Most intriguing.
MCA has not given up.
The stance of the MCA President Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat is being echoed by his underlings with the MCA leadership continuing to plug the line that the DAP should boycott the Kuala Terengganu by-election over PAS agenda on hudud.
Of course, no indication that MCA would boycott the by-election although there is no renunciation by the UMNO leadership of a series of hegemonistic agendas, whether the “929 Declaration” that Malaysia is an Islamic state or “ketuanan Melayu”.
Forty hours to nomination in Kuala Terengganu by-election on Tuesday morning.
Meanwhile, let the blogosphere respond to the MCA stance – for or against, the pros and cons, merits and demerits as to whether DAP should boycott Kuala Terengganu by-election over PAS agenda on hudud..
#1 by Jeffrey on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:05 am
Godfather, Can you come out with something more convincing than mere labelling eg MCA plant, Islamophobia etc?
It is not necessary for me to say more. What you said is self explanatory to all of your state of mind. You are welcomed to carry on and spew more of what’s on your mind. :)
#2 by wanderer on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:07 am
The Malay votes in Kt will be distributed quite evenly to both sides, BN and the Opposition. The Chinese votes will decide the final outcome, so OTK is playing the Chinese’s fear on PAS Hudud law.
Good try you MCA scumbags, the Chinese are not beggars and definitely have better sense and intelligence to be coned.
Ong, take issue with UMNOputeras on ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ than I will be convinced your so called ‘good intention’ on Hudud law is not fraud.
#3 by Bigjoe on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:09 am
The choice of candidate for KT, while not DAP first choice, is still a good choice for DAP as far as within PAS is concern, he is known as someone who focus on main agenda of reform rather than an all the trappings of Islamic politics. He is known to attack BN and UMNO ways vigorously while not participating in the Islamic rhetoric. He is known for attacking vigorously against corruption and abuse of power.
This is MCA trash-talking politics to focus on Hudud and DAP because all they got is to divert attention from them shooting blanks (ahem). It makes sense given the trash-talking but can’t back it up president that they have now. OTK is failing to match his trash talk and action which his underlings seem to following and his rival CSL is pointing out everyday.
You know what they call a trash talker who can’t back it up? A loser….
#4 by patriotic1994 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:13 am
Kit,
Why I always see in main stream media reporting DAP is demanding PAS to revoke hudud? TheStar reported “Karpal calls on PAS chief to revoke hudud plan” and so on.
It is either TheStar is spinning it or DAP really keep insisting PAS to revoke hudud.
I am tired of BOTH reasons. Can you make them all go away?
I am boycotting the Main Stream Media in supporting of many bloggers and Malaysia-Today readers. And please, DAP, do your part too.
Thanks.
#5 by OrangRojak on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:45 am
Nice to see the contributions by ismailhakim (would PAS still be PAS if they didn’t have PAS objectives?), katdog (so how to educate voters to keep voting out bad governments?), Bigjoe (I hadn’t read anything about the candidate before) and patriotic1994.
There doesn’t seem to be any benefit in DAP asking PAS to give up on Islamic ambition. PAS is what it is. PR is a coalition of 3 very different parties who share the common goal of replacing a corrupt, incompetent and oppressive government. Malaysian society is what it is. Anybody with political ambitions so strong that they are blinded to their civic duty can see that joining the largest coalition is the way to realise their goal.
There’s no honest commentator available to most Malaysians to draw their attention to the flagrant everyday violations of democratic practice. For most Malaysians, there simply is no problem – this is what the propaganda tells them. For the parties of PR, principles tell them something is wrong with Malaysian politics, and they each have their own answer. DAP/PAS/PKR’s principles similarly tell them there are 3 (or only 2?) different right ways to do things.
Campaigning as a coalition is unavoidable, given the nature of Malaysia’s politics. Defeating an incumbent with a uniting policy of ‘happy feeding at the trough’ is going to be very difficult. It would be nice to read some genuinely helpful suggestions.
#6 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 9:56 am
DAP leaders should have done a door to door campaign to win Chinese support for the PAS candidate. They should provide buses and cars to take these voters to the polling stations on election day. Every vote counts.
Ceteris paribus, these voters are going to remain indoors come election day. DAP must not let that happen.
