Apology to Perak Sultan and Regent – No offence intended


My three-paragraph statement at 7 pm last night that the DAP Central Executive Committee emergency meeting on 9th March had not given approval for a PAS Mentri Besar to head a Perak coalition state government was not made out of disrespect to the Perak Sultan and Regent both whom I have always held in the highest regard and I apologise for any offence caused. The statement was on the party position at the time.

There have been further discussions and developments on the matter in the hours after the statement. Announcements of the latest position will be made.

Print Friendly

  1. #1 by burn on Saturday, 15 March 2008 - 11:43 pm

    it seems like someone here is trying to create an issue here…
    can he just create his own blog or argue at MT with RPK or just go straight to harakah website to get the clearer picture…

    ko ni macam memang sengaja nak buat hal… crita yang lama pun hang nak korek keluar. orang lain takdo masa’alah. ko pulak, asyik membebel, sampai orang lain pun naik bosan… panjang crita pulak tu!
    rakyat kito ni baru nak bersatu, ko pulak nak ceraikan formasi rakyat. aku rasa ko ni memang sengaja nak provoke. lagi lagi mesti bukan kaki supporter. kalau kaki supporter tu memang dah paham, sure diaorang tau… mana yang patut dan tidak patut dikatakan!
    kerna sekor punya hal… hancur semua!

  2. #2 by RocketDAP on Saturday, 15 March 2008 - 11:56 pm

    LKY…..why are you trying so hard to put a spanner in the coalition of DAP-PKR-PAS? If DAP is not your cup of tea then go find another party to support. We are trying to move forward and you trying to stop it. It makes one wonder if you really support DAP.

  3. #3 by alaneth on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:03 am

    In this blog, I see 2 different DAP supporters. One who supports PAS, and the other who are against any collaboration with PAS. One should know that this blog consist mostly DAP staunch supporters, or we will not be able to even find this blog over the net in the first place. I am NOT in favour DAP collaborating with PAS in any manner. What Uncle Lim has done is correct.

    In my kopitiam talk (the following is revealed in opinion of the people) – I statistically say that in 100 people (DAP voters), only 5 supports PAS. 95 are against PAS due to religious fanatics. In that group, also 5% supports BN(UMNO-rule), 95% dislike UMNO (specifically mentioning Hishamuddin & Khairy). The Indians I’ve talked to all supports DAP. Chinese – no need to say; but a significant number of Malays said they will not vote BN, no matter what the opposition is, including DAP. Reason = Cronyism.

    So statistically, I put that the Chinese/Indians votes in favour this GE : (1=strongly dislike to 7=supports most):

    1. PAS
    2. Pemuda UMNO
    3. UMNO
    4. PKR (Malay Candidate)
    5. MCA & Gerakan & SUPP (same spot)
    6. PKR (Chinese/Indian Candidate)
    7. DAP

    More findings…
    There is still a strong support for MCA/Gerakan, with the only dislike is that they are the ‘yes-man’ to UMNO. No other negative comments, except they are acting as stooges. In fact, MCA has done well to help the Chinese, building more schools, going all out against crime, helping the needy etc. That is why the sentiment when I talk to a Kulai guy (Ong Ka Ting constituency) is that OKT is very good & helped the rakyat a lot – explaining his high majority. Whereas talking to Perak guys, they are not saying MCA is no good, but as MCA must support UMNO as ‘yes-man’, he got no choice but to vote DAP. A significant number of Chinese also associates Samy Vellu=MIC=UMNO=BN & vote opposition, even though his area is PAS vs UMNO.

    But this is special as only 5% will really vote PAS – anyway, they vote out of anger & no other choice of opposition. Anyway, this guy is a big time Chinese contractor & seeing his projects all go away to UMNO crony, he doesn’t mind PAS. The normal Chinese man on the street will still vote UMNO in favour of PAS if presented these 2 choices.

    Anyway my sample size is small… If you guys have more kopitiam talk opinion of the people, pls share it here… I want to know more of what Malaysians think, regardless of their political ideologies in which DAP can use to strengthen their presence in the future.

  4. #4 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:04 am

    http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:AdVw7yqqi_UJ:www.kairos-malaysia.org/view_file.cfm%3Ffileid%3D3+ng+kam+weng&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3

