITIZEN.

Bagan Pinang by-election
The writer implores the Indian voters to boycott the abovementioned by-elections as a sign of protest against both Pakatan and BN.
There are some 5,000 Postal votes involved are of concern, in US armed forces tend to vote Republican, here they tend to vote BN.
This makes the by-election already lop-sided in favor of BN.There is a chance pakatan may win Its dicey, if they can win by 1500 votes -I would be happy,
In 2004 BN won 75% of votes in 2008 it went down to 59%,
This is good but to counter the postal votes, more people must come out to vote, there are about 14,000 voters, I think its possible but difficult, but I hope they can repeat the feat in Kuala Terenganu by election where they seized a BN incumbent seat.So far in the last 8 by elections all were status quo except KT where seats changed .There is also the factor of Independent/s contesting who may act as "spoilers " who have no hope of retaining their deposit but directly benefit BN.A high voter turnout will favor PR, a low turnout will favor BN.

Repercussions of Indian voters boycotting the by-election :
I will just bluntly say that if the Indian voters (est 2000+) follow Subramaniam Barathy's rationale of boycotting the by-elections, they are handing victory on a silver platter to BN, the very same party that the writer is upset with as he quoted "Hishamuddin the Home Minister says it is alright to slight the Indians in the country by desecrating their religious symbol, the cow. The Federal Government has done nothing on the Indian issues"
The BN will then use the results of the by-election as a referendum that the Indians still prefer the BN, because the boycott gave them a victory.
BN will also be very happy as such actions are likely to sour ties between Hindraf and Pakatan grassroots NATIONWIDE, which falls in very nicelywith their divide and rule plans.
To do this would be to damage the very interests one is talking about protecting.

There is an idiom for idiots who do this, it is called "shooting yourself in the foot"

The defender of Civil Rights is HERE!!

The man with the tall songkok who carried the cow's head to the Selangor State Secretariat building threatens the Menteri Besar:
"Hoi Khalid (Samad), kau duduk. Kau belum kenal aku siapa?
Selepas ini, kau jangan turun Seksyen 23, kalau tidak, kau mati.
Ini kawasan majoriti Melayu!"

Meanwhile, of course - the demonstrators didn't know who the third party that brought the Cow's head was .....
- but the Toyol of Selangor did , and even knew why they brought it!!

Read also Art Harun's "Who's Pinochio?"

Hisham - Did Somebody LIE?

Hindu Sangam denies meeting cow-head protestors, wants them charged

SHAH ALAM, Sept 4- Malaysia Hindu Sangam said today it had no intention of meeting the cow-head protesters and have called on authorities to take immediate action against them.

It’s advisor Datuk A. Vaithilingam said the name of the national body for Hindu affairs had been misquoted in the press as having met the cow-head protestors.

“There were no such meetings,” he said today.

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

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

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

Meanwhile, Khir Toyo has gone on the offensive and out to town today with the press. He showed a plot of land that was prepared for the temple at a "strategic location in Section 18"!!
That too, complete with "Infrastructure" since 2007, mind you!!
It is quite Strange (and bigtime, too), that the transfer or construction of the temple never took place during his time, if you ask me ...

Well - what has Khalid and the Hindu Sangam got to say about Khir Toyo's "magnanimity"?

In another development to the above incident:-
Malaysiakini asked to remove ‘cow’s head’ videos

Friday, 04 September 2009 17:43

(The Star) - Independent news portal Malaysiakini has been directed to remove footage and videos of the controversial “Cow’s Head Protest” from its website. In a letter, the Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission requested Malaysiakini remove what it described as provocative and offensive videos following “numerous complaints from the public.” “These videos contain offensive content with the intent to annoy any person, especially Indians,” monitoring and enforcement division senior acting director Abdul Halim Ahmad said in the letter dated Sept 3. He added that this was an offence under Section 211 or 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998. The affected videos are: Hisham: Don’t blame cow head protesters Temple demo: Residents march with cow’s head

Mercury Rising in 2-Malaysia!

"It goes back to the fundamental contradictions in Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s Vision 2020 ..... It offered the image of an economically and technologically modern society,
but failed to recognise that you cannot simply create a modern economy with modern technology and keep everything else pretty much unchanged."
-Clive Kessler, Bumpy stretch ahead for Malaysia

Six months down the road, it appears that Najib is losing his grip on party matter - and he needs another "war" to prop him up.
Everything Umno does, seems to be going wrong - from the proposed Internet Filter, to Rohaizat's candidacy, to the caning of Kartika, to the beer issue, to the reversal of the Non-Muslims only ruling for the Black eyed Peas concert, to the Visit Malaysia advertisement. Let us not forget Najib's address to the media - encouraging it to be bolder in its journalism, and to report without fear or favour, while at the same time retaining the PPPA....... and of course Moohyiddin's lie at Permatang Pasir, that Singapore threatened to go to war over water.
Morale in Umno is low - bigtime - and he needs a reason to have his Umno minions to rally around him.