#7 by patriotic1994 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 10:03 am
Yeah, DAP must go to KT to pull people out to support and vote for PAS! This will proof that our media is lying! What matter most is at the ground. Go go go!!!
#8 by OrangRojak on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 10:10 am
undergrad2: DAP must not let that happen
Malaysians must not let that happen. My relatives and neighbours weren’t going to vote last March either, so I got their IC numbers, found their polling stations, and told them who was driving where so they could share cars. You can’t fight greed with apathy. You only need a few supporters here and there who are prepared to talk to their neighbours (even by phone would do, if you’re not in KT), have access to the polling station info and are able to say “stop the rot!” or something equally catchy.
Ten times out of ten, if “someone has to do something”, that’s your job.
#9 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 10:30 am
Obama was the first U.S. Presidential candidate to use the internet in a big way. He was able to get small donors to donate $25 and the result? Millions poured in. He used the internet to organize his supporters, inform ed them what was going on where and whose services were needed where and how. The result? His supporters (strangers to each other) were able to organize themselves into small groups and helped campaign for him. This door to door campaign proved very effective.
On the day of the election, they organized into small groups to ferry voters to polling booths. Such networking proved very effective.
Internet penetration in Malaysia may be low but it could still be used to organize support for the election. Volunteers could submit names, addresses and telephone numbers so others could contact them.
#10 by ablastine on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 10:35 am
Instead of talk of boycott, DAP must do the reverse and redoubles its effort and use every means possible to help its ally, PAS and PR to win the KT seat. HUDUD or Islamic laws are non issues really. They are just the spent ammunitions of the BN and their running dog component parties. DAP cannot run to indulge in small fights at the sideline with some inconsequential idiots, when they are most needed in KT now. It must show its mettle, resolve and ability to work as a cohesive whole in PR all the way to the Federal Government. This is no small matter because there is not much time and the entire future of Malaysia depends on it. IF PR fails it will take less than 30 years for Malaysia to degenerate into another Zimbawee at the rate we are going today.
#11 by OrangRojak on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 10:53 am
Undergrad2 – I wonder if the same could be done (legally) in Malaysia? It’s a bit ’11th hour’ for KT, but I think those tactics could work well for PR in future. Any chance of a forum on such a thing, LKS? Even an online forum / wiki where these things could be worked on at dapmalaysia.org or limkitsiang.com might help. I see plenty of pages at dapmalaysia.org relating to volunteering in person – anything for cyber-supporters?
#12 by 1 United Bangsa Malaysia on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:03 am
Together For 1 Nation, 1 Malaysia as 1 United Bangsa Malaysia
5 January 2009
To Saudara LKS and All Malaysians,
After 308 and 2008 dawn, the only Change is a Change in Leadership in MCA and a shift in absolute power from BN to greater check and balance by Pakatan Rakyat. While BN strived to continue in office by constantly reminding the Rakyats to exercise “TOLERANCE” for greater peace, harmony and stability BUT in reality all political parties continue to champion on narrow ground of race/religion/language/party line; etc. All these are done for BN and Pakatan Rakyat SELF INTERESTS without focus on the real issues faced by Malaysians for the proper prescription of medicines to cure all ills faced by Malaysia.
While the politicians broker for power and money to raise issues and concerns drummed for the gallery, no real work is done for the Rakyats basic needs of love and care, food and shelter. The only Courage to Change is once The Rakyats are not with ME (BN/Pakatan Rakyats) The Rakyats will suffer for not putting ME in power and money. That is why All Malaysians must exercise “TOLERANCE” and restraint for self decay and self destruction under ME rule WITHOUT COURAGE for CHANGE by being focus on the real issues without fear and favor.
The call for DAP and MCA to boycott KT is obvious cowardice of both divide without interests of The Rakyats at heart. Both DAP and MCA should not use the Chinese race as the decoy for KING maker. When 2 elephants fight the ants got killed.
Why can’t MCA and DAP just accept the Malaysians Chinese maturity and intelligence to just allow Bangsa Malaysia to make their decision in KT? Why continue to harp on race/religion etc. line when The Courage for Change should be issues centered for the good of 1 Bangsa Malaysia.. I would humbly, suggest to BN and Pakatan Rakyats that as your action and non action are not issues focused but for SELF only, just leave The Rakyats alone for their wise decision. Win as you may BUT not at the expense of The Rakyats.