    PAS ISLAMIC STATE DOCUMENT
    Critical Comments
    By Dr. Ng Kam Weng

    Birds in a bird park, we may blithely assume, would be happier in than their feathered brothers shut up in small cages in a home somewhere. After all, birds in a park can take longer flights and enjoy a measure of freedom and security, albeit within the netting. But birds know better. Give them half a chance and they will fly off to real freedom that lies beyond the netting.Some of the questions posed in the recent PAS launching of their Islamic State Document raised the ridiculous suggestion that birds should accept life within confinement just because the park keeper is able to give them tastier seeds and larger nettings. Surely, these questioners have missed out on the more fundamental issues of freedom and equality in limiting the discussion to issues like granting permission to non-Muslims to drink and gamble, and seeking less severe punishment for adultery.To be sure, the glib answers from PAS officials may persuade some to accept the Islamic state. At least, PAS has now laid its cards on the table with its manifesto that is sprinkled with the language of piety. The manifesto even affirms fundamental liberties.But the people need to be wary—what the bold print giveth, the fine print taketh away. On the one hand, the PAS document accepts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. On the other hand, it specifies that the rights must not contravene the provisions of the Syariah. What can this mean? Non-Muslims are at liberty to practice their cultural expression, presumably “within the ambit of the Syariah.” PAS offers such concessions precisely because it is replacing the Federal Constitution with its version of the Syariah as the supreme law of the land.The PAS proposal strikes at the foundation of our whole legal system. Hence, we must reject it. To borrow a phrase from PAS officials, we must defend our fundamental liberties and rights to equal citizenship enshrined in the current Federal Constitution because they are “immovables”.The Constitution formulated in 1957 and 1963 was arrived at through the tradition ofmusyawarah-muafakat ( consultation and consensus) of the nation’s Founding Fathers to reach a consensus. It epitomizes a social contract among equal partners that promises equality of all citizens—regardless of race and religion—in a pluralist democracy.In contrast, PAS insists on the Ulama (from which non-Muslims are obviously excluded) as the final interpreter of the laws of the land. In other words, non-Muslims are relegated to a subservient position.PAS assures us that their rule will include consultation (Shura) within Parliament. Butunfortunately, without the premise of equal citizenship, and with PAS reserving the right to make the final decision, such consultation will only be tokenism that provides a veneer of legitimacy for PAS’ undemocratic rule.What will happen when PAS replaces the current politics of democratic consensus? Politics of mutual recognition will then be replaced with a politics of hegemony where all Muslim citizens are ‘more equal’ than others.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Page 2
    2The PAS document lists out various freedoms that include the right of mother-tongue and cultural expression. But political scientists and historians often warn us that paper guarantees are insufficient to protect democratic rights. For example, the 1936 Soviet Constitution (Article 125) guaranteed by law freedom of speech, the press, assembly and even street demonstrations. It added that “these rights of citizens are ensured by placing them at the disposal of the working people and their organizations of printing shops, supplies of paper, public buildings, the streets, means of communication, and other material requisites for the exercise of these rights.” These promises did not prevent the rise of tyranny.Rhetoric must be fleshed out in concrete institutions to be credible. In this regard PAS’document fails to demonstrate how the party will move from pious principles to concrete policies in the context of establishing just institutions that will preserve the checks and balances of political power.PAS appears reluctant to spell out concrete details. Regardless of whatever concessions it makes, PAS reserves the prerogative to define the limits of the rights of its non-Muslim subjects. To be sure, the document emphasizes that “the citizens possess all rights to demand transparency at all levels of leadership.” But sadly, such transparency was not evident when PAS was thrown the question on kharaj. PAS gave a misleading answer by suggesting that it was merely taxation.Kharaj may be deemed as merely taxation if it is equally required of all citizens but if it is imposed on non-Muslims then it can only be a continuation of the historical policy of relegating non-Muslims to the inferior status of the dhimmi since historically kharaj was considered as jizyah (protection tax) on their conquered land. PAS evocation and evasion contradicts the document’s assurance of transparency.The practice of telling half-truths emphasizes the fragility of political language that is open to distortion and misinformation. Barisan National politicians who look forward to a field day attacking PAS and its manifesto ought to take note that their criticisms will have credibility only if they are not seen as political opportunists, but they are genuinely defending the sanctity of the Constitution and strengthening our democratic institutions.I sympathize with my Muslim fellow-citizens when PAS seeks to impale them with a dichotomy between loyalty to the Constitution and loyalty to God. But surely, the choice between serving God and our fellow-men is both false and unnecessary.Indeed, we may argue that religion plays a vital role in promoting a pluralist democracy when its believers move beyond self-interests to promote the common good and foster social relations of mutual respect in the context of just institutions.The real choice for all of us is clear. We must choose either the present Constitution that preserves justice and equality for all citizens and affirms the importance of religion, or PAS’ document that evidently undermines democratic justice and equality and renders religionvulnerable to political exploitation.November 2003

  5. #5 by Godfather on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:07 am

    There you go again….surfing the net and posting articles critical of PAS. When will you stop ? You want to DAP leadership to explain its position that you are so opposed to ? Why don’t you join Gerakan or MCA and then ask for the explanation ?

    Anyway – my simple question is this: When will you stop bashing PAS and calling for DAP to quit the state governments of Perak and Penang ?

  6. #6 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:08 am

    An excerpt from
    PLURALIST DEMOCRACY OR ISLAMIC STATE?
    Dr. Ng Kam Weng

    http://www.kairos-malaysia.org/index.cfm?menuid=6

    PAS’s attitude towards non-Muslims can be described as condescending. Non-Muslims clearly understand that PAS’s Islamic state will impose Islamic law on all citizens in a such way that their religious freedom will be violated. Indeed, PAS’s politicians are being disingenuous in suggesting that non-Muslims are against the Islamic state just because they want freedom to eat pork, operate casinos or dress indecently in public. The fact is non-Muslims are more concerned about the fundamental issue of citizenship rights.