As usual, Umno looks for a "bogeyman" to attack, in its efforts to unite Umno that appears to be very much shaken after last year's mandate - it is a party so weak, that cannot feel at ease unless it gets a two-third majority in Parliament.
In search of a bogeyman to blame their failures on, we now hear that our former Information Minister, Zainudin Maidin saying (in Utusan, of course), “If 50 years of independence have given a deeper understanding of the poison sowed by Kuan Yew 40 years ago, the recent events mentioned would not have occurred.” “Singapore sticks to a Third World democracy despite having a developed world mentality, while Malaysia has a Third World mentality but a developed world democracy.”

We had plenty of racist rhetoric from the fascists/extremists. Candle-light vigils disrupted. We had cycling children apprehended. Then came the Perak coup in which hooligans took control of the State assembly with the support of Najib. Then the threats of violence by a group of hoodlums disguised as NGO at the anti-ISA rally. We had Teoh Beng Hock die with the "cooperation" of MACC. We had some two-bit "Islamists" threatening violence and blood using a cow head, with an "inexperienced" police force looking on. Lately. we had Najib openly announcing that he "wants" Selangor, despite the people's mandate. And today, we have Aduns arrested in Perak. (That's the "developed world democracy" Zam speaks of!)
All these, while he goes around proclaiming a "1-Malaysia" - devoid of Law & Order.

To me, there is a very obvious pattern of events that are taking place - "somebody", it appears, is desperately trying to subvert the the whole system that holds the country together. This "somebody" needs to rally one sector of society against all the others, whose support they have lost (and have no hope of regaining).
The temperature is being raised, and those on the offensive are now bent on creating a very nervous society which can one day "snap", and then run riot. This will bring about calls to curtail civil liberties and "stern action". It is being made increasingly obvious that the lazy Home Minister isn't too keen on the "review" of the ISA, as it was a convenient tool to be used on dissenters on the pretext of "national security".

To make it possible for them to retain ISA and other draconian laws (like the Police Act, PPPA, Sedition Act, UUCA and the OSA), they seem to need some level of "insecurity". The people (mainly the Malays) need to feel insecure - and only then can these archaic laws be retained. They need to feel like they are defending something that means everything to the Malays - and "hang the other Malaysians", and hold them at ransom (that includes the "bumiputeras or pribumis" in the penisular or Sabah and Sarawak).
They need to raise the temperature of politics and threaten the public with chaos and trouble. The Malays must be made to feel that they will lose everything, when they never did gain much - beyond the political hogwash and racist rhetoric peddled by their Umno masters. They want us to ask for "stern action" against dissenters.

So what we have now is the creation of 2 Malaysias in "1-Malaysia" .... one has to hold the other by the balls. That is the "Pekan Formula" .... that is Ketuanan UmnoPutera.

It's "Merdeka"? Mmm ... It's Black out there.

[A black flag was used by Muhammad to represent his religion.[2]

It has also been stated that it will be the flag of the army that will fight the Dajjal.
Islam has not symbolized itself with any particular object or symbol, but due to political reasons a flag was required to give a standard for Muslims, especially during the wars. The Prophet used flags of different colors in different Ghazwat (campaigns commanded by the Prophet) and Saraya (campaign commanded by any Sahabi). The major flag of the Prophet was known as "Al- Uqaab", it was pure black with and without symbol or marking. Its name and color was derived from Quraish's national flag.]

The "Secular" Controversy

(NOTE: This was first published here on 24/o5/2008)

***********************************
"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].

"Many of our perceptions are distorted by our prejudices, particularly if we perceive those prejudices to be convictions".
- Ravi Zacharias

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

There is this constant "threat" of a spiritual war - at least in their minds.
In their fervour, the "religious right" never tire of debating on these matters.
These "necessary wars" go on ad infinatum, ad nauseaum, so as to keep the "fire of God" burning in the hearts of men.
Of late there have been a few articles published in Malaysia Today, catering to this debate - controversies starting with the Hijab, scarf, "sexy" school uniforms , and then the question of the "secular state".

Let us take the Malaysian political climate into consideration.
Here is a "Pakatan" at it's infancy (not a formal coalition, in the real sense of the word - they don't even have a common symbol or identity as yet) that is trying to achieve a paradigm shift in our political structure.
There are two stumbling blocks for this pact, towards achieving unity in purpose.
One is the question of "the secular state" - a tussle between the staunchly "secularist" DAP, and PAS - which is passionate about being Islamic.
The other is that of the agent provocateur on the sidelines who needs to dismantle this "pact", so as to perpetuate their racist/ religious hegemony in the interests of the "putra elite".

The debate about "Islamic State/ values" is the perfect tool to drive a wedge between the parties mentioned above, and have no doubt in my mind that it would be used to the hilt by the agent provocateurs to achieve their goals. Is it possible that more of these controversies would be highlighted by the Putra-philes so as to jeopardize the "uneasy pact" of the "Pakatan Rakyat"?.