All Malaysians, the passing of the bills on judiciary and corruption by both BN and Pakatan Rakyats is a step in the right direction in the common objective of a transparent and respected judiciary system and corruption is bad for man kinds. Just imagine if the 2 issues are mooted and carried by Pakatan Rakyats it will not see daylight in parliament and ALL COWARDICE MPs will toe party line. Even issues dear to The Rakyats can be brushed aside because ME is not in public focus or in bad light. No wonder Dr M coined our MPs as brainless!
If PAS had been narrow and small to champion Hudud and Islamic Laws, by demonstrating (Is a permit issued!) in front of PAS Headquarter only stir anger and burn the fire of hatred against Chinese.
As The Constitution spelt out clearly the rights of all Malaysians why play to the partisan and not just focus on the real issues of rights to choice of religion and a law for a specific group can not be the universal law of all Malaysians until and unless 1 Bangsa Malaysia supported it. If MCA is courageous and not BRAINLESS and COWARDICE then MCA should take the PAS dare by the horn that PAS is unconstitutional and that HUDUD and Islamic Laws if implemented is indirect conversion of 1 Bangsa Malaysia religion because all right minded citizens would want to learn about the religion and the laws since 1 is subject to its legislation.
Saudara LKS, Malaysians Condominium (MC) is still looking for Pakatan Rakyat’s good office to address the 11 years old issues faced on property maintenance. Malaysians Condominium (MC) is jointly developed by a private developer with land from the Local Council which is now managed by a Joint Management Body (JMB) formed under Act 663 with effect from April 2008 .
The JMB is Chaired by a cohesive minority group with 3 foreigners of the small traders and working class. 4 of the Joint Management Committee members are also related by marriage and blood tie. No audited accounts was presented for 1 decade since 1998. The JMB is also not able to provide any monthly accounts since April 2008 and buy time under Act 663 that the accounts will be audited in due course!
A sum of RM3.2 millions Sinking Funds billed by the developer/property manager appointed by the Local Council since Day 1 was not accounted for.
No action was taken by the JMB on the RM3.2 millions and instead JMB now intends to collect further Sinking Funds from owners although JMB have given notice on 8 May 2008 to owners that JMB waived the 7 sens psf Sinking Funds.
All these are happening with full knowledge of the Authority without any enforcement action made by Commissioner of Building (COB)/MP/Minister, against the JMB to address the issues.
Surprise of surprise some of the first owners listed in MC are royalties, Tan Sris, Datuks and high ranking civil servants together with foreigners of the expatriates class.
What a fall from grace and Rakyats Malaysia continue to face shoddy maintenance and services and facilities not provided but billed for by the developer/property manager and now The JMB!
As MC is in the heart of Kuala Lumpur and only 1 MP who is also The Minister of WP is from BN is the 9 Pakatan Rakyats MPs not capable to take on MC issues as a national agenda on all Strta Title properties?
Thank you.
Together for 1 Nation, 1 Malaysia and 1 United Bangsa Malaysia.
#13 by AhPek on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:07 am
Yes you are right,undergrad2 to say that Obama is the first US Presidential candidate to use the Internet in a big way.Because of this he has become today the only president of US not beholden to any big business or for that matter any business.He is only beholden to the people of US cos his campaign is funded by the people of America!
Kit is the first politician here in Malaysia who also has used the net in a big way
enabling him and his party to win in a big way as well in the 12th GE.But he can also use it further to help PAS to win the KT election too.All he needs to do is to focus on the king-maker,the Chinese community of KT.Tell them Hudud law is not the main issue.Main issue is whether ,firstly we want Najis to be our PM and secondly whether we want to see a 2-party system to come about.
#14 by voice on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:14 am
Boycott it and we are back to square one, imagine UMNO become strong again and MCA and MIC are still holding a lot of parliamentary seats, where they can fill in their pockets again, then the nation will fall.
#15 by k1980 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:17 am
If umno loses KT, Bijan will be forced to hand power over to his deputy in March 2010, just as his predecessor was coerced to resign in March 2009
#16 by voice on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:17 am
And why should just DAP boycott it? there are 3 major parties in PR, why they trying to associate DAP with chinese again? old trick!
Come on, DAP is for MALAYSIAN!