    I recall a forum where YB Nik Aziz was asked whether non-Muslims could play a meaningful role in the legal system of the Islamic state PAS has in mind. Would they have a genuine say in the formulation of laws and public policy? Would non-Muslim lawyers be allowed to represent their clients as advocates in courts? Would non-Muslim judges be allowed to make judgments in the Shariah courts? YB Nik Aziz’s response was very revealing – he did not give an affirmative answer to any of these questions. Instead he gave a roundabout answer which suggested that non-Muslims would accept Islamic law when they properly understood it. In effect, he evaded the issue that most troubles non-Muslims, that is, whether PAS’s Islamic state effectively disenfranchises non-Muslims from the legal system.

    Worries about legal disenfranchisements are inevitable if PAS’s Islamic state maintains a distinction between Muslim citizens and non-Muslim subjects by categorizing the latter as dhimmis. Muslims may enjoy the full legal status under the Shariah law while dhimmis are assigned a subordinate role. This subordinate role is epitomized by payment of the poll tax, the jizyah and kharaj. Indeed, in 1999, an attempt to impose the Kharaj on non Muslims was put off only after a public outcry against it. Dhimmis cannot assume authoritative positions in PAS’s legal system precisely because unbelievers cannot understand the Shariah law. Dhimmis are also excluded from holding senior positions in government. Maududi, an influential jurist from Pakistan explained that the Islamic state is an ideologcal state and as such non-believers who do not share its ideology cannot share political power. But does not such exclusion amount to legal apartheid? It would be easy for PAS to allay the anxieties of non-Muslim by declaring decisively that it will not implement the dhimmi system and that all citizens will be accorded equal rights and legal status. PAS appears reluctant or unwilling to do so. As long as PAS fails to undertake this pledge, we can only regard its assurances about tolerance and justice as inconsequential concessions and empty rhetoric.

  7. #7 by Godfather on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:09 am

    Are you aware that you are creating ammunition for people like Lim Keng Yaik, Ong Ka Ting and Ong Ka Chuan ?

  8. #8 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:13 am

    Part 2
    An excerpt from
    PLURALIST DEMOCRACY OR ISLAMIC STATE?
    Dr. Ng Kam Weng

    http://www.kairos-malaysia.org/index.cfm?menuid=6

    Let it be stressed that the anxieties of non-Muslims are not abstract fears. Indeed, they have for some years experienced painful restrictions on their own religious rights even under an UMNO led government. For example, some government officials – acting from a narrow interpretation of Islam – make it difficult for non-Muslims to gain approval to build places of worship. Some state governments even prohibit non-Muslims from using some crucial technical terms like Allah, Iman, Wahyu, Injil, Kitab,Nabi etc. In effect, non-Muslims are denied the right to talk about the central tenets of their own religion. Non-Muslim religious literature have been confiscated on grounds that they contain such words. Is it any surprise that non-Muslims fearfully anticipate that PAS – with an even more narrow interpretation of Islam – can only make matters worse?

    In the light of these grave concerns, the non-Muslim’s objection to the establishment of an Islamic state should not be taken as an act of animosity towards Islam per se. It is, rather, a reaction towards a serious threat against one’s fundamental citizenship rights. Polarizing citizens into contesting groups – divided along the criterion as to whether they are for or against the Islamic state – would only cloud the real issue. As such, conflictive politics should be replaced by a positive approach concerned with defending the inalienable basic rights of all citizens as enshrined in the Constitution.

    It is therefore appropriate to clarify the relationship between religious and political institutions envisaged by the Federal Constitution. Of direct relevance is the clause which states that “Islam is the religion of the Federation, but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.” The additional Constitutional provisions that empower the government to render assistance to Islam, especially pertaining to education, require lawmakers to be sensitive to the concerns of Islam. But the status of Islam was clarified by our first Prime Minister when he explained that the clause referred to the ceremonial role of Islam at official functions.

    To put the matter in historical perspective, we need to recall that the original architects of the Federal Constitution assured the Sabahans and Sarawakians during negotiations for the formation of Malaysia that the clause “does not imply that Malaysia is not a secular state.” Put positively, Malaysia is therefore a secular state. By a secular state is meant a state that adopts religious neutrality in a pluralistic society. Notice that neutrality is far from hostility towards religion. Indeed, a secular state should maintain a benevolent neutrality that respects the integrity and equality of diverse religions of the nation.

    Two consequences emerge if we demarcate a clear boundary between state and religious institutions. First, the state is judged as lacking competence in matters religious. The Latin term saeculum (from which the word ‘secular’ comes) means pertaining to temporal matters. The call for a secular state is to remind state authorities in a democratic society that the electoral mandate given to them in elections only pertains to temporal matters in society. The state should respect the autonomy of religious institutions even though both institutions work together in promoting a moral society.

    The act to remove religious institutions from state sovereignty should not be seen as an act to undermine religion. On the contrary, the act alleviates the status of religion since its institutions become independent public institutions capable of censuring state authorities if it should arrogate for itself the final authority in human affairs. If anything, state authorities are morally held accountable to a higher transcendent authority.