Anyway, although the "secular" spirit has been articulated in general in our constitution without specifically stating it, many have failed to understand and accept this fact. To many a staunch Muslim, "Secular" is a "four-letter-word" - at least, as they understand it.

The argument often brought about is that the Malaysian Federal Constitution does not say that Malaysia is a secular state. Those who espouse this argument, need to understand why the constitution is worded in such a way.
Allow me to quote from The Australian Achievement: From Bondage To Freedom by Dr. Mark Cooray
"The rule of law requires both citizens and governments to be subject to known and standing laws. The supremacy of law also requires generality in the law. This principle is a further development of the principle of equality before the law. Laws should not be made in respect of particular persons. As Dicey postulated, the rule of law presupposes the absence of wide discretionary authority in the rulers, so that they cannot make their own laws but must govern according to the established laws. Those laws ought not to be too easily changeable. Stable laws are a prerequisite of the certainty and confidence which form an essential part of individual freedom and security. Therefore, laws ought to be rooted in moral principles, which cannot be achieved if they are framed in too detailed a manner."

For one thing, DAP needs to articulate what it means to be a "Secular State". They need to be able to articulate their ideas, so as not to alarm the "religious".
They need to be able to convince PAS and Islamists alike, that "secularism" isn't the "dirty word in Islam" (a popular notion in the Islamist's camp), that it is made out to be. For this to happen, DAP definitely needs to understand and relate to the philosophical basis of "secular humanism", Islam & the "Islamic politician's" psyche better, instead of simply "defining the constitution" and harping on the "secular state" rhetoric.
They need to have a think-tank who can articulate the idea that Islam is compatible with "secular humanism", as opposed to the stereotype perceptions.

There is a belief among the religious that "secular humanism" is "anti-God".Myths are created towards propagating these ideas while the achievements of "secularists" are conveniently ignored or belittled.

The advocates of theocracies need to understand that-
"Humanists are staunch supporters of freedom of religion, belief, and conscience, as laid out in both the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These rights protect the freedom of religious belief equally with the freedom of nonreligious belief, the freedom of religion equally with the freedom from religion.
Secular humanists would actually oppose advocacy of their worldview by schools or the government because that would violate the neutrality of a secular society, and the rights of religious believers. Secular humanists believe that a healthy society supports a variety of worldviews, just as it supports a variety of political parties. They also believe that religious and philosophical views should be every bit as open to debate and discussion as political beliefs." -10 Myths About Secular Humanism

PAS on the other hand, needs to articulate their ideas on an "Islamic State" better.
One that can be inclusive in its ideas based on "Universal Values" (which are incidently, very Islamic), by not espousing arbitrary repressive laws that belonged to a different time, age and culture, which are supposedly "Islamic". They should understand that resigning one's fate to "God-ordained" laws without sufficient intellectual debate or consensus, isn't an option in this era of ICT.

It is ironic that there are many prominent Islamic thinkers who believe that the philosophical/moral/ethical premises of the Constitution of USA is far more "Islamic" and superior than that of many a "chest-thumping Muslim" nation of the OIC - and rightfully so, too.
Academic debate on these matters at our hallowed halls of educational excellence is however, quite constipated at best (and we have the HP6 ideologues of our nation to thank for that) - usually dwelling on "accepted ideals".
These topics are deemed too "sensitive" - just as mentioning "May 13" was, not so long ago (unless it was to threaten for votes, of course). Our leaders believe that the masses are simply incapable of civilized conduct, and would foam at their mouths with the first mention of any misconception.

PAS should be aware that the lack of open inter-faith dialogue and exagerated sensitivities help "those with vested interests", in demonizing PAS in the eyes of the non-Muslims. It aids them further, should the masses remain in ignorance and get emotional in response to perceived insults, without rationally addressing their fears and insecurities.
It is a formula for governance that has worked well over the centuries for the despotic regimes of theocracies, monarchies and many a pseudo-democracy or socialist state.
Therefore, one would do well to pay heed to what Voltaire meant when he said :-
“So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannise will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.”

Therefore, what matters isn't really the populist rhetoric of politicians advocating "virtuous" systems of governance (based on debatable ideas deemed "holy"), but the well defined and thought out set of progressive values and ideas that allow for freedom and embraces humanity as a whole, in all its diversity.

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

"It will not do to cling to the cause and wish the result away.
Reality does not play mind games.
What is more, to anesthetize the mind in order to abort what comes to birth
when wrong ideas are conceived and borne in the womb of culture,
will only kill the very life-giving force of the nation that nurtures the idea."
-Ravi Zacharias

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

Related articles:

• The Myth of Secularism :Religion and Politics are Mutually Constitutive - M.A.Muqtedar Khan
• 10 Myths About Secular Humanism
• Religious Politics - Seeds of Fascism?
• A Malaysian Disease of Fear and Apathy