DAP leaders dont fall for it!
#17 by monsterball on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 11:56 am
As much as I admire and respect Karpal Singh…..sometimes I think he is totally…a very stubborn man…..too straight forward…straight as an arrow…and with a brave heart.. like Lim Kit Siang for Malaysians.
But LKS is trully smart to counter fight UMNO in every angle.
Karpal…just talk….and go to jail.
However….he is also stupidly falling into MCA’s trap…..in cunning politics. For that…Karpal cannot compete.
Like I said….no marriage is 100% perfect..and Karpal can actually say…..”lets leave Hudud law matters aside……and let DAP supports PAS as part of Pakatan Rakyat party obligation…in the Terengganu by-election”
By forcing PAS to say ….openly they also reject Hudud law…right now..where Islamic matters are major factors to win…muslim votes…Karpal is not logical and practical as a politician to fight cunning opponents.
He is simply…too good a lawyer..to good a politician for a very good clean uncorrupted country.
I hope DAP will not boycott the by-election.
Hadi Awang is the pain in…? for PAS.
Karpal is such …..for DAP.
#18 by Richardqed on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:02 pm
Whatever MCA wants DAP to do, DAP should just do the opposite.
MCA is a useless party. BN has delayed the next decrease of petrol prices for several days (it’s already Jan 5th now), and I don’t see them doing anything about it even though they are supposedly part of the ruling federal coalition.
#19 by Bigjoe on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:05 pm
There is something about BN candidate that I like to point out. I have been watching him campaign and the one thing I notice is that the guy’s body language sends out all sort of wrong signal. You can tell that people don’t feel comfortable with him personally unlike Abdul Wahid Endot. People genuinely like Abdul Wahid, feel comfortable with him even the Chinese.
Its no wonder the first statement BN candidate did was to say he did not want personality to come into the picture. If you notice, children even run away from him unlike Abdul Wahid. There is something fake and untrustworthy about this guy body language. His friendliness is forced, hesitant, unessarily aggressive some times and not commited enough at other, does not come from the heart but the head.
#20 by simon041155 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:14 pm
Errrr… is MCA a political party? With all those mud splashed over its face by Ahmad Ismail, it dared not even utter a sound! You call that a political party?
#21 by ch on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:19 pm
Dear All,
It appears that the BN sponsored media machineries are at full force over the past few weeks in order to ensure a must win for its candidate. Khairy Jamaluddin had articulatively lured Husam to state the actual stand of PAS on Hudud as a component member of Pakatan Rakyat (PR). For all said and done, I sincerely believe that PAS should at some point states its official stand on Hudud as PR aspires to be the guardian of the federal government. Similarly, DAP has to declare its stand if PAS is adamant of establishing Hudud. However, one must always be reminded and aware that PAS has been consistent that Hudud is only meant for Muslims and has nothing to do with non-Muslims. But having said that, political parties will always manipulate the issue in order to gain popularity and votes. For example, MCA’s cleverly manipulated on Islamic state issue in 1999 and 2004 general elections by its “A vote to DAP is A vote to PAS” which oblitereated DAP, annihilated DAP’s quest of reaching the hearts of the Chinese. I was told that even the staunchest DAP supporters altered their votes to MCA then.
We will surely see the same propaganda being played up again this time around in KT and DAP must be prepared for the worst. The Chinese voters constitute 11% of KT electoral and they are extremely important to both PR ands BN. As of now, BN has made some good progresses in winning the Chinese votes at KT as they started earlier. PAS and PR component members have at least two weeks to change the minds of the Chinese. The recent land titles issue in Perak can be an issue for PR to capatilize as it concerns Chinese settlements. It is good to note that PR Perak has already started giving out those titles to the applicants, defying the order of Federal Government.
So, DAP being a multi-racial political but the most Chinese supporters should lead the charge in KT. Having said that, I believe PR has a score of issues to amicably settle within component members as they need to move forward in one single voice and with the same objectives for the betterment of Malaysia going forward into the future.
#22 by Onlooker Politics on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:20 pm
Dato Seri Ong Tee Keat should have heard about the a story of Si An Mutiny, which recorded the kidnap of Generalisimo Chiang Kai Shek by Nationalist Young Marshal Chang Hsueh Liang at Si An. Chiang was later set free after he had agreed to sign a peace treaty with Communist Party of China in the presence of Young Marshal Chang. The peace treaty finally led to the cooperation between Communist Army and Nationalist Army in the joint effort to fight against the Japanese Imperialist invaders.