    Second, the separation between state and religious institutions is necessary to avoid possible conflicts in the event that some politicians exploit religious sentiments and incite disgruntled citizens to resort to violence. A quick look at Nigeria and the Indian sub-continent should serve as a salutary reminder against the temptation to mix religion and politics. Maintaining the precarious harmony between the various racial communities in Malaysia is already a most difficult task for any government. Confusing the boundaries between religious and political institutions will make matters worse given the conflictive nature of politics.

  9. #9 by Menang atau mati on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:27 am

    Dear Administrator or is it Uncle Lim who does the moderating?

    I suffer the same fate as OneforallAllforone,Jeffrey and Prelude.

    I am clueless as to why my posting is still under moderation for at least 20 hours.

    I don’t see anything offensive in my post.

    At least,advise what’s wrong with it?

    Is the moderator on leave or what?

    BTW, that Lee guy – just ignore him/her – could be BN cyber trooper!

  10. #10 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:31 am

    //Jeffrey, is your waiting for moderation that long?// – Loh

    One of 2 postings on current debate about PAS-DAP collaboration was posted more than 48 hours which I consider is as good as ‘deleted; the other more than 12 hours, so I am writing anything more on this subject for the time being. Which is why I am puzzled from which of postings that appeared I had said that DAP should walk out of the state government in Perak attributed to me by Godfather.

  11. #11 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:35 am

    //Jeffrey, is your waiting for moderation that long?// – Loh

    My postings on on current debate about this subject of PAS-DAP collaboration are moderated past 12 hours, and my feeling is that they won’t clear.

  12. #12 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 12:35 am

    Those who don’t like those excerpts should simply ignore them. I’m sure some readers will find them helpful.

  13. #13 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 1:01 am

    According to Dr. Ng Kam Weng, ‘Dhimmis [non-Muslims] cannot assume authoritative positions in PAS’s legal system precisely because unbelievers cannot understand the Shariah law. Dhimmis are also excluded from holding senior positions in government.’

    Is this such an Islamic notion of Dhimmi’s role the reason why (i.e. the rationale underlying the state’s consitution) non-Muslims cannot be Perak MB? Could it be that Perak’s consitutional restriction of the MB post to Muslims reflects such a notion? If so how could DAP accept such an arrangement?

    As Dr. Ng says, ‘But does not such exclusion amount to legal apartheid? It would be easy for PAS to allay the anxieties of non-Muslim by declaring decisively that it will not implement the dhimmi system and that all citizens will be accorded equal rights and legal status. PAS appears reluctant or unwilling to do so. As long as PAS fails to undertake this pledge, we can only regard its assurances about tolerance and justice as inconsequential concessions and empty rhetoric.’

    (see my post above for reference)

  14. #14 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 1:20 am

    oops… ‘Is this such an’ should have been ‘Is such an’

  15. #15 by RocketDAP on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 1:48 am

    Lee Wang Yen…….so basically now what you are saying is that:-

    1) DAP should not work with PAS. They should not even try to take an initiative to work with PAS even if it means for the betterment of the people.

    2) DAP should leave the coalition and let BN form the goverment and go against the wishes of the people that have voted BN out.

    3) Challenge the Sultan of Perak on the MB post and make it a racial issue and in the process create animosity between the races.

    What does that sound like? A DAP supporter? As Godfather says
    “Godfather Says:

    Yesterday at 22: 53.28
    You are seriously undermining the very party that you purport to support. You are also seriously undermining the coalition governments in Perak and Selangor.”

  16. #16 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 1:54 am

    The coalition governments in Selangor and Perak may well be short-lived, given the differences between DAP and PAS, unless DAP keeps compromising, thereby evolving into another MCA or Gerakan. Either way, there is not much benefit for the people.

  17. #17 by RocketDAP on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 2:09 am

    Whether it is workable will all depend on the parties involved. So we must give them the benefit of a doubt to work together even if they have different ideologies. This is what democracy is about. We all want the same thing. A Malaysian Malaysia. As has been said many times before , sometimes we need to move back a step in order to move forward. Compromising for the good of the people is not a bad thing. We have to show that DAP is not an arrogant party.

    Chill….

  18. #18 by Loh on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 2:25 am

    Some people think that it is possible to mould a political party to what he likes, like a teacher training or brainwashing the students. PAS has its ideology, and it has its hard core supporters. So has BN which appears to be the art of making money. There are more than 17 political parties in the country and each has its own special agenda, and supporters. Otherwise, all the 13 junior BN component parties would have merged; UMNO would remain the party which has perfected its strategy through Ketuanan Melayu, and would not accept others to join as equal members. PAS has now been singled out to be condemned because of its support for Islamic state for which it has not explained how Islamic state would function.

    Though different political parties have different ideology, we do see coalition governments elsewhere in the world, and in the five state governments in Malaysia for the first time. Obviously when these parties form a coalition, they would be looking for common understanding of issues that they could agree, and they would retain their core differences distinguishing among them.

    It makes no sense not to cooperate for the government to function. When those that they could not agree ever predominate in the coalition government, a vote of no confidence can always be called during the five years, and new election would be held.

    It is the first time in fifty years that BN state government is replaced. This is an opportunity for the coalition to work together, which hopefully would prove to better than BN. For the BN, the hiatus gives them a chance to realise that they have to earn the right to rule, and it is not their entitlement. It is hoped that come next election they can given ‘Barisan Rakyat’ a good competition.