Chang, being a Nationalist Leader, was trying to pursuade Chang to mobilise all Nationalist Army’s armed forces strength in order to focus only on the fight against one single common enemy, i.e. Japanese Imperialist invaders, and not to divert the attention to fight against Chinese Communist members, who were seen as the brethrens to the Nationalist Chinese. Chang’s expediency in taking custody of Generalisimo Chiang by force was taken as a disloyal misconduct and Chang was later put into the house arrest by Taiwanese Nationalist Government for the rest of his life.
In the eyes of many Chinese people, Young Marshal Chang was indeed a Chinese hero who had helped save China from being colonised by Japanese Imperialist invaders.
The moral of the story:
If DAP Chairman Karpal Singh and DAP Secretary General Lim Guan Eng could continue to cooperate with PAS under the coalition of Pakatan Rakyat in order to focus on the attempt to overthrow Barisan Nasional and to seize the Government Forming Power from Barisan Nasional, most Malaysians would endorse them on their so doing because the main objective of overthrowing Barisan Nasional could justify all means, by hook or by crook. After going through 51 years’ pains and suffering under the administration of Barisan Nasional or its predecessor, the only hope left for the oppressed and underprivileged Malaysian people would be lying in CHANGE. Yes, CHANGE. We want a CHANGE. No matter whether we can stand to gain much from the CHANGE, we don’t really care much now! What we actually want is a CHANGE. As for all questions raised by Barisan Nasional, our answer is “enough is enough!” We don’t want to see a Prime Minister coming from the camp of Barisan Nasional anymore.
Hopefully, the CHANGE we hope for will be a CHANGE that can make our dreams come true! We want a CHANGE for a better future and for the sake of our next generations.
#23 by Onlooker Politics on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:24 pm
Chang, being a Nationalist Leader, was trying to pursuade Chiang to mobilise all Nationalist Army’s armed forces strength in order to focus only on the fight against one single common enemy, i.e. Japanese Imperialist invaders, and not to divert the attention to fight against Chinese Communist members, who were seen as the brethrens to the Nationalist Chinese.
Sorry! A typo… a second “Chang” shoud be “Chiang”!
#24 by mifadzil on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:30 pm
I don’t know why a lot of people are arguing about Hudud & Qisas again. Non-Muslim dominated political parties are against it just because of their ignorance and afraid of losing support from their representative people. First, understand academically what is Hudud & Qisas and explain to your representative people without any prejudice. Why not taking it as one of the solution that we can apply to our country law especially for Muslims. Secondly, respect other party’s ideologies and missions, then other parties will respect your party. Thirdly, let’s the democracy decide either Hudud & Qisas can be implemented legitimately- we need 2/3 votes which are not likely with current state. Finally, please stop talking about Hudud & Qisas due to your ignorance because you are insulting Islam practitioners (@Truth Muslims) without your knowledge. Truth Muslims will not insult other religion practices. Please play respect to religious matter and focus on your effort to bridge closer Muslims and non-Muslims in Malaysia at least.
#25 by Godfather on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 12:40 pm
Poor lawyer Jeffrey. His pro-MCA, anti-PAS position is being obliterated by the numerous writers on this blog. So much so that he is now muted. Join the Mute Chinese Association, Jeffrey. What you have done for them deserves a life membership.
#26 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 2:14 pm
MCA has undeniably been unprincipled in its refusal to part with UMNO when the latter made the Islamic state declaration and continues to pursue its agenda of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’.
But the fact that MCA is unprincipled in the above sense does not mean that there is nothing wrong with DAP to co-operate with PAS as a coalition partner when the latter has reiterated their agenda of Islamic state.
DAP should pull out from PR and form a third coalition with parties that are committed to secular democracy and social equality. I have already provided arguments for this proposal in several previous threads.
#27 by Cinaputera on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 2:27 pm
Malaysia Coward Association chief thieve OTK, LISTEN,
I would rather have hudud law then Bee eNd to swindle the country’s wealth. With hudud your dirty corrupt hands will not be spared.
Go to hell, MCA. Don’t ever try to claim you are represent we Malaysian Chinese. You are merely representing a group of thieves.
#28 by Jeffrey on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 3:04 pm
Godfather, it is not that I am mute but that I can find no justification to respond to your solitary soliloquys and delusional rantings which no one else here (but you) appears to be interested, in disruption otherwise of a forum where readers are genuinely interested in discussing issues raised than settling old scores.
Besides, your method of argument (if one can call it one) is hardly constructive engagement, often a muskeg of irrelevancies, dwelling habitually on the dishonest method of labeling messenger with generalisations of what you perceive has negative connotation (eg Pro-MCA Islamophobia) hoping that such a label will stick to discredit the position (by that sticking) of whatever he says rather than grappling objectively with the demerits/demerits of a message or a point of view.
In a sense, it is good in a perverse way in that you serve by the power of negative example of how not to conduct or engage to others.
#29 by limkamput on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 4:55 pm
PR should have fielded old man nincompoop! He has caliber. More caliber that all the others added together. Half baked undergrad2
Let me tell you what is wrong with PR although when taken together they probably are NOT worse than BN.
PAS basically is archaic who can’t think beyond religions. They think God and religions are the final solution on everything when history has repeatedly shown that religions have been used and reused by men for their own political and self interests.
PKR basically still have all the remnants of UMNO – Malay centric, supremacists, thinking that government is a cash cow.
DAP, despite its progressive ideology, is basically a party caught in the time wrap of half baked socialist-populist sixties.
#30 by Godfather on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 5:25 pm
“Let me tell you what is wrong with PR although when taken together they probably are NOT worse than BN. ” Mr Know All aka Limkamput.
What does that mean ? PR not worse – does this mean you think they are the same ? Does this mean you think they deserve a chance to form the federal government ? Or forget about them since they are six or half a dozen ? Be more specific, man, don’t talk in riddles like some lawyers we know.
#31 by ablastine on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 5:25 pm
Can Jeffrey and Godfather simply take their fight elsewhere. This place is too sacred and precious for them to indulge in personal vendetta. I suggest both of you channel your energy and time to address the issue under discussion without mudslinging each other. Both of you are excellent thinkers and contributors here and I hate to see you guys waste your talents like this.
#32 by Godfather on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 5:29 pm
“DAP, despite its progressive ideology, is basically a party caught in the time wrap of half baked socialist-populist sixties.”
You should know that there are factions within DAP. One faction led by a Cambridge professor and his legal mentor can’t be termed progressive. They are so Islamophobic they will say anything to derail DAP.
#33 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 5:45 pm
Islamophobia is a false accusation. Islam per se is not a problem. Islamic fundamentalism such as the type espoused by PAS is the problem.
DAP should not work with Islamic fundamentalists within a political coalition. They should work with liberal and progressive Muslim leaders in a coalition without Islamic fundamentalists and racists. DAP should have no problem with working under the leadership of a liberal and progressive Muslim leader such as Anwar Ibrahim within a coalition without PAS.
#34 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 5:55 pm
A firm commitment to secular democracy and opposition to Islamic state should not be confused with Islamophobia.
Lim Kit Siang is firmly committed to secular democracy and opposed to Islamic state. But I’m sure he is not Islamophobic.
DAP quit BA in protest against PAS’s agenda of Islamic state about a decade ago. I don’t think this was Islamophobic at all. It was simply a principled action reflecting its firm commitment to secular democracy.
Rejection of Islamic fundamentalism is not equivalent to a rejection of Islam per se.
#35 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:04 pm
In 2003, Kit Siang posted five questions on ‘the incompatibility of the PAS Islamic State blueprint with democracy, human rights, women rights and pluralism’ at the Perak DAP state Dinner.
At the end of the speech, he concludes that ‘ it is most regrettable that the PAS Islamic State document has confirmed that the Political Islam of PAS is incompatible with democracy, pluralism, human rights, women’s rights, cultural diversity and modernity.’
Such a firm opposition to Islamic State should not be interpreted as Islamophobia. It only reflects Kit Siang’s firm commitment to secular democracy.
#36 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:05 pm
oops… ‘ … he CONCLUDED that…’
sorry!