    There are people who have made disproportionately more postings to impress others of the danger of PAS regarding Islamic states, and perhaps Islamic teaching itself. That might give notice to PAS about the fear non-Muslims have about Islamic state. Yes, PAS could become stronger through their participation in coalition governments. There might be a risk that they become too strong that they would turn this place into an Islamic state, in 50 years. Risks are everywhere in life. MCA should not have agreed with the formation of the Alliance government, fifty years ago. That was the wisdom of hind sight. We are now suffering under BN. Should we just accept our fate, and migrate? Should not we take the risks?

    People who are currently overseas can advise us to maintain the status quo because they do not earn their livings in Malaysia. They can enjoy cheap food of cheap quality with the high exchange rate. People who are currently in the situation of frogs in the gently warming water rising to a boil would like to be taken out of the water; if they are aware of their real situation while feeling pretty comfortable at the moment. Should anyone stop the hands that lift the frogs out of the wok?

  19. #19 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 2:33 am

    I don’t know about you but all this talk about frogs refresh my yearning for frog legs!

  20. #20 by Loh on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 2:39 am

    Loh Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Yesterday at 06: 11.24

    That is 20 hours and still waiting

  21. #21 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 3:25 am

    Some jump to the conclusion that I’m one of those ‘who are currently overseas [who] can advise us to maintain the status quo because they do not earn their livings in Malaysia. They can enjoy cheap food of cheap quality with the high exchange rate’, from the fact that I’m writing in UK.

    This is a baseless statement. The only thing they know is that I’m writing this while in UK. But I could be on a holiday trip, or a business trip, or studying here, or about to complete my studies and return home. They present these bold and baseless conjectures as if they are facts.

  22. #22 by Lee Wang Yen on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 3:34 am

    Some don’t like properly reasoned arguments. They don’t like those who back up their statements by providing quick references for others to check out (note: this does not imply that those who cite these references derive their knowledge about a particular subject solely from those sources). They don’t like those who try to argue a point by providing materials from diverse sources.

    But they themselves like to make baseless conjectures and assert them as truths.

  23. #23 by cucu adam on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 3:49 am

    I salute you for your courage to make an apology to the HRH Sultan of Perak and the Regent of Perak. This was done without much time wasted, otherwise the media and BN-UMNO members will manipulate and make a mockery out of the differences that exist in the lose coalition.

    Make the lose coalition works, and show to BN-UMNO that DAP-PKR-PAS can rule better. BN-UMNO used to boast that only they can rule Malaysia, and that chaos will prevail if other than BN-UMNO rules this country. Prove them that they are dam wrong.

    Show the them the exit door to BN/UMNO.

  24. #24 by Loh on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 4:26 am

    ///This is a baseless statement. The only thing they know is that I’m writing this while in UK.///

    The statement referred to did not have Lwy listed, and Lwy was not needed for the argument. So the reason why Lwy is anywhere is not important to that statement. The argument relates to people working overseas. If the hat fits, wear it.

  25. #25 by matterofchoice2008 on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 8:48 am

    # Lee Wang Yen Says:

    ………….or studying here, or about to complete my studies and return home………..

    I bet you are a young chap who is about to complete an advance degree in UK. Most likely your research topic is related to religion. And you think that as you do considerably well academically, you deserve more attention by putting forth your THEORETICALLY “CORRECT” comments. Some of us here had also been to UK for further studies.

    Be more humble, and be more practical. And don’t just see the real world issue from religion perspective where you think you know best.

  26. #26 by matterofchoice2008 on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 8:52 am

    # Lee Wang Yen Says:
    ………….or studying here, or about to complete my studies and return home………..

    I bet you are a young chap who is about to complete an advance degree in UK. Most likely your research topic is related to religion. And you think that as you do considerably well academically, you deserve more attention by putting forth your THEORETICALLY “CORRECT” comments. Some of us here had also been to UK for further studies.

    Be more humble, and be more practical. And don’t just see the real world issue from religion perspective where you think you know best.

  27. #27 by kkchong on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 9:45 am

    Lee Wang Yee ,

    I strongly feel you have negative think about the whole Malaysian politic .
    complete your studies IN uk FIRST, THEN come back to malaysia to be a truly Malaysian with moden thinking, dont just think you are chinese, they are Malay or indian. We are True Malaysian for all we are the same. We are looking for better life in Malaysia.

    Are you introduce yourself as Chinese Malaysian in uk ? or i from Malaysia

  28. #28 by lopez on Sunday, 16 March 2008 - 11:14 am

    In my days for 50 years i kept reading MCA is chinese representatives of Chinese Malaysians.

    But in those same 50 years, these thick skin fools still cannot get their thinking straight perhaps blinded by bar girls or night clubbing, or girlie barbers squats.

    That they are not representatives of Chinese Malaysians but only their members.

    For those who are young, I dont blame you getting to think that way because there is no other source of media. Lies has appear truth, the power of the media.
    If it takes 50 years to get this understanding blame it to MOE an BN and your father or yourself for not seeing beyond the veil.