#37 by Godfather on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:08 pm
Let’s look at the empirical evidence in this thread alone. Reading from top down, I can only see two commentators who are in favour of a boycott – chengho and Professor Lee Wang Yen. Not even my friend Jeffrey has asked for a boycott in this thread (although he has supported a divorce from PAS in other threads). Most are in favour of all-out support for PAS in the by-election.
So why the heck are we still discussing this ?
#38 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:08 pm
I’m disappointed to have to agree with old man nincompoop on the issue of PKR being essentially a splinter group of UMNO. But that is only because old man nincompoop has not volunteered his services as a cleaner. It helps clear the mess after each meetings – tables, chairs, and toilets have to be cleaned.
#39 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:13 pm
The following is an extract from a statement Lim Kit Siang made on 30th June 2001, entitled: “BA at crossroads and no more tenable”:
‘The issue confronting the Barisan Alternative is whether the PAS leaders are prepared to respect the DAP’s opposition to an Islamic State in Malaysia not because of anti-Islam sentiments but because an Islamic State in multi-racial and multi-religious Malaysia is not compatible with parliamentary democracy, power-sharing in a plural society, human rights and individual freedoms, women’s rights and social tolerance.’
This is a good answer to the charge of Islamophobia.
#40 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:13 pm
Lee Wang Yen Says:
Today at 17: 55.55 (12 minutes ago)
A firm commitment to secular democracy and opposition to Islamic state should not be confused with Islamophobia.”
Fear of anything Islamic (phobia) is not a problem?? Let’s not split hairs here. Old ma nincompoop has none to split. Let’s be fair.
#41 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:15 pm
The issue of Islamic state concerns political Islam.
#42 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:16 pm
I have never suggested that DAP should boycott.
I’ve been urging DAP to quit PR to form a third coalition without UMNO and PAS. When that happens, the question of whether to boycott does not arise at all.
#43 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:16 pm
We don’t need pinheads!
#44 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:18 pm
Lee Wang Yen Says:
Today at 18: 16.22 (21 seconds ago)
When that happens, the question of whether to boycott does not arise at all.”
Of course! When that happens the question of victory at the polls for DAP also does not arise at all.
#45 by Godfather on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:26 pm
“I have never suggested that DAP should boycott.
I’ve been urging DAP to quit PR to form a third coalition without UMNO and PAS.”
Cambridge teaching you to split hairs again ? DAP quits PR, and therefore will no longer campaign for PAS in KT – this does not have the same effect as a boycott ?
The boycott does not arise, but the end result is withdrawing support for PAS.
#46 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:39 pm
undergrad2 says:
‘Of course! When that happens the question of victory at the polls for DAP also does not arise at all.’
I don’t think Undergrad2 really understands what he writes. If by that statement he means that DAP has no chance of winning any seat if it quits PR, then the question of victory still arises in the following sense – question: ‘will DAP win any seat?’; answer: ‘No!’ So, why does he say that the question of victory at the polls for DAP does not arise? He is merely claiming that a particular answer will be guaranteed (the answer ‘no’) if DAP quits PR. But that does not mean that the question does not arise.
EVEN IF the question does not arise when a particular answer is guaranteed, do we have good reason to think that the ‘no’ answer is guaranteed? In other words, do we have good reason to think that DAP has no chance of winning any seat if it quits PR? Of course not! The most we can say is that DAP MIGHT lose a lot of seats by quitting PR. But that does not mean that it has no chance of winning any seat. To suggest that it will have no chance of winning any seat if it quits PR is too incredible an exaggeration. So the ‘no’ answer is not guaranteed.
#47 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:39 pm
If it takes three shoulders to break open a door to the house you’re trying to enter, is there any logic in fighting over the issue of shoulders to have the same shape and color??
#48 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:43 pm
Lee is splitting hairs again!! Victory at the polls, in this particular context, means victory to form the next federal government in coalition with other parties.
Politics is not for pinheads!
#49 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 6:46 pm
Let’s not put readers through your convoluted analysis of A not equal to B but C etc or a lesson in logical reasoning.
#50 by undergrad2 on Monday, 5 January 2009 - 7:05 pm
Lee’s suggestion so far, put in a nutshell, is we need to find another shoulder with the same shape and color to break down the door.
Politics of ideology must give way to politics of pragmatism – and Kit knows that.