    The Chinese Malaysians vote DAP like all other non Chinese Malaysians because they stand up for well being our future , our children future not just talk and make dream statements like angkasawan -NAH…and making nice glamorous motivating statement while siphoning $$$$.
    All because they have media on the strangle hold.

  29. #29 by Godfather on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 1:06 am

    LWY:

    If you believe so strongly in your principles, come back to Bolehland and join UMNO in the protests in Perak against the PAS/PKR/DAP coalition. Any supporter of the DAP who puts the new ruling coalition at risk is a moron. No other word to describe this.

  30. #30 by cucu adam on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 2:29 am

    It is disgusting, disgraceful and shameful thatthe media as expected highlighted the demos that were held at Komtar in Penang and in Ipoh. The first relates to demo in protest over Ketua Menteri Penang statement on DEB, and the second demo refers to a demand on an opened apology to HRH Sultan of Perak over Lim statement that DAP SAs to boycott the swearing ceremony of the newly appointed MB of Perak.

    Did these two demos received police permit to hold the demos. It is everyone guess. It is obvious that both demos are meant to instill fears and hatred towards the DAP in particular and PKR and PAS in general.

    If such demos become a daily event, imagine what subsequently will follows – bloodsheds in the country. This will be an excuse for the federal government to impose emergency rule in the country.

    The rakyat are intelligent enough and are sick with the cheap propaganda of the BN/UMNO. As a matter of fact the lies and demos that were carried out will backfired on them, as more and more people will give their full hearted support to DAP-PKR-PAS lose coalition which explained the lost of the five states and denying two thirds majority to BN/UMNO in the Dewan Rakyat in the recent election..

  31. #31 by matterofchoice2008 on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 10:05 am

    Lee Wang Yen thinks that he is very smart. He wants to impress us with his “in-depth” knowledge about religion.

  32. #32 by mchoice2008 on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 10:17 am

    Godfather Says:

    Today at 01: 06.55 (9 hours ago)
    LWY:

    If you believe so strongly in your principles, come back to Bolehland and join UMNO in the protests in Perak against the PAS/PKR/DAP coalition.

    Yes…… that’s the way to go

  33. #33 by Wisdom above on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 11:55 am

    Look like Sabahans know what is the ” Truth”.

    > Someone from Sabah talk sense…..

    1)…Sabah Progressive Party president Datuk Yong Teck Lee said he was puzzled why the NEP was still an issue when it had been replaced by the

    >’National Development Policy’(NDP)…

    > TUN DR M launched the “NDP” which year ? I forgot the year ,do you remember ?

    2)…“so called cancellation of the NEP” was completely redundant because it no longer existed and it was equally disappointing that Penang Umno was still harping on a non-existent policy.

    3)…no wonder that some politicians both from ruling and opposition have lost focus on which policy to talk about,”

    Why PKR,DAP,PAS & West Malaysians are still dreaming ? ….Lost focus ?

    Why MCA, Gerakan, MIC, PPP, PBB,PRS still hiding the ‘Truth’ ?

    Bravo, Sabahans dare to speak out.

    Repeat for reference only.

    Syabas. Barisan Rakyat.

  34. #34 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 1:45 pm

    PAS’ PROPOSAL FOR ISLAMIC GOVT IRKS DAP VETERAN
    17/3/2008

    http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Monday/Frontpage/2188527/Article/index_html

    GEORGE TOWN: The DAP has expressed shock and anger over Pas’ proposal to form an Islamic federal government.

    DAP life adviser Dr Chen Man Hin said the party would not agree or co-operate with Pas should they insist on forming an Islamic government at the federal level.

    “This is not part of our understanding. It will be no-go for the DAP if they do that. We will surely not accept it.

    “Their proposal has left a big question mark over our future co-operation,” a visibly upset Dr Chen said while angrily pushing aside a newspaper article on the Pas proposal.

    Dr Chen, who was at the day-long DAP national leadership convention, said the party decided to co-operate with Pas because of its intention to convert Malaysia into a welfare state.

    “But look at what they are saying now,” he said when asked to comment on Pas vice-president Datuk Husam Musa’s statement that Pas was confident it could soon set up an Islamic form of government at the federal level.

    Husam had said there was growing support among the Chinese and Indians for the party’s political struggle.

    Dr Chen said the DAP would be discussing the matter soon.

    “While I would like to leave this matter alone at this moment, I think the party will need to seek clarification on this.

    “Right now, we do not know whether it is Husam’s personal view or the party’s.”

    Parti Keadilan Rakyat vice-president Sivarasa Rasia also expressed surprise at Husam’s statement.

    “I have looked at the latest manifesto of Pas and there is nothing stated about an Islamic government.”

  35. #35 by mchoice2008 on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 3:59 pm

    Husam clarifies ‘take-over’ statement

    By IAN McINTYRE

    KOTA BARU: PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa has clarified that his statement on the party taking over the Government at the federal level was taken out of context.

    “I mentioned that we are hopeful of taking 30 more parliamentary seats to win power and not about forming an Islamic Government,” he said.

    Husam urged the mass media to be careful in its reporting to avoid antagonising anyone unnecessarily.

  36. #36 by Godfather on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 4:53 pm

    You live in the UK – maybe you don’t understand Bahasa. If you do, read what PAS has said regarding the NST article. Or maybe you will still whinge that PAS is not sincere. Sigh. Bodoh sombong betul.

  37. #37 by Menang atau mati on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 6:22 pm

    That Lee guy should come out clean.Declare himself.

    Just like DAP assemblymen are required to declare their assets.

    Lee,declare yourself.

    Do not just say you are in UK now.

    Are you in UK as a student,holidaying,a PR there or a citizen?

    If you want others to take you seriously,declare yourself.

  38. #38 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 7:49 pm

    http://www.harakahdaily.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13310&Itemid=28

    “Persoalannya dalam situasi sekarang, apakah warna sebenar politik PAS? Adakah pemimpin PAS akan membiarkan mereka dipermainkan oleh DAP? Atau mungkin kerana kuasa segala prinsip perjuangan dikorbankan? Hanya masa akan menentukan.”

    Saya ingin menasihati Zul bahawa rakyat telah pun bersuara melalui PRU ke-12 lalu, suka atau tidak, selesa atau sakit, suara rakyat perlu dihormati. Demi mempertahankan keputusan rakyat itu PAS memutuskan untuk membentuk kerajaan campuran walaupun sedar DAP hadir di dalamnya. Kalau Zul tidak memutarkan kenyataan Tuan Guru Presiden PAS semasa pelancaran Manifesto PAS: “Kerajaan Beramanah, Adil dan Bersih – Menuju Negara Berkebajikan”, beliau akan dapati bahawa dalam majlis itu Presiden PAS berkata (apabila diajukan tentang persoalan darihal kerjasam PAS dan DAP), kita tunggu bila tiba masanya. Bermakna bila tiba suasana itu PAS akan membuat keputusan dan kini PAS telah pun memutuskannya.

    Soalnya adakah akan tergadai maruah perjuangan PAS apabila berkerjasama dengan DAP ini? Zul dengan kecenderungan politiknya sudah pastilah akan menjawab: Ya!

    Tetapi hakikatnya dalam kemelut politik hari ini, semua mengakui bahawa PASlah yang paling kelihatan matang dan mempamerkan kedewasaan. PAS saya yakin akan terus mempertahankan agenda Islam dalam apa keadaan sekalipun, kerana ia Parti Islam, kekalahan atau kemenangan tidak akan merobah hakikat itu. Sama ada PAS pembangkang, PAS membentuk kerajaan negeri, PAS bersama BN (tahun 70an) atau kini PAS bersama PKR dan DAP, tidak sesiapa pun yang bekuasa mengikis atau mematikan matlamat perjuagan PAS itu.

    Kini PAS sudah membentuk kerajaan (selain di Kedah dan di Kelantan) bersama PKR dan DAP di Selangor dan Perak. Asas pembentukkan kerajaan itu sudah pastilah berdasarkan muafakat hormat-menghormati dan saling faham-memahami. PAS sudah pasti akan berusaha melaksanakan agendanya dalam ruang-lingkup dan keterbatasan yang ada baginya. Mana yang mudah dan boleh diterima semua, diberikan keutamaan manakala yang rumit dan perlukan kefahaman dikemudiankan, bermakna prinsip bukan dikorbankan tetapi dipelihara dan dimantapkan.

    Bagaimana kalau berlaku pertembungan, bagaimana kalau perlu pilih antara menerima atau menolak Islam? Di sinilah kedudukan kritikal PAS dalam kerajaan tadi akan diambil-kira oleh semua. KeADILan dan DAP sedar akan hakikat ini, begitu juga PAS. Kita mengharapkan kerajaan ini tidak akan menghimpit PAS sampai ke peringkat itu,

  39. #39 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 7:51 pm

    NOTHING CAN STOP PAS FROM STRIVING FOR ITS ISLAMIC AGENDA
    PAS akan terus mempertahankan prinsipnya
    Roslan SMS
    Sun | Mar 16, 08 | 4:32:16 pm MYT

    PAS saya yakin akan terus mempertahankan agenda Islam dalam apa keadaan sekalipun, kerana ia Parti Islam, kekalahan atau kemenangan tidak akan merobah hakikat itu. Sama ada PAS pembangkang, PAS membentuk kerajaan negeri, PAS bersama BN (tahun 70an) atau kini PAS bersama PKR dan DAP, tidak sesiapa pun yang bekuasa mengikis atau mematikan matlamat perjuagan PAS itu.

    http://www.harakahdaily.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13310&Itemid=28

  40. #40 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 17 March 2008 - 8:14 pm

    PAS rejects secular democracy (DAP’s ideology). Theocracy is the Only Option:

    Pemikir-pemikir politik Barat, sedar akan kemunduran kerana dijajah oleh keagamaan Kristian yang banyak tidak rasional terhadap mereka, menyebabkan negara mundur.

    Dari sinilah lahirnya fahaman sekular yang memisahkan penghidupan dengan agama, sekali gus memisahkan agama daripada politik (daripada kalangan Kristian).

    Meskipun itu boleh berlaku dalam masyarakat Barat yang berpegang dengan fahaman Kristianiti, ia berbeza dengan agama Islam.
    ….
    Pemikiran politik Islam bertitik tolak daripada kefahaman Islam yang tidak memisahkan Islam daripada pemerintahan.

    Ia bersatu dalam satu perkataan di istilahkan sebagai Ad-Din, cara hidup yang lengkap, terungkap seperti firman Allah (mafhumnya): “…Pada hari ini, Aku (Allah) telah menyempurnakan bagi kamu agama kamu, dan Aku telah cukupkan nikmat-Ku terhadap kamu, dan aku reda Islam menjadi ad-Din kamu (cara hidup yang sempurna)…” (Surah al-Maaidah, ayat 3)

    Oleh kerana itu, kita umat Islam perlu terima hakikat, Islam adalah agama yang sempurna, termasuk cara berpolitik, memerintah cara Islam.

    Jika kita menolak pegangan ini dan memilih yang lain, ia bermakna menolak ketetapan Allah dan merendah-rendahkan agama, seolah-olahnya cara hidup ciptaan manusia, lebih sempurna dari ciptaan Allah.

    Merendah-rendahkan agama Allah boleh menyebabkan kerosakan akidah.

    Bersama Dr Haron Din: Pilihlah parti untuk kebahagiaan dunia, akhirat
    Dr Haron Din
    Thu | Feb 28, 08 | 10:08:47 am MYT

    http://www.harakahdaily.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12793&Itemid=91

    [please - limit your posting to ONE thread, multiple posting of the exact same comments = spam]

  41. #41 by Lee Wang Yen on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 - 1:24 am

    The Islamist’s view of politics and state rests on their
    fundamental premise that Islam is not a “religion” in the
    sense in which we speak of Christianity and Hinduism
    today, i.e., a code of religious beliefs and doctrines, a
    mode of spiritual orientation, or a set of some outward
    rituals. Islam is a complete way of life; it covers the entire
    spectrum of human activities. Islam means total
    commitment and subordination of all aspects of life –
    individual, social, economic, political, international – to
    God. Hence, Islam is both religion and politics, mosque or
    church and state, joined in a single goal of serving God
    and implementing His commandments.

    Nasharudin Mat Isa,
    Secretary General,
    Islamic Party of Malaysia
    10th February 2003

    http://www.pas.org.my/kertaskerja/Islam,Politics_and_Democracy.pdf

  42. #42 by mchoice2008 on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 - 2:20 pm

    PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa has clarified that his statement on
    the party taking over the Government at the federal level was taken out
    of context.

    “I mentioned that we are hopeful of taking 30 more parliamentary seats to
    win power and not about forming an Islamic Government,” he sa

  43. #43 by mchoice2008 on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 - 3:10 pm

    PAS vice-president Datuk Husam Musa has clarified that his statement on the party taking over the Government at the federal level was taken out of context.

    —————————————————————-
    Lee Wang Yen, you happily and selectively took NST and STAR reports to support your arguments.

    Our best guess is that you are still a PHD student, possibly doing some research in religion or so.

    It looks like you are more concerned with your own arguments and research topics than really thinking of some PRACTICAL and IMPLEMENTABLE ways to move Malaysia to a BETTER Malaysia.

    Be more humble, and be more practical. The world is definitely much more diverse than what you could see from your research topics.

  44. #44 by Godfather on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 - 11:35 pm

    The guy is doing either a masters or a PhD degree on anti-Islam, so let’s let him be. Soon everyone will just ignore his academic regurgitations.

  45. #45 by Lee Wang Yen on Thursday, 20 March 2008 - 2:15 pm

    Note that I have not used that particular NST online report for any argument.

    Note that the Star online report of Husam’s clarification does not prove that he has not made the statement, insofar as one thinks that the NST online report does not prove that he has made it.

    Here is a case where we have a claim and counter-claim by two different newspapers. Without further evidence, we do not know whether or not Husam has made the statement.

    I’m not anti-Islam. I reject PAS’s agenda because it is not appropriate for the multi-religious and multi-cultural Malaysia. I’ve talked to progressive Islamic scholars from Indonesia, and have very high regard for them. Part of the problem is PAS’ fundamentalistic interpretation of Islam.

    By the way, I’m a philosopher of science and have no academic degree in Islam or anti-Islam.

    Godfather, one cannot get any research degree in any respectable university by just ‘academic regurgitations’. Also, regurgitating the claim that someone’s else is allegedly doing ‘academic regurgitations’ without making any substantial points about the subject under discussion does not further any discussion.

    When a discussant D has provided arguments X, Y, Z for a certain proposition P, one who disagrees with P may take great pleasure in saying all sorts of bad things about D. But at the end of the day, one still has to face up to the fact that nothing useful has been said about P and X, Y, Z. People enjoy and engage in ad hominem arguments because they either have no substantial ones or do not take them seriously.

    Sadly, many people think that they can argue their case in a serious and rational discussion with the rhetoric and strategies they use in squabbling with their family members.

  46. #46 by Lee Wang Yen on Thursday, 20 March 2008 - 2:16 pm

    oops.. someone else…

1 34 35 36

You must be logged in to post a comment.